Know the Text
☰
⌕
SeekQuestion

Reading as Question: the text, translations, history and evidence, plainly. Read as Seek →

← Questions

⚠ Fact-checked, not yet reviewed by a person.

Does Matthew 7:1 forbid all judging?

Question guide

Fact-checked · Version 1 · Revised · How this page was madedrafting: Version 1, written from a research ledger of 70 sourced claims (content/work/matthew-7-1), each checked by a second AI from a different vendor before writing (51 verified, 19 corrected); every fact-bearing item cites the claims it relies onreview: An editor from a different AI vendor than the writer reviewed the draft against its claims, rebuilt the cases and responses of the four hard questions (what kind of judging is forbidden, the fit with John 7:24 and church correction, measure for measure, and courts), stated the broad reading at full strength with Plummer, Price and Chandler's account of recent interpreters, brought in Hillel and Kulp, Hubmaier, Carson, Laurie, Nolland, 1 Clement, the Didache and the Oxyrhynchus papyrus, described Philo and Josephus as Jewish writers rather than rabbinic authorities, and corrected attributions and agreement rows; a code check compares every item with its cited claims; owner sign-off pending

Matthew forbids judging, then describes correction after self-correction; read alone, the ban is unqualified, and interpreters dispute its scope, including courts.8 sources8 sources1. Matthew 7:12. Matthew 7:53. Kayumba4. Chandler5. Leviticus 19:156. Tolstoy7. Luther8. Aquinas

Matthew 7:1 forbids judging without specifying whom or where; verse 5 says to remove your own beam before seeing clearly to remove your brother's speck. John 7:24 uses the same verb to forbid and command judging; Matthew 18 and Paul expect church correction. ChrysostomJohn ChrysostomBishop of Constantinople from 398 (about 347–407), called “golden-mouthed” for his eloquence. The Catholic Encyclopedia calls him the chief representative of Antioch’s grammatical-historical interpretation, which opposed Origen’s allegorical reading.From: Baur; Baur; Baur; BaurAll terms →, AugustineAugustineA North African theologian (354–430), born at Tagaste, who served as bishop of Hippo from 396 until his death, according to the Catholic Encyclopedia.From: Portalié; PortaliéAll terms → and CalvinJohn CalvinA Protestant reformer (1509–1564) who settled in Geneva in 1536, with an interval away, according to the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica. Alongside the Institutes of the Christian Religion, he wrote commentaries on Scripture.From: Alexander; Alexander; Alexander; Alexander; AlexanderAll terms → limit the ban; Chandler reports an overwhelming majority of recent interpreters favoring a nonjudgmental attitude, but reads it as a warning against unjust legal judging. LutherMartin LutherA German religious reformer (1483–1546), according to the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica. Henry Ganss’s Catholic Encyclopedia article reports that Luther translated the New Testament into German while at Wartburg.From: Lindsay; Lindsay; GanssAll terms → and AquinasThomas AquinasA philosopher, theologian and Doctor of the Church, born in 1225 or 1227 and deceased in 1274, according to the 1912 Catholic Encyclopedia. He wrote the Summa theologica.From: Kennedy; KennedyAll terms → allow lawful judges; Tolstoy and the Schleitheim Confession reject Christian sentencing.

Matthew forbids judging, then describes correcting another person after correcting yourself. The cited interpreters disagree about which judging is forbidden and whether Christians may serve as judges.

At a glance

The evidence

Claims about the text

Theological claims

The central debate

Who, where, when
Who
JesusPaul
When set
Jesus teaches his disciples on a mountain in Matthew's Sermon on the Mount. The sermon ends with the crowds astonished at his teaching.
When written
4 sources4 sources9. Matthew 5:110. Matthew 5:211. Matthew 7:2812. Matthew 7:29
How to read this page
Text what the text saysTradition later interpretationEvidence what has been foundScholarship inference; scholars differ1 numbered source

The evidence

Evidence

Each claim judged on its own, with the limits of the evidence stated.

  • Supported

    Matthew 7:5 envisages correction after self-correction.

    Verse 5 tells the speck-remover first to remove the beam from his own eye, after which he will see clearly to remove his brother's speck.

    Why this verdict

    Claims about the text

    Confidence: high

    Verse 5 tells the speck-remover first to remove the beam from his own eye, after which he will see clearly to remove his brother's speck. The verse still envisages removing the brother's speck. Calvin, Chrysostom and Kayumba lean on this point; Tolstoy reads the whole block as about tribunals instead.6 sources6 sources2. Matthew 7:513. Chrysostom14. Calvin15. Calvin3. Kayumba16. Tolstoy

    Cross-community agreement · interpreters from different traditions read verse 5 as still envisaging the removal of the brother's speck: Calvin, Chrysostom and Kayumba all lean on this point. Tolstoy reads the whole block as about tribunals instead. (as of 2026-11-09)

  • Supported

    The measure saying of Matthew 7:2 was a current Jewish proverb.

