New Thoughts: (09/02/15-09/07/15)
Having begun the previous study with a comment about something I felt the Message got wrong, it seems only fair to note something the Message got right in this case. It is still a matter of inference in part, but it is well worth having before our eyes. “Don't imagine us leaders to be something we aren't. We are servants of Christ, not his masters.” In truth, I would that every believer would come to grips with that statement. We are all of us servants of Christ. No one among us can claim to be His master. Yet, in our prayers we can become arrogant in the extreme. We may begin demanding results of our Lord, as if He were ours to command.
People will derive all manner of justification for this, the most common being, “We’re king’s kids.” The implication is that as His kids, of course we can make demands of Him, or at least, we can ask whatever we please knowing we have Him wrapped around our finger. But, we don’t. Face it. A wise parent would hardly tolerate this sort of presumption on the part of their children, knowing it will only cause them to grow worse with time. An indulgent parent may be every child’s favorite, but it is the bane of maturity to be raised by that parent. Father God is no indulgent parent. He is a wise Father, raising His children to be pleasing in His sight, not so that He can be pleasing in theirs.
We have allowed culture to invert our sense of how the parent/child relationship is supposed to work, and that thinking in turn corrupts our perspective in regard to God. Too often we treat Him as our genie, rather than our Master. It is a dangerous game to play, and it is a testimony to His great patience towards us that we are not consumed for our effrontery. “We are servants of Christ, not His masters.”
It is an interesting term that Paul has chosen to convey this message. It’s not one of the more usual terms used to indicate a servant or slave. Instead, he has chosen the word hupeeretas. We are under-oarsmen. OK. So, think back to those colorized afternoon movies from your youth; the grand epics of Rome and Greece and the like. We come to the sea battles, and we see the biremes and the triremes with their myriad oars plying the waters. Who is it that moves the oars? Most typically, we associate that work with galley slaves chained to their oars, with an ogre of a slave master watching them, whip in hand. It is hard duty, and unpleasant in the extreme. Hands get blistered. You’re in an enclosed space with a bunch of hard-laboring men. Hygiene is not a great concern among your coworkers, and air fresheners haven’t been invented. The food is poor, the lighting poorer, and always the incessant beat of the drum – stroke, stroke, stroke.
An under-oarsman, whether slave or paid, is not his own man. He can’t just up and quit if the job becomes too much. He cannot set his own pace, but must perform as directed. It’s not just that punishment may await if he fails of his duty. If that ship is going into battle, his life may well depend on doing exactly as he is commanded.
Welcome to Christian leadership! Our Lord is no ogre, to be sure, but He is in command. Your leadership is not permit to do as you please. It is not an occasion to tell everybody else how to do their jobs. We are not given to think that now, by golly, this place will finally start doing things right. It’s good I’ve come at this time. You folks were lost without me.
There’s a reason why Paul’s discussion of requirements for the elder takes great pains to reject those whose character or maturity would incline them towards pride. If pride has not been an issue prior to entering the office of elder, rest assured that every possible temptation to pride awaits you upon entry. Fortunately, every opportunity to be humbled likewise presents itself. If we fall subject to pride, I dare say it won’t last long. The elder who is depending on his own wits to see him through will not last. Trust me, I am addressing myself with this. I am as much a product of our culture as any man. We are raised to be independent and self-sufficient problem solvers. We bring that with us into the church and into the office. It takes a fair amount of effort on God’s part, I think, to keep bringing us to recognition of the absolute nonsense such a mindset represents. You? Independent? Apart from Me you can do nothing! You? Self-sufficient? Were I to turn My eyes away from you for so much as a fraction of a second, you would cease to be. A problem solver? You are the problem! You are every bit as much a sinner fallen from grace as those you would lead out of the wilderness. Without Me, you remain a blind guide of the blind, and will be in the ditch in short order.
Now, God does not rub our noses in this. He is kinder than that. But, the realities of leadership in His service will not allow any man to long escape these realizations. Oh, we will slip into character in our weaker moments, revert to form if you will. But, He will not suffer us to remain in that place. The cost to the sheep is too high. He will command and we, if we are His, will heed.
I think that image of the galley slave heading for battle is really entirely appropriate as well, although Paul does not build on the image here. We are in a battle and, as far as our own power is concerned, we are horribly outmatched. Again, think of that ship whose oarsmen are each rowing to their own beat. Such a ship is going nowhere. It is purposeless, courseless, and powerless. For all the energy being expended on the oars, it is effectively a sitting duck for the enemy. So it is when the church leadership fails to heed the Master. The church is laid prey to the enemy. Except God. God will not suffer His people to become victims of poor leadership. Oh, there may be seasons where such leadership remains in place, but those seasons will not be long, nor the damage to His own permanent.
