Another common tactic is to refer to a verse fragment such as "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone" or "Judge not!" These of course are taken horribly out of context. The story of the woman caught in adultery is a perfect example of the full Gospel. You have the law which condemns represented by the Pharisees who wanted to stone her to death. You have Jesus as being the new covenant, better than the law. He says He will not condemn her as the law would. The part that everyone wants to forget however is the repentance. Jesus says - "go and sin no more." The legalist just wants to talk about the behavior. The greasy-grace preacher just wants to talk about the lack of condemnation. The Gospel preacher must preach the entire story for each part is reliant upon the other and leaving any part out is not the full gospel. How important is that?
Therefore I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all, for I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God. - Acts 20: 26-27 (ESV)
This is going back to Paul's farewell to the Ephesian elders. The narrative is clear. Paul declares he is innocent of their blood because he preached the full Gospel. Not just the parts they wanted to hear. Not just the seeker friendly parts. Not just the purpose driven parts. Not just the parts about prosperity. All of it. From the Pharisees standing over the woman with stones in their hands to Jesus saying go and sin no more. Law, grace, sin, and repentance. The inverse is also clear. If we do not preach the whole counsel of God and that person goes to eternal suffering then we will be held to account for their blood. This is why the Bible says that preachers and teachers will be judged by a tougher standard. This is why they are due double honor. The "judge not" snippet is even more horribly contorted here. This is the actual context:
"Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?Or how can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when there is the log in your own eye?You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye. - Matthew 7: 1-5 (ESV)
These verses are not about judgment. They are about hypocrisy. All you need to see is verse five to realize that Jesus still expects us to help our brother with the speck in their eye. The Bible also teaches us to judge righteously. It says we are to judge those inside of the church. Also, the Bible specifically instructs preachers to denounce false teachers:
He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it. - Titus 1: 9 (ESV)
This is not presented as an option beloved. Those who are charged with bringing the Word of God are charged with also rebuking those who do so falsely. Why? Because they are considered under shepherds to the Great Shepherd. They need to not only feed and nurture the sheep but they also need to protect them for there are many fierce wolves among us. The nature of the wolf is to kill the sheep. To slaughter the sheep. We ought not to be found playing with them. So keep your pious sounding platitudes. If I see the wolves approaching the sheep I am going to sound the alarm. Sorry if it wakes you.
Reverend Anthony Wade - August 26, 2015
