GeorgePWood.com

Much of our behavior toward others is reactive. If someone sends us a gift for our birthday, we feel obliged to send them one for theirs. If someone speaks about us behind our back, we find opportunities to return the favor. And if someone slaps us in the face, our hand is already halfway toward that person’s right cheek before we even begin to wonder whether retaliation is such a good idea.

In Matthew 7.12, Jesus articulates a proactive ethic in what has come to be known as the Golden Rule: “So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.” Notice three things about this rule:

First, its scope: “everything.” All actions fall within the purview of this commandment. How we talk, how we express our emotions, and how we behave in joy and sorrow and success and crisis are all governed by the Golden Rule. There is never a time and no kind of circumstance when the Golden Rule does not apply.

Second, its positive character. The idea underlying the Golden Rule was not unknown before Jesus. In fact, the Rabbis taught a negative form of it: “Whatever you don’t want others to do to you, don’t do to them.” Jesus takes a positive, proactive stance. Here’s how the difference between Jesus and the Rabbis played out in terms of cursing and praise. According to the Rabbis, we should not curse others because we do not want to be cursed by them. But according to Jesus, we should praise others because that’s the way we want them to speak about us. Following the Rabbis might decrease the level of negative action in the world, but following Jesus increases the level of positive action.

Finally, its biblical basis. According to Jesus, the Golden Rule is simply a summary of “the Law and the Prophets.” All the “Thou shalt nots” of the Ten Commandments find their positive expression in this little rule. Interestingly, in Matthew 22.34–40, Jesus said that “All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments,” namely, to “Love God” and “Love your neighbor as yourself.” The Golden Rule, you see, is simply the law of love.

What would it look like in your life if you followed the Golden Rule? What if you began speaking to your spouse the way you wanted to be spoken to? What if you treated your children with the same respect you wanted them to give you? What if talked about and to your fellow employees with kind words? How might our society change if we began to inject the Golden Rule into public discourse and community relations? If, for example, instead of shouting slogans at one another, we began to speak the truth in love—how might society improve?

We do not have to wait to find out the answers. We can implement the Golden Rule in our own lives today. So be proactive, not reactive.

"Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened.

"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? 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!”

These verses contain a promise about prayer (7–8) and a proof of that promise (9–11). Today, I’ll look at the promise; tomorrow, at the proof.

In verses 7–8, Jesus promises that God will answer our prayers. And he does so in absolute, unambiguous terms. Everyone will receive what he asks for, find what he seeks, and enter through opened doors of opportunity when he knocks. There are no qualifications to Jesus’ promise of divine answer. In other words, Jesus does not tell us that God will answer our prayers only if we pray in God’s will or ask for things we truly need, as opposed to things we merely want. He simply and without reservation promises that God will answer us.

But this raises the obvious objection of unanswered prayer. We do not always receive what we pray for; neither do our family and friends. Is Jesus’ promise a hollow one, then—nice words but nothing else?

First, we must interpret Jesus’ words correctly. Jesus often spoke in absolute terms, vivid contrasts, and hyperbole. We misinterpret his teachings if we mistake rhetorical flourish for legalistic promise. In verses 7–8, Jesus used strong language to motivate us to pray. I sincerely doubt that he intended us to think our relationship with God is a blank check. After all, even he had an unanswered prayer, namely, “may this cup be taken from me” (Matthew 26.39), which referred to the crucifixion.

Second, as a general principle, it is true that God answers our prayers. The issue really is not unanswered prayer per se, but rather prayers with answers that we did not expect. Someone has written that God always answers prayers in one of four ways: No, Go, Slow, and Grow. I think that’s about right. Sometimes, God refuses our requests. Sometimes he grants them. Sometimes he let us know that now is not the right time. And sometimes he wants our character to mature. Only a very bad parent would give a very selfish child whatever he wanted, whenever he asked for it. And God is not a very bad parent.

Indeed, according to verses 9–11, God is a very good Father, who longs to give us “good gifts.” If, on occasion, I ask for things that God does not give me, I’m quite sure he has something better in mind.

One Christmas, I gave Tiffany a string of pearls for Christmas. (She makes them look good, by the way.) Pearl necklaces aren’t cheap, which is why I can appreciate what Jesus said in Matthew 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.” If for some reason Tiffany ever threw the necklace into a pig pen, I’d dive in right into the mud and muck to retrieve it. After all, why waste expensive jewelry on tomorrow morning’s bacon? But then again, why would anyone throw pearls into a pigpen in the first place? What, in other words, is Jesus talking about here?