But, let’s shift to the second image: The steward. The steward, as this culture would know the office, was every bit as much a man under command as the oarsman, and like the oarsman, he was likely a slave. He was not, by most measures, any better or any different than those he was tasked with overseeing. The one defining characteristic that might set him apart is that which Paul notes: He must prove faithful; trustworthy. He would, after all, be the man in charge when the master was away. He would have care of collecting on debts, seeing to the procurement of necessaries for the household, and otherwise taking care of the day to day business of what was potentially a very large household. Recall that such a household would combine both family members of the master and the myriad slaves he had accumulated to see to his lands, his house, his business ventures. But, among all those slaves, the steward stood in the highest position.
The height of that position was not due to honor associated therewith, although I doubt not that the steward would find himself honored to have been entrusted with the duty. It was not due to the relative ease of the work, although it was certainly less to do with manual labor than the tasks assigned to many of the other slaves. But, then, there could well be a particularly well-educated slave seeing to the teaching of the young master, or female slaves whose service consisted in attending on the lady of the house; hardly strenuous activities themselves. The thing that set the steward apart was that he was trusted. For the master’s part, one hopes that trust was well placed. For, the master might find it needful to be gone from home for extended periods. Considering that the master might well be a military man, and required to campaign, those periods could be years long. There were no cell phones, no email by which to remain in contact. The master couldn’t just log in to his home system and check things out on the cameras mounted around the property. He had to be able to rely on the steward or he could expect to return to a property much diminished. After all, there were plenty of other slaves in his employ who would as soon rob him blind as serve him, given the opportunity.
Let us move this back into the life of the church. Jesus had his own parables about the stewards in His house. Paul is not just drafting this image from his own imagination. He is building upon what is really a longstanding concept that goes back farther even than the ministry of Jesus. It has ever been the case in the service of God that those who officiate do so as servants of the Most High. Yes, there are those who fall prey to pride and begin to make more of themselves than of God, but they are not true priests any longer; not while that attitude persists. The true servant of God sets himself to serve faithfully, to honor the Master to whom he belongs. It is true of the pastorate. It was assuredly true of the Apostles, which is more directly to the point Paul is making here. It must also be true of the elders, the deacons, and in the end, every man, woman and child who count themselves among the elect.
That is really Paul’s message isn’t it? Yes, we have been entrusted with certain things which you have not. But, this does not render us objects of veneration. It is a duty set upon us. We haven’t been given these things so that we can proudly point out that we have them and you don’t. We have been given them so that we can provide for you from them. As this treasury consists of the mysteries of God, it is a teaching ministry we oversee. We impart as you are able to receive. We’ve heard this from Paul already. Among the mature, I impart wisdom (1Co 2:6). It would be a most unworthy steward who spent the Master’s wealth of wisdom on those as yet unable to receive or comprehend. The steward is, therefore, quite interested in aiding the maturation of those he serves, because the wealth of the Master is never intended to be hoarded as if for preservation. It is meant to be given out so that it can produce more wealth.
The banker who never makes a loan or an investment will not long be a banker. How, after all, will he pay his own wage, let alone the wages of his employees if the only thing he does is hide his customer’s money away until they have need of it? What customer will be bothered with him if they cannot even expect some small return on the money they place with him? So, too, the steward before God, as the parables of Jesus make clear. You were not entrusted with this to hide it away and keep it secure. You were entrusted with this to bring profit to My kingdom by its use.
As we oversee a particular congregation, I think this might also inform how we look to the membership in that congregation. There will be times when people come. There will be times when people go. In our society, that going may be the simple product of relocation. Certainly, that is the simplest cause to address. But, with the numerous churches and denominations from which we are able to choose, there are also those who will leave at the first hint of offense. It may be something as inane as a change of fabric in the sanctuary. It may be a difference in taste as to the style of music employed in worship. We can counsel, and seek reconciliation, but that will not always prove possible. What we ought not to do is to cling so tightly to our members as to discover we have prevented them from pursuing the path God has chosen for them. Now, for these less noble causes, these matters that really ought not to be a concern at all, it is more appropriate to seek ways to help these ones mature. After all, simply jumping to the next church will not have addressed the issue, nor is it likely to help them grow up, unless it is simply because the leadership at that next church is more inclined to do their duty than we have been.
If it’s a doctrinal issue that has prompted departure, this is more serious, certainly. It should at least lead us to assess ourselves, and seek understanding. If neither party can be brought to recognize the other’s perspective as the right course, it is perhaps better that the person depart for a church that is more agreeable to their views. This necessarily confines itself to those matters we can safely deem secondary. Their salvation is not in doubt, but it would be hard for a congregation to move forward in unity where it cannot agree on what it is they are united in believing. They will mature more readily in a different garden. In service to our shared Lord and Savior, let them go.