    Mishnah Sotah 1:7, the TargumTargumAn Aramaic translation of the Bible. The Jewish Encyclopedia traces the practice to the Second Temple period and describes translators rendering biblical texts into Aramaic in the synagogue.From: Bacher; Bacher; LevineAll terms → on Isaiah 27:8 and Mark 4:24 use the measure saying in other settings, and Allen and Chandler take it as proverbial.

    Why this verdict

    Claims about the text

    Confidence: high

    Mishnah Sotah 1:7, the Targum on Isaiah 27:8 and Mark 4:24 use the measure saying in other settings, and Allen and Chandler take it as proverbial. The rabbinic and Targum parallels were written down after the Gospels, so they show wide Jewish use, not a specific text Jesus borrowed.6 sources6 sources17. Allen18. Chandler19. Mishnah Sotah 1:7 (Mishnah Yomit translation by Joshua Kulp, CC BY, via Sefaria)20. Mark 4:2421. Mishnah Sotah 1:7 (William Davidson Edition, Koren-Steinsaltz, CC BY-NC, via Sefaria)22. Targum Jonathan on Isaiah 27:8 (London "Chaldee Paraphrase", 1871, public domain, via Sefaria)

    Cross-community agreement · Allen (1907, a critical commentator) and Chandler (2009) both take the measure sayings as proverbial; no cited source disputes it. (as of 2026-11-09)

  • Open

    Unjust legal judging is the specific target of Matthew 7:1-5.

    Chandler reads Matthew 7:1-5 as a comment on the laws for just legal judging in Leviticus 19:15-18.

    Why this verdict

    Claims about the text

    Confidence: medium

    Chandler reads Matthew 7:1-5 as a comment on the laws for just legal judging in Leviticus 19:15-18. Allen reads a warning against hasty or unjustifiable condemnation, and Chandler reports that the overwhelming majority of recent interpreters read a nonjudgmental attitude. The verse names no setting, and the verb's senses include both condemning and going to law, so the lexicon alone does not decide.5 sources5 sources4. Chandler5. Leviticus 19:1523. Allen1. Matthew 7:124. this site's data

    Contested · Chandler (2009) argues for a legal target, against what he reports as the reading of the overwhelming majority of recent interpreters, a nonjudgmental attitude; Allen (1907) reads hasty or unjustifiable condemnation. (as of 2026-11-09) · Minority: Chandler argues that Matthew 7:1-5 comments on the laws for just legal judging in Leviticus 19:15-18.

  • Outside what evidence can settle

    Christians may serve as judges.

    Whether Christians may serve as judges is disputed among the cited interpreters as a theological application of the passage.

    Why this verdict

    Theological claims

    Confidence: high

    Whether Christians may serve as judges is disputed among the cited interpreters as a theological application of the passage. Historical and linguistic evidence can inform the passage's original sense; Schleitheim argues from Christ's refusal to divide an inheritance and Chandler proposes a critique of unjust judging.6 7 8

    Contested · Tolstoy says no Christian judge could pass a sentence of condemnation; Luther and Aquinas hold that judging by those in office is lawful. (as of 2026-11-09)

What people get wrong

Text

Things people commonly believe the text says, checked against it.

  • A common belief among believers

    Myth Once correction is allowed, the command has little left to forbid.

    Actually Matthew puts the corrector's own beam first. Calvin reads the command as a cure for the eagerness to censure others, and DeYoung, who rejects a blanket ban on moral evaluation, still warns Christians not to mute the command, since sinners are apt to assume the worst about people.2 25 26

  • A common belief among skeptics

    Myth Matthew's passage leaves no room for correcting another person.

    Actually Verse 5 still envisages removing the brother's speck once the corrector has removed his own beam. John Nolland, as quoted by Chandler, writes that applications people often make, such as giving others personal space, probably have little to do with the intention of Jesus or the Gospel writers.2 27

  • A common belief among believers

    Myth Matthew 7:1 has overtaken John 3:16 as the best-known or most-quoted verse in the Bible.

    Actually The writers who say so offer it as an impression: Laurie believes it is the nonbeliever's favourite verse, McClain recalls hearing it, DeYoung says it may be the best known, and Price appeals to social media. Carson's displacement remark, as quoted by Qaoud, cites no count either; no source cites a count or survey.6 sources6 sources28. Laurie29. McClain30. Price31. Chandler32. Qaoud26. DeYoung

Hard questions

The strongest case, the strongest responses, then a plain assessment of where the logic holds.

What kind of judging does the speck-and-beam passage forbid?

Matthew 7:5 keeps correction after self-correction, so a ban on all judging does not fit the passage; which kind of judging it targets remains disputed among the cited interpreters.

