Is “judge not lest ye be judged” about never calling out sin, or about how we do it?

General Faith
1

I’ve come to read this less as a command to suspend moral discernment and more as a warning about posture. Jesus doesn’t forbid recognizing sin; He warns against judgment that is hypocritical, self-exalting, or blind to one’s own need for grace.

The surrounding context about logs and specks matters a lot. The issue isn’t seeing clearly, but seeing clearly enough to help rather than condemn. Calling out sin without humility tends to harden hearts, including our own.

So for me, the question isn’t whether truth should be spoken, but whether it’s spoken from love, self-awareness, and responsibility rather than superiority.

1 Like
2

A really good question might be, what do we mean by judging?

One meaning is observation. I look at how you behave, how you treat people, your tone, your reactions, whether you are closed off or open, whether you are aggressive, passive, or assertive. I look at how orderly or chaotic you are. Whether you play victim or bully or take personal responsibility. And how you respond when you first meet me, and begin to engage me, and every reaction to every little subject I bring up- your interest, your lack, your own engagement or dismissal. It tells me a great deal. And I have this wonderful little ability to read people. I have a sharp, innate understanding of cues.

I look at everything like someone gathering intel. And I take all this information and gather it to a portfolio of you that I keep in my mind. It is a rolling portfolio, which means it is constantly shifting and growing. I add to it, as I see new layers. And I use this information to decide if I will trust you, to what degree, the amount of time I will give you, how much of an investment I am I going to make in your life, or if there is anything that connects us like a theme or a common interest.

And if God guides me to intervene in your life, it is a resource that I draw from. Memories of previous conversations will come to me, understanding will resonate with it as I learn more. And things about you will come to me, things you have not shared at all. I will know them. Or God will guide me to speak of a subject that is important to you, without my knowing it. It comes in the form of personal testimony that arises in my mind, or stories I am familiar with, or passages of the Bible, or Life lessons learned that I feel in some way compelled to share. And it can seem quite random, but in a way, it is like being carried downstream in a river.

I don’t fight it, I go with the flow, engaging it and letting it engage me, and engage others through me while never losing myself fully in it. I am still quite Conscious, awake, aware, focused, making decisions. We are partners, so to speak. And I don’t always know the reason why a subject was touched upon, but I trust God has a reason. And that is all I need- But sometimes, people will express the reason once something important has been touched upon. And if it is a wound, a hurt, a sensitive space that is hard for them to speak of or bring to light, it is my goal to help in the healing process. To do my little bit, as God works toward a larger healing goal in their life and I am only there for that brief moment.

I am not here to judge. I am here to help. To protect, defend, heal, and save. To feed, nurture, and support. To guide. To nudge or pull back. To encourage. To offer hope, kindness. To soothe. To counsel. And occasionally to warn when a line or boundary is about to be irrevocably passed.

I do not want to judge. I don’t want to be someone who destroys life, to decide if someone is worthy of life. I don’t want to lose my empathy, my love for others. I know what it is like to have darkness in my heart, to wish bad things on my enemies, and I do not want to be that person again. And that is the battle I wage.

It is such a slippery slope. One step into the darkness leads to another, and then another. That HATE feels so good, doesn’t it? And to have a reason to hate? Like sin? A qualified definite sinner who is hell bound? Validation that says in my mind, it’s okay to hate them. It’s okay to say snide remarks, roll my eyes, cast them away from me. It’s okay to not welcome them to my church. It’s okay not to show them the LOVE of Christ. Because God doesn’t love them like He loves me… One step after another into the flames of hell.

To me, that is what it means to serve the flesh rather than God. Getting my vengeful satisfaction, giving them the comeuppance they deserve. Focusing on the pleasure I get from being better. Because I know I am saved. Because I know I have Christ and they don’t. And it becomes so much harder to care with each step you take into it.

It takes a hold and it twists you until no one recognizes you. It is a lot like the Ring Frodo carries in Lord of the Rings; The Ring of Power tempts all who wield it, to eventually bend to Sauron’s (Satan’s) will, twisting everyone by the hold it has upon them, which grows until they are either as twisted and murderous as Gollum, or nothing but shadow puppets like the Wraiths. While it has the least effect on the small, humble, and meek (hobbits), who do not want to hold power over others, it still has a slow burn (Gollum) the longer they carry it and puts them in Sauron’s sight when they do use it.

