“DO NOT JUDGE, or you too will be judged. 2For 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? 4How 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? 5You 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.
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.
7“Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. 8For 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? 10Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? 11If 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! 12So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.
Original Meaning
JESUS NOW SHIFTS from warning his disciples about their own personal temptations concerning wealth and worry to temptations that can surface in their relationships with each other. This carries forward his theme about the nature of kingdom life for his disciples. After giving the interpretive principles of kingdom life that fulfills God’s original intention in the Old Testament (5:17–48), Jesus turned to teach his disciples how they are to develop true kingdom life in the real world (6:1–7:12). The present section is the third of three sections that deal with this theme (see comments at the beginning of 6:1–18). Here he address the disciples’ interpersonal kingdom spirituality in their community relationships (7:1–12).
Jesus spent considerable time condemning the religious leaders for their hypocrisy, the outward appearance of righteousness for the acclaim of people (6:1–18). Now he acknowledges that his own disciples can fall into hypocrisy (7:1–5). Then he adds a word of caution against the opposite extreme—being undiscerning (7:6). To avoid both extremes is an impossible task in one’s own power, so Jesus includes a section on prayer to show his disciples how to live in balance, both in this problem and in all others (7:7–12). Kingdom life allows his disciples to live properly in relationship to others. It will free them from both improper judgmental attitudes as well as guard them from gullibility toward the truly hurtful people in this world.
Judging Others Inappropriately (7:1–5)
JESUS WARNS, “DO not judge, or you too will be judged.” This warning sets the principle for the section to follow (7:1–5). The specific issue being judged is nowhere identified but allows for a broad application. The verb “judge” (krino) has a number of different nuances, depending on the context—ranging from ordinary discernment or evaluation (cf. Luke 7:43), to judicial litigation (Matt. 5:40), to bestowal of reward (19:28), to pronouncement of guilt (John 7:51), and to absolute determination of a person’s fate (5:22; 8:16). The latter two senses are in view here: Jesus warns his disciples against setting themselves over others and making a pronouncement of their guilt before God. We should be careful in making these kinds of judgments, because we too will be judged for committing a sin worse than that which we are accusing. A similar sentiment is found in Sirach 18:20: “Before judgment comes, examine yourself; and at the time of scrutiny you will find forgiveness”; and James warns, “There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the one who is able to save and destroy. But you—who are you to judge your neighbor?” (James 4:12).
The principle of the warning is reemphasized, “For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged.” The Greek text is emphatic: “With the judgment you judge you will be judged.” We can understand the rationale behind the warning if we recognize that it reiterates earlier principles of the SM.1 The warning about judging is the reverse of the positive blessing Jesus advocated in the fifth beatitude: “Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy” (5:7). The warning also recapitulates the point of the fifth petition of the Lord’s Prayer: “Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors” (6:12). True disciples, who have been impacted by the mercy of God in the arrival of the kingdom of heaven, will exhibit mercy toward one another, not judgment. Because true disciples have received forgiveness, they will forgive one another.
In other words, to fall into a pattern of life in which we judge others is to show that we are not true members of the kingdom of heaven. Absolute judgment is a categorical pronouncement of the guilt of another person as though this is the final word on a matter. At fault is a person who makes himself and his way of doing things and his opinion the absolute standard. He or she has usurped the place of God because only God can judge in this way.
When disciples have developed this critical, condemning attitude as a pattern of life, they have forced love out of their relationships with others. The kind of love that Jesus offers enables his disciples to give what is good to others, not to condemn them. If we don’t have that love, but instead have vindictive condemnation in our hearts, we demonstrate that we really do not know God’s mercy and forgiveness. The divine passive, “you will be judged,” points to God as the judge, who alone can judge absolutely.
The warning continues with a parallel admonition, “And with the measure you use, it will be measured to you,” which is similar to a cautionary note found in a rabbinic ruling on adultery: “With what measure a man metes it shall be measured to him again” (m. Soṭah 1.7). The “measure” can be a scale, a vessel, or a rod used for calculating weight or distance, but which was often used figuratively, as here, to designate God’s uniform justice (cf. 23:32).