If, on the other hand, it really is a central tenet of the Christian faith over which division has come, then I think we have departed the situation Paul is addressing. It is no longer a matter of opinions, or of preferred emphases. It is a matter of Truth versus Lie. If we the church are in error, God help us! Open our eyes and let us repent of our error. But, if it is the departing congregant, we must assuredly do our utmost to bring loving correction. Failing that, though, I think we enter into that space John addresses in regard to false teachers. We dare not continue to extend welcome to them, let alone invite them to abide with us in spite of their error. The Lie must be exposed and dealt with.
This has been a rather long-winded diversion of topic, but it’s a matter that we must concern ourselves with, who are given stewardship of God’s house. We are no longer stewards of the mysteries of God, for to us is not given the direct revelation that was given to the Apostles. We are instead stewards of what has already been revealed, the Word of God, the foundation set by the prophets and the apostles. We are, really, far more shepherds than stewards in this regard. We know the landscape and the sheep, and are set here to care for the sheep as we guide them across that landscape. We do not invent fields and streams. We do not derive clever new systems of shepherding. We serve by what we know, and we serve primarily to protect.
But, we do remain stewards; stewards of the Truth. We impart that Truth with the same care that Paul did. We seek to assess the capacity of those we serve, lest we feed them to overfilling with a Truth they cannot yet digest. We care for that Truth, ensuring that the storehouse is not infiltrated by the rot of the Lie. We care for the feeding of those over whom God has set us, never losing sight that we are ourselves but oarsmen, following His command. It is imperative for our health and theirs that we both hear Him and heed Him as instantly as the angels. We are a church at war, in a world which wars against us. Like those triremes and galleys battling on the ancient Mediterranean, if we are not propelling the church with unified effort under the guidance of the One who sees, we will be powerless, directionless targets.
We are, then, set here to perform a specific, defined function as stewards. We are not permitted to add to our duties as we see fit, nor are we granted to set aside those duties we find less fulfilling. We are entrusted with gifts to be used for the good of our brethren. We are also in need of remembering that our brethren have also been entrusted with gifts which they use for our good. We are not it. We have not arrived. We are brothers amongst brethren. We are entrusted with a particular task for a particular season, but this is no cause for lording it over the rest. It is no cause for swelling pride or arrogance. We are not holier than thou. We are just servants doing as we should – at best. We serve a Master who has made it inescapably clear that in His household, to lead is to serve. He came not to be served, but to serve (Mt 20:28). We who lead, lead to serve as we were served. May we be found faithful stewards of the inestimable treasure of those mysteries God has revealed through His servants, the Apostles; neither adding to nor subtracting from that which He has caused to be spoken for our benefit.
“The one thing required of such a servant is that he be faithful to his master.” This is how the TEV presents verse 2. As one who finds himself such a servant today – not an apostle, certainly, nor even a pastor, but one set to watch over the church – I pray this may be said of my filling of the office assigned me. May I be found to have been faithful to my Master. I also know that this shall only be so as my Master makes it so. It is He who is at work in me. It is He who is at work through me. Else, it is me at work, and those who are affected by my work are ill-served indeed.
Lord, God, make of me a faithful servant. Grant Your servant all that wisdom, patience, perseverance and charity that is needful to the completion of this task You set before me. Keep my eyes firmly fixed on where You are directing. Keep these ears clear to hear Your command, and grant this weak flesh sufficient strength to obey Your will. Thy will be done in me and by me as it is in heaven. This is my prayer, and it is offered to You knowing that I am incapable of such obedience in myself. My need for You grows daily. I am utterly humbled by the trust You have placed in me, and can only trust that You will indeed so will and work in me as to accomplish Your good purpose.
At first, it might seem like Paul has shifted his focus rather drastically going into verse 3. Who, after all, has been talking about judging anybody? For all that, isn’t he in the process of judging the proponents of these various factions? And, to be sure, going forward, as he addresses the matter of sexual sins, there will be judgment rendered. That being the case, we will at the very least need to be careful about how we take the message in verse 5. But, let us stick with the transition point a bit longer. Is Paul addressing yet another issue? Were there those in Corinth that were casting aspersions on him, on his ministry? In point of fact, I think it’s pretty clear that there were. Some of his defensiveness in regard to his apostleship hints at the situation. It’s possible that this is why he brings the matter up at this point. But, the more immediate connection would appear to be with his point about the steward: He must be found trustworthy.
Notice that this already starts to shift things into something of a forensic setting. It’s not that the steward must be trustworthy. He must be found to be so. For this to be found, the steward must be examined, and that idea is contained in the word. Inquiry, examination, scrutiny: it all plays into the idea of finding the thing to be so. This is set in contrast to the judgment of verse 3. The meanings are actually quite similar, though the words differ. In verse 2 we have heurethee, and in verse 3 it is anakrithoo. The latter term has the sense of finding to the negative, arriving at sentence and condemnation for crime committed. The investigation, then, might be supposed to have a certain presumption of guilt at the outset. Vine’s doesn’t appear to contemplate this forensic side of finding, but Thayer keeps it in view. The idea might be, then, that a dispassionate observer would have to recognize that the steward was being faithful to his task, whereas those who were whispering accusations were looking for reason to condemn.
