SUNDAY: JUDGMENT OR DISCERNMENT? By: Manny Man Sansano, John Daly City, California, USA Note: Sunday’s Lesson only of SS Lesson # 9 entitled, “One Lawgiver and Judge,” November 22-28, 2014. INTRODUCTION Our Sunday’s lesson this week is about “judgment” and “discernment.” What is “judgment,” and what is “discernment,” and how do they differ, and also which one of the two do you think is better, and why? This is what we are going to discover in Sunday, and so let’s move, and deal with the subject matter. 1. THE TEXT AND ITS TRANSLATION: WHAT DOES IT SAY IN THE ORIGINAL? The key text for Sunday, which is James 4:11 based on the original says, “Do not speak against one another, brothers. The [one] speaking against [a/his] brother, or judging his brother, is speaking against [the] law, and is judging [the] law. On top of this if you are judging [the] law, you are not a doer of [the] law, but a judge.” Take a look at the ESV (which is literally akin to the KJV) that says, “Do not speak evil against one another, brothers. The one who speaks against a brother or judges his brother, speaks evil against the law and judges the law. But if you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law but a judge.” What do you notice in this literal translation in comparison to what I have provided? You would notice that James 4:11 has three sentences, and in the first one what I have and the ESV are the same. The second sentence has four verbs. Let us look at the first two of these verbs first. You would notice that what I have are 1) “The [one] speaking” and 2) “judging,” 4) while the ESV has 1) “The one who speaks” and 2) “judges.” In essence, both are correct, but what I did is simply to reflect the “participial” nature of the verb “speak” and “judge.” In the original both are present active participles, which normally in English are verbs that end in the “ing,” and that’s just what I did, and both ways are correct anyway in terms of being present active. This is what I have for the last two verbs of the second sentence, namely 3) “is speaking against” and “is judging [the] law,” while the ESV has 1) “speaks evil against” and 2) “judges the law.” These two verbs are not participles, but they are present active verbs in the original, and once again that’s just what I did, that is, to simply reflect the verbs in the active “ing” forms, and again, both ways are correct. In the third sentence what I have is 1) “if you are judging [the] law,” while the ESV has “if you judge the law.” What I have done here is very much akin to the two previous verbs. This is verb is not a participle, but simply a verb in the present active, and again I’m just reflecting its active nature using the “ing” form. What I have and what the ESV has are acceptable depending on the purpose of your translation. The purpose of the ESV is to reflect the verbs and the participles in their present forms, and my purpose is to reflect them not only in their present forms, but also in their “ing” active forms. The NIV, a dynamic translation, has this, “Brothers and sisters, do not slander one another. Anyone who speaks against a brother or sister or judges them speaks against the law and judges it. When you judge the law, you are not keeping it, but sitting in judgment on it.” Take a look what the NIV does. It has the word “sisters,” which is not found in the original. All the verbs and the participles in the second sentence are rendered akin to what the ESV has. And the last sentence has the verbs “you are not keeping it” and “sitting in judgment on it.” These words are not verbs in the original, but nouns (“doer” and “judge”), but the NIV made them to appear as if they are verbs. The NIV has its own purpose, and that’s what it does for this text, that is, it makes it dynamics. Dynamically, however, that’s what it means if one is “not a doer of the law” (“you are not keeping it”), and when one becomes a “judge” of the law (you are “sitting in judgment on it”). The NLT which is a paraphrase translation has this, “Don’t speak evil against each other, dear brothers and sisters. If you criticize and judge each other, then you are criticizing and judging God’s law. But your job is to obey the law, not to judge whether it applies to you.” What it does for the verbs “criticizing” and “judging” (the second set of verbs in the second sentence) is akin to what I have. It reflects the “ing” active forms of these verbs, but what it does for the two nouns in the third sentence is it transforms them into infinitives (“to obey” and “to judge”). Once again, it has its own purpose, and that is, to make it as a “thought for thought” translation, while the NIV makes it dynamic. My interest and purpose here is to reflect the text literally as possible so that you would see what it looks in the original. The words that I have inside the brackets (“[]”), which you can see in English translations, are not in the original, but are necessary supplements in doing translations. And one more, if you notice, my third sentence begins with “on top of this,” while most of the translation begin