I'm not saying sin should be encouraged. It absolutely shouldn't. But the Bible says, in Matthew 7:1-2, "[1] Judge not, that ye be not judged.
[2] For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again." We've all sinned. That's why Christ died on the cross, as a sacrifice for sin.
Why judge others because they sin differently than you?
Other urls found in this thread:
truthortradition.com
contradictingbiblecontradictions.com
twitter.com
What is the purpose of this thread?
To ask why some Christians are so judgemental towards others for being sinners, when literally everyone is a sinner.
See, liberal “Christians” love to twist this verse to say we should all be tolerant of sin and do logging to stop or even criticize brothers who are in sin. It doesn’t actually even say we can’t judge, just that we should judge by the same standard with which we judge ourselves. Liberal Christians can’t fathom someone actually being serious about their faith and not living in a constant state of mortal sin, so they take it to mean we can’t judge at all.
That wasn't exactly the point of Jesus' saying. He says right afterwards in verse 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."
He was teaching against hypocrisy. He wasn't saying to be blind to sin in general. Jesus said to make sure you're not guilty first, and then you are capable of being a helping hand to others struggling. And in this sense, it's not a condemning judgement, but done out of love.
If there was no judgement at all, then Jesus wouldn't have also told his disciples "whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven." And there'd be no point to the Acts, the WHOLE CHURCH, the myriad epistles and instructions given by these men. Nothing would matter. We could have just had degenerates rule the church, screaming "you can't judge me!" They could all be like Tupac "Only God can judge me!"
But that's not what happened.
Take for instance something like homosexuality- the problem isn't that they're sinners, it's that they insist they're not. Too many people use "judge not" to excuse or even justify sinful lifestyles - homosexuality, fornication, adultery, even murdering unborn children.
Remember the story about Jesus stopping the stoning of the prostitute. So many just quote the part about those without sin casting the first stone. But remember the end - "Go, and sin no more".
So yes we're all sinners, but don't just ignore the sins of those around you. There's no shortage of passages in the epistles about admonishing, rebuking and correcting those around you who have strayed - not out of hate, but out of love.
“Judge not, lest ye be judged.” “I judge no man.” The teaching is clear. Obviously Christ’s philosophy became rapidly distorted as soon as He left earth, and the reason is that men are sinners.
It’s also worth remembering that just because Christians follow Jesus as opposed to doesn’t make them any less Pharisaical. All the old patterns repeat. God, please save Christians and forgive us of our sins.
The teaching is not clear; if it was, He wouldn't have given His Apostles all the answers to the parables, nor the power to His Church to bind and loosen with authority on Heaven and Earth.
If we take your proof-texting seriously, then…what, should we release murderers and rapists because they cannot be judged? If they can be judged, then your proof-text is erroneous. What about the thief on the Cross? He admitted his crime, admitted his due and righteous punishment, and entered heaven…but still suffered death for his crimes.
The Church teaches that Christ is proclaiming that He alone is Judge, nobody has the right to decide who is saved or damned outside of Christ alone. If you then move on to the distinction between mortal and venial sins, it is from Scripture, and the Church has the duty to warn the flock of sin that leads to death (judgement by Christ).
Usually a poor circular argument, everyone's definition of "Pharisaical Christianity" is just the Christianity that they dislike.
Obviously a Matthean interpolation into Mark.
No, treat them practically and be pragmatic about the safety of society. But yes, don’t judge them in your heart.
Exactly
Um, what? How is the ruling of pagan Rome at all relevant here?
Contradicting your earlier statement that the Church may judge definitively and Heaven will sustain its ruling.
Sure. There is a big difference between guidance and judgment.
Nope. No tradcat accuses Francis of being Pharisaical.
Would just like to point out the irony that this is precisely what Jesus does in justifying sinners before a Holy God.
I'm not sure if you're new to Christianity, but the Gospels were inspired by the Holy Spirit, though the human instruments differ, it is de facto the same divine Author.
Actually, the traditional teaching is to treat them dispassionately. Since Christ was not referring to "being mean" to your fellow men in that specific scriptural context, it follows that if you yourself do not commit the sin you accuse your brother of, you can safely rebuke him. We are even given instructions to rebuke him privately, then in the company of another, then to the entire Church by St. Paul.
Whether secular, pagan, or Christian, all authority is divinely authorized by God, please read Romans.
There is no contradiction; the Church has the right to proclaim what is legal or what is illegal (in conjunction with both scripture and tradition), but Christ alone is Judge.
It's like saying that laws or morality is contradictory because there has to be a judge to pass sentence.
Did you really just try to defend your false points by calling the Word of God a sham and rely on higher critical/literary analysis?
That's rhetorical. Of course you did. Obviously you're a faggot of some kind. And safe to ignore now.
