Watch Your Mouth – Pt. 2

if God’s people would once again
take their Bibles and turn to James chapter 4. James chapter
4. I certainly meant nothing personal
about my little illustration about trees. I like trees. Anybody who knows me knows that
I love trees. I love horticulture. I even had occasion some years
back, working with the kids, although it became more my science
experiment than theirs, we gathered and germinated over 200 species
of trees. And it was quite an adventure. In fact, I still drive through
town and I see trees that we started from seed, eight of which
are in our own yard. But there was one particular
tree that I planted, and soon found out that it was not such
a great tree. It was advertised well. People
spoke well of this particular tree, but the more I examined
it, the worse it appeared. And so I cut it down. And the next year it was back.
And so I cut it down again, and the next year it was back, only
there were multiple versions of this little tree. And I soon
discovered essentially what I’m trying to illustrate. I love
trees, but not all of them. And that’s exactly what James
is suggesting here. He’s talking about a tree that
essentially is a noxious weed. It is invasive. It is insidious,
and it is, as we characterized last week, the insidious tree
that we know of as slander. This tree produces fruit that
is putrid and inedible. This tree is unsightly. It has gnarled, ugly branches
and thorns, and it has a treacherous root. We began last week, James
has fit this verse into the greater context, not only of his epistle,
but even in his more recent dialogue. The dialogue that he began in
chapter three regarding the tongue, the dialogue that he continued
in chapter four regarding worldliness, and now James is focused on particulars. How does the church see such great trouble from a
troubled individual. How does the church endure such
great difficulty simply from someone who has selfish ambition? It comes from the tongue. that comes from their words.
And so James isn’t starting a whole new line of thought here, he
really is trailering on to the discussion that he’s been conducting
for some time. He warned us about the tongue,
he warned teachers about the tongue, he warned us about selfish
ambition, and he warned us about worldliness, and now he ties
it all together under this image that I would suggest is akin
to an invasive tree. We began last Lord’s Day, and
we can limit ourselves this week to verses 11 and 12, where James
writes, do not speak against one another. Brethren, he who
speaks against a brother or judges his brother speaks against the
law and judges the law. But if you judge the law, you
are not a doer of the law, but a judge of it. There is only
one lawgiver and judge, the one who is able to save and to destroy,
but who are you to judge your neighbor? As we began last week
to look at the insidious tree’s putrid fruit, this wasn’t just
a case where someone picked the fruit prematurely. or after it
had completely ripened and now begun to rot, this tree’s fruit
is always putrid. This tree’s fruit is inedible. And what James says in the form
of the verb that he uses when he tells them, do not speak,
he essentially tells them to stop this ongoing, this continued
practice. of criticizing and slandering
and speaking evil of one another. This wasn’t just an accident. This wasn’t a one-time occurrence. This was a regular feature of
this individual’s life, slander. And we talked about this, that
many people want to exonerate themselves immediately because
they have an impartial and incomplete definition of what slander is. The legal definition basically
lets us off the hook. But if we begin to press further
into how scripture defines this word, We find that in a very
real sense, we’re all guilty of this sin. It is the utterance
of false charges or misrepresentations which defame and damage another’s
reputation. And the focus there is on false
charges, but we’ll look at that closer in a moment. It is divulging
things about another brother that are less than pleasing. They’re negative. And so there’s
an indulgence in unkind talk. There’s, we can call it harsh
criticism. It basically is the love of finding
fault. But we learned a couple of things
about this word as we began to examine it. There’s a key element
to this dialogue. The other person is absent. It
is a tendency to criticize, to harangue someone when they are
not present. There’s another key element that
we looked at, and briefly, the other key element is that the
real nature of slander is that it’s not necessarily false. And so we often want to exonerate
ourselves of slander on that term. Because basically what
we’ve said is true, isn’t it? We need to be careful that we
don’t step into a place of sin by sharing something, even if
it’s true, if it isn’t to the right person at the right time,
if we’re not called to it, if we don’t have the authority to
do it. I love the way one pastor sewed
these up. Slander could be found in any
one of four categories. Willful, false accusations, that’s
obvious. Anyone would say that that is
slander. To say something false about
someone, obviously slander. to exaggerate the faults that
are real. We don’t often think about that. We all have the privilege of
looking about us and seeing people in real time. We know their faults.