In a sense, this depicts the distinction between test and temptation. The stimulus might look pretty much the same, but the intent behind it is very different. The one comes to demonstrate faithfulness, the other to provide grounds for accusations of sin.
But, Paul is apparently addressing those who were looking to take him down a notch or two. You want to examine me? Have at! I have nothing to hide. Quite frankly, it means nothing to me, whatever your opinion may turn out to be. The text translates it as ‘a very small thing’, but the term is more of a superlative nature. It is of the least concern. It is, if I might, less than nothing. What matters is not what you think to be true. What matters is what is true. This gets at the second part of his statement. It’s not just that you particular individuals are in no position to render any meaningful judgment. The whole ‘human court’ is incompetent to that task.
That phrase turns out to be rather curious. It is more literally the day of man. That is pretty clearly set against the day when ‘the Lord comes who will bring to light the things hidden, and disclose the motives of the heart’. That’s the thread that runs through these verses. Faithfulness in the service of the Lord is a matter of the heart motives. Looking upon that, we cannot be recall that the heart is desperately sick. As Paul points out at the end of verse 3, we can’t even make proper assessment of our own motivations, let alone those of any other man.
Let’s look at that verse more closely, because it is rather challenging to recognize the meaning given the somewhat colloquial nature of the writing. Whether, then, it is you accusers who reach a verdict of condemnation against me, or whether the collected judgment of all humanity finds me to have failed to prove trustworthy, it won’t mean a thing, really. “I don’t even examine myself!” Really, Paul? No reflection, no checking as to whether or not you’re truly following Christ? I don’t believe it for a moment. Were that the case, it would only prove the utmost arrogance, and would really be providing these accusers the very evidence they sought, wouldn’t it? And here, Paul is using anakrinoo, it is that same negative tilting investigation that these men were applying to his case.
A few of the less literal translations suggest Paul is indicating his being as ill-suited as they to arrive at a true measure of his record. “I don’t even trust my own judgment on this point,” reads the TLB, for example. The point itself would certainly seem to be in accord with Scripture. But, I’m not so sure that’s Paul’s intent here. Try it this way: You, gentlemen, have but the evidence available to your senses. You can read and hear my words. You can observe my actions, and the results of those actions. You can weigh them against others you have heard. You may find my style more or less pleasing, more or less effective by comparison. What you cannot find is my motivation. You cannot, really, even find whether I have been faithful to the commission given me or not, because all you know of that commission is what I tell you. That same applies for the whole court of world opinion – even more so, really, for they are not even as equipped for the task as you. You who are spiritual at least have some basis for making assessment. They don’t even have that going for them.
But, here’s the thing: I do have access to my motives, faulty though it may be. I do know what drives me, what I was commanded to do, and how whole-heartedly I have pursued that assignment. Whatever you may think of it, I know more about the situation than you ever can. With that information in hand, I find no cause in which my conscience accuses me. Setting aside matters of self-deception, that is clearly a more informed judgment than yours. Even with the self-deception, it remains more informed. But it’s not perfect. My conclusions about myself are of no more value than your opinions of me. That’s not what matters. There is one thing that matters: What does our mutual Lord think? When He comes; when He has brought every hidden thought and deed to light, and has laid bare the true motivations of the heart, what verdict will He render? He alone sees the heart with clarity. He alone has full access to the whole of the evidence. His judgment alone matters.
On one level, we want to read this as indicating that our responsibility is to God alone, and that is true to a point. But, our responsibility to God involves being responsible to our brothers. We are responsible to God as His representatives and His servants. This does not leave us free to summarily ignore the opinions of those to whom we minister, or even to those with whom we find ourselves in casual contact. It is not license to offend. The Gospel may offend. We can be more definite. The Gospel will offend. Unbelief does not like to be identified as such. But, when the bearer of the Gospel finds this cause to be offensive in his own right, it is no gospel he bears, but his own sinfulness in proud display.
Surely, it should be obvious that the Gospel is not such as would offend the believer! Offense between brothers is no badge of honor. It is evidence of failure. If our approach to godliness consists in belittling our fellow believer because their beliefs don’t perfectly mesh with ours, if we are busy putting on our holier-than-thou attitude – even as we level accusations of being holier than thou against our opponent – it avails little to nothing to boldly proclaim how Christian we are. Actions speak louder than words. Our responsibility may be to God alone, but that responsibility demands that we be responsible in our dealings with all these others who, like us, are created in His image and who, like us, are fallen and needy.
There can be no proud Christian. That has been much of the message here, hasn’t it? Enough with the boasting! It’s no good when it’s about you, and it’s no better when it’s about me. To be a Christian is to be utterly humbled before God, brought low by the realization of His holiness and our sinfulness, and then brought to wonder by the magnitude of His forgiveness. It is to totally lose self in Him, finding nothing in ourselves worth speaking of, and everything good in Him.