Idiot.
For those still reading, to the extent that “liberal” means lack of belief in the literal truth of Christianity and the severity of God, it is in error, but to the extent that “conservative” means increased judgment of one’s fellow man, it is in error.
You can call me all the names you want. It isn't going to help you after this. Next time hide your unbelief and degeneracy a little better.
I’m shaking the dust off my feet, hypocrite. I’m sorry your faith is so weak that you feel mortally threatened by the ideas presented.
That’s what I said.
Putting aside that you can’t really “safely” do anything before the Lord because all salvation is an act of pure mercy.
Everyone is appointed to die once. I just didn’t see your point with this.
Nothing is contradictory? Torah is the Law, Christ is the judge. Not rocket science.
Shaking the dust off your feet? Now you're using Jesus' words about persecution when preaching the gospel and applying it to atheistic scholarship? That if people don't accept your skepticism, you're like one of the Apostles who "shook the dust" off their feet?
And what am I hypocritical about? I didn't accuse you of anything I'm guilty of myself. So far, you're about as different from me as I can imagine.
Nor am I "mortally threatened". I called out your liking for higher criticism immediately. Because I know it and expose myself to it. You aren't special for this. If I was "mortally threatened" I wouldn't know anything about it and would have let your words slip by. And if my faith was weak, I would be like you, believing every novel theory that comes your way.
No. It was being called a faggot and a degenerate who you made a big spectacle out of deciding to ignore.
Other than being a faggot?
Back on topic, there are legitimate contradictions in the Bible, so how can they be reconciled without admitting that they’re only a very good approximation of what the Holy Spirit presented to these very human authors with human flaws? Nothing atheistic about it. I don’t care how exposed you’ve been to these issues, you obviously haven’t fully digested them, otherwise your response wouldn’t have contained fundamentalist insecurity.
I don’t believe the pope has the moral authority of Christ, so I am almost forced into this interpretation. But is it so crazy, given that there is every reason for scribes to intentionally authored this deviation so as to increase their worldly power? Look at it as a crime with a motivation.
Having been intrigued and researched it a bit more, here is an excellent Protestant exposition of the same verse, looking at the ancient Jewish meanings of the words “binding” and “loosing:”
truthortradition.com
Maybe these verses weren’t maliciously inserted into the Bible by subverters after all. Thanks to the critical (“atheistic”) analysis which suggested to me that it might be an interpolation I now know this much more deeply. Amazing how the dialectic works, isn’t it? Christ is the Logos. Now stop being such a faggot.
You’ll be back. Remember, you’re here forever.
Don't judge, so let justice cease it the law of Moses completed by Jesus. Jesus is not a sacrifice for sin, but he sacrificed himself to speak a word it the mouth to be understood to free us from death. To walk among men going into sheeps, it his hands to make his works.
Then by this being against the vanity of the Jews of the time; the hipocrisy of them, how they fast, how they prayed it the purpose of making an appearance.The temple of his father full of commerce.
He was going to the serpent dew to save the lost sheep of Israel by speaking the word of guidance, by healing the bite it the hand, and by walking to one place to the other to the rescue of a great number.
And this was the sacrifice, not a mere magical ritual for your sin, you egocentric winnie the pooh. Meditate on these words: Nail on the feet, nail on the hand. What is his feet and what is his hand ?. Vinegar on the mouth, souring the mouth. What is his mouth ?. Cross on the back, guilt on the back. Will you carry the same guilt ? What was the guilt YOU EGOCENTRIC winnie the pooh ? blinded in the road, the blind Paul.
Good resource, thx user. Maybe I should start believing more in inerrancy.
For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
I dont mind being judged by my own standards. And you are a disgusting leftist that is dishonestly trying to imply that a verse against hipocrisy is in reality one that tell us that we should be quiet.
Schizopost, or non-native English speaker?
You don’t?
No
I sin all the time mainly porn and masturbation, gossip, alcoholism, slight racism. The main difference is that I am aware of my sins and strive to be better. Each day is a battle, sometimes I win and sometimes I lose. I want to be better. With God's help.
That's the difference between us and them. They don't want to be better, they want us all to be worse. I only judge those that encourage sin and promote it or won't call it sin. If a Christian brother fails and Sins, I won't judge him harshly because I know he struggles like I do.
What specific sin are you accusing OP of, dishonesty? Have you ever told a lie? If so, shut the F up. Pro tip: “Thou shalt not be a disgusting leftist” isn’t one of the 10 Commandments.
Your “standards” should be perfection, otherwise you’re not a Christian. Enjoy Hell.
You’re right, it’s all 10.
Good. If the 10 Commandments are the way you judge others, then you are facing judgment and eternal condemnation.
the main difference between the apostolic and the protestant, is that there is a normative, physical method of being forgiven of your sins.
