Disciples Need Wisdom for Relating to Those Inside and Outside — Matthew 7

Judging Other Believers, 7:1-5

 1 “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. 3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye." (Matt 7:1-5 NIV)

The words "Today's trouble is enough for today" in 6:34 leads naturally into Jesus' teaching about practices that can lead to today's and tomorrow's trouble, namely, conflicts within and without the communities of disciples. I understand chapter 7, verses 1-12 to be a unit—if not in Jesus' thought, at least in Matthew's. The words "for this is the law and the prophets" (v 12) seems to mark a "seam" in Matthew's account of the Sermon on the Mount.

Within this section the individual sayings of Jesus all belong to the general subject of preserving a peaceful and beneficial spirit within the communities of believers.

The first saying concerns harmful criticism within such a community. The judging referred to is a sign of spiritual competition: one disciple seeks to establish his or her superiority spiritually by pointing out minor flaws or spiritual lapses in a fellow believer. Jesus' imagery is almost burlesque it is so funny: a person with a huge log in his eye trying to see around that log to get at a tiny speck in another person's eye!

The warning given to a believer thus judging another is that he or she will be judged. This is not a warning that others will judge him or her, but that God will.  This kind of passive construction is what NT scholars call the "divine passive", since Jews in Jesus' day were reluctant to mention God by name lest they misuse His name. When we pray the Lord's Prayer "forgive us our debts, as we have forgiven our debtors," we are acknowledging this kind of reciprocity in God's dealing with us as we deal with others. The last half of v 2 warns us that the same degree of strictness that we judge others will be applied by God to judging us.

Verses 3-5 focus on the hypocrisy of our judging our fellow believers. Most of us who think we detect spiritual weakness in our brothers or sisters, are simply blind to much more serious sins in our own lives.

The final sentence, in which Jesus appears to give the okay to the judgmental believer to resume doing so after he was removed the log in his own eye is somewhat misleading, since at the  beginning he commands his disciples not to judge at all. I resolve that conflict by concluding that the last sentence is somewhat tongue in cheek: something like "if you are bound and determined to remove the speck, then at least first get rid of the huge log in you own eye!" That interpretation would be my preference.

We should distinguish this situation from what was commanded by Paul in 1 Corinthians 5:1-5. This refers not to private competition between believers but to formal church discipline. There also the sin Paul refers to much more serious than a minor flaw, a "speck"! A believer is committing adultery with his father's wife! Public behavior in direct contradiction to the clear moral teachings of scripture is concerned there.  Something that scandalous must be confronted and done so in an official way. Church discipline is not only permitted: it is mandated, and Matthew himself is fully aware of that, as verses later in his gospel show. But removing a speck is not church discipline. And the very fact that Jesus uses the imagery of a tiny speck shows how inconsequential the matter is, certainly not worth offending a brother or sister by mentioning.  Christians criticizing one another within local assemblies erodes the unity of the Body of Christ and weakens our testimony before the world.

Ronald Reagan made famous what he called "the Eleventh Commandment," which was "Thou shalt not criticize thy fellow Republican." What he meant by that was that it was more important that his party show a unified front in the quest for the presidency than to engage in intramural political wrangling. This dictum served Reagan well, both as a candidate for the highest office in our land and as a sitting president. There is an important analogy here applicable to us as believers: what minor differences we may have among ourselves pale in significance, when compared to the vital mission we have to present the gospel of God's saving grace to a world deceived by Satan and enamored of so many myths about Jesus and the scriptures. We dare not endanger the success of that mission by focusing on comparatively minor issues of disagreement with fellow Christians. In this regard Billy Graham will always serve as a good example.