See the argument

The strongest case

Taken at its word, the command is unqualified. Matthew 7:1 names no object and no setting. Alfred Plummer reads its present imperative as 'Cease to pass judgment', as if everyone transgressed in this way. Daniel Emery Price says there tends to be much effort by Christians to explain how 'Judge not' does not mean what it seems, and thinks the words can basically be taken at face value. Chandler reports that the overwhelming majority of recent interpreters read the sayings as promoting a nonjudgmental attitude.9 sources9 sources1. Matthew 7:12. Matthew 7:533. Plummer30. Price34. Chandler5. Leviticus 19:153. Kayumba35. Hippo36. 1 Corinthians 5:12

  1. P1. Matthew 7:1 forbids judging and names no object or setting.1No listed response challenges this premise
  2. P2. Plummer reads the present imperative as an order to cease passing judgment, as if everyone did so.33 37No listed response challenges this premise
  3. P3. So the command targets the habit and attitude of judging others, and narrowing it to one kind of judging risks explaining it away.

→ Conclusion. Matthew 7:1 is a broad warning against a judging attitude, not a rule about one narrow kind of judgment.

Strongest responses

Protestant: Reformed challenges P3

Hypocritical and self-righteous judging. Kayumba argues that Matthew 7:1-6 does not prohibit judgment altogether but warns against hypocritical and self-righteous judgment. Verse 5 still envisages removing the brother's speck once the corrector has removed the beam from his own eye.3 2

Early church: Latin challenges P3

Doubtful intentions, not manifest acts. Augustine, giving it as his opinion, holds that the command teaches putting the better construction on actions whose intention is doubtful. Manifestly wrong acts, such as theft and drunkenness, may be judged, he holds, citing Paul's question whether the church is not to judge those within.35 36

Academic (critical) challenges P3, the framing

Unjust legal judging. Chandler argues against the nonjudgmental reading he reports among recent interpreters. On his account Matthew 7:1-5 is a comment on the laws for just legal judging in Leviticus 19:15-18, criticising unjust legal judging.34 5

Plain assessment

Verse 5 still envisages removing the brother's speck once the corrector has removed his own beam, so the passage does not end in a ban on all correction. Beyond that the readings divide: Kayumba targets hypocritical and self-righteous judging, Augustine judging doubtful intentions and Chandler unjust legal judging, while by Chandler's account the overwhelming majority of recent interpreters read the sayings as promoting a nonjudgmental attitude.

What would change this assessment: A stated object or setting in the passage would narrow the range of readings.

Assessment uses: Matt.7.1-Matt.7.2 · Matt.7.3-Matt.7.5 · An ongoing practice? · Early church: Latin · Protestant: Lutheran · Academic (critical) · Matthew 7:5 envisages correction after self-correction. · Unjust legal judging is the specific target of Matthew 7:1-5.

How does the warning fit John 7:24 and correction within the church?

The texts are reconciled by distinguishing kinds of judging, as John 7:24 does within one verse; Matthew 7:1 itself does not state the distinctions its interpreters draw.

See the argument

The strongest case

Matthew 7:1 forbids judging, yet in John 7:24 Jesus commands righteous judgment with the same verb, Matthew 18:15-17 sets out steps for confronting a brother before the church, and Paul asks whether the church is not to judge those inside. Chrysostom raised this objection himself, arguing that if no one judged, all would be lost in churches, states and households. The Anabaptist Hubmaier, as Chandler reports, noted the paradox that Christians should not judge and yet should appoint judges among themselves.19 sources19 sources1. Matthew 7:12. Matthew 7:538. John 7:2139. John 7:2340. John 7:2441. this site's data42. Matthew 18:1543. Matthew 18:1644. Matthew 18:1745. 1 Corinthians 5:136. 1 Corinthians 5:1246. 1 Corinthians 5:1347. Chrysostom13. Chrysostom48. Chandler35. Hippo25. Calvin14. Calvin15. Calvin

  1. P1. Matthew 7:1 forbids judging; John 7:24 commands righteous judging with the same verb; Matthew 18:15-17 and 1 Corinthians 5:12-13 direct judgment within the community.11 sources11 sources1. Matthew 7:138. John 7:2139. John 7:2340. John 7:2441. this site's data42. Matthew 18:1543. Matthew 18:1644. Matthew 18:1745. 1 Corinthians 5:136. 1 Corinthians 5:1246. 1 Corinthians 5:13No listed response challenges this premise
  2. P2. Read without qualification, these instructions conflict, and reconciling them requires limits that Matthew 7:1 does not state.

→ Conclusion. The prohibition cannot be both unrestricted and consistent with the commands to correct.