it with the word “but.” I am fine with the word “but,” because that’s what it is in the original. However, I’d like to note that the translation “on top of this” is also a part of its lexical meanings that include “on the other hand,” “and,” “moreover,” “indeed now,” and “next.” I have chosen “on top of this” over the most common “but” because to me the third sentence appears to be climactic in the flow of what James is talking about in this text. Now, it’s time to take a look at what James 4:11 is saying in relation to our Sunday’s sub-topic entitled, “Judgment or Discernment?” And hopefully, we will see why our SS Lesson entitled James 4:11 as “Judgment or Discernment?”, and that is, we would discover that while it has nothing to do with “judgment,” why then it has to do with “discernment.” 2. “SPEAKING AGAINST ONE ANOTHER”: WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? Let’s bring the text of James 4:11 here. It literally says, “Do not speak against one another, brothers. The [one] speaking against [a/his] brother, or judging his brother, is speaking against [the] law, and is judging [the] law. On top of this if you are judging [the] law, you are not a doer of [the] law, but a judge.” The first thing that we will do is to take a look at the verb “speaking against.” Most translations render this verb as “slander” (NIV), “speak evil against” (NLT; ESV; NASB), “criticize” (Holman; ISV); “slandering” (GWT), “murmur” (Jubilee 2K), “detract” (Douay-Rheims), and “speak against” (WEB; YLT). These translations are all are correct, because they are a part of the range of meanings for this verb, which also include “to speak ill of,” “to rail at,” “to speak down to in a hostile, deriding way,” “to mock (revile),” and also “to detract from someone’s reputation by malice of speech directed against one’s neighbor,” “to defame,” “to slander (backbite),” “to speak against one,” “to criminate,” “to traduce,” “to speak evil of,” and “to talk against.” What is unique about this verb in the New Testament is that it occurs only 5 times, and it is found only in James (4:11) and in 1 Peter (2:12; 3:16), and nowhere else. The adjectival form of this verb is found in the New Testament, but one time and only in Romans 1:30. So Paul, James, and Peter were aware of what these words mean. As an adjective it means “slanderous,” “back-biting,” “a railer,” “defamer,” “evil speaker,” “talkative against, i.e. a slanderer - backbiter.” In Romans 1:30 the “slanderers” are associated with a wrong crowd of people: “God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents” (NIV). In 1 Peter 2:12 the act of “slandering” is something that is common among those that did not have the knowledge of the true God in their lives (“pagans”). It says, “Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing wrong, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us.” The verb here is the word “accuse,” which is the same one as found in James 4:11. And likewise, in 1 Peter 3:16, the act of “slandering” is something that is common among those that did not know and did not have Christ in their lives. Take a look, “keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.” The verb here is “speak maliciously.” So, these two words (“accuse” and “speak maliciously”) from the NIV are a part of the range of meanings for the verb that we are dealing with. There’s another thing that is helpful, and that is, the noun form of this verb, which occurs 2 time in the New Testament and are found in 2 Corinthians 12:20 and 1 Peter 2:1, and once again from Paul and Peter. Notice that in 2 Corinthians 12:20 the noun “slander” is associated with so many bad activities, “For I am afraid that when I come I may not find you as I want you to be, and you may not find me as you want me to be. I fear that there may be discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, slander, gossip, arrogance and disorder” (NIV). In 1 Peter 2:1 the same things are found. It is associated with a host of bad activities, “Therefore, rid yourselves of all malice and all deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and slander of every kind” (NIV). Putting aside the pagans (the ungodly and the non-Christians), and concentrating mainly among the believers, based on the texts cited above, “speaking against” one another is a manifestation of pride, jealousy, and selfishness, and quarrels, and many others. It is with hope that by now we already have an idea as to why James told the Christians not to engage in this kind of business, and for one thing, it is very ungodly and very un-Christian. Apparently, those that engage in “slandering” fellow church members are engaging into something that is far from being expected of godly people or Christian believers. So the very strong injunction of James is very clear, “Do not speak against one another, brothers,” and that means, as far as our range of meanings is concerned, “Do not slander, criticize, detract, rail at, speak down to in a hostile, deride, mock, revile, defame, backbite, criminate, traduce, accuse, or speak maliciously