You would probably think it would be difficult to wish an entire race of people harm, or people of another religion, just because one person behaved incredibly spiteful toward you? How hard do you think it is to see everyone as the enemy? I have experienced that. Even when I thought I was beyond it. I mean, racism??? I have always tried to be better than that. Until it happened. A racist comment. Racist thoughts. Because of the way one or two people treated me.

But the Living God, that walks with me, quickly and even preemptively puts other people in my path. To show me I am wrong about my hate. To lead me to question my judgement when I am ready to see the other person or people go to hell. Like how God said to Satan, have you considered my servant Job? Just when we think our judgement of others is sound, God places a roadblock to trip us. And Thank God, Christ is that stone that causes men to stumble. Or none of us might pause to see the evil we are so keen to do, as evil, and be moved, transformed, to do better.

To judge, for me, is a step in the wrong direction. God alone is Judge. I serve God.

3

Jesus is not telling us to shut our eyes and call it love. He is telling us to check our hearts before we open our mouths.

When Jesus says, “Judge not, that ye be not judged” ~Matthew 7:1, He is not cancelling discernment. He is cancelling hypocrisy. He paints a picture of a man with a beam in his own eye trying to do eye surgery on someone else ~Matthew 7:3–5. That man is dangerous, not loving. But notice this. Jesus does not say leave the speck alone. He says deal with your own sin first, then you will see clearly to help your brother. The problem is not judging. The problem is judging from a throne instead of from your knees.

This is where grit meets grace. God never calls His people to tolerate sin, but He never authorizes self-righteousness either. Jesus turns around in the same breath and says, “Beware of false prophets” ~Matthew 7:15. You cannot beware without discernment. He says, “Give not that which is holy unto the dogs” ~Matthew 7:6. That requires judgment. Later He says plainly, “Judge righteous judgment” ~John 7:24. Scripture does not contradict Scripture.

Paul drives it home even harder. “Do not ye judge them that are within?” ~1 Corinthians 5:12. Silence in the face of sin is not humility. It is neglect. Love that refuses to speak truth is not biblical love. “Thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him” ~Leviticus 19:17.

Here is the dividing line. Are you correcting to restore, or condemning to exalt yourself? Are you submitting to the same Word you are using to confront someone else? When correction flows from repentance, humility, and obedience to Christ, it reflects God’s heart. When it flows from pride, it reflects the flesh.

So “judge not” is not about never calling out sin. It is about refusing to play God while obeying God. The Bible does not call us to be blind. It calls us to be clean, clear-sighted, and courageous enough to speak truth without pretending we stand above it.

1 Like
4

I am a big fan of this explanation: The Judging Trap That Jesus Warns Us About • Sermon on the Mount

But this one is extremely cute: https://youtu.be/bAfq6yLdXLU?si=GqCBlD2zqUmocs0j

As the first video explains, “ITS A TRAP!

333
333620×464 52.2 KB

222
222321×180 4.74 KB

111
111600×450 48.8 KB

1 Like
5

Excellent video @Tillman

J.

1 Like
6

Everything you said here seems beautiful and well-written. So one question, just one. When do you warn the person that you are “gathering intel. And I take all this information and gather it into a portfolio of you that I keep in my mind.” While observing them. While contemplating and waiting, do you actually LOVE the person enough to point out their sin, and the way to free them of it, and to keep them from heading to hell? Or? Do you just live and let die? Do not say anything because you do not want to offend or hurt someone in any way. Just love them to hell?
Peter

2 Likes
7

I think I understand your point, @Tillman. Online we can present ourselves as flawless Christians and are very quick to use Scripture as a weapon against others, which is far too easy to do. In real life, though, it is different.

Face‑to‑face, in real time, we actually see how one another lives, build genuine relationships, and create space where you can point out my faults and I can point out yours.

How a Jewish reader would understand this…

Proverbs 4:23 – “Keep your heart with all diligence; for out of it are the issues of life.”[1]

While not about judging others directly, it emphasizes self-guarding and personal responsibility. Jewish readers would see this as the foundation: correct your inner life first.

