top of page
Writer's pictureBible Brian

The truth about hypocrisy


Hypocrisy within the Church is a commonly cited criticism of the faith, both from unbelievers, and even fellow Christians. Unfortunately, it is a genuine problem we must deal with. There really is a lot of hypocrisy within the Church, mainly because hypocrisy is a very human problem. Rather than being unique to the Church, hypocrisy is a feature of people in general.


Although it is a real problem, it is also a highly exaggerated one. Unfortunately, "hypocrite" and its variants have become meaningless buzz words. People use it because it suits their emotions, but not necessarily the situation in which they are using it. In this article, I first want to acknowledge the problem of hypocrisy, but also to define it. I want to explain what hypocrisy is, what hypocrisy is not, and how we, as both a Church, and as a species, should respond to it.


Defining hypocrisy


The exact meaning of hypocrisy will depend on the dictionary you use, but the common themes are an inconsistency between one's verbally expressed and practically lived values. Dictionary.com, for example, defines hypocrite as


"1. a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that they do not actually possess, especially a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.


2. a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, especially one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie their public statements."


With this as a baseline, hypocrisy has always been a problem within the Church. In fact, Scripture constantly warns of "wolves in sheep's clothing", and "chaff among the wheat". Many who claim to be Christians actually have little or nothing to do with the faith, and in fact, Jesus warns that on Judgment Day, many will call Him Lord, and boast of the good deeds they did for Him, yet He will denounce them as evildoers whom He never knew (Matthew 7:21-23).


But even a true believer must acknowledge that ultimately, we are all hypocrites. According to 1 John 1:8-10, while Christians will be forgiven and cleansed of all unrighteousness if we confess our sins, we are self deceived, and the truth is not in us, if we do not do this. Yet, the confession of sins requires that there must be sins to confess. In spite of this, we, as Christians, understand the standard to which we are held. We are no longer supposed to live in sin (e.g. Romans 6:1-4). Furthermore, we have the absolute ability to overcome sin whenever we are tempted by it (1 Corinthians 10:13).


This means that every Christian believes we can, and should, be perfect, and yet we also fail to do so. Regardless of our personal level of sincerity, every sin we commit is the sin of hypocrisy. When we lie, we are being hypocrites. When we steal, we are being hypocrites. When we lust, we are being hypocrites. Every idle word, we, as Christians, believe will be judged (Matthew 12:36), and yet we exercise almost as little control over our tongue as an unbeliever. This is true hypocrisy within the Church, even before we get to the more extreme examples.


And of course, there are more extreme examples. Perhaps the most easily recognisable, if fictional example is Judge Claude Frollo from the Disney classic "The Hunchback of Notre Dame". From the beginning of the movie, this man is said to have seen corruption everywhere except within. The result is his persecution of many people, even to their very deaths. In spite of a momentary glimmer of fear for his immortal soul, Frollo spends the rest of the movie as the ultimate villain, boasting of his righteousness, and claiming "of my virtue I am justly proud". Yet, when he begins to lust after a gypsy named Esmerelda, he begins praying (to Mary, I'll add) to either give her to him in marriage, or destroy her for tempting him.


While not to the extreme of the murderous Frollo, many such so-called Christians sit in the pews every Sunday. They judge the sins of others, but are all but entirely blind to their own. They are happy to get involved in the lives of "sinners" - a category from which they conveniently excuse themselves - yet make no effort to improve themselves, if they even believe they need such improvement. They judge, but refuse judgment, or as Christ would say, they attempt to remove the specks in other people's eyes without first removing the plank in their own.


In Scripture, Jesus regularly interacted with a similar group of people, the Pharisees. The Pharisees were openly religious, but privately proud. They did great works, but only for sake of being admired. They studied the word of God, emphasising certain parts of The Law, yet ignoring its "weightier matters" (Matthew 23:23). To Christ, faith is an all or nothing thing. It is essential to take the entire faith into account, holding it dear outwardly, but also inwardly. Failure to believe is worse than failure to practice, and in fact, Scripture tells us it is impossible to please God without faith (Hebrews 11:6).


Examples of non-hypocrisy


Seeing what hypocrisy means, it's helpful to understand what people mean by it. Realistically, it should mean "you're being inconsistent with what you say", but far too often, it is instead used to mean "you're being inconsistent with what I say". When accusing someone of hypocrisy, it is important to hold them to their own standard, rather than our own.