Misjudging the moment, 7:6

“Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces (Matthew 7:6 NIV)

Related to the issue of misjudging a fellow believer and criticizing him for an inconsequential matter, is the subject of misjudging a situation for gospel witness. A Christian should be perceptive to distinguish between a hardened opponent of the gospel and a relatively receptive and open unbeliever. They are to be treated differently. That is one way in which this next short saying (in verse 6) can be interpreted in this context. Dogs are what gentiles are often called by Jews in that day. Even Jesus once compared gentiles to the puppies under the dinner table on which one did not waste food leftovers. Pigs were unclean animals in Jewish law. So the combination of the two terms suggests that to his Jewish disciples Jesus was referring to unbelievers. There was a danger in misjudging the readiness of an unbeliever to hear spiritual truth. If he was ready, he was no longer a dog or a pig. If he was not, then one ran the risk of only finding oneself embroiled in a heated argument, in which there are no winners. I vividly recall once when I was a new Christian in Princeton University and confidently engaged another student, who was in the second category. Not only did he not accept my testimony, but he thoroughly embarrassed me with the force of his arguments. In the language of this passage, he turned on me and tore me to shreds! Jesus was able to tell the difference between sincere inquirers who came to him or whom he encountered and the wily critics who sometimes pretended to be sincere inquirers. In his rials before Caiaphas and Pilate, Jesus was often silent, refusing to be drawn into needless arguments. He knew they were determined to sentence him to death. What was the point of antagonizing them and giving them an opportunity to blaspheme God?  "But we are not Jesus," you say. And you are right. For that reason, we need to listen to what he says next.. 

Ask, Seek, Knock, 7:7-11

“Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. 8 For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened. 9 “Which of you, if his son asks for bread, will give him a stone? 10 Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? 11 If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him! (Matthew 7:7-11 NIV)

Has Jesus changed the subject here? Or is he continuing the general subject of knowing how to relate to both fellow believers and outsiders? The fact that immediately afterwards, in verse 12, he summarizes what has preceded by the Golden Rule suggests that he has not changed the subject, but continues to address the above questions. So, although Jesus uses the example of a son asking his father for food, he definitely has his disciples' need for wisdom in mind among the "good gifts" that their Father will give them.

Both relating to fellow believers and non-believers requires divine wisdom, and—among the other "good gifts" that God will give—that is what Jesus proceeds immediately to suggest that his disciples seek in prayer. In this sequence of sayings it seems clear that the recommendation to ask, seek and knock was not a general recommendation of prayer, but a specific prayer for wisdom to know how to act, so as to edify and encourage fellow believers and not antagonize obdurate unbelievers. Luke records another occasion when Jesus repeated this saying and substituted the Holy Spirit for the "good gifts" (Luke 11:13). And since the Holy Spirit is the believer's guide, Luke's variant suggests that also here in Matthew Jesus had in mind the gift of guidance and wisdom.

Jesus uses three images for prayer here: asking, seeking and knocking. Why? It could be that he uses these three images to suggest both the need for persistence in prayer and for exhausting all possible avenues to God in prayer, such as your own private prayer, submitting requests to group prayer, and recruiting others to pray privately for your need.  

"The Golden Rule," 7:12

So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets (Matthew 7:12 NIV)

Rabbis in Jesus' day were fond of creating short pithy summaries of the ethical teaching of scripture. The famous rabbi Hillel, who was a slightly older contemporary of Jesus, coined one that is remarkably similar to this one. And of course Jesus himself on other occasions suggested others. The most famous is the first and second great commandments: (1) You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and mind, and (2) you shall love your neighbor as yourself. Since I don't believe Jesus had different opinions on the central rule on different days of the week, I am inclined to use the second great commandment as a guide to interpreting this Golden Rule as well. The disciple's main guide to interpreting the ethical commands of the Bible is the rule of love for others, love that imitates Christ's love.

Verse 12—in this specific context—was not intended as a general rule for conduct, as useful as it might seem to be. If that were the case, it would appear either at the very end of the Sermon on the Mount or near the beginning, perhaps after the Beatitudes. In this context it clearly relates to how a disciple should relate to fellow believers. It also encapsulates the wisdom that will be given by asking, seeking and knocking.