We shouldn’t be surprised at their faults, and they know ours. But we have this tendency to
play up everyone else’s faults, don’t we, and minimize our own. And then there is the repetition
of real faults. They’ve really sinned. They’ve
really blown it. And so we make sure that everybody
knows about it, whether it’s called for or not. And then there’s
just that needless derogation that just running people down,
just criticizing, backbiting. We looked at even the motivations
for all of these things. And even as I spoke to the saints
afterwards, there were more motivations that people bubbled up to the
surface. Vindictiveness, we forgot completely
about that one. And I spent two weeks meditating
on this passage, trying to think of everything I could possibly
think of that would cause someone to engage in slander. Here was
my list. An unsettled soul, their heart
just isn’t right. They’re not walking with the
Lord. And so, in a moment, they blurt out and lash out. A critical spirit. This is more
seasoned. This is something that’s been
going on in their life for a long time. It’s habitual. There are those sinful outbursts. Maybe they hadn’t molded over
for very long, but suddenly they lash out at someone with a harsh
word. And then there’s hypocrisy and
arrogance. And now we know, likewise, vindictiveness. Somebody has their nose bent
out of shape because of something, and they are going to let someone
have it. And the saddest part of it all,
as we saw last week, this is all, as James says, brother to
brother. He’s addressing brothers, and
he says it is patently wrong that we would speak against a
Christian brother. Well, that is the insidious tree’s
fruit. The insidious tree’s fruit is
this evil speaking that James mentions in verse 11. But as I said, this tree is faulty
from the ground up. In fact, it’s faulty all the
way down to its root. Every part of this tree is faulty. And having considered the insidious
tree’s putrid fruit, I want to move today to the insidious tree’s
gnarled branches. And for that, I want you to look
again at verse 11. He who speaks against a brother
or judges his brother. He who speaks against a brother
or judges his brother. That’s an interesting grouping.
James puts them both in the same basket. This insidious tree,
this invasive, noxious weed, is characterized here by its
horrid unsightliness. It’s an ugly tree. In addition
to bearing foul and inedible fruit, it can also present itself in its ugliness
just in its aesthetic value. James takes up the challenge
to go further to describe this tree literally branch by branch,
one sentence at a time. And he begins here in verse 11
by declaring that evil, slanderous speech is an act of judgment. Slander is essentially the fruit
of that judgment. But the two sins go hand in hand.
You can’t really have one without the other. To slander is to judge,
James says. To speak against a brother is
to judge that brother. And before an evil word can ever
be uttered, it must develop. in the heart and the mind and
reside for a season in the heart, one faithful shepherd described
the frightening process. However difficult or impossible
it may be to avoid forming unfavorable opinions of other people. And
what he acknowledges there is it’s almost impossible not to
form those opinions. It’s impossible not to notice
those shortfalls. It’s impossible not to observe
them. We’re fellow sinners. But he says, however difficult
or impossible it may be to avoid forming unfavorable opinions
of other people, we can at any rate abstain from publishing
such opinions to the world. He says, look, it’s possible
to make an observation about a brother in Christ, one that
is less than flattering, just maintain it in our heart. as
an observation and nothing more. But he goes on to say, the temper
which delights in communicating suspicions, criticisms, is even
more fatal than the habit of forming and cherishing them. Bitterness and misery which are
caused by the love of evil speaking is incalculable. We ruin lives
when we let it out. But he concludes with this, but
it is entirely preventable. Do you hear what he says? It
may be impossible to look about, see your brothers, form unfavorable
opinions about them, but it is always possible not to share
it. It’s possible. It should be noted
that this whole passage, verses 11 and 12, is all about judging. Unfavorable judgment. Brothers,
Christian brothers, are supposed to be one in Christ. They are
supposed to be part of that happy family of God, which place neither
of them earned or deserved, which place was only granted to them,
not by birthright, but by the process of adoption, and that
by a price they did not and could not pay. But suddenly, suddenly
the happy condition, the warm confines that only the truest
family can provide is troubled. There’s a break in the rank.
There’s a hostile, terrible word, and that by a brother against
another brother. And we’re left in stunned silence,
aren’t we? Because it’s so utterly out of
place. What, we should ask, does it
mean judge a brother? What is it that James corrects
here? What’s forbidden? What does it
mean? And just as importantly, what
doesn’t it mean? You see, James’s admission is,
of course, very likely an echo of words that he may have heard
directly from the Lord Jesus Christ. Matthew 7.1, Judge not,
lest you be judged. For in the way you judged, you
will be judged. Let’s pause for a moment to consider
what this statement does not mean. It cannot possibly mean
that we as Christians are forbidden from making observations, assessments,
and even drawing conclusions about the sinful condition either
of the world or of our brothers in Christ. Last week, you might
recall, we reviewed Matthew 18. as the great means of addressing
our brother’s sin. To do so, one has to know God’s
standards and to observe some noteworthy violation in his brother’s
life. in order to appropriately address
that sin. In such an instance, we are not
judging. We are taking our brother graciously
and lovingly before the judge himself on his terms, to his
law, not our own, observing sinful behavior and
addressing it as such was one of the hallmarks of Paul’s ministry.
