Judge Not, Lest You Be Judged
Lesson Overview
Judge Not, Lest You Be Judged with Josh McDowell
This standalone message is given by Josh McDowell, the apologist and author of Evidence That Demands a Verdict and More Than a Carpenter. Speaking as a father and grandfather as much as a scholar, he tackles one urgent question: how do we know right from wrong? He argues that a generation has been taught to decide morality by feelings, consequences, and tolerance, and that Christians often defend morality no better, appealing to bare commands. His answer is that true moral authority rests in the character of God. Use this overview to review the key points after watching the full video.
The Question No One Could Answer
McDowell opens with a challenge he has posed to hundreds of young people. Using the September 11 attacks and other atrocities as examples, he asks: was it wrong? Everyone says yes. But when he asks why, the answers collapse into a circle: it is wrong because God commands against it, and God commands against it because… he commands it. He reports that almost no one, including committed Christians and even leaders of moral causes, can say why killing is wrong without simply restating that it is forbidden.
His striking claim is that “killing is not wrong because God says thou shalt not kill.” To stop there, he argues, is legalism, a bare command with no reason behind it. The rest of the talk builds toward the real reason.
Two Cultures Under One Roof
McDowell argues that for the first time, two “cultures” live in the same Christian homes: adults, for whom truth is discovered (external, objective, something you find), and youth, for whom truth is created (personal, subjective, “true for you but not for me”). He cites surveys reporting that large majorities of churchgoing young people say there is no absolute truth, and reads quotations from educators and textbooks promoting the idea that each student should construct his own values.
His provocative through-line is that if truth is merely personal and all values deserve equal respect, then no one retains the ground to condemn a terrorist, because the terrorist was simply acting on his own “truth.” He repeats this to expose what he sees as the bankruptcy of relativism: a worldview that cannot distinguish Mother Teresa from a mass murderer has failed.
Six or Seven Bankrupt Ways to Decide Right and Wrong
The core of the talk is McDowell’s walk through the flawed methods people use to determine morality, showing how each one, taken to its logical end, cannot condemn evil:
By your own created truth: if right and wrong are personal opinion, no shared moral judgment is possible.
By consequences: if an act is right because of the outcome you prefer, then a terrorist who preferred his outcome was, by that logic, acting rightly.
By tolerance and non-judgmentalism: he argues the culture has redefined “tolerance” from respecting persons to treating all beliefs and lifestyles as equally valid, and redefined “respect” the same way, so that any moral distinction becomes “intolerance.”
By family or parental authority (“because I told you so”): if something is wrong only because a parent taught it, then another parent who taught the opposite has equal standing, and the terrorists’ families who trained them have equal standing too.
By feelings: if right and wrong track how you feel, then the attacker who felt exhilarated was, by that measure, in the right.
By legality: he argues nothing is moral merely because it is legal or immoral merely because it is illegal, pointing out that slavery, apartheid, and other evils were legal.
By bare commands: even quoting “the Bible says thou shalt not” carries no moral authority by itself, because a command only states that something is wrong without explaining why, and another religion’s book issues contrary commands.
McDowell’s point in each case is not that consequences, family, or Scripture are unimportant, but that none of them is the foundation of morality, and building on them leaves young people defenseless.
Defining Truth: Fidelity to the Original
Before giving his answer, McDowell insists on defining truth, a word he says almost no one can define. He offers Webster’s older definition: truth is “fidelity to the original,” meaning that which is the same as, or equal to, the original.
He illustrates with the International Bureau of Weights and Measures near Paris, which holds the master standards. A claim to have “one meter” of wood or a measure of water is true only if it matches the original standard. Truth, then, is not personal opinion but correspondence to a fixed standard outside ourselves.
He applies this to the boldest of Jesus’ claims. When Jesus said “I am the truth” (John 14:6), McDowell argues He was claiming deity: to have perfect fidelity to the original, God the Father. That is why Jesus could say “whoever has seen me has seen the Father.” He is the visible expression of the invisible God because He has fidelity to the original.
The Answer: The Character of God
Here McDowell delivers his thesis. Every command in Scripture is an expression of the person, character, and nature of God Himself, and that is where moral authority comes from.
Why is lying wrong? Because God is truth, and a lie has no fidelity to Him. Why is killing wrong? Because God is life and made humanity in His image. Why is justice right? Because God is just. Why is impurity wrong? Because God is pure. Why is hatred wrong? Because God is love. A command is not an arbitrary rule; it describes what is consistent, or inconsistent, with who God is. Anything contrary to the character of God is wrong; anything in keeping with it is righteous.
His pastoral application follows: do not take your children back to the Scriptures as a rulebook, but through the Scriptures to the God of the Scriptures. He cites Jesus rebuking those who searched the Scriptures thinking life was in the text itself, when life is found in Him. Rules produce legalism; the character of God produces relationship, and relationship, he argues, carries young people far further.
Judging Rightly
Finally, McDowell returns to the talk’s title. He argues that “judge not, lest you be judged” (Matthew 7:1) has become the most-quoted verse in the culture, and is used to forbid all moral discernment. But he sets it beside John 7:24, “do not judge by appearances, but judge with righteous judgment.” The prohibition, he says, is against self-appointed, personal-preference judgment, not against all moral discernment.
He turns this on his own audience honestly, noting that Christians often condemn things (his example is certain music styles) merely because they personally dislike them, then appeal to the Bible to justify a preference. Righteous judgment means measuring by the character of God, not by personal taste. Believers are called not to abandon judgment but to judge rightly, by the right standard.
Key Terms
Truth as fidelity to the original: McDowell’s definition, that truth is that which corresponds to a fixed standard.
Absolute truth: truth that is objective and universal, which he says the culture has abandoned.
The new tolerance: the redefinition of tolerance to mean treating all beliefs as equally valid.
Legalism: reducing morality to bare commands (“because the Bible says so”) without the reason behind them.
The character of God: the true source of moral authority, of which every command is an expression.
Righteous judgment: judging by the nature of God rather than by personal preference.
Verses to Know
John 14:6, I am the way, the truth, and the life. John 14:9, whoever has seen me has seen the Father. Matthew 7:1, judge not, lest you be judged. John 7:24, judge with righteous judgment. Judges 17:6 and 21:25, everyone did what was right in his own eyes. John 5:39-40, you search the Scriptures, yet life is found in Christ.
Takeaway
McDowell argues that morality cannot rest on feelings, consequences, tolerance, family, legality, or even bare commands, because each collapses under pressure, but only on the character of God, so that every command is an expression of who God is, and the way to prepare the next generation is to lead them not merely to the rules of Scripture but through Scripture to the God whose nature those rules reveal.