Proverbs 21:2 – “Every way of a man is right in his own eyes: but the LORD pondereth the hearts.”[2]

This highlights human blindness to personal faults, aligning with the “log in your eye” image. God discerns true character, not superficial judgment of others.

Leviticus 19:18 – “Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.”[3]

Jewish readers often see interpersonal ethics as rooted in self-awareness and fairness, so the warning against hypocrisy in judgment fits naturally with this command.

Mishnah Avot 2:4 – “Do not judge your fellow until you have stood in his place.”

This is a classic mussar principle, practically identical in spirit: don’t condemn others until you’ve accounted for your own faults. The “log and splinter” metaphor would echo this teaching directly.

Concept of cheshbon hanefesh – Literally “accounting of the soul.”

Jewish ethical tradition emphasizes self-examination before moral critique. The log/splinter imagery reads as a vivid metaphor for this practice.

So to a Jewish reader, the saying would be immediately recognized as a warning against hypocrisy, an encouragement toward inner moral work, and a principle of careful ethical judgment, all of which have deep roots in the Hebrew Scriptures and rabbinic thought.

Is that a fair summary of what you were saying?

J.

  1. Keep your heart with all diligence; for out of it are the issues of life. - KJV ↩︎

  2. Every way of a man is right in his own eyes: but the LORD pondereth the hearts. - KJV ↩︎

  3. Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people: but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. - KJV ↩︎

1 Like
8

@Johann, let’s get the record straight first. You started this conversation. You chose to engage. Responding to what you wrote is not “following you around.” That claim is a deflection, not an argument. Scripture commands answering error when it is presented publicly ~Titus 1:9. Silence in the face of confusion is not humility. It is negligence. Now to the substance.

Jesus did not borrow His authority from Jewish ethical tradition. He did not lean on Mishnah, rabbinic sayings, or later moral reflections. He spoke as the Judge of all the earth. When He said, “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” ~Matthew 7:5, He was not shutting down correction. He was demanding honest repentance before correction.

That verse does not end with “leave your brother alone.” It ends with “then shalt thou see clearly.” Clean eyes are for clear judgment.

The Bible already teaches self-examination without appealing to extra sources. “Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith” ~2 Corinthians 13:5. But the same apostle also commands, “Reprove, rebuke, exhort” ~2 Timothy 4:2. Same Bible. Same authority. No contradiction.

The idea that correction requires shared life proximity is foreign to Scripture. Paul rebuked churches he had never met based solely on doctrine measured against the Word ~Galatians 1:6–9. John warned believers about deceivers without sitting at their table ~2 John 7–10. Truth does not wait for permission from relationship.

God never told His people to be quiet inspectors of their own souls while error marches unchecked. He told us to judge righteous judgment ~John 7:24. Not proud judgment. Not self-exalting judgment**. But judgment rooted in submission to Christ and obedience to His Word.**

When correction bows to Scripture, it honors God. When correction is silenced by appeals to feelings, tradition, or accusations of motive, truth is the casualty. That is the line Jesus drew. And that is the line I am standing on.

9

When teaching repeatedly redirects correction away from testing truth and toward tone, empathy, and personal reflection, it discourages biblical examination. Scripture never treats doctrine as something to be protected from questioning. It commands the opposite. “Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God” ~1 John 4:1.

The shift from “What has God said?” to “How would I want to be treated?” quietly relocates authority from God’s Word to human perspective. Jesus did not say truth is measured by how it feels to receive it. He said, “Judge righteous judgment” ~John 7:24.

Biblical humility does not avoid scrutiny. It welcomes it. “Examine all things; hold fast that which is good” ~1 Thessalonians 5:21. Teaching that cannot endure examination is not protected by humility. It is insulated by it.

Jesus never discouraged testing doctrine. He rebuked those who claimed authority while refusing correction. “Search the scriptures” ~John 5:39. Truth does not fear questions. Error does.

So when correction is consistently reframed as unwise, unkind, or premature, readers should recognize the pattern. Scripture calls us to repentance, submission, and obedience to God’s Word first, not comfort with unchecked teaching.