Strongest responses

Early church: Greek challenges P2

Correct as a physician. Chrysostom answers his own objection. Correct the sinner, he says, not as a foe exacting a penalty but as a physician providing medicines; Christ did not forbid stopping the one who sins, and the command means not being bitter in pronouncing sentence.47 13

Early church: Latin challenges P2

Manifest acts may be judged. Augustine holds that manifestly wrong acts, such as theft and drunkenness, may be judged, citing Paul's question whether the church is not to judge those within. For actions whose intention is doubtful, he holds, the command teaches putting the better construction on them.49 36

Protestant: Reformed challenges P2

A cure for eagerness to censure. Calvin writes that the words do not contain an absolute prohibition but are meant to cure the eagerness to censure others. Believers are bound to condemn all sins, and the passage is misapplied when used to set aside the distinction between good and evil.25 14 15

Plain assessment

John 7:24 uses the same verb to forbid judging by appearance and to command righteous judgment, so the qualifier carries the weight. Chrysostom, Augustine and Calvin reconcile Matthew 7:1 with Matthew 18 and Paul by limiting what is forbidden: Chrysostom corrects as a physician rather than with bitter sentencing, Augustine permits judging manifest acts, and Calvin holds believers bound to condemn all sins while curing the eagerness to censure. Matthew 7:1 does not state these distinctions; verse 5 still envisages removing the brother's speck.

What would change this assessment: Evidence that Matthew meant 7:1 without qualification, despite 7:5 and 18:15-17, would reopen the objection.

Assessment uses: Matt.7.1-Matt.7.2 · Matt.7.3-Matt.7.5 · John.7.24 · 1Cor.5.12-1Cor.5.13 · Matt.18.15-Matt.18.17 · Early church: Greek · Early church: Latin · Protestant: Reformed

Is 'measure for measure' a Jewish saying, and does that make the warning judicial?

The cited commentators agree the measure saying was proverbial; its later written Jewish parallels identify no borrowed text, and its other settings do not make Matthew's use judicial.

See the argument

The strongest case

Chandler holds that measure-for-measure sayings are proverbial, and reads Matthew's use judicially. He compares Matthew 7:1-2 with Philo of AlexandriaPhilo of AlexandriaA Jewish philosopher of Alexandria (about 20 BCE–after 40 CE). The Jewish Encyclopedia describes his effort to harmonize Greek philosophy with Hebrew religion through allegorical interpretation of the Bible.From: Toy; ToyAll terms →, a first-century Jewish author, for whom a judge regards his office as if he were at the same time judging and being judged, and uses the Jewish historian JosephusJosephusA Jewish historian (37–after 100 CE), according to Steve Mason and the Jewish Encyclopedia. Mason explains that his Antiquities, completed in 93/94 CE, retells Judean history from creation to the eve of the war against Rome.From: Mason; Mason; Gottheil; Mason; MasonAll terms →, who gives a convicted false witness the punishments the accused would have suffered, as a judicial parallel. On his account Matthew 7:1-5 comments on the laws for just legal judging in Leviticus 19:15-18.10 sources10 sources17. Allen18. Chandler19. Mishnah Sotah 1:7 (Mishnah Yomit translation by Joshua Kulp, CC BY, via Sefaria)20. Mark 4:2421. Mishnah Sotah 1:7 (William Davidson Edition, Koren-Steinsaltz, CC BY-NC, via Sefaria)22. Targum Jonathan on Isaiah 27:8 (London "Chaldee Paraphrase", 1871, public domain, via Sefaria)50. Alexandria51. Josephus4. Chandler5. Leviticus 19:15

  1. P1. The measure saying appears in other Jewish texts, including Mishnah Sotah 1:7, and in Mark in another sense.5 sources5 sources17. Allen18. Chandler19. Mishnah Sotah 1:7 (Mishnah Yomit translation by Joshua Kulp, CC BY, via Sefaria)20. Mark 4:2421. Mishnah Sotah 1:7 (William Davidson Edition, Koren-Steinsaltz, CC BY-NC, via Sefaria)No listed response challenges this premise
  2. P2. PhiloPhilo of AlexandriaA Jewish philosopher of Alexandria (about 20 BCE–after 40 CE). The Jewish Encyclopedia describes his effort to harmonize Greek philosophy with Hebrew religion through allegorical interpretation of the Bible.From: Toy; ToyAll terms → describes a judge who judges as if he were being judged, and Josephus a false witness who suffers the punishment he sought for another.50 51No listed response challenges this premise
  3. P3. So the reciprocal measure of Matthew 7:2 belongs to a judicial setting, and the warning is about unjust legal judging.

→ Conclusion. On Chandler's account the warning criticises unjust legal judging rather than abolishing courts.