The illustration Jesus uses indicates that the specific issue that the accuser condemns is of no major consequence. Once again he uses hyperbole (intentional exaggeration; cf. 5:29–30) as a figure of speech to illustrate his point: “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?” The metaphor may surface from Jesus’ own background as the carpenter’s son (13:55). The “speck” (karphos) refers to a small twig or stalk, something quite insignificant in contrast to a “plank” (dokos) or large beam. The contrast illustrates the difference between the insignificance of the problem of the accused in comparison to the magnitude of the accuser’s problem. The accuser cannot help anyone else because his spiritual vision is impaired by the plank in his own eye.
The real problem is that the accuser is a “hypocrite” (7:5). Jesus uses the singular vocative, “You hypocrite,” here, which personalizes the accusation, implying that the hypocrisy is detected among Jesus’ own followers. As earlier (cf. 6:2, 5, 16), hypocrisy means to perform external acts of righteousness that mask, perhaps even from oneself, one’s own inner corruption. In this case, the hypocrite thinks he can see clearly the sin of a fellow disciple and is condemning her before God. However, he has not seen his own self-righteous, judgmental attitude. On the one hand, the hypocrisy may be a remediable sin that the disciple can eliminate through self-examination and confession (7:5). On the other hand, the hypocrisy may reveal a more terminal sin. Throughout Jesus’ ministry certain people attached themselves to him, but they never truly believed. The primary example is Judas Iscariot, but there were many others who once called themselves disciples, yet never truly believed (e.g., John 6:60–66).
Jesus calls the nominal disciple to examine himself or herself, because a hypocrite in the latter sense does not know God (see comments on 6:1–2). Religiosity in either case blinds the disciple to the hypocrisy.2 He must seek God to bring forgiveness and spiritual healing to himself before he can in any way even know what is wrong with others. When the disciple removes the plank of self-righteousness, she is then able to see with eyes of humility the speck that other brothers or sisters may have. A mark of the discipleship community is the responsibility that disciples have to help each other remove the “speck” of sin from each others lives (cf. 18:15–20), but it must come from a humble and self-examined life that has removed the plank of self-righteous judgment (cf. Gal. 6:1–5). Then restoration can occur with the right attitude: “After self-criticism takes place, relationships are based on redemptive empathy rather than condemning detachment.”3
Evaluating Others Appropriately (7:6)
JESUS NEXT ADDRESSES a problem at the opposite extreme of judging hypocritically: naive acceptance. He calls for the appropriate discernment of right and wrong or good and bad (7:6, 15–23), because in their everyday world disciples will have to make regular evaluations. They are to be wise and discerning.4 In the first place, “Do not give dogs what is sacred.” To modern readers the mention of “dogs” conjures up images of well-groomed household pets, but in the ancient world dogs lived in squalor, running the streets and scavenging for food (Ps. 59:14–15). To refer to a person as a dog was a grave insult, reducing the person’s status to among the lowest in the social scale (2 Sam. 16:9). As a metaphor, “dog” was a humiliating label for those apart from, or enemies of, Israel’s covenant community.5 But the reference here seems wider, in that it includes all those who are hostile to Jesus’ disciples. “What is sacred” in this context most likely refers to the message of the gospel of the kingdom, indicating that this holy message must not be defiled by those who are unreceptive to, or have rejected, Jesus’ invitation.6
The image of the dog is reinforced by the parallel image of a pig: “Do not throw your pearls to pigs.” The pig in the ancient world is far different than modern cartoon characters like “Porky Pig.” Although pork was a highly prized food among many people in the ancient Mediterranean world, it was rejected by Jews (and perhaps some ancient priestly Egyptians), probably because pigs, like dogs, were scavenging animals. Their omnivorous habits occasionally led pigs to feed on decaying flesh, a practice deplorable to Jews. Pigs were often dangerous because they ravaged fields (Ps. 80:13), and while running wild in city streets were often responsible for the death of little children.7 “Pearls” symbolize the value of the message of the kingdom of heaven (see comments on 13:45–46). Something so valuable should not be given to those who have no appreciation for such precious truths; their nature is demonstrated by their rejection of that message.
Jesus’ disciples are not “judging” people to be beasts but are simply taking them at face value. By their actions these are people who have demonstrated themselves to be enemies of the kingdom of heaven. Dogs and pigs are linked elsewhere in Scripture (Isa. 66:3; 2 Pet. 2:22) as dangerous and ritually unclean animals. The bizarre behavior of these wild animals produced fear, because their often-intense hunger could cause them to attack and eat humans (cf. Ps. 22:16–17). The image here warns disciples of the danger of those who have rejected the message of the kingdom of heaven. It is a warning against mistaken zeal in proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom to those whose only intent is mockery or ridicule, or worse.