Your judgment, my judgment, my conscience: These avail nothing, however good their report. It is the Lord who examines me, and if there is justification, it is by His decision. Here, then, is the wonder of wonders. Let me just contrast two verses to help it be seen. “If you marked our iniquities O Lord, who could stand?” (Ps 130:3). That is the recognition of universal criminality. There is none righteous. No, not one. But, hear the antidote! “If our heart does not condemn us, we have confidence before God” (1Jn 3:21). Perhaps this is not good enough. After all, our hearts will find occasion to convict us, at the very least, if not condemn. I’ve been reading through a back issue of Table Talk dealing with the issue of shame in the Christian. We all know plentiful cause for shame, if we have ever been so brave as to contemplate ourselves. The Christian who knows of no cause for shame in himself has never looked. I say that in spite of Paul’s statement here, and hopefully I can make the consistency clear.
We find plentiful cause for conviction. We make mistakes. We sin. The one who says he does not is a liar, as John also notes in that same letter. So, that’s not where he’s coming from. Hold fast to this, though: “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1Jn 1:9). Understand, that is the immediate predecessor to this: “If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us” (1Jn 1:10). The points are connected. We sin. We must confess. If we fail to confess, we only demonstrate that we are not His in the first place, for He has already told us that all have sinned. Paul knows himself to be included in that accounting. But, “If our heart does not condemn us,” conscience is leveling no accusations – not because it is deadened, but because, “we have confidence before God.” We have confessed every failure He has made us aware of. We have gone to Him for forgiveness, and He has provided it, and this alone is our confidence. We know who we are. That is no cause for confidence at all, but cause for despair. However, we know who He is, and therein lies every cause for confidence, and the assurance of our perseverance in this faith He has so graciously bestowed.
We will stumble. We will even fall. But, we will not stay fallen. Our progress may seem halting at times, but it will remain progress. Our responsibility is to God alone, and He, thanks be to God, has taken responsibility for us. Here is where Paul’s conscience could find reason to remain silent, and here we, too, can find reason: God’s judgment is the one – the only one – that counts. He has already rendered judgment on the elect, and called them sons and daughters. In that very moment when faith was implanted and the wonderful work of the Cross brought to bear, judgment was rendered: Not guilty. Justice has been served. What remains, then, for conscience to do? It can most assuredly continue to point out areas where we need to make better progress. It can and will make note of sins committed and spur us to stand more firmly against the temptations that beset us day by day. Count on it. But, it does not condemn, for as we pursue our course of sanctification, we have that assurance in our back pocket: Justice has already been served.
My justification is not the product of any man’s judgment, not yours, not my own. It is the Lord who examines me. It is His judgment that matters. That’s the summation of this section. Or is it?
Reading the HCSB this morning, I am put in mind of another take on this passage. Consider the context. The issue Paul has been addressing is not one of tearing down, but rather of building up. The Corinthians were not so much looking to discredit Paul as to elevate Apollos. Admittedly, the use of anakrithoo suggests a more negative intent, but the HCSB chooses to render this verb as ‘evaluate’. Thus, where the NASB has “I do not even examine myself,” the HCSB has, “I do not even evaluate myself.” It’s a bit softer in its connotations. It brings up images of an annual review at work. There may well be constructive criticism to offer, but the intent has more to do with rating.
This sense of things fits well with the matter of countering factionalism in the church. If you get away from the idea of ranking your pastor, ranking guest speakers, and that whole comparison shopping approach to the church, you’ll fare much better. The question isn’t how well things are presented, but how True is the content? Are your teachers faithful to the Truth of God? It is well! They may be plain spoken or eloquent. They may dress sharp or dress for comfort. They may be full of anecdotes or simply laying the lesson out there. Style has its points, but style is not the point.
Here’s the thing: The Corinthians, like the rest of us, were readily impressed by outward forms. Look at what will be coming up in regard to spiritual gifts. The ones that had the greater display factor were the ones that were deemed more important. Paul will turn that opinion on its head, as we shall see when we get there. But, here, it’s been matters of outward form that led to this teacher or that being held up as superior. Apollos was more eloquent than Paul, at least as concerns live oratory. The ritual duties that the Judaizers sought to impose had the outward appearance of being a holier way of life. However unimposing a man Paul may have been, the fervency of his convictions, and the newness of his message no doubt caused a stir. Paul’s point is that all of this is window dressing. You can’t know what moves the men who bring this to you. You can’t even know yourself particularly well.