10

Where you err, and I can teach you to “prompt correctly”-just ask. And you really need to study your bible, not proof-texting.

First, Torah assumes proximity and relationship for correction.
Leviticus 19:17[1]

“Brother” and “neighbour” are covenantal and communal terms. This is correction inside lived relationship, not abstract critique of strangers.

Second, wisdom literature ties correction to trust and familiarity.
Proverbs 27:6[2]
Correction is framed as something that comes from a friend, not a distant observer.

Third, Jesus explicitly grounds correction in relational order and proximity.
Matthew 18:15[3]
This assumes access, relationship, and mutual recognition. You cannot “go to him alone” if there is no shared life.

Fourth, Jesus condemns correction without shared self-examination.
Matthew 7:3–5[4]
This does not forbid correction. It forbids unaccountable correction, which is exactly what disembodied rebuke produces.

Fifth, Paul ties correction to pastoral presence and relational authority.
1 Thessalonians 5:12[5]
Admonition flows from known labor, presence, and care, not anonymous assertion.

Sixth, Paul explicitly limits correction to those within shared covenant life.
1 Corinthians 5:12[6]
Correction is an inside-the-community practice, not a universal right exercised from afar.

Now, the necessary clarification so this does not get distorted.

Scripture does contain prophetic rebuke at a distance.
Nathan to David, Elijah to Ahab, John the Baptist to Herod.
But prophets are divinely commissioned, accountable to God, and embedded in Israel’s covenant story. They are not random believers claiming “truth over relationship” as a lifestyle.

So what you said only works if you quietly equates:
– prophetic office
– pastoral authority
– online commentary
– and mutual discipleship

Scripture never does that.

Biblically, correction is meant to be restorative, not performative.
Restoration requires trust.
Trust requires presence.
Presence requires shared life.

So no, the idea that correction requires no shared proximity is not foreign to Scripture.
What is foreign to Scripture is the modern habit of calling disembodied critique “biblical correction” and then baptizing it with a verse.

Correction without relationship may still be true.
But Scripture is clear that it is rarely wise, rarely effective, and often hypocritical.

Kinda what you are doing friend. Tell me, how are we to test (δοκιμάζω) doctrine (διδαχή)?

Do you have any idea what dokimazo is?

And…

Scriptural rebuke begins in the heart. Before we confront anyone about anything, we should first examine our own motives. First Corinthians 16:14 says, “Let everything be done in love.” That includes rebuke. There is a right way and a wrong way to rebuke someone. Wrong rebuking stems from pride, anger, malice, jealousy, or another selfish attitude. The goal of an unscriptural rebuke is to injure, shame, or otherwise injure a Christian brother or sister. Often, hypocrisy is involved. Most of the Bible’s warnings against judging others pertain to those who condemn others for the very things they do themselves (Matthew 7:3–5). Paul wrote, “I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified” (1 Corinthians 9:27).

Jesus gave clear instructions for handling situations in which a brother or sister is caught up in a sin: “If your brother or sister sins, go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over” (Matthew 18:15). There is discernment implied in this verse. We are not to be watchdogs over each other, because we all sin in many ways every day (1 John 1:8; James 3:2). We all sin in thought, word, attitude, or motivation. But when another believer is choosing sin that harms himself, someone else, or the body of Christ, we are to intervene. A rebuke is necessary at times, as we must look out for each other. James 5:20 says, “Whoever turns a sinner from the error of their way will save them from death and cover over a multitude of sins.” Confrontation may be difficult, but it is not loving to allow a professing Christian to continue in a sin that will bring God’s consequences upon him or his family or his church.

J.

  1. Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him. - KJV ↩︎

  2. Faithful are the wounds of a friend; but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful. - KJV ↩︎

  3. Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. - KJV ↩︎

  4. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? … 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. - KJV ↩︎

  5. And we beseech you, brethren, to know them which labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you; - KJV ↩︎

  6. For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within? - KJV ↩︎

11

Here you go with your eisegesis again. If you can not figure out what eisegesis is look it up. You are conflating doctrinal testing with pastoral discipline, and Scripture does not do that.