God’s Guidance in Relationship to Others (7:7–12)
THE CONNECTION OF these verses to the preceding seems somewhat disjointed until we see that Jesus is now drawing the SM to a close. In these verses, he focuses on the source of the disciples’ stability as they learn to live a true kingdom life in this fallen world.
Ask, seek, and knock (7:7–8). For the application of the principles not to judge, yet to evaluate others wisely and appropriately, the disciples should approach the Father with expectation she or he will receive: “Ask . . . seek . . . knock and the door will be opened to you.” Jesus’ disciples may find it difficult to be at the same time both merciful and forgiving, yet wisely discerning; to give other disciples the benefit of the doubt, yet to be on guard for those who would harm the community; to judge no one, yet to be wisely observant to see the true character of people and deal with them accordingly. But through the divine enablement that is supplied by God as Jesus’ disciples pray, they can avoid the extremes of 7:1–5 and 7:6.
To “ask” naturally indicates prayer, but “seek” and “knock” are also metaphors for prayer. In the apostle John’s vision, the risen Jesus “knocks” so that the church will hear and open themselves to the intimacy of his fellowship (Rev. 3:20).8 Although some see the present imperatives “ask, seek, knock” as practically equivalent,9 it seems better to suggest that Jesus is indicating a rising scale of intensity in one’s prayers and points to the persistent manner of life lived before the Father.10 “Ask” indicates coming to God with humility and consciousness of need, as a child fittingly comes to her father. “Seek” links one’s prayer with responsible activity in pursuing God’s will, as when a person prays for a job and at the same time checks out leads. “Knock” includes perseverance in one’s asking and seeking, as when the disciple perseveres in praying for his unbelieving family’s salvation and speaks and lives the gospel throughout his lifetime.11 Jesus’ disciples are to ask the Father continually as a manner of life, to be constantly responsible in pursuing God’s will, and to maintain an unremitting determination in expecting the Father to answer.
But if these present imperatives teach that the disciples are to exhibit persistence in prayers, then the parallel responses teach that they are to know the certainty of the answer of their prayers to the Father. The predictive responses—“it will be given,” “you will find,” and “the door will be opened” (7:7)—are reiterated to give a remarkably universal certainty of the answer to the disciples’ prayers. It isn’t just a few who will have their prayers answered, but “everyone,” meaning all those who have followed Jesus as his disciples.
Bread . . . stone . . . fish . . . snake (7:9–11). Jesus clarifies the open-ended teaching on the certainty of the answer to the disciples’ prayers by demonstrating that the Father will answer with what he knows is good for his children. “Which of you, if his son asks for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake?” (7:9–10). Staple food in a Jewish daily diet included bread and fish. A responsible father would not be mean and trick his children with stones that resembled bread (cf. Jesus’ first temptation, 4:1–4), nor would he be hurtful by tricking them with snakes that resembled fish. So if a responsible father will supply his children precisely what they need on a daily basis, the heavenly Father, who is absolutely trustworthy, will always give to the disciples what they really need.
Jesus closes with an a fortiori argument (arguing from an accepted conclusion to an even more evident one), called in Jewish rabbinic interpretation qal waḥomer.12 “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!” (7:11). If the lesser is true (the activity of earthly fathers who are tainted by the evil of this fallen world), “how much more” the greater will be true (the response of the heavenly Father). Earthly fathers have an innate sense of doing right by their children and are not primarily mean or hurtful to them, even though they are still evil by way of the entrance of sin to all humanity through the sin of Adam and Eve (cf. Rom. 5:12–14). How much more will the heavenly Father, who is inherently perfectly holy and good, always give to his children what they need when they ask him.
The Golden Rule (7:12). The primary teaching of the SM is drawing to a close, so Jesus takes the way of the kingdom to its zenith in one precept: “So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets” (cf. Luke 6:31). The maxim is commonly called the “Golden Rule,” with the Emperor Alexander Severus reputedly having it written on his wall in gold.13 The word “so” (oun; “therefore”) introduces the saying as a summarizing conclusion to the core of the SM. The statement “for this sums up the Law and the Prophets” forms an inclusio to the similar saying that signaled Jesus’ initial intent for the SM (5:17).14 Jesus’ teaching in the SM “fulfills” (pleroo) the Law and the Prophets (5:17), while his Golden Rule “sums up” the Law and the Prophets (7:12). So the Golden Rule summarizes the essence of God’s will for his people in the Old Testament, and now for Jesus’ disciples. After this concluding saying, Jesus will call for his audience to make a decision between two ways: either with him or against him (7:13–27).