Look at verse 3 once again. It means nothing to me if you give me a good evaluation, or if the whole world does. I don’t even evaluate myself. Why? Because I know my judgment is faulty. I will incline to paint myself in a much better light than I ought. I am conscious of nothing against myself, but that is partial evidence at best. If I am conscious of anything, it’s that the heart is desperately sick. I know myself this well, that I want to think the best of myself. The fact that God has not, at present, put me in mind of any particular sins that need addressing can hardly be taken as evidence that no such sins persist in me. I like to think I know my motivations, and in some part, I probably do. But, whatever you may think of modern psychological practices, one thing that they have demonstrated is that quite often we are totally unaware of the ways in which we have been motivated. So much of adult practice may be largely a matter of unconsciously reacting to youthful stimulus. We think we know what makes us tick, but it ain’t necessarily so.
So, when we arrive at verse 5, wait for the Lord. He will make the true motivation of each man clear, and where praises are truly due, they will come from Him. If you are looking for a merit review, there’s the only one that shall ever matter. This is not, by any stretch, to suggest that we have no need to heed conscience in the meantime. God gives us conscience for a reason. If, indeed, conscience is pointing us to a place that needs addressing, let us be found working together with God to see that matter addressed. But, don’t suppose a quiet conscience indicates arrival at perfection.
If we are to be acquitted it shall be because God, in Christ, has acquitted us. What does that mean? To be acquitted is to be rendered just or innocent. That may come about by it being clearly demonstrated that we are thus innocent, or it may simply mean that the court has decided to regard us as such. Now, it should be clear to all that none of us are going to be demonstrably innocent of all charges. If we were indeed innocents, if there were even one such innocent, there would have been no call for the Cross. But, through the work Christ accomplished upon the Cross, our sins have been forgiven. The mounting eternal debt we owe to the High King of Heaven for our constant violation of His law has been paid in full. I purposefully keep the ‘owe’ of that statement in the present tense, for we continue to add to our debt daily, even though we are now found in Him. The flesh remains. Sin continues to pester us if not plague us. But, if we confess our sins and repent of them as best we are able, He is faithful and just to forgive them.
It would not suffice for God to be so faithful as to forgive us our every sin. That would just make Him a doting and indulgent Father allowing us to do as we please. No, He is also just to forgive. He does not ignore His law to leave us untouched by its demands. He has satisfied the demands of the Law for us, knowing we could in no wise do so ourselves. He has paid our eternal debt in eternal blood, that we might be regarded as innocent in His sight, else who could stand? This acquittal is not, cannot be, license to go and sin with impunity. Remember the conditional: If we confess and repent. Not, if we apologize and then get back to it.
Coming to verse 5, Wuest opens up with, “Stop exercising censorious judgment.” I cannot, at this point, accept this translation. I’m not even sure I’d go so far as “passing judgment”, which is where the NASB leaves it. If I go back to the lexicon, the first definition I find is to divide, make distinction. Certainly, the term has its forensic sense of reaching a court decision, and passing judgment, but I do not find that it necessitates this idea of censor. In fact, in light of what I have just been saying, I might suggest it has far more to do with approving and elevating. Either way, the point is that you have insufficient data, but again, I don’t find that it’s a matter of tearing down one man as it is of putting another on a pedestal. Look forward just a couple of verses. “Who regards you as superior?” (1Co 4:7). “Some have become arrogant” (1Co 4:18). This has nothing to do with censor. It has to do with pride, and pride will destroy a ministry faster than just about anything else.
But, Christ, when He comes, will reveal the motive, the boule. This is one of two terms that will often be translates as will. But, here, it is more to do with the considerations preceding the decision and the act. It is, then, a discussion of purpose rather than deed. The deed is visible. The acts of God, as we account them, are visible. The purposes behind them are not. One thinks of the reaction atheists will have to things like Katrina or the tidal wave that bore down on Japan or any number of other natural or unnatural disasters. If there’s a God, and He is good, they posit, how could He allow such a thing? Since He’s supposedly in control of events, how could He do such a thing? In many cases, we shall find that unanswerable as concerns any specifics, and those who have publicly put forth their theories are as likely as not incorrect. Does it come as punishment for godlessness? That certainly can’t be ruled out. But, the simple fact remains: You don’t know God’s purpose any more than I, not as to the specifics of this particular action or that. Perhaps He shall choose to reveal it, and then we can answer. But, if He has not, our only proper answer is, “I don’t know, but I know He has a good reason.”
As to the purposes of man? Again, we certainly don’t know what motivates another, and our knowledge of our own motivations is partial at best. We all have our moments of acting more on instinct than on thought. What motive does this reflect, and do we even reflect on it enough to consider the question? Maybe yes, maybe no. But, this is worth considering as we assess our progress in sanctification: The right thing done for the wrong reason is of no value as concerns our righteousness.
If our sole reason for acting as we do is because we know we should, or because we wish to avoid the consequences if we don’t, the deed has no value. If we are doing it so everybody can see how pious we are, God help us! It is the deed done for no reason other than the love of Christ that might have some value. It is the thing done of love. Apart from love, every attempt at Christian living is null and void. But, that’s many chapters ahead as yet. For now, let it suffice to be reminded that while we may know them by their fruits, fruits can never be the whole picture.
