Good Judgment?

---

Good judgment, good discernment, and proper discrimination between right and wrong is essential. So why is it that being "judgmental" turns out to be so wrong or damaging? In dealing with that, the oft-quoted maxim is to love the sinner and hate the sin. I don't think many people can really pull this off very well. We tend to fail at either one, or the other. Often, both.

Let's examine how it is supposed to be done. How does Jesus manage to maintain judgment against sin while extending mercy to not condemn the sinner? Look in the gospel of John, chapter 8, for the story of the woman caught in adultery. The accusers are trying to trap Jesus, placing him in a difficult situation in which any response a man might be likely to provide to the provocation would give them grounds for denouncing him.

So they bring the woman who was, as they said "caught in the very act". The obvious question is "where is the man?" The law did, in fact, demand that she be stoned, but also that the man be stoned. Note that adultery was when a man had intercourse with a woman who was married to another man (apparently, if a married man had intercourse with a woman who was not married at all, then he could thereby betroth himself to her, and he would obligated to take her as an additional wife).

Jesus seemed to ignore them, stooping to run his finger on the "ground" (this was inside the Temple) as if he was writing something, though there is no record of what he wrote, as if there was mark being made so no one could tell. After they persisted in questioning him, he stood up to answer, but then he immediately after went back to his stooped posture, and continued his writing with his finger.

Perhaps you remember his answer. It is important to point out that the question was posed as "the law says this, but what do you say?" But Jesus did not contradict the law. He did not tell them they should not stone her. He did not invalidate the Law. He did not even go so far as to say "Yes, the law calls for her death, but I grant her mercy." Rather, he agreed, implicitly. He effectively said, "Yes, go ahead and stone her." Did you catch that? Of course, that was not the important part of the answer. But it was there. The important part of course was the stipulation that he was adding to the Law, a way that it should be carried out. He said, "Let the one of you who is without sin be the one to start the stoning by casting the first stone." [sorry, my paraphrase]

While continued his writing the second time, they began to leave, oldest to youngest. Some commentators have suggested that he was writing out the sins of those men, and they saw their sin exposed, and left. But I don't think so. I don't think anyone could tell what he was writing, or else the text would say something about it. To me, the important part of this is to look at where else we find a divine finger doing some writing. One instance is recorded in Daniel, where it was a ghostly apparition delivering a message of judgment from God.

But look further back, all the way to Exodus. It was the finger of God, present on Mount Sinai in a physical manifestation, that wrote the commandments of the covenant onto tablets of stone. If you accept the concept of a theophany, where the pre-existant Christ appears in bodily form multiple times in the old testament, this leads to an interesting thought. By the way, it is soon after this passage that we find Jesus explaining that even Abraham rejoiced to see "my day", and that "before Abraham was born, I am." I don't know what Jesus was writing, but it was like a sign of remembrance; Jesus recounting that it was He who wrote that Law in the first place. And as he explained elsewhere, the whole Law hinges on loving God thoroughly and loving your neighbor as yourself. This is the Law. So he drove that point home to those accusers. Is this what they really want? Is this the kind of justice they truly desire? Justice without mercy? If so, then they themselves would likewise deserve justice without mercy. James had something to say about that in his epistle.

I don't want that sort of absolute justice. No thank you. I want mercy. But if mercy applies universally, across the board, then there is no justice at all, and mercy has no meaning. In order for mercy to be mercy, it must necessarily be the exception rather than the rule. Thus, only the remnant are saved. But back to the story...

Jesus is the wisdom of God, the Word, and the fulfillment of the Law. How interesting that He stooped to write with his finger -- just like he stooped with clouds to write upon the tablets of the covenant when the Law for the Jewish people was first delivered through Moses. I believe there was something significant taking place as Jesus wrote on the ground, but I'm not exactly sure what it was. You can guess along with everyone else. But it was effective as intended. Each accuser left. Finally, there were no more, so He rose up and addressed the adulteress woman for the first time. The accusers were gone, yes, and Jesus did not condemn her either.

But what about the adultery? What about the offended husband? Well, actually, yes, where was he? We have no idea. Was he one of the accusers? If so, he had left and given up his demand for justice. In any case, there remained no accusation, except what Jesus might retain, for (as David pointed out regarding his sexual sin) the sin was against God. But Jesus, having no sin of his own to require mercy, granted mercy by not condemning her.

Most of us would like to take this as our license of freedom to go ahead and sin. Hey, she committed adultery, not just some violation of ceremonial procedure, but something that was covered explicitly by both the ten commandments as well as the Noachide laws in effect (according to ancient Jewish traditional teaching) from the time of Adam, and codified in the 7 Laws of Noah. And still, Jesus let her off the hook. Cool. So we can do whatever we want. Right?

Oops, not so fast. What did Jesus actually say? "Go now and leave your life of sin."

Whoa, did you catch that? He called it "sin"! He judged her behavior.

He passed judgment on her lifestyle as a life of sin. Ouch. And moreover, he commanded her to stop it!

Has that been your view of mercy? Has that been the way you tuck away this story in your own mind? It is extremely important that we catch this. Jesus did not invalidate the Law, but actually upheld it. Adultery is sin. And Jesus commanded that it stop. That is judgment. You see, judgment that can say that what is wrong is wrong is a good thing. Judgment that agrees with God's wisdom, his revealed word, and the principles of His law, is a very good thing. I even think this is closely tied in with the two fears the New Testament says we should have: a fear of God, and a fear of Sin (those are the only two, by the way). When there is no judgment, there is no fear of either. But the fear of the LORD is the beginning of Wisdom. And certainly here, in this story, we see Jesus clearly judging the woman's adultery as sin.

But, at the same time, He did not condemn her. This is what the mercy of God is about. It still honors the Law, and fully recognizes the vile ugliness of sin for what it is: evil rebellion against God. But it grants us what we do not deserve: a clean slate and an extension of our life, along with the command to stop sinning. If you follow this through the rest of the New Testament, I think you'll find the same thing continues to be elucidated and expounded upon. Jesus' willing death was in substitution for our deserved punishment so that the requirements of the Law could be satisfied while still granting us mercy and the opportunity for reconciliation and friendship with God. Jesus could allow the woman to go uncondemned because Jesus Himself would pay the penalty of death as the condemnation for her sin. And not just hers. Also my sin. And yours.

It is a horrible mistake for us to think that Jesus' way of mercy is one that says "your sin doesn't matter". If it didn't matter, then there would have been no need for him to volunteer to suffer the passion of his torturous execution on our behalf. Our sin is still sinful! Every sin still cries out toward God, screaming "DAMN ME TO HELL!" But Jesus stands in the way and says to the Father "Penalty already paid, in full".

And then He says to us, "Go and sin no more."

If your understanding of Christ's mercy over our sin has missed this point, then I dare say you are not alone, but among many who have been deceived by the father of lies into having no fear of sin, or of God. This is not the faith of the bible. May God have mercy on us, still.