This moral maxim of the Golden Rule occurs in various forms in other traditions, stated both positively and negatively (see below). The precept appears to have been a common theme in Judaism of the time, with Hillel the Elder supposedly having as his motto, “What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor.” Rabbinic literature attributes the saying to Hillel the Elder, who goes on, “That is the whole Torah. The rest is commentary. Go and learn!” (b. Šabb. 31a).15
In Jesus’ Golden Rule we find a liberating basis for personal and community life. What is the right thing to do? Think of the way that you would like to be treated and then use that as a guideline for how you will treat others. In this way we have a summary rule that expresses all that God intended in the Old Testament for the righteousness of the community and that Jesus expects from the kingdom community of his disciples.
Jesus’ teaching on prayer and the Golden Rule brings to the light two significant points about stability in one’s discipleship. (1) Stability will come as his disciples learn how to depend on their heavenly Father—their one constant in this world. Whatever needs the disciples have, whether material or spiritual, they must develop a healthy dependence on their heavenly Father (7:7–11). To love God is to trust him to take care of us.
(2) Stability will also come through a healthy commitment to live for the benefit of others (7:12). To truly love others is to give to them for their benefit. When there is truly mutual love, both persons completely trust one another to take care of the other’s needs. When appropriate trust in another’s care is linked with trust in the Father’s care, Jesus’ disciples never have to think about their own needs being met; those needs are met in the loving community of disciples who emulate the Father’s commitment to care for us.
Bridging Contexts
AS HE HAS done throughout the SM, Jesus moves the motivating force for discipleship to the heart, so that what impels obedience begins with God’s work in the inner person. True disciples will not judge one another inappropriately, because they have experienced God’s mercy and forgiveness and so will extend to others that same mercy and forgiveness out of gratitude to God (7:1–5). True disciples will learn whether it is advisable to share their gospel with those who are apt to scorn it (7:6). The continual development of the disciples’ inner growth is found in a persistent prayer relationship with the Father, who promises to answer their requests with what is good for them (7:7–11). And the determination of what is the “good” comes from the values of the kingdom, which to this point are explicated most clearly in the full teaching of the SM.
The Golden Rule. So with the culminating Golden Rule, Jesus articulates in one statement the essence of God’s will as revealed in the Old Testament and the essence of kingdom life for his disciples. As a benchmark for human relations, this moral maxim has been expressed in other contexts throughout history in both positive and negative forms. The ancient Roman philosopher and statesman Seneca (4 B.C.–A.D. 65) expressed the principle positively: “Let us show our generosity in the same manner that we would wish to have it bestowed on us” (De beneficiis 2.1.1), while the Chinese philosopher Confucius (551–479 B.C.) stated it negatively, “Do not do unto others what you would not want others to do unto you!” (Analects 15:23).16
The precept appears to have been a common theme in Judaism of the time of Jesus. Tobit gives a negative form of the principle, “Watch yourself, my son, in everything you do, and discipline yourself in all your conduct. And what you hate, do not do to anyone” (Tobit 4:14b–15 NRSV). We noted above that Hillel the Elder (c. 70 B.C.–A.D. 10) had a similar motto. But whereas other expressions of this saying in the ancient world indicate ethical aspiration, Jesus declares that the Golden Rule is the normative manifestation of his followers’ discipleship.
As such, the Golden Rule truly “sums up the Law and the Prophets” (7:12; cf. 5:17–20), because it localizes the motivating force for discipleship in the heart. As he has done throughout the SM, Jesus indicates that this was God’s original intent for the Old Testament. Moses pointed in this direction when he declared that the commandments were to be impressed upon Israel’s heart (Deut. 6:6), not simply performed externally. Ethical obedience must operate out of the fullness of a person’s heart. A person may say that he or she lives by the Golden Rule as the expression of a utilitarian ethical ideal, but it will become a futile effort, or possibly even self-serving, unless it is generated from the heart.