Strongest responses

Academic (critical) challenges P3

A proverb about condemnation. Allen also says the sayings of verse 2 are of the nature of proverbs, probably current maxims of life. The meaning, he writes, seems to be that hasty or unjustifiable condemnation of others will provoke the just judgment of God.4 sources4 sources17. Allen18. Chandler19. Mishnah Sotah 1:7 (Mishnah Yomit translation by Joshua Kulp, CC BY, via Sefaria)20. Mark 4:24

Protestant: Anglican challenges P3

One proverb, many settings. Mark 4:24 uses the same measure clause in a warning to take heed what one hears, with no mention of judging, and Plummer notes that the saying is given in different contexts with different meanings. Chandler himself says such sayings are easily employed in a variety of contexts, and Mishnah Sotah applies it to the punishment of a suspected adulteress.5 sources5 sources20. Mark 4:2417. Allen18. Chandler19. Mishnah Sotah 1:7 (Mishnah Yomit translation by Joshua Kulp, CC BY, via Sefaria)21. Mishnah Sotah 1:7 (William Davidson Edition, Koren-Steinsaltz, CC BY-NC, via Sefaria)

No known response in these sources

  • Jewish: rabbinic: The rabbinic texts are the parallels under discussion; the checked sources contain no Jewish response to a judicial reading of Matthew.

Plain assessment

Allen and Chandler agree that the measure sayings were proverbial, and Mishnah Sotah, the Targum on Isaiah 27:8 and Mark 4:24 use the saying in other settings. These Jewish parallels were written down after the Gospels, so they show wide Jewish use, not a specific text Jesus borrowed; Chilton's view that Jesus likely knew the Targum is his hypothesis. Philo and Josephus supply judicial settings, but Chandler's judicial reading rests on his Leviticus argument.

What would change this assessment: Evidence for the saying's use before the Gospels, or a firmer link between Matthew 7:1-5 and Leviticus 19, would sharpen the comparison.

Assessment uses: A Jewish measure-for-measure saying · The measure saying of Matthew 7:2 was a current Jewish proverb. · Unjust legal judging is the specific target of Matthew 7:1-5. · Academic (critical) · Mark.4.24

Does the command forbid courts and Christian judges?

A ban on Christian judges is a documented reading, held by Tolstoy and on other grounds by the Schleitheim Confession; Luther and Aquinas permit lawful judging, and Chandler reads a critique of unjust courts.

See the argument

The strongest case

Tolstoy concluded in What I Believe (1884) that 'Judge not' means 'Institute no tribunals', so that no Christian judge could pass a sentence of condemnation. He reached this through 'resist not evil', which he read as the key to the Sermon, and took Luke's added verb katadikazo as proof that 'judge not' refers to courts. The Anabaptist Schleitheim Confession (1527) had already answered that a Christian should not pass sentence in worldly disputes. Russell called 'Judge not' an excellent principle, but not very popular in the law courts of Christian countries.14 sources14 sources1. Matthew 7:152. Luke 6:3653. Luke 6:3716. Tolstoy54. The Schleitheim Confession (1527), tr. J. C. Wenger, Rod and Staff printing (1985), anabaptists.org55. Luke 12:1456. Russell57. Luther58. Aquinas59. Deuteronomy 16:184. Chandler5. Leviticus 19:1560. Chandler61. Chandler

  1. P1. Matthew 7:1 forbids judging, and Luke places the saying after the call to mercy and adds a command not to condemn.1 52 53No listed response challenges this premise
  2. P2. Tolstoy argues that Luke's condemnation verb means only condemnation in judgment, which points to courts.6
  3. P3. So the command rules out the institution of tribunals and any Christian judge's sentence of condemnation.

→ Conclusion. On Tolstoy's reading no Christian judge may pass a sentence of condemnation.

Strongest responses

Protestant: Lutheran challenges P3

Disciples, not government. Luther holds that Christ is preaching here only to his disciples and is not speaking of the judgment or punishment that must occur in the world. A prince or a judge who means to discharge his duty properly, he writes, cannot do otherwise than judge and punish.57

Catholic challenges P3

Lawful judgment is an act of justice. Aquinas answers the objection from Matthew 7:1 by citing Deuteronomy 16:18 on appointing judges. Judgment is lawful, he holds, as an act of justice that comes from a just inclination, from someone in authority, and according to prudence.58 59

Academic (critical) challenges P3

A critique of corrupt courts. Chandler also reads Matthew 7:1-5 in a legal setting, as a comment on the laws for just legal judging in Leviticus, but makes unjust legal judging its target. On his reading it is a critique of corrupt courts, not a ban on courts.4 5

Tradition unspecified challenges P2

The word evidence. The tagged text has katadikazo in four verses, with five occurrences, and Matthew 12:7 uses it of condemning innocent disciples. That Tolstoy's court sense holds for every use, and so for Luke 6:37, is his interpretation.62 6

Plain assessment

Tolstoy's tribunal ban, the Schleitheim answer and Chandler's judicial reading are different arguments: Schleitheim grounds its answer in Christ's refusal to divide an inheritance, not in Matthew 7:1, and Chandler targets unjust judging, not courts. Luther and Aquinas permit lawful judging on their own grounds, and Chandler writes that the reading limiting the command to private judging became mainstream. The Christian judges Russell knew felt no conflict.