This may not even be a standard with which we agree. For example, the Islamic dilemma holds Muslims to the standard of the Qur'an without suggesting that the Qur'an is actually true. Rather than suggesting the Qur'an is true, the dilemma aims to show it cannot be, because any belief one holds about the Bible would be inherently hypocritical. By contrast, even though I do not believe the Qur'an is true, I cannot claim a Muslim is being hypocritical for believing Muhammad is a prophet based on its teachings, because although he is not consistent with my standard for judging Muhammad, he is consistent with his own.


Connecting to the above, there are 4 main ways people erroneously identify hypocrisy in the Church:


1. Opposition to a sin one has previously repented of.


2. Preaching a Biblical message contrary to someone else's understanding of Scripture.


3. Preaching against sin in general, or promoting righteousness.


4. Preaching the Gospel itself.


Opposition to one's own previous sins


This one is perhaps the saddest, because effectively forbids personal growth, locking people into their past mistakes, forbidding them to change for the better, and preventing helping others in the same position. This mentality is actually a form of hypocrisy in and of itself, because no one who preaches such a standard would accept the same logic being used against them. We all make mistakes, but none of us really want to be judged by them, especially when we have repented.


One example from my own life as an apologist is my public stance on homosexuality. Because of my belief that the Bible is the infallible word of the Living God, I believe homosexuality is both an unnatural lust, and a sin which God will one day judge. However, I make no effort to hide my own history with homosexuality. I saw nothing wrong with homosexuality before I became a Christian, and initially resisted the Christian teaching when I discovered it (which was true hypocrisy, my resistance to the Christian teaching was inconsistent with my claim to be a Christian). However, because I claim to believe the Bible, it is consistent for me to repent of, and preach against, the sin of homosexuality. It would actually be quite inconsistent for me to do otherwise. Thus, those who accuse the penitent of hypocrisy are doing so in error.


Preaching contrary to your understanding


The Bible, being a complex book, is very easy to rip out of context, and it's a very common accusation against Christians that we do this regularly, at our own convenience. This is especially the case with the Old Testament, which is filled to the brim with commands Christians do not obey. Thus, we are accused of cherry picking. We supposedly obey the Bible when it's convenient for us, but ignore the Bible when it isn't.


As an example, I have tattoos, and so I am often reminded that Leviticus 19:28 speaks against them. Am I being hypocritical if I speak against homosexuality, yet I have tattoos?

To the uneducated, and especially to those who seek excuses to dismiss what I preach, the answer is a loud "yes". But to those who diligently study the Bible, including the context the New Testament gives the Old, the answer is an even louder "no".


The New Testament makes it abundantly clear, the Old Testament law was fulfilled in Christ, and we are no longer under it. The irony of this is it means that those who accuse Christians of cherry picking must actually engage in cherrypicking to sustain the accusation.


While it's understandable that Christians may appear hypocritical to those who do not understand the Bible, it's actually consistent to interpret the Bible in its entirety, rather than taking any verse at face value. It would be hypocritical to claim to believe the Bible, but only believe the parts you like. However, this is very rarely what's going on when Christians are accused of hypocrisy. Usually, the one making the accusation simply has not understood Scripture.


I'll add a final layer by saying not all Christians study the Bible equally. Some Christians know more than others. Many Christians do not do what the Bible says because they do not know the Bible says it. This is ignorance, not hypocrisy.


Preaching about righteousness


As "hypocrite" is such a buzz word, it is often a default reaction to literally anything we find unpleasant. As sinners, that tends to be the default reaction to anything we perceive as judgment, including the preaching of Biblical truths. This may be general moral preaching, as we consider the very words "sin" and "righteousness" incendiary. The word "sin" sounds judgmental, and the word "righteous" conjures images of snooty, "holier than thou" types. It may also be more specific moral teachings that hit close to home, such as the condemnation of a sin we practice - whether directed specifically to us or not.


Of course, there are areas in which we may genuinely accuse such people of hypocrisy. During His ministry, Jesus even told a parable about two men in a temple; one, a Pharisee, who boasts of his own righteousness, even thanking God that he is not like the other, a tax collector. The tax collector is so humble as to not even look up to Heaven. His one request? "Lord, be merciful to me, a sinner". Jesus tells us the tax collector went down to his house justified. The implication is that the Pharisee does not.