If we apply this rule to our relationships within the fellowship of believers, it reinforces the preceding words about not judging other disciples, because we would not wish them to do that to us. Realizing that we all occasionally fail, we should reserve all judgment on other Christians. Also, since it often impossible to tell from another person's external behavior what is going on in his or her heart, the possibility of misjudging is very great!

The Narrow and Wide Gates, 7:13-14

“Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it." (Matthew 7:13-14 NIV)

The imagery here is of two different entrances, called "gates" (or possibly "doors").  Behind each lies a roadway that leads to a destination. One entrance is wide and easy to find. The roadway behind it is also wide and easy to travel on. The other entrance is narrow and difficult to find and pass through, and the roadway behind it is also narrow and difficult to travel on. But the destination of the first is "destruction," while that of the second is "life," which in Matthew's terminology refers to the future earthly kingdom after the resurrection of all believers (Matt 18:8-9;19:16-17, 29; 25:46). Interpreters down through the centuries have rightly seen in this illustration the two life paths with opposite eternal results. In a way, this metaphor of Jesus' builds on the imagery of Psalm 1, which describes life's only two options: to follow the way of the righteous or the way of the wicked. In that psalm too the two ways have contrasting destinations. "The way of the wicked will perish" (Psa 1:6), and the destiny of those who choose to live this way is to be like chaff that the wind drives away in God's final judgment: they will be excluded from the "congregation of the righteous" (Psa 1:4-5).On the other hand, the righteous experience "life" in the following form: "They are like trees planted by streams of water, which yield their fruit in its season, and their leaves do not wither. In all that they do, they prosper" (Psa 1:3), and "The Lord watches over the way of the righteous" (Psa 1:6). In Psalm 1 the destination of the righteous, which corresponds to Jesus' word "life," is fruitful living in the present life, leading to inclusion in the "congregation of the righteous" after death. Jesus seems to use "life" in the same double sense: real life of fruitfulness in the now, as well as eternal life in God's presence after death.

All well and good. But how does one know what is "righteous" and what "wicked"? Are these not merely terms for what is generally approved and generally disapproved? Psalm 1 gives God's answer, in that it describes the two paths of the righteous and the wicked in terms of contrasting relationships to the law of God: the righteous both meditating on it and doing it, while the wicked disregard it and scoff at it. This is the objective standard. In the immediate context of the Sermon on the Mount Jesus also is concerned that his disciples "fulfill" the law and the prophets, i.e., the Old Testament scriptures, and that their "righteousness" exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees, which represents a very high standard. Although this seemingly unattainable goal has to be regarded by Jesus as attainable for his disciples, it is admittedly a difficult path, and one that few will opt for. Many of those who even profess to be his disciples may choose to settle for a lower standard of living.

We who believe in what is called the "eternal security" of all believers may find it difficult to understand a warning like this one. But it seems to me unavoidable that Jesus warns those who think they are his disciples and suppose that they can enter "life" while maintaining a standard for their lives lower than this difficult roadway described in the Sermon on the Mount, should not deceive themselves. For "life" and discipleship are inseparable entities. To "enter … life" is to commit to a narrow and difficult path. But it is the path our Savior himself trod and he is our companion and guide on that path, enabling us to meet the seemingly impossible demands and picking us up when we stumble in it. Failures along that path do not exclude a disciple from eternal life, but failure to even enter upon it does exclude. 

True and False Prophets, 7:15-20

“Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thorn bushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them." (Matthew 7:15-20 NIV)

On the surface this short section, which interrupts the flow from verse 14 to 21, seems out of place. What does this have to do with the general subject of a disciple pursuing the higher righteousness? True prophets of God always pointed the way in the Old Testament to a life that conformed to God's law and pleased him. False ones looked like the real thing on the outside, but inwardly only preyed on God's "sheep." How does a disciple recognize a "false prophet"? In the Old Testament times false prophets were recognizable in several ways. First, they were recognizable because their predictions didn't come true. The "rubber-stamp" prophets in King Ahab's court, who predicted his victory in the battle of Ramoth Gilead, were exposed as false because Micaiah, a true prophet of God, correctly predicted Ahab's death in that battle (see 1 Kings 22). Young Samuel's reputation as a true prophet of God grew as his predictions showed themselves to be unerringly correct (1 Sam 3:19-20; 9:5-6). Indeed this was one of the tests of a true prophet of God that God gave through Moses to the people in Deut 18:17-22.