In other words, the Golden Rule must be lived in conjunction with the greatest commandment. Later when asked what is the greatest commandment in the law, Jesus replied, “ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ . . . And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself’ ” (Matt. 22:37–40; cf. Deut. 6:4–5 and Lev. 19:18). The practice of the Golden Rule as an outgrowth of discipleship to Jesus is at the core an expression of the life of a person who loves God and neighbor.
In this we find a liberating basis for personal and community life. Love for God enables us to love others, which means in its most practical sense to do to others as we would want to have done to us. But we do not always know what is best for us. Each of the ancient expressions of the Golden Rule had expectations of what people wanted to have done or not done to them. So the practice of the Golden Rule assumes that Jesus’ disciples know what is best for them, which they can use as a standard for doing unto others. That standard is the impact of the kingdom of heaven in their lives.
In responding to the gospel of the kingdom, Jesus’ disciples have experienced what is truly best for them. They have, for example, experienced the Father’s love for them as his children, so they will love not only their neighbor but their enemy (5:43–47), which establishes love as the central standard of the discipleship community. They have experienced God’s mercy, so they will extend mercy, which establishes mercy as a realistically reciprocal standard of their mutual discipleship (5:7). They likewise have received forgiveness, so they will forgive others, establishing forgiveness as a mark of reciprocal discipleship (6:12). They understand what solitary dedication means in their relationship with the Father, so they will extend to their spouse solitary dedication, eliminating lust, adultery, and divorce from the community (5:25–32).
In this way, all of Jesus’ teachings in the SM become the standard by which a realistic practice of the Golden Rule can be conducted. It is an ethical ideal that fulfills the deepest inclination of the person created in the image of God, liberating Jesus’ disciples from external legalistic obedience to extend in concrete activities the very love of God to others that they have experienced in their reception of kingdom life.
Contemporary Significance
SEVERAL YEARS AGO two speakers came to our university to give a series of messages in the undergraduate chapel during a missions conference. The speakers were trying to help the students understand how to find God’s will for their lives. The first message had as its theme passage Psalm 46:10: “Cease striving and know that I am God; I will be exalted among the nations. I will be exalted in the earth” (NASB). The speaker entitled the message, “Let Go, and Let God.” The second message had as its theme passage Matthew 7:7: “Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you.” This speaker entitled the message, “Knocking Down Doors.”
The first message advocated letting go of the problem and turning it over to God. The focus was on letting God take control of their lives and then finding peace about what they wanted to do in their lives. They were encouraged to find a quiet corner and seek the mind of God. They were admonished to let go of their own ambitions, their own planning, their own struggle to find God’s will, and instead to allow God to be the God of their lives. “Let go and let God!”
The second message advocated personal responsibility. The focus was on exercising faith as a means to discovering God’s will for their lives. The students were encouraged to go enlist godly advice, to explore possibilities, and to attempt various alternatives. They were advised that it is only in taking a step of faith that they will find God’s will. An illustration used was that a car that is moving steers easier than a car that is parked. “Knock Down Doors for God!”
Many students were visibly confused by those seemingly contradictory messages. The speakers seemed to be telling them opposite things. Were they contradictory? I would say yes, and no. Yes, in that each gave a correct biblical principle, and in our limited perspective they are seemingly contradictory. But no, in that they don’t have to be opposed to each other. Instead of living with one or the other, both principles can have crucial significance in the attempt to discover God’s will for us as individuals.
Balance. One of the most significant keys to my life as a disciple of Jesus Christ is balance. I do not go so far to say that balance is the key, but rather is a key that has helped me to deal with many difficult issues. The kind of balance I affirm arises from a phenomenon that pervades much of life. In our day-to-day existence and in some of our most profound intellectual pursuits, we often encounter dilemmas produced by paradox. By dilemma I mean “a situation requiring a choice between equally undesirable alternatives” or “a choice between alternatives which both appear to be true.” By paradox I mean “any person, thing, or situation exhibiting an apparently contradictory nature.”17
The important point is that the opposing alternatives are not necessarily contradictory, but from the perspective of the observer they appear to be contradictory. What makes for a dilemma is that the alternatives are both apparently true and therefore both apparently must be retained, yet the observer is not able to understand how the alternatives can be retained at the same time. In addition, one alternative often appears to be more desirable than the other. Some dilemmas are found when we pursue the great truths of history, some are produced through our attempt to understand God and his revelation to us, and others are experienced in the daily routines of life.