There is great hypocrisy in seeing sin in other people while being blind to your own. There is, however, no hypocrisy in acknowledging the existence of sin, or that there is a standard of righteousness towards which we should strive. Even our failures to reach this standard are hypocritical, but in a sense temporarily so. That is, we act inconsistently with the standard we preach, but as a failure, not as a standard in and of itself.


It's worth noting that this is not a Christian problem, but a human problem. We all have some concept of morality. Even a moral Relativist will object when someone who does not share his moral opinions proceeds to violate them. This is hypocrisy in the opposite direction. A Christian will say there is a standard of righteousness for which we should strive, yet will regularly fail to achieve this. A moral Relativist will say there is no standard of righteousness to which we should strive, yet will get upset with people who act as if this is true.


This, ultimately, makes non-Christians far bigger hypocrites. A Christian may be intellectually consistent with a standard of which they fall short, but those who accuse Christians of hypocrisy because we preach this standard are effectively saying "you are sinning by claiming there is such a thing as sin". Now, which is worse? To fall short of a standard you confess exists (and hopefully confess that you fall short), or to confess an inherently contradictory standard? Obviously, it is far better to have a logically coherent goal you fail to meet than to have a logically incoherent goal you literally never can.


Preaching the Gospel while imperfect


Perhaps the strangest example of "hypocrisy" that isn't hypocrisy is the preaching of the Gospel. The world in general looks at Christians as if we believe we are the ultimate good guys. We deserve Heaven, everyone else deserves Hell. This, ironically, gives us the right to behave in far worse ways than any unbeliever.


But this perception is a mere caricature. It is not what Christians preach. Unfortunately, there are exceptions. Or, more accurately, there are people who claim to be Christians who believe they are better than everyone else. It's worth noting that, as stated earlier, Jesus describes their fate quite graphically in Matthew 7:21-23: "“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’"


Notice their appeal. "Lord, Lord, have we not (done these things) in your name?" Presumably, they really had. You're not going to stand in front of the omniscient God and claim to have done things if you're not fully convinced He is aware you have. Yet, He says "I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!" Evildoers. Workers of iniquity. Sinners. These people bragged to Jesus about their good works, yet He condemned them on the basis of their bad ones. Meanwhile, as we have previously established, Christians acknowledge our bad works before judgment. We don't go to God saying "here are my good works" while ignoring our bad ones, we go to Him saying "please forgive my bad works", ignoring our good ones.


Such is the nature of the Gospel. We aren't hypocrites, acting like our righteousness will get us into Heaven, but saved, appealing to His righteousness. I like to use the analogy of a rapidly descending plane. If a plane malfunctions mid-air, everyone is in grave danger. Humans can’t fly unassisted, and crashing at terminal velocity is almost certainly fatal. Now, if we’re all on the same plane and someone says, “Put this parachute on and jump,” they aren’t claiming to be able to fly while you can’t. We all need a parachute to survive. Wearing one doesn’t mean I’m a better flier or more deserving of survival. Similarly, my sinfulness and need for Christ don’t make me more worthy of Heaven than you, nor does my sin justify your choice to remain in yours.


Conclusion


Hypocrisy has become a meaningless word in modern discussion, being used as a default response to basically anything the accuser does not like, or understand. This should not be the case. Although hypocrisy is a very real problem within the Church, the term should be reserved only for situations in which it is accurate. Hypocrisy, by any reasonable account, is is inconsistency with one's own beliefs or standards. Ultimately, hypocrisy is not a Christian problem, but a human problem. This, ironically, means the term is often used hypocritically; hypocrisy is ok when everyone else does it, but if Christians do it, that is used to tarnish the one human being who never sinned: Christ Himself. What it should actually do, however, is cause us to seek His intercession for all the times we have been inconsistent with God's standard. We should seek to be the tax collector in the temple, who actually did not eve acknowledge the Pharisee. He did not look to Heaven and say "I would believe you, if only this Pharisee were not a hypocrite." Likewise, if hypocrites provide even a hint of distraction in our own faith, that faith was never truly in God. Yet, that is where it should truly be.


AI usage


AI was used in the following ways during the production of this article:


1. The generation of the cross in the header image.

2. ChatGPT was used to rephrase the plane analogy.


See prompt


0 views
bottom of page