Go back to the parable of the wheat and the tares (Mt 13:25-40). The problem with tares is that right up until harvest time, they look so similar to wheat as to be indistinguishable. Even as the grains are growing, you can’t be sure. It’s only there at the end, when all is ripened, that the reality is made known. When the Lord comes, He will bring everything to light. Whom He praises shall be worthy of praise. Whom He condemns shall be worthy of condemnation. In the meantime, be careful of your estimates, both of others and even more so of yourself.
When I first began considering this passage, one question I found myself asking is when is it proper to judge, and when not? After all, Paul’s command here is pretty straightforward, and it doesn’t terminate until Christ’s return: Don’t pass judgment before then. We can add similar prohibitions from elsewhere. “Don’t judge lest you be judged” (Mt 7:1). “You are all without excuse when you pass judgment, for in the very thing about which you judge another you condemn yourself for practicing the same things” (Ro 2:1). Yet, one cannot help but notice that Paul makes judgments. John makes judgments. Christ makes judgments. Clearly, there are bounds set on this prohibition, but what are they?
First, it is very clear that when it comes to defending sound doctrine against the myriad attempts of the devil to pervert it, absolutely, judgment is in order. What value the gift of discerning spirits if not to this end? Here, I would note, is where we see the Apostles passing judgment. Here, too, is where Christ exercises His judgment. For His part, we could add cases that had more to do with condemning behaviors which not only failed to exhibit orthopraxy, but were in fact diametrically opposed to the righteousness God requires. Add to this that in every case these opposing actions were promoted as the true piety. In this light, the judgment remained upon doctrine, but doctrine in action.
Concerning the passage before us, I think context is key. Notice what is not in view. It’s not a question, at least so far as has been discussed thus far, of whether this teacher or that has the truth. There is the slightest hint of that in the mention of the Cephas faction, but Paul is not dealing with Judaizers here, as he did with Galatia. If it is an issue in this particular church, it is a minor issue when set over against everything else that was going on. The primary issue has not been one of content but of style. Apollos and Paul differed not as to their message, but as to their presentation, and if there were factions forming, it was on this basis. If we take the reference to Cephas at face value, and suppose that some perhaps held him to be more authentic in that he was among the original Twelve, the same can be said. Their doctrine (having just finished studying 1 Peter) is one. Their styles of teaching differed somewhat. Their points of emphasis might have been unique to themselves. But, their doctrine was one doctrine.
In light of that, the judgment Paul is referencing here is not judging which is teaching truth and which is teaching a lie. If that were the issue, I have no doubt that Paul would be saying, “By all means, judge, and judge wisely!” After all, this is the same Paul who closes this same letter by saying, “If anyone does not love the Lord, let him be accursed” (1Co 16:22). That’s pretty judgmental, I should think! More to the doctrinal point, though, we have the letter to Galatia. “Even if I were to come back preaching something different, even if an angel from heaven comes with a conflicting message, let him be accursed. Any man preaching a gospel contrary to what you received, let him be accursed” (Gal 1:8-9).
Truth matters. This is not a question of truth. It’s a question of style. It’s a question of who’s better than who. Here, we are utterly unfit to judge and shouldn’t be bothered anyway. That’s for Christ to decide, should He care to make distinction. I could offer the case of one of the leading men in my old church, a man I considered a paragon of Christ-like behavior. Here was a model Christian, a mentor, and a steadfast companion to be trusted. Until he fell, left his wife and kids for another woman, and fled the church. I know many who, to this day, cannot accept that he was not a believer prior to that point, and will hold him up as a case in point for their Arminian views of salvation. “You can’t tell me he wasn’t a believer.” No, you’re right. I can’t. Of course, you can’t tell me he was, either. You can offer opinions, like any other man. But, you have no better view of that man’s heart than I. Neither of us is fit to pass judgment, and neither of us knows his end; only the Lord. But, to the degree that any of us held him up as a paragon of virtue, we only demonstrated the aptness of Paul’s warning here. “Don’t make your judgments on this partial data. Wait for Christ. He will make the Truth to be plainly seen, and if this brother is truly worthy of praise, he shall have it – from Christ.”
This has got to temper our understanding of Paul’s message. Does he really not care what people think of him? To the degree that it impacts his ability to reach them with the gospel, I am confident he did care. Just look at the efforts he went to in order to understand the culture he sought to reach. “I have become all things to all men, that I may by all means save some” (1Co 9:22). Christ Himself became like us in all things (save that he did not sin) in order to be better suited to be our High Priest. But, He despised the shame, counting it as less than nothing. Doesn’t that ring with what Paul has been saying? You discount me? Fine. Don’t discount the Gospel. That is the thing that matters. Hear the message, whatever you may think of the messenger. And, if you hear that message, if it is truly taken to heart and if it truly takes root in your spirit, you will understand just how faulty your ability to judge is. You will know better than to trust your assessment of self, let alone of any other. Then, you will trust in Christ and Christ alone.