against one another.” I’d like to bring another similar word here that would hopefully widen our understanding for the word “slander” as found in James 4:11. There is a particular word that means “slanderer,” and that word is the word “devil,” which occurs 38 times in the New Testament (Matthew 4:1, etc). In the original the word “devil” (an adjective based on Matthew 4:1; etc) also means “false accuser,” someone “unjustly criticizing to hurt (malign) and condemn to sever a relationship,” and particularly it refers to Satan “the Slanderer.” It also means “backbiter, i.e. an accuser, calumniator (slanderer),” “someone who casts through, i.e. making charges that bring down (destroy).” The verb form of this particular adjective also means “to slander,” “to accuse, and “to defame” just like the verb “speak against” as found in James 4:11. Do you think there is a connection between the verb “speak against” as found in James 4:11 and the word “slanderer” as found, for instance, in Matthew 4:1? As far as inspiration is concerned yes there is a connection. James is exhorting the Christians that they should not slander one another, because such a thing is the work of the Devil. He is telling them to stop this evil practice to which they have resorted, because if they will continue to slander one another they will eventually destroy their relationship with one another within the church. Now, let’s go to the next set of thought in James 4:11 as found in the second sentence, and let’s pay attention to what it says, because it is very surprising. 3. “SPEAKING AGAINST ONE ANOTHER” MEANS “JUDGING THE LAW”: WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? The next thing that James is talking about in James 4:11 is very important one. He says, that when you are “speaking against” (“slandering”) or “judging” your fellow believer you are actually guilty of “speaking against” (“slandering”) the law, because by then you are “judging the law.” Once again, let’s bring James 4:11 here, and concentrate on the second sentence. “Do not speak against one another, brothers. The [one] speaking against [a/his] brother, or judging his brother, is speaking against [the] law, and is judging [the] law. On top of this if you are judging [the] law, you are not a doer of [the] law, but a judge.” This is very surprising, because the person that is being a target of “slander” is being equated now with the “law,” and why? To answer this question, I’d like to show you some literary connections found in the second sentence of James 4:11, and here it is: 1) The [one] 2) speaking against = 6) is speaking against 3) [a/his] brother = 7) [the] law 4) or = 8) and 5) judging his brother = 9) is judging [the] law. Do you see the equation here? Number 3 (“brother”) and number 7 (“the law”) parallel each other, and also number 5 (“judging a brother”) and number 9 (“judging the law”) parallel with each other as well as also the rest. When you are judging a fellow believer, that’s what would happen, and it is as if you are judging the law itself. The logic here should not be complicated, and it is. If you violated the second half of Ten Commandments (“the law”), logically you have done something wrong against your fellow human beings, because the second half of the Ten Commandments has to do with our relationship with our fellow human beings (“love your neighbor as yourself”). The first half has to do with our relationship with God. The matter of “speaking against” (“slandering”) our fellow believers is simply a violation of the particular commandment that says “you shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.” What James is doing here is that he is expounding a particular commandment (“do not slander”) to the church for the best interest of the relationships of the believers within the church. Apparently, as I have mentioned, there was a problem among the early believers, and “speaking against” (“slandering”) one another must be a reality among them. And because of that those that were guilty of such a crime were guilty of “speaking against” the law for by then they were “judging the law.” Now, here’s the intriguing point in the text, and that is, how those who are “speaking against” one another or “judging” one another are actually “judging the law” in the grand scheme of things? To answer that question, this is a thought from a commentary, and it says, “The logical train of thought seems to run thus. To speak against a brother is to condemn him; to condemn, when no duty calls us to it, is to usurp the function of a judge. One who so usurps becomes ipso facto a transgressor of the law, the royal law, of Christ, which forbids judging (Matthew 7:1-5).” It is clear from this quote that once you usurp the law, you become guilty “ipso facto” (“by the fact itself”) of “judging the law.” The better thing to do to avoid becoming guilty of “judging the law” is to avoid “speaking against” (“slandering”) or “judging” one another. It is true that such a thing is a difficult thing to do, because that is already a human sinful default. In our fallen nature, it is very easy to “speak against” (“slander”) or “judge” others. It takes a change in mindset to stay away from such a thing, and for one thing, that is very much possible to do, because while it is commanded, a particular result is expected, and as far we all know, it is by the God’s grace alone, and not by means of our own efforts only. Let’s now go to the last part of James 4:11, which provides the climactic thought of what James is trying to emphasize. 