Matthew 18 governs private sin between brothers. It does not govern the evaluation of teaching. Paul never applies Matthew 18 to false doctrine. He rebukes false teaching publicly and immediately ~Galatians 1:6–9, ~Galatians 2:11, ~Titus 1:11–13.

Leviticus 19:17, Proverbs 27:6, and 1 Corinthians 5 address covenant life and moral correction within a local community. They do not restrict believers from testing doctrine wherever it is taught. Paul explicitly commands the opposite: “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good” ~1 Thessalonians 5:21. That command is not limited by proximity or relationship.

δοκιμάζω means to test against a standard. The standard is Scripture, not relational trust. “Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God” ~1 John 4:1. John does not require shared life. He requires fidelity to Christ.

You say correction requires presence. Scripture says truth requires examination. Relationship governs care. Scripture governs doctrine. When those are confused, authority shifts from God’s Word to human process.

Correction meant to restore hearts must be done humbly. Testing doctrine must be done faithfully. Scripture never makes relational proximity a prerequisite for examining what is taught in God’s name.

Truth is not insulated by relationship. It is established by the Word of God.

What you are doing here is explaining away Scripture in order to preserve a man-made framework.

Instead of letting the apostles define how doctrine is tested, you keep importing extra conditions Scripture never gives. Relationship, proximity, trust, and process are being treated as gatekeepers of truth. The Bible does not do that. “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good” ~1 Thessalonians 5:21. That command is unconditional.

When Galatians 1, Romans 16, and 1 John 4 are presented, you do not refute them from the text. You reframe the issue around tone, wisdom, and relational dynamics. That shifts authority away from Scripture and onto human judgment. Scripture warns against adding requirements God did not give ~Proverbs 30:6.

Matthew 18 governs interpersonal sin. It does not govern doctrinal testing. Collapsing those categories is not careful exegesis. It is eisegesis.

Biblical correction can be pastoral and restorative. Biblical testing of doctrine is textual and objective. Scripture never says truth must wait for proximity. It says truth must be examined by the Word.

So yes, what is happening here is not submission to Scripture correcting opinion. It is opinion redefining how Scripture may be applied. That is the line Scripture itself will not cross.

12

Uh, you don’t believe in “exegeting” the Scriptures and you don’t address my points, so what’s the problem?

Exegesis means “exposition or explanation.” Biblical exegesis involves the examination of a particular text of scripture in order to properly interpret it. Exegesis is a part of the process of hermeneutics, the science of interpretation. A person who practices exegesis is called an exegete.

Good biblical exegesis is actually commanded in scripture. “Study [be diligent] to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15).

According to this verse, we must handle the Word of God properly, through diligent study. If we don’t, we have reason to be ashamed.

There are some basic principles of good exegesis which serious students of the Bible will follow:

  1. The Grammatical Principle. The Bible was written in human language, and language has a certain structure and follows certain rules. Therefore, we must interpret the Bible in a manner consistent with the basic rules of language.

Usually, the exegete starts his examination of a passage by defining the words in it. Definitions are basic to understanding the passage as a whole, and it is important that the words be defined according to their original intent and not according to modern usage.

To ensure accuracy, the exegete uses a precise English translation and Greek and Hebrew dictionaries.

Next, the exegete examines the syntax, or the grammatical relationships of the words in the passage. He finds parallels, he determines which ideas are primary and which are subordinate, and he discovers actions, subjects, and their modifiers. He may even diagram a verse or two.

  1. The Literal Principle. We assume that each word in a passage has a normal, literal meaning, unless there is good reason to view it as a figure of speech. The exegete does not go out of his way to spiritualize or allegorize. Words mean what words mean.

So, if the Bible mentions a “horse,” it means “a horse.” When the Bible speaks of the Promised Land, it means a literal land given to Israel and should not be interpreted as a reference to heaven.

  1. The Historical Principle. As time passes, culture changes, points of view change, language changes. We must guard against interpreting scripture according to how our culture views things; we must always place scripture in its historical context.

The diligent Bible student will consider the geography, the customs, the current events, and even the politics of the time when a passage was written. An understanding of ancient Jewish culture can greatly aid an understanding of scripture.

To do his research, the exegete will use Bible dictionaries, commentaries, and books on history.