What would change this assessment: Clearer evidence of the setting Matthew had in view would inform the reading; the application to Christian judges would still need theological argument.

Assessment uses: Christians and the courts · Judging, condemning and forgiving · Protestant: Lutheran · Catholic · Academic (critical) · Skeptic/secular · Christians may serve as judges.

What the texts say

  • Matthew 7:1–2 — Jesus tells his hearers not to judge so that they will not be judged. Verse 2 explains why: the judgment they give and the measure they use will be applied to them in return. The command does not say whom they must not judge or who will judge them.1 63
  • Matthew 7:3–5 — A person notices a speck in his brother's eye but misses a beam in his own in verses 3-4. Verse 5 calls him a hypocrite and tells him to remove his own beam first; then he will see clearly to remove his brother's speck.64 65 2
  • Matthew 7:6 — Verse 6 forbids giving holy things to dogs or throwing pearls to pigs. DeYoung reads this as a call to distinguish between recipients, which counts against a ban on all evaluation; Allen, drawing on his hypothesis about a Logia source, sees no particular link with the preceding verses. Neither explanation comes from the verse itself.4 sources4 sources66. Matthew 7:626. DeYoung67. Allen68. Allen
Show 4 more key verses
  • Luke 6:36–37 — Luke places the saying just after the command to show mercy as the Father does. Alongside the command not to judge, he includes commands not to condemn and to forgive.52 53
  • John 7:24 — Jesus tells his hearers to judge rightly rather than by appearances during a dispute over his sabbath healing. The verb used in Matthew 7:1 appears twice here, once in a prohibition and once in a command; the words describing the judging make the difference.4 sources4 sources38. John 7:2139. John 7:2340. John 7:2441. this site's data
  • 1 Corinthians 5:12–13 — Paul asks whether the church should judge its own members and orders the wrongdoer removed. He says judging outsiders is not his business and leaves their judgment to God.45 36 46
  • Matthew 18:15–17 — Matthew tells a believer to speak privately to a brother who sins against him. If the brother will not listen, the believer is to bring one or two others, then take the matter to the church. If he refuses to hear the church, he is to be treated as a pagan or tax collector.42 43 44

Background

A Jewish measure-for-measure saying Scholarship

Mishnah Sotah 1:7 states that a person is measured with the measure he uses, and applies it to the punishment of the suspected adulteress, not to judging others. The Targum on Isaiah 27:8 also uses the saying; Chandler reports Bruce Chilton's hypothesis that Jesus likely knew this Targum, whose date is debated. These parallels were written down after the Gospels.6 sources6 sources19. Mishnah Sotah 1:7 (Mishnah Yomit translation by Joshua Kulp, CC BY, via Sefaria)21. Mishnah Sotah 1:7 (William Davidson Edition, Koren-Steinsaltz, CC BY-NC, via Sefaria)22. Targum Jonathan on Isaiah 27:8 (London "Chaldee Paraphrase", 1871, public domain, via Sefaria)17. Allen18. Chandler20. Mark 4:24

Judging one's fellow in the Mishnah Tradition

Hillel's saying in Mishnah Avot 2:4 includes the instruction not to judge one's fellow until one has reached his place. Joshua Kulp explains this as meaning that you do not know what you would do in the other person's situation, and reports the Meiri's alternative, that a person's character should be judged only by how he behaves in his own place. Avot conditions judging rather than stating a total ban.69 70

The corrector can also need correction Tradition

The Babylonian Talmud (Arakhin 16b) reports Rabbi Tarfon doubting that anyone in his generation could accept rebuke, because a man told to remove the splinter from his eyes would answer by pointing to the beam between the corrector's eyes. Bava Batra 15b uses the same retort. Plummer says the mote and beam may have been current; Allen dates Tarfon to the end of the first century AD. The later attribution does not date the image's origin.4 sources4 sources71. Babylonian Talmud Arakhin 16b (William Davidson Edition, CC BY-NC, via Sefaria)72. Babylonian Talmud Bava Batra 15b (William Davidson Edition, CC BY-NC, via Sefaria)73. Allen74. Plummer

Show 2 more background topics (How the sayings circulated; Christians and the courts)

How the sayings circulated Evidence

1 Clement 13, a letter of the church at Rome to Corinth, quotes words of the Lord Jesus that include the measure saying, in wording not identical to Matthew's or Luke's. A papyrus from Oxyrhynchus, which its editors date probably to between AD 150 and 300, preserves the end of the speck saying in wording they say agrees exactly with Luke 6:42. The Didache (ch. 9) cites the saying about holy things and dogs to restrict the Eucharist to the baptized.5 sources5 sources75. Rome76. Grenfell77. Grenfell78. Luke 6:4279. The Didache, tr. Roberts and Donaldson (ANF vol. 7), New Advent