The dilemmas that are so much a part of our intellectual, ethical, and daily lives bring out a grave tendency in many of us. That tendency is toward “polarization” or “extremism.” When we are confronted with two seemingly opposite truths, our tendency is to cling to one and then ignore, exclude, or attack the other. Three issues contribute to this tendency: our finite capabilities simply will not allow us to grasp fully how both can be true, life situations demand that we make a decision immediately before we can really grasp the complexity, and the pendulum of history swings from one alternative to the other as being more desirable.
The kind of balance I advocate means to take two seemingly opposite truths and live with them both at the same time, even though we may not be able to understand completely how they fit together. Some avoid the concept of balance because it may seem as if it leads to compromise or fence-straddling, which we certainly want to avoid. But what I mean by balance is much different. It is a process that includes the following points.
1. Think sensibly! Don’t be carried away by emotional reactions. Such reaction to apparent contradictions may cause us to become immobilized or carried away to an extreme.
2. Be honestly open to both truths, regardless of past experience or background.
3. Hold those seemingly opposing truths at the same time. If they are both biblical, they will both have value in the decision-making process and ultimately will reveal themselves as complementary, not contradictory.
4. Apply both sides of the issue to life at the same time. Since Scripture is a guide to life, both principles may be more easily lived out than fully comprehended.
For example, although we may not be able to understand completely how God’s sovereignty and our responsibility coexist (for that is a major underlying issue in Scripture), we all have the experience of seeing both principles worked out in the day-to-day experiences of life. We need both to hear God’s direction and seek out his direction. Both principles are essential for helping us function effectively as we walk with God in real life. At first it may be simpler just to take one side of the issue or the other, but we will be wiser, better informed, and more well rounded with a balance of both.
Throughout the SM we have had to resort to balance to understand Jesus’ full teaching on the nature of kingdom life. We saw, for example, that Jesus exhorted his disciples to “let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven” (5:16); yet later he admonished, “Be careful not to do your ‘acts of righteousness’ before men, to be seen by them” (6:1). A balance of both advises us to avoid the temptation from both personal cowardice and religious vanity by the adage, “Show when tempted to hide, hide when tempted to show.”18
Or again, we are not to be anxious about what we eat or drink (6:25–34), yet if a person refuses to work, he is not to be supplied with food from the others in the church (2 Thess. 3:10). This calls for a balance of God’s ever-present care and our own personal responsibility. We are told by Paul that we can rest in who we are because of our positional righteousness in Christ (Rom. 8:1), yet Jesus tells us that we should press on toward perfection (Matt. 5:48). I find a balance of those principles in the expression “restful dissatisfaction.”
In this section we come across a number of issues that require us to balance two truths. (1) We are not to judge (7:1), yet we are to be wisely discerning (7:5). To be an accurate judge, a person must know the accusation, have all of the evidence, hear both sides, render a verdict impartially, and then carry out the punishment according to the law. Absolute judgment (which only God can do) is prohibited, yet a relative judging or evaluation of a person’s behavior is required.
(2) We are not to give what is holy to dogs or give pearls to swine (7:6), yet we must continually proclaim the gospel with love to those who are even our enemies (5:43–47). Think of what it is like trying to share the gospel with a belligerent drunk or trying to share the beauty and power of the name of Jesus with someone who has just used it in vain. An old saying goes, “Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig.” Yet some who we think are dogs or pigs will respond to the pearls that we have. We shouldn’t make a hasty “judgment.” Remember that Jesus saw much more in the tax collectors and sinners and the thief on cross than did the religious establishment—perhaps even more than they saw in themselves.
(3) In following the exhortation to ask, seek, and knock (7:7), we should balance it with the advice from the psalmist, “Cease striving and know that I am God” (Ps. 46:10). That is what I helped our students to discover.
Living with a sense of balance has been a very helpful tool in my interpretation of Scripture and in applying it in my own personal life. But sometimes the attempt to be balanced can cause us to read into truths a balance that is faulty or unnecessary. We can be so focused on finding balances that we become blind to real contradictions. In that case striving for balance can actually lead us to error or compromise. The analysis of paradoxes can also be such a consuming process that we can end up in intellectual burnout, leading to immobilization. Rightly approached, proportional living is a fulfilling way of thinking and exploring all of life, because it leads us into the fullest realization of truth. But it is also the most demanding, because we are always thinking and weighing our actions and thoughts. We must recognize that we are always in process. But the pursuit of the goal to understand and apply all of God’s truth is what will enable us to keep balanced.19