  1. The Synthesis Principle. The best interpreter of scripture is scripture itself. We must examine a passage in relation to its immediate context (the verses surrounding it), its wider context (the book it’s found in), and its complete context (the Bible as a whole). The Bible does not contradict itself. Any theological statement in one verse can and should be harmonized with theological statements in other parts of scripture. Good Bible interpretation relates any one passage to the total content of scripture.

  2. The Practical Principle. Once we’ve properly examined the passage to understand its meaning, we have the responsibility to apply it to our own lives. To “rightly divide the word of truth” is more than an intellectual exercise; it is a life-changing event.
    What is good biblical exegesis? | GotQuestions.org.

Right?

Good ol’ hermeneutics and exegesis of Scripture, or did you have a change of mind?

Guess Wes Huff is also off the beaten path?

J.

13

Yes. I absolutely addressed your points. And I did it directly, biblically, and in context. I don’t have to run to outside sources and other people’s opinions to do it. What you’re doing now is hiding behind definitions to avoid the conclusion.

I never rejected exegesis. I corrected your misuse of Scripture. Matthew 18 deals with interpersonal sin and church discipline, not doctrinal testing. That distinction comes from the text itself and from apostolic practice.

Paul did not apply Matthew 18 to false teaching. He rebuked it publicly and immediately ~Galatians 1:6–9, ~Titus 1:11–13. John commanded believers to test doctrine without relational proximity ~1 John 4:1. That is Scripture interpreting Scripture. That is exegesis.

Quoting dictionaries and GotQuestions does not answer the issue. The issue is whether you are importing rules into texts that were never written to govern that situation. That is eisegesis, no matter how carefully it is wrapped.

2 Timothy 2:15 does not say “require proximity before correction.” It says rightly divide the Word. Rightly dividing means not collapsing different instructions into one rule.

This is not about rejecting scholarship. It is about submitting scholarship to the text. If doctrine could only be tested inside trusted relationships, Galatians would not exist.

The Word stands. Definitions do not change it.

14

As for that link, it is a good link. What you quoted from GotQuestions describes exegesis done correctly. What you are practicing here does not follow your own standard.

Good exegesis begins by asking what a text is actually addressing. Matthew 18 addresses interpersonal sin and church discipline, not doctrinal testing. Applying it to false teaching violates the contextual and grammatical principles you just listed.

Good exegesis also follows the Synthesis Principle. Scripture interprets Scripture. When Paul confronts false doctrine, he does not use Matthew 18. He rebukes publicly and immediately ~Galatians 1:6–9, ~Titus 1:11–13. Ignoring apostolic practice while forcing one passage to govern all correction is not synthesis. It is selectivity.

You also violate right division ~2 Timothy 2:15 by collapsing distinct biblical categories into one rule. Scripture gives different instructions for private sin, church discipline, and doctrinal error. Treating them as the same is not careful handling of the Word.

Quoting definitions of exegesis is not the same as doing it. Exegesis submits interpretation to the text’s purpose, audience, and use elsewhere in Scripture. What you are doing is importing a relational requirement into passages that never teach it.

By the standard you quoted, this is not exegesis. It is eisegesis.

15

Personally, this is just my opinion, but it seems to me that you may be bored and looking for attention. That said, do you also think Wes Huff is off track? And how, or by what method, do you study the Scriptures?

J.

16

This is not what dokimazo means, care to look it up?

Or here, let me help you.

Dokimazō, Dokimion, Dokimasia
This term is a metalurgist term for testing the genuineness of something (i.e., metaphorically someone) by fire . The fire reveals the true metal and burns off (i.e., impurities) the dross. This physical process became a powerful idiom for God and/or Satan and/or humans testing others. This term is only used in a positive sense of testing with a view towards acceptance (see SPECIAL TOPIC: GOD TESTS HIS PEOPLE [OT]).
It is used in the NT of testing
oxen ‒ Luke 14:19
one’s life ‒ 1 Cor. 3:13
ourselves ‒ 1 Cor. 11:28
believers approved by God ‒ 2 Cor. 10:18; 1 Thess. 2:4
even God ‒ Heb. 3:9; 1 Pet. 1:7
our faith ‒ James. 1:3
spiritual messengers or prophets ‒ 1 John 4:1
The outcomes of these tests were assumed to be positive (cf. Rom. 2:18; 16:10; 2 Cor. 10:18; 13:3,7), therefore, the term conveys the idea of someone examined and approved
to be worthwhile
to be good
to be genuine
to be valuable
to be honored