Christians and the courts Scholarship

The Anabaptist Schleitheim Confession (1527) answers that a Christian should not pass sentence in worldly disputes, because Christ refused to divide an inheritance between brothers; its ground is that refusal, not Matthew 7:1. Chandler reports that the Anabaptist Balthasar Hubmaier noted the paradox that Christians should not judge and yet should appoint judges among themselves. He writes that two readings grew out of these debates, and that the view limiting 'do not judge' to private judging won out and became mainstream.5 sources5 sources54. The Schleitheim Confession (1527), tr. J. C. Wenger, Rod and Staff printing (1985), anabaptists.org55. Luke 12:1448. Chandler60. Chandler61. Chandler

Where translations differ

Text

Where the wording in different Bibles diverges, and why.

Matthew 7:1 · “Judging” krino

Abbott-Smith's lexicon lists eight senses, from separating and deciding to condemning and going to law, without assigning this verse to one of them. LSJ places Matthew 7:1 under passing sentence or condemning. That is one lexicographer's classification; the range of meanings alone does not decide which the passage carries.24 80

Open in compare →

Matthew 7:1 · “An ongoing practice?”

The verb is tagged as a present active imperative, second person plural. Anglican scholar Alfred Plummer reads it as 'Cease to pass judgment', as if everyone transgressed in this way; Kayumba likewise reads 'stop judging'. That is their reading of the grammar, not something the tag itself establishes.37 33

Open in compare →

Luke 6:37 · “Judging, condemning and forgiving” krino; katadikazo; apoluo

Luke uses three different verbs. Apoluo usually means 'release'; 'forgive' is a contextual rendering. Tolstoy argued that katadikazo means only 'to condemn in judgment' and is used four times in the New Testament; the tagged text has it in four verses but five occurrences.4 sources4 sources53. Luke 6:3781. this site's data62. this site's data6. Tolstoy

Open in compare →

How it has been interpreted

Tradition

How different traditions read these texts, in their own terms.

Early church: Greek · Chrysostom — correction as healing

John ChrysostomJohn ChrysostomBishop of Constantinople from 398 (about 347–407), called “golden-mouthed” for his eloquence. The Catholic Encyclopedia calls him the chief representative of Antioch’s grammatical-historical interpretation, which opposed Origen’s allegorical reading.From: Baur; Baur; Baur; BaurAll terms → argues that if no one judged, all would be lost in churches, states and households. He tells his hearers to correct a sinner not as a foe exacting a penalty but as a physician, glossing the command as not being bitter in pronouncing sentence.47 13

Early church: Latin · Augustine — doubtful intentions and manifest acts

Augustine, giving it as his opinion, holds that the command teaches putting the better construction on actions whose intention is doubtful. Manifestly wrong acts, such as debauchery, blasphemy, theft and drunkenness, may be judged, citing 'by their fruits' and Paul's question whether the church is not to judge those within. Aquinas later cites this reading.35 36

Catholic · Aquinas and the Catechism — acts, persons and lawful judgment

Aquinas holds that judgment is lawful as an act of justice when it comes from a just inclination, from someone in authority, and according to prudence. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says (paragraph 1861) that one can judge an act to be a grave offence but must entrust judgment of persons to God's justice and mercy, and (paragraph 2478) asks for a favourable interpretation of a neighbour as far as possible.5 sources5 sources58. Aquinas59. Deuteronomy 16:1882. Church83. Church84. Church

Show 8 more interpretations (Orthodox, Protestant: Lutheran, Protestant: Reformed…)

Orthodox · The Prayer of St Ephrem — seeing one's own faults

The Orthodox Lenten Prayer of St Ephrem, in the OCA translation, asks God to grant the one praying to see his own transgressions and not to judge his brother. It is a liturgical use rather than a commentary on Matthew 7, but it pairs self-examination with not judging, as Matthew 7:3-5 does.85

Protestant: Lutheran · Luther and Price — disciples, government and a face-value warning

Luther holds that in Matthew 7:1 Christ is preaching only to his disciples and is not speaking of the judgment or punishment that must occur in the world; a prince or judge who means to do his duty must judge and punish. Daniel Emery Price thinks the words can basically be taken at face value, as a warning against ruthless judgment and failure to apply a charitable construction, not a ban on every evaluation.57 30

Protestant: Reformed · Calvin and DeYoung — discernment with restraint

Calvin writes that the words do not contain an absolute prohibition of judging but are meant to cure the eagerness to censure others; believers are bound to condemn all sins. Kevin DeYoung says too many people take the verse as a blanket rejection of all moral evaluation, but warns Christians not to mute the command.4 sources4 sources25. Calvin14. Calvin15. Calvin26. DeYoung

