A Judgement-Free Zone
If Shakespeare’s Hamlet is known for one phrase, that phrase is, “To Be or Not to Be.” If today’s Christian dilemma could be summed up in one phrase, it might be, “To Judge or Not to Judge.” If the question is ever given an answer, the answer is the latter—not to judge! Instinctively, we want to offer a Christianity free of judgment. But is this what the Bible says?
Perhaps the most misapplied verse in the Bible is Matthew 7:1, “Judge not lest you be judged.” On its face, this seems to fit the cultural zeitgeist of our day. Our attitude is: “Who are you to judge me?” But the Bible’s approach to the topic of judgment is more nuanced than that. Like most topics in the Bible, a single verse does not tell the entire story. Allow me to offer a few examples on the topic in order to demonstrate a more robust picture.
First, let’s cede some ground. There is a type of judgment that is unwise, even unChristian. To judge in a manner different than you would have yourself judged is hypocritical. The context of Matthew 7 urges members to be fit to help another member, “brother,” stop sinning. Matthew 7 is a prohibition of hypocritical judgment, or a judgment in a final sense, not of members-to-wayward-member judgment. The book of Revelation makes clear to the reader that there will one day be final judgment at the throne of Christ! It will be totally loving and totally just. There, God’s holy love will be on display. My fear in our losing the category of “judgment” is that we are losing our ability to lovingly warn non-Christians of pending judgment. For it is appointed for man once to die and then to face judgment (Hebrews 9:27). If Matthew 7:1 falls into the category of forbidding last-day judgment only, then it accelerates church’s necessary judgment of obvious sin. Divine judgment will not be hypocritical. So we can cede the ground that any intra-church judgment this side of heaven should not have an aura of hypocrisy.
Second, let’s reclaim some old ground. There is a type of judgment that is mandated. To deny it is patently unChristian. For example, 1 Peter 4:18 reminds us that “judgment” begins in the household of God. If we do not rightly apply judgment in the household of God (i.e., the church), now, then what will become of the ungodly? This indicates that a rightly ordered church helps rightly order the church’s witness to the watching world. It’s unloving to squeak into heaven while not ever presenting an accurate picture of the gospel to the world around us. We are to be holy (1 Peter 1:16). 1 Corinthians 5 gives us specific application to judgment beginning in the church. When the church is assembled they are to “judge” a known, characteristically, unrepentant, sexually sinful member. It is the job of the church members to judge their fellow member in the rare case that that member can no longer be convinced of the err of his or her way. The rationale for formally judging is that this is good for that individual (5:5), good for the younger members (5:6), and good for the church’s witness to outsiders (5:12). There is to be an “outside” and “inside” of the church. Church leaders need to take heed of these texts and be sure that the structure they are building is built to last, God’s way. 1 Corinthians 3 warns against building a structure that appears to be large but won’t indeed last. So let’s reclaim some old ground with regard to the value of judgment within each local church membership.
Third, let’s claim some new ground. The church needs to speak to the culture. Good law is affordable to us all because common grace is here for us all. A healthy church member has much to say for the good of those outside the church. It is loving for the church member to pass judgment on that which will be good and not good for human flourishing. We do not have to share a claim to special grace for salvation in order to share a common grace for law. The law is always a teacher. While it has been said that you cannot legislate morality, try telling that to a cop. You most certainly can legislate morality. If it’s illegal to do something, that serves as a deterrent to citizens. The question is not if society has a business legislating morality but which morality a governing authority will legislate. For example, will the governing authorities prize erotic or religious liberty more highly? Christians have influenced societal norms from the get-go in the American experiment. With the muzzling of spiritual mouths has come the muzzling of societal morals. It might be time for local church members to find their voices—not just for the sake of conversation but also for the common good. If the moral law is a schoolmaster for salvation (see Galatians 3:23-24), then law has a function in transformation. Church members will need to think more deeply if we want to reach more widely. If the church speaks to the culture they should expect cries of “judgementalism”—even comparisons to the shallower elements of moral majorities in the past. But the charges will be without warrant. Speaking into good law is new ground worth breaking. The Christian ethic, when practiced, leads to more human wellness not less. I’d like to ask the reader to reconsider judgment-free zoning, that is, if this doesn’t come across as too judgmental!