In his excellent book, Jesus according to Scripture, Darrell Bock offers this interpretation:

“In the Old Testament, a dog was often a figure of reproach (1 Sam. 17:43; 24:14; Prov. 26:11; also in 2 Peter 2:22). Pigs were ceremonially unclean animals. So the point is that one does not give what is precious (holy things or pearls) to those who will not respond appreciatively. As with other parts of Jesus’ teaching, the point is not an absolute prohibition, because then the disciple could not share the gospel with those who are not responsive. Rather, the point is that the disciple is not obligated to share with those who are hard-hearted. These people are like pigs that trample what is precious and like dogs that turn and attack the one seeking to feed them. Using discernment is the point here. The sentiment recalls Prov. 23:9: ‘Do not speak to a fool, for he will scorn the wisdom of your words.’ A contrast in attitude is suggested in Prov. 9:8: ‘A scoffer who is rebuked will only hate you; the wise, when rebuked, will love you.’ The discerning follower of Jesus can tell when a scoffer is present, and so remains quiet.”

I think Bock is onto something here, which I can affirm from personal experience. Several years ago, at a church in Costa Mesa, I taught a Sunday school class. One day, a nice British gentleman joined the class. After a while, I noticed that whenever he asked questions, he would preface them by contrasting the King James Version (which he used) with the New International Version (which I used). No problem; I think such contrasts can be illuminating. But it turned out that he believed the KJV was the only translation Christians could use. All other translations—NIV included—were corrupt, heretical, and illegitimate. At first, I patiently argued with him. But after a while, I realized that (a) he didn’t know what he was talking about, (b) he wasn’t open to being corrected where he was obviously wrong, and (c) he was slowly destroying the class.

Had I been an older, more discerning pastor, I would have sniffed this guy out early on and quickly invited him to leave the class. But, being young and stupid, I threw pearls at swine for months. By the time he left, the mud and muck were everywhere, and it took some time to clean up my class.

Jesus commands us to share the gospel with all kinds of people (Matthew 28.16–20). But doing so requires discernment, for some are interested, and others are hostile. Don’t waste your time on hostile people.

In Matthew 7.1–2, Jesus said, “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.” Few Bible verses are as well received in our tolerant age as these, but they are usually misunderstood. In order to understand them correctly, therefore, we need to examine what they do not mean.

First, they do not mean that the state cannot pass judgment on criminal behavior. The Pharisees once asked Jesus whether it was lawful to pay taxes, and Jesus responded, “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s” (Matthew 22.21). By saying this, Jesus recognized that the state has legitimate functions and that Christians should pay taxes in order to support those functions. Paul said much the same thing in Romans 13.1–7, describing the state as “God’s servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.” (Like Jesus, he also urged Christians to pay their taxes.)

Second, Matthew 7.1–2 does not mean that the church cannot pass judgment on unrepentant sinners. In Matthew 18.15–20, Jesus describes a three-step process of church discipline by which a Christian is held accountable for his behavior. If the sinful Christian repents, he is forgiven. If not, he is excommunicated—an extreme result that is rarely necessary.

Third, Jesus’ words about judgment do not mean that individual Christians cannot exercise moral discernment about right and wrong behavior or good and bad people. The Sermon on the Mount itself contains many statements about what is right and wrong, with respect to murder, anger, adultery, lust, divorce, oath taking, vengeance, and love of enemy, among other things (Matthew 5.21–48). And Jesus himself distinguished between true and false disciples (Matthew 7.15–20), true and false disciples (7.21–23), and wise and foolish builders (24–27).

In sum, the church, the state, and the Christian cannot live according to God’s will without judging between good and bad people and behavior.

What, then, do Jesus’ words mean? According to John R. W. Stott, they forbid censoriousness. “Censoriousness is a compound sin consisting of several unpleasant ingredients. It does not mean to assess people critically, but to judge them harshly. The censorious critic is a fault-finder who is negative and destructive towards other people and enjoys actively seeking out their failings. He puts the worst possible constructions on their motives, pours cold water on their schemes and is ungenerous toward their mistakes.”

Why should we avoid censoriousness? Because, as Jesus put it, “in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.” A judgmental, censorious, fault-finding Christian will one day be hoist by his own petard.

So, as we await Christ’s Second Coming, let us use good judgment with regard to people and behavior. But let us flavor our judgment with ample helpings of grace.

Psalm 146:3 offers valuable advice to Christians in America on this Election Day:

in mortal men, who cannot save.

The presidential campaign that is (mercifully) coming to an end today may be one of the most religiously fraught campaigns in recent memory. Typically, Republicans have a lock on the so-called “values voters,” whose church-going habits strongly correlate with conservative politics. But this year, the Republican candidate is reticent about his faith, while the Democratic candidate is quite open about his.