But even if they were able to predict the future or give other miraculous signs, they were also identifiable if their advice went against the law of Moses and the words of other true prophets.  Moses wrote:

If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a miraculous sign or wonder, 2 and if the sign or wonder of which he has spoken takes place, and he says, “Let us follow other gods … and let us worship them,” 3 you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The LORD your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 It is the LORD your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him. 5 That prophet or dreamer must be put to death, because he preached rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery; he has tried to turn you from the way the LORD your God commanded you to follow. You must purge the evil from among you. (Deuteronomy 13:1-5 NIV)

Ironically, it was probably a passage such as this that Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin would have used as a pretext for ordering the execution of Jesus, for they would conclude that by claiming to be the Son of God and receiving worship from his followers he was essentially advocating the worship of a "god" other than the one true God.

In the New Testament Jesus too taught about "false prophets", and Peter and Paul taught about  "false teachers". The word "false" here refers to deceptive imitations: look-alikes, persons who want to be seen as true prophets.  In both of these sources the individuals described are identifiable by their deeds, what Jesus here calls their "fruit". In this context that "fruit" can hardly be anything other than behavior commanded by Jesus in the earlier parts of the Sermon. As Jesus will go on to say in verse 21, it is not words alone that qualify us to enter the kingdom, but words that produce a life matching Jesus' teachings here. James, Jesus' brother, stressed the same truth when he taught that believers are "justified" not just by faith, but by faith that produces appropriate works. Living the way Jesus taught his disciples should live is the best identification mark of a true voice from God. And, just as in the earlier context the "wide gate" and "wide road" lead to "destruction," so here the false prophets will find their final state in the "fire" into which the trees with bad fruit are thrown (7:19).

In this section Jesus warns his disciples not to follow teachers whose lives violate the teachings of scripture and his own teachings. In the next passage he expands the distinction between false and true prophets to disciples who witness and teach the true gospel, but do not live by what they teach.

True and False Disciples, 7:21-23

 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’" (Matthew 7:21-23 NIV)

Verse 22 depicts "many" (not just a select few) who claim to be disciples of Jesus (for they call him "Lord") and who claim in the final judgment that they "prophesied" in his name, drove out demons and performed miracles. It is hard not to see here people who imitated the apostles and heroes of the Book of Acts (see the healing in Acts 3:6 and the exorcism in Acts 16:18), but showed no evidence of moral renewal, no evidence of new life from God. Do you remember the story of the seven sons of Sceva in Acts 19:11-20? while St. Paul was preaching the gospel in Ephesus and the Spirit of God was confirming his words with great miracles done through his hands, several Jews—including seven sons of Sceva, a chief priest—went about trying to drive out demons from possessed people. One day as they pronounced over a man, "In the name of Jesus, whom Paul is preaching, we command you to come out of him." Whereupon the demon spoke from within the man, "Well, I know Jesus, and I know Paul. But who are you?" And he attacked them and gave them a severe beating! There is tremendous power for good in the name of Jesus, when used by those who believe in him and have entered the narrow gate of demanding discipleship. For others to use that name is not only pointless, it can be dangerous.
In the parallel passage in Luke, the self-professed "disciples" make a slightly different appeal, after Jesus first challenges them:

"Why do you call me, 'Lord, Lord,' and do not what I say? Then you will say, 'We ate and drank with you, and you taught in our streets.' But he will reply, 'I don't know you or where you come from. Away from me, all you evildoers!'" (Luke 6:46; 13:26-27 NIV).