Acts 20, 31, when Paul gathered the Ephesian elders to himself,
he said, I did not cease to admonish each one of you. Paul was no
coward, nor was he slanderous when he did it. To the Corinthians, He reminded
them that even the purpose of his writing was not to shame
them, but to admonish them. To the Galatians, he uses very
strong language. And he talks about those who
are preaching, if you would, another gospel, a gospel contrary
to what he had communicated to them. And if that was the case,
if an individual was found preaching such a gospel, Paul says he was
to be accursed. That’s judgment on God’s terms,
not Paul’s. If we were to heed the erroneous
suggestion here that any and all brotherly scrutiny is forbidden,
we would end up running counter to a great measure of biblical
teaching, wouldn’t we? To know God’s word, to know God’s
principles, and to observe them being transgressed by our brother
is no sin. Nor is it a sin to humbly address
them. In fact, it is precisely what
James is doing in this passage, isn’t he? What then does James
mean? To slander is to judge, that
we are not to judge our brother. The sin that James is addressing
is the harsh and critical evaluation that goes above and beyond principles
that are clearly articulated in God’s word. or it goes above and beyond the
God-given means of addressing such. James’ admonition searches
the thoughts and intentions of the critic. The harsh man’s motives
are on full display as his aims are his own, not God’s. His purposes
are not the good of his brother, but his own. If he can tear down
and even destroy the name of his brother, his personal goals
have been met. He capriciously assigns to his
brother questionable, even sinful motives. This is the judging about which
James speaks. One faithful commentator, Robert
Johnstone, declared that to judge motives and character without
tangible and most convincing evidence, this is sin. It is sinful to do it even if
the judgment is kept to ourselves. Do you remember a moment ago
I said, we can’t help but look and note shortfalls of our brothers,
but to assign false motives to them, to assign indictments to
them, even if we keep it to ourselves, it’s wrong, sinful. But the ugliness of this tree
has only begun to be described by James. James continues by
saying that to speak, to judge a brother is actually and ultimately
to judge the law, God’s law. Well, this tree gets uglier by
the branch, doesn’t it? Look at the passage. Verse 11,
do not speak against one another, brethren. He who speaks against
a brother or judges his brother speaks against the law and judges
the law. Now I will tell you immediately
here, there’s a long-standing question, a debate really, about
what kind of law is meant. We’ll consider the various viewpoints
momentarily, but either way, this is a disturbing turn. The
critic is now presented as sitting in judgment of law, God’s law. And no matter which way we go
with the argument, this is troubling. This is sinful. But the question remains, what
law is in view? Is it the law of God, the Mosaic
law in its entirety, or is it the law that James has already
alluded to a number of times in this epistle? The perfect
law, the law of liberty, James 1.25. The royal law, according
to the scripture, thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. It’s really an unnecessary debate
because all law is God’s law. In other words, this critic does
not need to be seen as speaking against and sitting in judgment
of the entirety of God’s moral law. The perfect law, the law
of liberty, are all expressions of God’s law. If he disdains
one part, he disdains the whole. One pastor said here, no one,
no one who knows this law, the law of liberty, the law of brotherly
love, no one who knows this law and has grasped it at all in
its meaning and purpose and scope can suppose that observance of
it is compatible with habitual criticism of the conduct of others. Did you hear what he said? You
can’t possibly submit yourself to this law all the while scrutinizing
and criticizing your brother in Christ. What James is saying
is that evil speaking is an act of judgment. It’s a judgment
against God’s law of love, which itself is established upon Leviticus
1918. Love your neighbor as yourself. to judge our brothers, to show
disdain for God’s ordinances, God’s law, to break these commands
is essentially akin to speaking evil even of them. Thomas Manton
said it this way, every sin is a kind of affront to the law
that forbids it. When we sin, we brush aside the
law as unimportant. God didn’t really mean that.