Having just finished a study of Galatians in our Sunday services, it is hard not to hear that message of grace alone permeating Paul’s meaning here as well. It undergirds the Gospel at every turn. Yes, you have a work to do in your sanctification. As Table Talk was pointing out last week, sanctification is indeed a synergistic effort in which we have our part to do. But, it is also done under the realization of reality: It is God who wills and works within you. You have your faltering part to play, but it is His assurance that gives you strength to get up and continue each time you falter. He will not let you stumble and fall. When the time comes that Christ has returned and He renders His judgment, the answer is already known to those who are called by His name, according to His will. That judgment was rendered on the Cross and in the Resurrection. It has not changed. It shall not change.
What, then, shall I say of that friend I once knew? Was he a believer or not? I cannot say. I can, however, say this: If he was a believer then, then his stumbling, though it continues for years, remains but for a season. There are some things that simply cannot be reversed in this life. I dare say it is far beyond the realm of the believable to suppose he might yet reunite with his ex-wife. That alone does not preclude salvation. Think David and Bathsheba. The sin was great, and the proper recompense of a repentant heart utterly impossible. The man she was rightfully wed to was dead. He wasn’t coming back no matter how repentant David’s heart. Nor was she leaving his household. Yet, David remained a man after God’s own heart, and God saw fit to make these two a part of the lineage from which His own Son would enter the realm of human life.
If he was a believer, then, I can be assured that he still is, and that somewhere along the way, God will see to his restoration, just as He did for Peter, for David. If he was not a believer, then however pious a face he put on his life, it was then and always shall be a lie. It’s not that hard, really, to maintain a mask of piety sufficient to fool our fellows at church. We all tend to have our church face on come Sunday anyway. It would be harder, I suppose, to maintain so good a façade as would fool a spouse for years on end, but even there, I could see it managed. Long hours at work would help, in that it lessens the hours in which the façade must be maintained. But, sure. We’re expert at putting on airs; hypocrites all! Christians can hardly claim to have cornered that market, though we seem to bear the charge more often.
Recognize, then, how readily we can be fooled, and stop passing judgment before it’s time. Don’t suppose your heroes of the faith are necessarily as heroic as you presume. Stop putting your favorites up on pedestals, lest in their falling, they fall upon you. You have one hero: Jesus, the Christ of God’s own choosing. That will suffice. Be thankful for sound teachers, but don’t exalt them above their due. Be praying for careful pastors and leaders, but never lose sight of the fact that they remain no more than men such as yourselves. They have their own foibles, their own failures, their own weaknesses to deal with. They have taken up a difficult task in serving you in spite of their brokenness. But, to serve you best, it is necessary to remind you often that your safety is not found in them, but in the Christ they serve.
For my part, I pray that I may be of sound mind and judgment as I continue in this role of serving as an elder in the house of God. I was asked again yesterday whether I was enjoying this office. It is not a matter of enjoying it, though I will admit to finding a certain joy in being found fit for it. I also know a great deal of wonder, and not a little bit of concern that it should be so. There is a weight that comes with the office, a weight of care and concern, a weight that comes of knowing how thoroughly incapable I am, and how great the harm could be should I fail to pursue my task in the strength and the wisdom God alone can provide.
Father, guard Your church from me. Hold me fast to Your Truth, to Your ways. I know my failures, and they are many. I know Your character, and it is holy. I trust – I must trust – that You have guided Your people in choosing to set me in this place. Therefore, I trust that You will help me to serve to Your glory. But, how great the fear, Lord, that I should fail. How weak I know myself to be. Praise be that You are strong! Holy Spirit, how greatly I need You as my constant companion, my Adviser and my Counsel. If I have been neglectful of You, let that cease today. If I have been deaf to Your direction, open these ears. But, this above all: For the sake of Your children, let me serve in wisdom and let my judgments reflect Your own, where judgment becomes necessary.
Holy God, You know the things that come to my attention, and seemingly to mine alone. I pray You would grant me to allow those matters the attention they deserve – no more and no less. Even this morning, You arranged that my eyes should fall upon the instructions given Your people. “A single witness shall not rise up against a man on account of any iniquity or any sin which he has committed” (Dt 19:15). Le me, then, be wise to discern a malicious witness from a true witness. Grant that I may rightly discern the Accuser of the brethren, even though he should speak through a brother. Above all, let me be mindful that our battle is not against flesh and blood, certainly not within the household! No. We battle against principalities and powers in high places, and knowing this, I give thanks this morning for Christ Jesus, our Warrior King! For, the battle belongs to Him, and in Him we shall certainly have our victory.