4. “JUDGING” MEANS TO BE A “JUDGE” RATHER THAN TO BE A “DOER”: WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? Finally, let’s bring James 4:11 here, and concentrate on the last sentence. “Do not speak against one another, brothers. The [one] speaking against [a/his] brother, or judging his brother, is speaking against [the] law, and is judging [the] law. On top of this if you are judging [the] law, you are not a doer of [the] law, but a judge.” In the second sentence, “speaking against” (slandering”) or “judging” one another equals “judging the law,” and now “judging the law” has changed to being a “judge” of the law than simply being a “doer” of the law. This train of thought should not confuse us. It is still the same as the train of thought of the second sentence. It means that when you take God’s law into your own hands (usurpation of God’s law), you become like a human judge that takes the human the law into one’s hands instead of a citizen whose duty is simply to obey the law. The difference between the law of the land, which is in the hands of a human judge, and the law of God is that God’s law should be in God’s hands alone, because only God is supposed to make decisions concerning His own law, and not anyone else. This is why “speaking against” (“slandering”) or “judging” one another is dangerous. In the past (here in this quarter) I have done some study on the word “doer” based on James 1:23-24, and I’d like to provide a summary here of what this noun means. It occurs 6 times in the New Testament, and it means “a performer,” “a poet,” “a maker,” or “carrier out.” This word occurs once in Acts 17:28 (as written by Luke), and another one in Romans 2:13 (as written by Paul), and once again the rest is found in James 1:22, 23, 25; 4:11. Now, what information can we get from such statistics? Obviously, this word is another word that is mostly found in James as one of his favorite vocabularies. The verb form of this noun means “to do,” “to make,” “to manufacture,” “to construct,” “to act,” or “to cause.” The lexicon says that it is used for a “performer,” especially of a “poet.” A “poet” is someone that do something. That is the meaning of the word “doer” in James 4:11 based on its context and range of meanings. James said, the Christian is supposed to be a “doer” of the law rather than being a “judge” of the law. In terms of being a “judge” of the law in contrast to being a “doer” of the law, this is what a commentary is saying about the matter: “It is implied here that it is the simple duty of every Christian to obey the law. He is not to assume the office of a judge about its propriety or fitness; but he is to do what he supposes the law to require of him, and is to allow others to do the same. Our business in religion is not to make laws, or to declare what they should have been, or to amend those that are made; it is simply to obey those which are appointed, and to allow others to do the same, as they understand them. It would be well for all individual Christians, and Christian denominations, to learn this, and to imbibe the spirit of charity to which it would prompt.” Here’s another quote that is worth sharing here. It says, “In a court a judge must be impartial in evaluating the evidence, and be just in applying the law and passing sentence. The slanderer, by contrast, generally neglects to learn the facts, avoids speaking in the presence of the accused, sets aside the law of love, and as a self-appointed judge hands down the verdict.” These two quotation really speak for the subject in terms of what James is saying concerning being a “doer” of the law against being a “judge” of the law. The slanderer puts aside the law of God and places oneself on the same level as God. While we cannot afford to be guilty of that, we should, therefore, avoid doing that. 5. DISCERNMENT INSTEAD OF JUDGMENT: WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? It is very clear from the Scripture that judging others is highly discouraged. However, there is a substitute for that kind of thing, and that is, “discernment.” How then is “discernment” different from “judgment?” The answer to this question should not be that difficult, and the answer is to “judge” in the context of what we have discussed so far means to destroy others, but to “discern,” however, means to “detect with sense.” Our SS Lesson provides us of the following texts that contain the “motif” (“idea” and not necessarily “wordings”) of “discernment” in contrast to “judgment.” And we will let the passages of Scripture speak for themselves. 1) Acts 17:11, “Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true” (NIV). 