Or God is too heavy-handed here. That’s what this brother does
as he judges his brother. By doing quite the contrary,
Manton says, we do in effect judge the law not fit or worthy
to be obeyed. That’s frightening. That’s frightening. to such a man God’s commands
for brothers is disagreeable. It isn’t good enough for him.
He disagrees with such a weak command. This standard will not
do and he will not abide by it. There must be more. And so he
will supersede such a weak law. and do as John Calvin put it,
to be at once prosecutor, witness, law, lawgiver, and judge, not
to mention executioner as well. This is shocking. It’s shocking
behavior. Look at verse 11 again if you
would. James is almost, finished describing this ugly tree, and
yet there is one more gnarled and twisted branch. Look at verse 11. Do not speak
against one another, brethren, he who speaks against a brother
or judges his brother speaks against the law and judges the
law. But if you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law,
but a judge of it. James says, in effect, you cannot
live according to the law if you’ve set yourself up as its
judge. Can’t do it. It can’t be done. One faithful shepherd said this
is heinous evil. It is to forget our place. We’re called to be doers of the
law. We’re called to submit ourselves. We’re called to worry about ourselves,
not everybody else. One faithful Puritan put it in
much stronger terms. To condemn one another for things
indifferent. I want to bring you along. When
he says things indifferent, these are things that scripture either
has not detailed, has not forbidden. This is the legalist now. This is somebody who is bringing
in their own set of standards to condemn one another for things
indifferent merely upon their own will and sense without any
warrant and sentence from the word of God. This is a kind of
condemning the law as if it were not full and exact enough, but
needed to be pieced upon by man’s intuitions to make more sins
than God has made, is to judge the law. Well, this tree I told you is completely
evil. It’s completely bad, the entire
plant. This insidious tree of slander
is seen in its putrid fruit, it’s seen in its gnarled branches,
and it’s seen thirdly in its treacherous root. Its treacherous
root. Look at verse 12. There is only
one lawgiver and judge, the one who is able to save and to destroy. But who are you to judge your
neighbor? There’s only one who is the judge. James has laid the foundation.
Slanderous speech is effectively judgment of one’s brother and
to engage in such behavior is sinful. It’s a violation of the
law itself. But James is relentless here. And he makes yet an additional
point. He takes us to look at the root
of this plant, that it’s treacherous. Note first that he points out
that judgment is inextricably linked to law making. The only
one who has the right and authority to enact divine law is God himself. And having established such law,
God is the only one with the authority to judge that law.
Law and judgment go hand in hand, but having made that point, James
takes it one step more. He identifies the lawgiver and
judge. Why he’s the one, he’s the same
one who is able to save and to destroy. James, of course, is
referring to God himself. Those awesome character qualities,
able to save, able to destroy, belong to God alone. James’s
point is that likewise, the prerogatives of judging the laws that he has
laid down is God’s. God only is the lawgiver and
judge. Isaiah 33, 22, the Lord is our
judge. The Lord is our lawgiver. The Lord is our king. Deuteronomy 32, 39, see not that
I, I am he. There is no God beside me. It is I who put to death and
I give life. 1 Samuel 2, 6, the Lord kills
and makes alive. He brings down to Sheol and he
raises up. Matthew 10, 28, fear him who
is able to destroy both body and soul in hell. It’s God’s
prerogative. Matthew Henry said that God has
power fully to reward the observance of his laws and to punish all
disobedience. He can save the soul and make
it happy forever, or he can, after he is killed, cast into
hell, and therefore should be feared and obeyed as the great
lawgiver, and all judgment should be committed to him. And James is almost finished. Here’s a summary of his argument.
To slander is to judge, but judgment is God’s prerogative alone. Therefore,
if we judge others by slandering them, then we effectively usurp
God of His place and prerogative. James has been very clear throughout
this entire passage And now having identified the one true judge,
God himself, he closes out his argument with one bullseye, arrow
to the heart, searching question. Who are you? Who are you who judge? Who are
you to judge your neighbor? James’ indictment here is that
such activity is not only an offense against a brother, it’s
an offense against God. It’s a trespass against his authority. This man has usurped the authority
of the judge himself. He’s usurped God’s authority.
And with decisive finality, James puts an end to this discussion.