I too attempted to "strive" and failed, I did not conquer my pornography or masturbation addiction until I went into the confessional.
That's begging the question, Scripture provides multiple conditionals on salvation - including baptism, confession, eucharist, etc.
I do not see the point with your false equivalence, the power of State is divinely appointed according to Scripture, the Christian is not expected to be a subversive rebel.
That is contradictory; for Christ did not abolish the Law.
A necessary condition isn’t the same thing as a sufficient condition. If the most devout and pious Catholic reaches Heaven, it is still entirely an act of mercy. This isn’t me talking, I am echoing the opinion of influential conservative Catholics. Do you dispute it?
What’s the contradiction in what I said?
You're re-framing the conditions of salvation, I do not deny invincible ignorance nor baptism by blood or desire, but all Christians are truly called to receive the sacraments for salvation, we cannot in good faith intentionally leave out the True way for people.
Torah is no longer the Law in and of itself, we must consider both the Gospels and the Church authority as binding parts of the Law perfected in Christ.
All of which requires preaching the binding authority of true Catholic doctrine.
which, seems to obviously contradict your original post here , which is an erroneous understanding based on proof-texting.
I'd also like to add that your error in "do not judge lest ye be judged" you are conflating the right of Christ to judge souls in Judgement Day with the rest of the Church's ability to rebuke and warn sinners (and each other) to repent - which is exactly how the apostolic tradition teaches it
Like?
That is exactly what He gave to the Church (St Peter in Matthew 16:18, rest of the Apostles in Matthew 18).
How about actually researching how the Church believes it? You know, the one that can establish itself back to Christ, 2,000 years ago?
See? You people can’t comprehend that we don’t do these things.
is talking about hypocrites who judge others for the same sins they also commit. the point is not that judging itself is wrong, but that you should prioritize your improvement first, before you teach others (blind cannot lead the blind)
The bible tells us to judge rightly, with wisdom and such.
And that we will also judge the angels.
proverbs 31:9 judge fairly
leviticus 19:15 judge fairly
2 Tim 3:14-17 all scripture…is good for correction + rebuking (how can you rebuke others without judging them implictly?)
etc
How many times did you go?
I have been many times but the addiction still remains, especially when I get arrogant or complacent and think it possibly defeated, it strikes like a ninja from the shadows.
It's nice that you mastered yours but I still struggle
As you can tell I am not a Catholic, but like any good Christian I give and continue to give the Church serious thought, and consider joining it, because it is Christ’s visible Church, what I like to call the Mountain of God, and to this day I consider getting baptized. I am friends with a local Priest and we meet and discuss things. So I will respectfully go through your points one by one. Bear in mind this is not a debate about Catholicism per se but a debate about whether Christians are to judge others.
I’m not. I’m saying that being Catholic is not in itself a guarantee of salvation, which is true. Not all Catholics go to Heaven.
Yes, Torah is the Law, in and of itself. Christ is also the Law, because Christ is the Word (Torah) made flesh, which is the fulfillment of the Law. Therefore, if Christ gives authority to an apostle, it is of utmost importance, which is the Catholic Church must be taken dead seriously.
Christ’s teaching is “judge not, lest ye be judged,” not “rebuke and warn not, lest ye be rebuked and warned.” Of course the Church has the right to offer guidance and warning concerning the severity of God. I would say more than that, that this is the calling of every Christian, and an obligation to fulfill in obedience to Christ.
I relented on this point. Helpful user provided a good resource here
The link I offered here provides a high quality Protestant exegesis of those verses.
I do.
Are you proclaiming yourself able to judge others on the basis of works of Law? Good luck come Judgment Day.
1. Everyone commits every sin. Which sin can you in good conscience say you have never committed even a single time?
2. We are judged by the whole of the Law, not just a part of it. Question: Did Jesus ask the Pharisees stoning the prostitute whether they were themselves prostitutes, or did he ask them if they were without sin?
Bible tells us to rebuke and judge fairly. Tradition is in accord with this position.
I've never laid with a man as with a woman. So if someone goes around saying they're a faggot and a Christian I'll rebuke them (fairly) and let them know the error of their way.
Rebuking and warning isn’t the same as judging them and in your mind and heart condemning them to death (stoning) and Hell. Rebuking and warning each other is the same as helping each other. Common sense.
As for Jesus telling Pharisees to judge fairly (after rebuking them and telling the to stop judging), recall that He also commands us to be perfect. If you are perfect, then yes, please judge.
Where did you get that from?
That doesn't mean you're guilty of every sin. The very passage you're quoting even distinguishes sins:
"For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law."
St. James said we become a "transgressor of the law". He didn't say the adulterer magically becomes the murderer. Believe it or not, God wants you to use logic. And this is not logical. The very law in question has different punishments for murderers and adulterers even. It's clearly different.