2) 1 Corinthians 6:1-5, “1If any of you has a dispute with another, do you dare to take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the Lord’s people? 2Or do you not know that the Lord’s people will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? 3Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life! 4Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, do you ask for a ruling from those whose way of life is scorned in the church? 5I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers” (NIV)? 3) 2 Corinthians 13:5, “Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you—unless, of course, you fail the test” (NIV)? 4) Philippians 1:9, “And this is my prayer: that your love may abound more and more in knowledge and depth of insight” (NIV). 5) 1 John 4:1, “Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world” (NIV). 6) Galatians 6:1, “Brothers and sisters, if someone is caught in a sin, you who live by the Spirit should restore that person gently. But watch yourselves, or you also may be tempted” (NIV). If you are interested with the meaning of the word “discernment” based on the Bible, the text by which we can work on, which is very common among us is the text that says, “The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned” found in 1 Corinthians 2:14 (ESV). The word “discerned” in this text is a verb, and it occurs 16 times in the New Testament, and what does it mean? It means “to examine,” “to inquire into,” “to investigate,” and “to question,” “to appraise,” “to ask questions,” “to call to account,” “to try (trial),” “to inquire into,” “to scrutinize,” “to sift,” “to question.” The meaning alone of “discernment” is very much contrary to the meaning of “speaking against” (“slandering”). We will dig more into this word from the Scripture. The act of “discernment” does not totally set aside the act of “judging,” but we should understand that such kind of “judging” is not the same as “to destroy” other people, but to “judge” properly to know the truth based on facts. This kind of “judging” is the one being spoken about in 1 Corinthians 6:1-5 (above). So furthermore, the word “discern” (verb) also means “to complete a process,” “to select by separating/judging,” “to distinguish by vigorously judging,” “to closely examining (investigating) through the process of careful study, evaluation and judgment,” and “to examine, investigate, question.” And in its forensic sense in the ancient world, the word “discern” refers to “examination by torture.” All of these processes (including the use of torture in those days) sets aside the idea of “judging” that is being discouraged in James 4:11. Discernment involves a lot of investigation rather than just presumptions. This is the same idea (of “examining” or of “investigating”) found among the Bereans spoken about in Acts 17:11, and also the same thing is found in 2 Corinthians 13:5 (above). Based on the contrast in meanings between the word “judgment” and the word “discernment,” we would rather practice “discernment” (“examining”) rather than “judgment” (“speaking against”). CONCLUSION By way of conclusion, I will ask you this question. Have you ever heard about the disease called “dung syndrome?” I heard about that a long time ago. It was brought to the Philippines by a certain Adventist evangelist from America. By this kind of disease what he means by that is that, when animal dung is dump into a certain area the tendency for the dung is it would smell terribly. However, when the dung is scattered in different places, it does not smell that bad. The truth of the matter is that, when believers are all living together closer to each other, they smell very bad, and that’s when “speaking against” one another happens. It is apparent that in those days believers were living not too far from each other, and thus, the dung syndrome tendency happens. When believers are living together closer to one another, gossip or slandering become a way of day to day living. In places where believers are living together (such as schools, institutions, ghettos), such would be the reality. Familiarity becomes a problem, because everything that others is doing is seen by everybody and known by everybody. And everybody is talking about it. That is where judging (“speaking against”) others occur within the faith community. And that is where believers become guilty of taking the law into their own hands, and become judges of the law themselves. Our Sunday lesson has this concluding comments and question, “It’s so easy to criticize and judge others, especially when they do things we don’t like. How can we learn to know if we have crossed the line from being spiritually discerning to being judgmental toward God’s law?” How can you learn to know that you have crossed the line? You would know it instinctively, because when you do something wrong, there is a sense within you that would tell you that what you are doing is no longer good, but bad.
Posted on: Mon, 24 Nov 2014 05:08:16 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015