Peirazō, Ekpeirizō, Peirasmos, Peirasmo
This term often has the connotation of examination for the purpose of fault finding or rejection. It is used in connection to Satan’s tempting Jesus in the wilderness (cf. Matthew 4; Luke 4).
It conveys the attempt to trap Jesus (cf. Matt. 4:1; 16:1; 19:3; 22:18, 35; Mark 1:13; Luke 4:2; Heb. 2:18).
This term (peirazōn) is used as a title for Satan in Matt. 4:3; 1 Thess. 3:5 (i.e., “the tempter”; see SPECIAL TOPIC: SATAN).
Usage
It was used by Jesus warning humans not to test God (cf. Matt. 4:7; Luke 4:12, [or Christ cf. 1 Cor 10:9]).
It also denotes the attempt to do something that has failed (cf. Heb.11:29).
It is used in connection with the temptation and trials of believers (cf. 1 Cor. 7:5; 10:9, 13; Gal. 6:1; 1 Thess. 3:5; Heb. 2:18; James. 1:2, 13, 14; 1 Pet. 4:12; 2 Pet 2:9).

In Hebrews 3:9 they are both used in their distinctive senses. Words have meaning only in contexts!

Wouldn’t you say?

J.

17

Gal 1:6 There is No Other Gospel
¶ I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of the Messiah [Or Christ] and, instead, are following [Lit. Messiah for] a different gospel,
Gal 1:7 not that another one really exists. To be sure, there are certain people who are troubling you and want to distort the gospel about the Messiah. [Or Christ]
Gal 1:8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should proclaim to you [Other mss. lack to you] a gospel contrary to what we proclaimed to you, let that person be condemned!
Gal 1:9 What we have told you in the past I am now telling you again: If anyone proclaims to you a gospel contrary to what you received, let that person be condemned!
Gal 1:10 Am I now trying to win the approval of people or of God? Or am I trying to please people? If I were still trying to please people, I would not be the Messiah’s [Or Christ’s] servant. [Or slave]

Tit 1:10 Guard What is True
¶ For there are many people who are rebellious, especially those who are converts from Judaism. [Lit. those of the circumcision] They speak utter nonsense and deceive people.
Tit 1:11 They must be silenced, because they are the kind of people who ruin whole families by teaching what they should not teach in order to make money in a shameful way.
Tit 1:12 One of their very own prophets said,
“Liars ever, men of Crete,
savage brutes that live to eat.” [Epimenides (6th to 5th century BC)]

Tit 1:13 ¶ That statement is true. For this reason, refute them sharply so that they may become healthy in the faith
Tit 1:14 and not pay attention to Jewish myths or commands given by people who reject the truth.
Tit 1:15 Everything is clean to those who are clean, but nothing is clean to those who are corrupt and unbelieving. Indeed, their very way of thinking and their consciences have been corrupted.
Tit 1:16 They claim to know God, but they deny him by their actions. They are detestable, disobedient, and disqualified to do anything good.

A Worker Approved by God
2Ti 2:14 ¶ Remind others about these things, and warn them before God [Other mss. read of the Lord] not to argue over words. Arguing [Lit. It] does not do any good but only destroys those who are listening.
2Ti 2:15 Do your best to present yourself to God as an approved worker who has nothing to be ashamed of, handling the word of truth with precision.
2Ti 2:16 However, avoid pointless discussions. For people will become more and more ungodly,
2Ti 2:17 and what they say will spread everywhere like gangrene. Hymenaeus and Philetus are like that.
2Ti 2:18 They have abandoned the truth by claiming that the resurrection has already taken place, and so they destroy the faith of others.

2Ti 2:19 ¶ However, God’s solid foundation still stands. It has this inscription on it: “The Lord knows those who belong to him,” [Num 16:5] and “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord must turn away from evil.” [Num 16:26]
2Ti 2:20 In a large house there are not only utensils made of gold and silver, but also those made of wood and clay. Some are for special use, while others are for ordinary use.
2Ti 2:21 Therefore, if anyone stops associating with [Lit. cleanses himself from] these people, he will become a special utensil, set apart for the owner’s use, prepared for every good action.

