A first glance, two of the three words in the title seem related but not the other. In fact, if you were like me, you may not have ever seen or heard the word before, (and now after seeing it, find yourself having a hard time pronouncing it). Contextomy was a word coined by historian Milton Mayer to describe the practice of quoting a text out of context. He used it to describe Julius Streicher, a Nazi, who misquoted the Torah and Talmudic texts in his newspaper to incite anti-semitism in Germany during WWII.
Contextomy occurs frequently in this post-modern age. Although we might not call it that, we certainly recognize it especially when one suggests that another should not judge 'lest ye be judged.' I don't think anyone speaks Medieval English anymore and yet we know that Jesus Christ minted the phrase two millennia ago. And one may think, albeit incorrectly, that Jesus suggested people not make moral judgments against one another. However reading the passage of Matthew 7:1 in context, Jesus goes on to call other people "pigs," "dogs," and "wolves in sheep's clothing." So, either Jesus was a hypocrite or he had something else in mind when he condemned the Pharisees.
Defending the latter statement, Paul Copan in True for You, But Not for Me, suggests: "What Jesus condemns is a critical and judgmental spirit, an unholy sense of superiority. Jesus commanded us to examine ourselves first for the problems we so easily see in others. Only then can we help remove the speck in another's eye – which, incidentally, assumes that a problem exists and must be confronted." It only takes a few minutes of flipping through the New Testament Gospels and Epistles to see that Jesus and his disciples encouraged a restraining of immorality as it did not reflect the Kingdom of God that Jesus proclaimed.
In the 21st Century there is mass contextomy taking place. "You shouldn't judge!" is demanded of by both Christian and non-Christian circles, perhaps unwittingly and/or ignorantly. If taken as is, wouldn't this statement produce anarchy? No one would be culpable for any wrong doing. Lying, stealing, and cheating would be allowed. Suicide bombers would be justified in their missions. Hitler would not have been wrong. Yet this is not what we say, or think, because we know that these things were wrong. We know that 911 and the Holocaust were examples of gross immorality and yet if one is to remain morally neutral, one could not suggest that Hitler and Bin Laden were wrong. One could not even say that what they did was evil. And yet moral neutrality is demanded by people every day, perpetuating the relativistic non-sense peddled by postmodernists.
The next time someone tells you that you shouldn't judge, ask them "Why Not?" Their answer will require a judgment value itself and the argument will commit suicide. They will be judging you for judging. Let's not delude ourselves or let others delude themselves, for mankind's sake, into thinking that one can maintain moral neutrality when we know that certain things are right and wrong.
Jesus did not remain morally neutral and didn't ask his disciples to be. The ability to judge is consistent with humankind being made in the image of God. So discern what is wrong and see the problem with contextomy.