Protestant: evangelical · Carson and Laurie — condemnation, not discernment

D. A. Carson, as quoted by David Qaoud, writes that Matthew 7:1 forbids judgementalism, not moral discernment. Pastor Greg Laurie suggests 'Condemn not' as a better translation. His gloss is a popular one; the LSJ lexicon likewise places the verse under the sense 'pass sentence upon, condemn'.32 86 80

Jehovah's Witnesses · The New World Translation study note

The Jehovah's Witnesses' study edition renders the command 'Stop judging', with 'Stop condemning' as an alternative. Its note says Jesus commanded those in the habit of judging to stop, citing the Pharisees as a bad example.87

Latter-day Saints · The Joseph Smith Translation

The Latter-day Saints' Joseph Smith Translation renders the verse as a command not to judge unrighteously and adds a command to judge righteous judgment, wording shared with John 7:24. The cited appendix does not establish how the wording was derived; 3 Nephi 14:1 keeps the unqualified form.88

Academic (critical) · Allen and Chandler — hasty condemnation or unjust courts?

W. C. Allen (1907) writes that the meaning seems to be that hasty or unjustifiable condemnation of others will provoke the just judgment of God. Christopher Chandler (2009) reports that the overwhelming majority of recent interpreters read these sayings as promoting a nonjudgmental attitude, and argues instead that Matthew 7:1-5 comments on the laws for just legal judging in Leviticus 19:15-18: a critique of corrupt courts, not of courts as such.23 34 5

Skeptic/secular · Russell — a challenge to Christian practice

Bertrand Russell, in his 1927 lecture Why I Am Not a Christian, called 'Judge not' an excellent principle but said it was not very popular in the law courts of Christian countries. The earnest Christian judges he had known, he added, felt no conflict.56

Where else the Bible mentions it

Text
  • Mark 4:24 Mark uses the same measure saying in a warning to take heed what one hears, with no mention of judging.

    24He went on to say, “Pay attention to what you hear. With the measure you use, it will be measured to you, and even more will be added to you.

    Read in context →

  • Galatians 6:1 Galatians 6:1 tells spiritual believers to restore someone caught in a trespass in a spirit of gentleness, watching themselves lest they too be tempted. The pairing of correction with self-examination parallels the order of Matthew 7:5.

    1Brothers, if someone is caught in a trespass, you who are spiritual should restore him with a spirit of gentleness. But watch yourself, or you also may be tempted.

    Read in context →

  • 1 Corinthians 6:1–6 Paul rebukes believers for taking disputes with one another before unbelieving courts, and asks whether no one among them is wise enough to decide between brothers. Hubmaier set this beside the command not to judge.

    6:1If any of you has a grievance against another, how dare he go to law before the unrighteous instead of before the saints! 2Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? 3Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life! 4So if you need to settle everyday matters, do you appoint as judges those of no standing in the church? 5I say this to your shame. Is there really no one among you wise enough to arbitrate between his brothers? 6Instead, one brother goes to law against another, and this in front of unbelievers!

    Read in context →

Test your understanding

Does the speck-and-beam saying end by forbidding all help for the brother?

No; verse 5 envisages removing the brother's speck once the corrector has dealt with his own beam.2

Matthew 7:5

Does John 7:24 use a different verb for the judging it commands?

No; it uses krino, the verb of Matthew 7:1, twice, once forbidding judging by appearance and once commanding righteous judgment.40 41

John 7:24

Do the later written Jewish parallels identify a particular text Jesus borrowed?

No; they show wide Jewish use of the measure saying, not that Jesus borrowed a specific text.4 sources4 sources17. Allen18. Chandler19. Mishnah Sotah 1:7 (Mishnah Yomit translation by Joshua Kulp, CC BY, via Sefaria)20. Mark 4:24

Matthew 7:2 Mark 4:24

Cite this page

Plain citation

Does Matthew 7:1 forbid all judging? Know the Text. Question lens, version 1, revised 2026-11-09, Fact-checked. https://knowthetext.com/question/questions/matthew-7-1/

Chicago-style note

Know the Text, “Does Matthew 7:1 forbid all judging?” Question lens, version 1, revised 2026-11-09, Fact-checked, https://knowthetext.com/question/questions/matthew-7-1/.

BibTeX

@misc{knowthetext-matthew-7-1,
  author = {{Know the Text}},
  title = {Does Matthew 7:1 forbid all judging?},
  howpublished = {Know the Text, Question lens},
  url = {https://knowthetext.com/question/questions/matthew-7-1/},
  year = {2026},
  note = {Version 1; revised 2026-11-09; Fact-checked}
}

Sources

88 sources from 76 works

What should we answer next?

Pick the question you'd most like us to research. One vote each; you can change it until the round closes.

We alternate: the page with the most reader votes, then the page with the most gifts.

Next pick: by reader votes

Votes choose what we research next; they never decide the answer.

Gifts are counted separately →

Suggest a question

Report a problem

Found something wrong, unsourced or unfair? Tell us; every report is read. Please don’t include personal information.

↑