You are doing an awful, unfounded assumptions, don’t you think?

J.

18

This is for you, “Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth” ~2 Timothy 3:7.

You brought up Wes Huff, but the material you linked and appealed to is Bob Utley. Unless you have a specific teaching from Wes Huff you want examined, there is no reason to shift the discussion to him. That move changes the subject instead of addressing the actual source being used.

This has already been addressed. Bob Utley is disqualified as a biblical authority because he allows personal opinion and conjecture to mix with the text. In fact Scripture condemns that practice directly. “Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation” ~2 Peter 1:20. The minute a teacher provides meaning instead of letting the text provide it, he has gone too far.

God never instructs believers to put His Word through a man’s grid. He tells us to accept what He has spoken. “All scripture is given by inspiration of God… that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works” ~2 Timothy 3:16–17. The Bible is enough.

This has nothing to do with who is popular or who sounds intellectual. It has to do with being faithful to the text. Opinions muddy the water and confusion results. “Every word of God is pure… Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar” ~Proverbs 30:5–6.

That is why I refuse to follow teachers who feel they need to mix God’s Word with their own philosophy. Scripture has already established the standard. Now the question is will we humbly submit to what God has said **or continue trusting in men?
**
As for what Bob Utley wrote from the link you gave, the Bible does not teach that sincere, godly believers arrive at different meanings of Scripture because the text is mysterious. That claim is false. God is not unclear when He speaks. “God is not the author of confusion” ~1 Corinthians 14:33. When meaning fractures, the problem is never God’s Word. It is the reader.

The statement that the Spirit is crucial but that disagreement among sincere believers is a mystery directly contradicts Scripture. God tells us exactly why people differ. “The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God… neither can he know them” ~1 Corinthians 2:14. That is not mystery. That is flesh, unbelief, or mishandling the Word.

The claim that no one is an objective interpreter is unbiblical. God says His Word gives understanding even to the simple. “The entrance of thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple” ~Psalm 119:130. If Scripture cannot be understood plainly, then God has failed to communicate. Scripture never teaches that.

The idea that interpretation requires a structured rational system to overcome bias places method above revelation. The Bible says meaning comes from God, not from human frameworks. “No prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation” ~2 Peter 1:20. Meaning is not produced by technique. It is received from God.

The repeated emphasis on ambiguity and “a larger range of interpretive options” contradicts how Scripture describes itself. God calls His Word truth. “Thy word is truth” ~John 17:17. Truth is not elastic. Truth does not shift depending on perspective.

The suggestion that Christians should expect widespread disagreement because the ancient text is ambiguous is not biblical. God says His Word is settled. “For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven” ~Psalm 119:89. Settled words do not produce endless meanings.

His approach subtly replaces Scripture alone with Scripture plus human caution, human systems, and human uncertainty. That is not how God says His Word works. God spoke clearly. He meant what He said. The issue is never the text. It is whether a man will submit to it.

Just remember you are the one who started this conversation, and you should not start complaining about my replies like you have been doing because you don’t like the truth.

19

Not lying, Bob Utley is not here to defend himself against your accusations, I’m more than happy to step up and show you your errors.
But we have a private conversation going, so let’s take it there.
Or take it to Facebook, makes no difference to me.

J.

20

We will discuss it here, not in PMs. You have already been hostile and insulting in private, and I am not continuing a private exchange where that behavior can be hidden.

You started this discussion by introducing the material, and I responded to it from Scripture. If you believe I am wrong, then correct me publicly, with Scripture, where everyone can see what is being said and how it is handled.

Bob Utley does not need to be present for his published words to be tested. Scripture commands us to test teaching, not wait for a man to defend himself. Let the issue be examined openly, by the Word of God, without insults or side channels.

For the record, you are the one who brought Bob Utley into this discussion, not me. I responded to the material you introduced. If there is an issue with Utley’s claims, then let’s examine them here, openly and by Scripture, rather than shifting the conversation elsewhere.