Judgement 1 Three independent coordinates -Coordinate -What it measures -Scriptural anchor Act - What was actually done (objective event) Ex 21 – 22: tort, assault, restitution Intent - Why it was done (volitional aim) Mt 5 :21-28; Heb 4 :12 Outcome - What real effect followed Nu 35 (manslaughter cities), Ex 22 (restitution) All three appear in biblical jurisprudence; none by itself settles every case. --- 2 Why intent still matters even when acts diverge or coincide (a) Pharisee with showy intent who keeps silent (Nicodemus-type) Act: Private approach to Jesus at night (Jn 3 :1-2). Intent: Mixture of caution and curiosity—not pure show. Verdict: Action aligned (seeking truth); intent partially mixed; Jesus answers him, not condemning (Jn 3 :10-21). ⇒ Intent tempers commendation but does not nullify a righteous act. (b) Disciple whose outward act aligns but intent is corrupt (Judas’s kiss) Act: A customary greeting of respect. Intent: Betrayal for money. Outcome: Arrest, crucifixion. Verdict: “Would have been better for that man if he had not been born” (Mt 26 :24). ⇒ Identical act ≠ identical verdict; intent flips the moral weight. > Principle: A righteous-looking deed done for treachery is condemned despite appearance. --- 3 Attempted evil vs. accidental harm Scenario Act Intent Outcome Torah category Axe head flies off Harm done No ill-will Death Manslaughter → city of refuge (Nu 35 :11-15) Swinging at a head but missing No harm Murderous will None Attempted murder → death penalty (Ex 21 :14 shows pre-meditation > act) > Intent without consummation is still judged (Prov 24 :9; Mt 5 :28). Failure to produce the outcome spares the victim, but does not erase guilt; law codes treat it as attempt / conspiracy. --- 4 Doing un-intended good > “Some preach Christ out of envy…but Christ is preached, and in this I rejoice.” (Php 1 :15-18) Act: Gospel advanced. Intent: Self-promotion. Outcome: People reached. Verdict: Paul rejoices for the outcome yet reminds that each will still “stand before the judgment seat of Christ.” ⇒ Good outcome cannot sanctify corrupt motive; reward is lost (1 Co 3 :13-15). --- 5 Synthesis 1. Condemnation floor – A deed that violates truth is condemned whatever the motive. 2. Commendation ceiling – A deed can receive full reward only when motive, deed, and (as far as possible) outcome align with selfless truth. 3. Mid-band – Mixed cases (good deed / bad motive, or bad deed / innocuous motive) receive partial or remedial judgment (loss of reward, restitution, lesser penalty). ┌──────── FULL commendation (act+intent+outcome align) │ MOTIVE good │ │ ├──────── Partial commendation (good act / mixed intent) │ │ ├──────── Mitigated guilt (bad outcome / negligible intent) │ MOTIVE evil │ │ └──────── Full guilt (evil act or evil intent or both) ↑ attempted murder here --- Bottom line Act is the public proof; intent is the moral engine; outcome controls restitution/reward. None can be ignored without distorting justice. This revised grid satisfies the Samaritan-Two-Sons emphasis on deeds and the biblical insistence that “Jehovah weighs the spirits” (Prov 16 :2).