He does so in such a way that the reader down to our very day
is compelled to a heart examination of one’s words. The individual
given to judging others by his slanderous words stands on dangerous
ground, James says. He’s taken a position not of
humble obedience, but a position of authority and that over his
fellow sinner. and over God’s law, and effectively
over God’s rightful position as judge. James concludes that such a one
has usurped the very authority of God himself, and that is frightening. This is effectively the picture,
isn’t it? of the unmerciful slave, who
having been forgiven the equivalent of $10 million, berated and nearly
strangled his fellow sinner for the equivalent of a measly 16
pennies.” Shocking. Likewise, the Apostle Paul, in
his discussion of matters about which the word is silent, gray
areas, remember, in Romans 14, he asks an equally heart-searching
question in that text. He says, who are you to judge
the servant of another? And what he points to there is
that with regards to these gray areas, God is perfectly capable
of taking care of his business. He doesn’t need you to write
and enact and judge and prosecute a law. Who are you? Here’s how I took this. It’s a job interview for a judge. And you walk in, and you sit
down, and the man is reviewing your resume. And he says, would you say of
yourself that you are perfectly holy? Morally blameless? Not exactly. Well, then would
you say that, do you have any experience writing moral law? Not exactly. Are you omniscient? Are your motives
always pure? Are you exemplary in the love
of God and all mankind? Do you have an impeccable history
of judging others in perfect righteousness? Get out of my office, he would
have to say, right? And still, still the most loving thing that
you can do for a brother in sin is to address it, to confront
the brother. We’re not setting that aside. Jesus didn’t say that we’re not
to concern ourselves. He didn’t say that we’re not
to concern ourselves with the speck in our brother’s eye, but
that we have to deal first with the mighty log in our own. And having done that, we are
to go to our brother with the attitude of one having been forgiven
a great debt, with a heart of mercy, an attitude of hopefulness,
as one faithful shepherd described it.” Listen to this. No man, however
willing he may be to have his conduct laid open to criticism,
is fond of being constantly subjected to it. Right? We don’t like when
it happens. We don’t like to have our faults
pointed out. It isn’t an enjoyable process. We’re not told to enjoy that
kind of scrutiny. He goes on, still less. Can anyone be fond of being made
the object of slighting and condemnatory remarks? We don’t enjoy the process
of being scolded. We don’t have to enjoy rebuke. And he concludes with this. Every
man’s personal experience has taught him. It’s taught him that. It’s taught
him that we don’t enjoy sustained scrutiny. We don’t enjoy being
rebuked. It’s a given. And if he loves his neighbor
as himself, he will take care to inflict on him as little pain
of this kind as is possible. In other words, you don’t make
a habit of it. And if you do it, you do it the right way.
We should never relish or enjoy rebuking or correcting a brother
in Christ. God has given us the means. We
reviewed it in brief last Lord’s Day, Matthew 18. If your brother sins, go and
show him his fault in private. Some years ago, I began to put
together a list of what that might look like. If we were to
lovingly confront a brother, if we were to confront a brother,
first of all, it would be lovingly. It would be for our brother’s
good and not our own. It would be for the purity of the church
and not our own benefit. It would be prayerfully done.
We would examine our own hearts and our own motives before God,
before we ever set up an appointment, lovingly, prayerfully, personally,
privately, granting him the same dignity that you would expect
as the scriptures stipulate. You need to go to him, not everybody
else, lovingly, prayerfully, personally, purposefully, With
the goal of restoration, it always frightens me when I say that,
when I hear people talk about church discipline, that it went
to the final step, and by that they mean kick them out of the
church. That’s not the final step. The
final step is restoration. The final step is repentance,
and we carry on like things never happened. Lovingly, prayerfully, personally,
purposely, humbly, remembering our own sin, remembering the
forgiveness that we enjoy, remembering the mighty price that Jesus Christ
paid to ensure your forgiveness. And then finally, forgivingly,
we go with an expectant heart, eager to put the matter completely
behind us forever. I mean, Matthew 18, what I’ve
quoted, is so far incomplete, isn’t it? If your brother sins,
go show him his fault in private. If he listens to you, you have
won your brother. You’ve won him out of sin. Slander can never do that. Humble yourself before Almighty
God. Let’s pray. Lord God, we thank you so much
for James’s words. He saw a problem in his church
and he addressed it as a loving shepherd. because what this individual
or these group of people were doing was wrong and dangerous. They were usurping the very authority
of God. Oh, God forbid that of us. We pray that you would make us
a people that humbly attends to our own lives first and foremost. And if only through your providence,
occasion stipulates and necessitates that we address our brother. Grant us your mind and your heart
to be able to do that for your glory, for the purity of the
church, and for the sake of this brother. Lord, spare us from
this evil and insidious tree of slander. We pray all of these
things in Jesus’ name.