Secondly, try to stop thinking of judgement in only a negative light. The very passage that started this thread also has Jesus explicitly saying "take out the mote of your eye, and THEN you can help your brother". He didn't say it was wrong to point things out. once you're able to help others out. He assumed it. He only condemned hypocrisy and when you have earned the right to do this. This sort of non-hypocritical judgement can be done in love and with counseling in mind, in order to build up others.
And it's always a two way street too. Any given person is guilty of something, but there's always someone else who is wiser or more experienced and can help. But there will be no improvement for anyone if everyone lives in an insular fashion, due to following this hands off approach you're advocating. Society would soon break down. Both the Church and the world as a whole.
P.S. If you see fit to accuse others of violating Leviticus 18:22, then why not also accuse others of violating Leviticus 19:19? God’s Law isn’t à la carte.
This is indeed the ideal he calls us all to. But again, he didn't say you couldn't judge unless you were perfect. Again, he said, take the mote of your eye. Single mote. Single sin. Single situation. He didn't say "take all motes in the history of your life, along with the history of all mankind".
I can't tell if you're just screwing with everyone now.
One more thing. I'm not sure I can sum this all up here, but the old/Orthodox point of view on sin is that it is mainly a sickness. A sickness of our flesh nature. And like other sicknesses, it has prescriptions as well. The Christian life is one of removing this sickness with what has worked as reliable prescriptions.
If you think of sin in only a juridical sense, I suppose I can understand how you could be wary of "solutions" that are offered. But try to look at it as sickness: And if it sickness, then obviously "cures" would be a good thing, no? Festering away without any care to the sickness would be the dumb thing to do.
The ultimate cure lies in Jesus Christ himself and being reborn in baptism - but our walk with him continues after that as well, as we learn from others in the Church who've sometimes been through the same things. Hiding from it all is not going to do any good.
I agree with your post, except I’m confused because I wasn’t quoting St. James? But if you want to use that book and chapter and verse, I would just point you to the next two verses
The rest of your post I pretty much agree with. Read what I said here
Notice the OP wasn’t asking us “why do you help others by rebuking and warning them about the wrath of God which abides on them?” Nor was he asking “why do you judge others in a constructive way?” He was quite rightly asking why we Christians are so famous for accusing others of sin when all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
That’s an excellent point and ties in nicely with the conclusion we all seem to have reached. I don’t like an overemphasis on harsh legalism either, but all the perspectives work harmoniously together and complement each other, all pointing to Christ in His fullness.
Wait, did I say that? I should have written: I don’t like an overemphasis on harsh legalism either, because it is antithetical to the spirit of Christ’s ministry, which is the Spirit of God, the Holy Spirit.
First time. For the purpose of honesty I will stay say I still struggle with custody of the eyes and the mind out in public, but pornography and masturbation addiction is gone.
Which is true, but there are still conditions established that must be met, which follows from scripture, tradition, and the Church teaching. Invincible ignorance must be genuinely invincible, and true ignorance. Not someone hearing the truth and deciding to turn away.
Absolutely, and I compliment you on this, because arguing with particular people here and elsewhere is like trying to pick out my own molars with my fingertips.
You need to understand when you offer up all authority to the Church, you are offering up the privilege of personal interpretation of the Scriptures. Proof-texting - that is, presenting a single piece of scripture out of context is an issue when you yourself cannot know (or do not yet know) if that is the teaching without cross-checking the Traditional Church teaching on it.
The Catholic Church (and the Eastern Orthodox) interprets the authority to loose and bind all things on Heaven and Earth has the authority to not only rule canonically as a Church, but has a sort of executive rule over the meanings of Scripture. There have been many prominent, many good Protestant exegesis on many things, but when they are in conflict with the Church's teaching, you must give all credence to the Church.
the forbidden fruit was either a pomegranate or a fig. it wasn't an apple, this was introduced by a latin pun, as the word 'malum' can mean either 'apple' or 'evil'.
just once wow
i find it too difficult to overcome my nature and replace it with things of spirit, even with the holy spirit in just one night, but it is my goal and only ambition in life, more than marriage, more than a prosperous job, I too wish to overcome it
Your words have been noted. I will closely examine the Church’s argument that it possesses the unique authority of God. If the argument stands up to scrutiny, I will become a Catholic. Even if it doesn’t, I still may become Catholic. Why? As I said, it is the Mountain of God, and as such it is the world’s teacher of truth, enjoying a treasure trove of Christian learning and wisdom. The goal is to be the best Christian I am capable of being. Love the Lord with all your might. I think that should suffice for now, God Bless.
Chuckled. If you do not doubt but believe in your heart that this is possible, it is.
Polite sage for off-topic.
Absolutely.