Never before have I seen so much debate among evangelical Christians about which candidate would best advance a biblical, political agenda. Should evangelicals support John McCain because he is resolutely pro-life or Barack Obama because his welfare policies would help reduce abortion? Should evangelicals vote for McCain whose support of the surge is helping wind down the war in Iraq with victory or Obama because his diplomatic overtures to our enemies would better embody the spirit of peacemaking? Does the Bible favor the creation of wealth through low taxes or the equitable distribution of wealth through high taxes? Different Christians—with the same theology and even the same denominational affiliation—will answer these questions differently.

What concerns me is that the respective sides are placing too much trust in their candidates. Indeed, it strikes me that our quadrennial choice of a president tracks closely with Jesus’ words to Simon Peter upon his confession of him as Christ (Matthew 16:13-28). At the start of the president’s term, filled with his—someday, her—extravagant campaign promises, we say to our new president, “Blessed are you!” Four years later, knowing that those campaign promises were empty words, we say, “Get behind me, Satan!” No president is either so angelic or so demonic that he deserves that kind of treatment. He is, instead, an earthy mixture of good and bad, of smart and dumb, of success and failure.

Knowing this—and we do know this, don’t we?—shouldn’t we be more than a bit skeptical about our preferred candidate and his stated agenda? Indeed, shouldn’t we actively interrogate their slogans and point out their real theological deficiencies?

Obama emphasizes hope and change. Hope and change are good things, but they easily become idols in the hands of politicians. “In Christ’s name the nations will put their hope,” Mathew 12:21 tells us. And 2 Corinthians 5:17 reminds us: “if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!” Whatever hope and change a politician can bring about pale in comparison to the hope and change Christ brings. We need to lower the expectations of what Obama can actually do if he’s elected president today.

And what about McCain’s slogan, “Country First”? It too is theologically suspect. It smacks of Stephen Decatur’s toast: “Our Country! In her intercourse with foreign nations may she always be in the right; but right or wrong, our country!” Yes, may our country always be in the right, but this can only happen when we have descralized our nation and obeyed the words of Jesus: “Seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well” (Matthew 6:33).

I doubt either Obama or McCain have thought deeply and theologically about their slogans. And I’m pretty sure that neither have their supporters. In a fit of pique, as I argue with friends about my preferred candidate, I must admit that I too lose perspective and attach more significance to this election than is warranted by the facts. The kingdom of God does not ride on who is elected today, if for no other reason than that we don’t elect God king.

Of course, this doesn’t mean that this election is unimportant. There will be real, measurable consequences in domestic and foreign policy if either man is elected. So, who you vote for today important. Just not all important.

 When their [i.e., the prince’s] spirit departs, they return to the ground;

on that very day their plans come to nothing.

Blessed is he whose help is the God of Jacob,

whose hope is in the Lord his God.

In the eternal scheme of things, a politician’s promises, plans, and policies are as fleeting as his life, and therefore unfit as an object of faith. Go ahead and vote your conscience, then, and may the best man win. But don’t put your trust in him! Only God can save.

Is the Christian life ascetic? Does God want us to live like the monks and nuns of early Christianity, who were indifferent (and sometimes hostile) to physical and material pleasures? Are we supposed to live the carefree life of the birds, trusting to God to provide for our needs?

Or rather, yes to the third question, not the first two. God will provide for our needs because he cares for us more than birds and lilies, which he feeds and beautifies respectively. That is the essence of Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 6.25–34 and the foundation of a worry-free life.

But we often confuse Jesus’ teaching with asceticism, that is to say, with the simple and disciplined lives of monks and nuns who take vows of poverty. God may call some people into that manner of life, but he does not call all of us. Instead, he calls all of us—whether rich or poor—to have the right attitude about our creaturely needs and wants. The essence of that attitude is faith or trust, which produces in us a lack of anxiety.

Anxiety, you see, is a fundamentally religious problem. It reflects a lack of trust in God. That is why Jesus says: “So do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.”

Jesus here contrasts a pagan lifestyle with a truly Christian one. The pagan is constantly concerned about food and clothing because his gods are many and fickle—much like the idols of fashion and popular opinion are today. Who knows what they want? But the Christian has no anxiety because the One True God is wholly reliable. Having created the world, the Christian God cares for it and all that is in it, especially those who have trusted him for their eternal salvation.

Because our Heavenly Father is reliable, Jesus tells us to “seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness.” Neither food nor clothing is ultimately important to us. What matters most is our relationship with God and the spiritual and moral fruit that relationship bears. The closer we draw to God, the more our thoughts, feelings, words, and actions should reflect his own. His righteousness rubs off.

So do his blessings. What else do the words “all these things will be given to you as well” refer to if not the food and clothing we need? The Creator always provides, if we prioritize him in our lives instead of creature comforts.

And anyway, anxiety about the future is a useless emotion. We only live one day at a time. The future is best left in the hands of God.