There (in Luke) their argument is that they were hospitable to Jesus, not that they performed miracles in his name. But in both cases their silence on obedience to him is absolutely deafening!  Jesus only permits obedient people to call him "Lord."
And that this category could apply to almost any Christian seems to be indicated by Jesus' initial words "Not everyone who says to me 'Lord, Lord' will enter the kingdom of heaven." So "false prophets" in the earlier paragraph may indeed have the wider sense of false disciples. The words "not everyone" clearly indicates that some—indeed perhaps most—who call him "Lord" will enter the kingdom. Only those who call him "Lord" and then refuse to enter by the narrow gate and follow the narrow road will also not enter the kingdom. His words here "who does the will of my Father who is in heaven" must correspond to people who follow the teachings given earlier in the Sermon, for this is "the will of my Father who is in heaven." Doing things in Jesus' name is not the same as living according to his teachings. What we do in Christian service has to be matched by the way we conduct our personal lives. Anything else is not just hypocrisy: it is being a "false prophet" and a "false disciple."

The Wise and Foolish Builders, 7:24-27

 “Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25 The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. 26 But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. 27 The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash.” (Matthew 7:24-27 NIV)

If further proof were needed that by "the will of my Father" Jesus means the very teachings that preceded in the Sermon, it can be seen in his words here: "these words of mine" are indeed the same as "the will of my Father." The final destinations of the true and false disciples are expressed in different imagery here. One house falls with a great crash, the other withstands all assaults of wind and flood. It is impossible to read the words of verse 25 and not also think of Jesus' words in Mt 16:13-20 about building his church upon a rock, so that the gates of Hell will not be able to overcome it. Here the rock represents the teachings of Jesus on which the disciples build their lives. In Matthew 16 the rock is the confession that Peter gives about the identity of Jesus: "the messiah, the Son of the Living God."

A number of years ago I came across a striking parallel to this imagery in an ancient Hittite text. There the man who seeks to overthrow the king is described as being like one who builds his house in the path of the flood, which washes it away into the sea. On the other hand the king himself (the contrast is not therefore with a loyal subject) has a house that is built upon a rock and stands forever. I'm not suggesting that Jesus knew of the Hittite text, although as the Son of God there was theoretically no limit to what he might have known, but rather that there is a remarkably similar idea at work in both of these teaching images. As the Hittite king's own house is secure, so is the house of any loyal subject who obeys him. But those who refuse to obey him are like rebels seeking to dethrone him, and their houses will fall. When we deliberately disregard the teachings of Jesus about our lives we tacitly deny him his role as our king.

The Effect of this Sermon on the Audience, 7:28-29

When Jesus had finished saying these things, the crowds were amazed at his teaching, 29 because he taught as one who had authority, and not as their teachers of the law. (Matthew 7:28-29 NIV)

None of us, I would guess, have ever read much of the teaching of the teachers of the law of Jesus' day. So it isn't possible for us to compare them at first hand with the teachings of Jesus. But I believe what is said here about how they differed. The "authoritative" interpreters of scripture in Jesus' day tended to argue about the meanings of scripture based on what was said by their predecessors. Jesus, on the other hand, although he probably knew very well what other teachers had said and were saying, did not bother interacting with other teachers by name. Whenever he did cite an erroneous teaching, he would only associate it with the Pharisees as a group or with anonymous "others". He was interested only in making clear the ethical demands of the Old Testament itself, not the interpretations of the rabbis in subsequent centuries. To those today who do not recognize his deity, such an approach seems dishonest and arrogant. But to those of us who recognize him for whom he is, it is the genuine hallmark of his deity and messiahship. We would not expect anything else of the messiah.

But was this all that constituted the "authority" that was felt in the teaching of Jesus? I think not. Consider how everything was related to "my Father who is in heaven." There was a personal and vertical dimension in the teachings of the Sermon on the Mount that any hearer could not fail to detect.  One could sense here that disciples were not just accountable to God in general or to the scriptures in general, but to Jesus himself and to his teachings, which were on the same level as those of the scripture.