1) This approach is often motivated by those who want to justify a certain sin that is condemned in other scriptures but not mentioned specifically by Jesus – e.g. homosexuality. It is presupposed by such people that if Jesus didn’t specifically condemn it, it must be OK. This, of course, is pure fantasy. Jesus doesn’t have to specifically condemn every sin that is committed under the sun for us to conclude something is evil. Consider, Jesus didn’t specifically condemn incest, bestiality, sorcery, idolatry, gossip, drunkenness, polygamy, and a host of other iniquities. Are we really to believe that all these sins are OK because Jesus didn’t specifically condemn them? In the following passage, Jesus lists several sins that come from the heart.

"Do you not understand that everything that goes into the mouth passes into the stomach, and is eliminated? But the things that proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and those defile the man. For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, slanders. These are the things which defile the man; but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile the man." (Matt. 15:17-20)

Are we to conclude that Jesus is providing us with an exhaustive list of every sin known to man? Of course not. He is merely giving a sample of iniquity.

2) “Red-letter Christians” are usually liberals who deny the inerrancy of scripture and don’t trust other parts of the Bible because they were written by men. But wasn’t Jesus also a man? Yes, he was also God in human flesh, but liberals usually deny this truth. So, if men cannot be trusted to write down exactly what God gave them to write down, then why trust Jesus, considering the fact that He is also a man? Furthermore, Jesus didn’t write Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Actually, those Gospels were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John – mere men! How is it that red-letter Christians can trust in the four evangelists, but can’t trust other parts of the Bible, because they were written by mere men? Also, if Luke can be trusted to correctly transcribe the words of Jesus, why can’t he be trusted in his writing of the book of Acts? If John can be trusted with respect to the Gospel of John, why can’t he be trusted in his writing of the three epistles (1, 2, 3 John), as well as Revelation?

3) “Red-letter Christians” actually despise Jesus Christ, because they essentially believe He was incapable of teaching His disciples effectively enough to commission them to go into the world and make disciples and communicate His teachings. In Matthew 28:18-20, we read the following words in red:

“And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, ‘All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.’"

Was Jesus foolish or naïve to send out His disciples to make other disciples? Didn’t He know that they were “mere men” and couldn’t possibly be expected to accurately write down and correctly transcribe everything He taught them? What was he thinking, entrusting such a task to “mere men” who were “biased” and “prejudiced” by their “culture-bound worldviews”?

Jesus had spent three years teaching the disciples. Jesus then promised to send them the Holy Spirit, who would be a Spirit of truth in them and who would remind them of everything Jesus had taught them. The passages are as follows:

"I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever; that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you. I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you.” (John 14:16-18)

"These things I have spoken to you while abiding with you. But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.” (John 14:25-26)

These words are also in red. They are the words of Christ. Do “red-letter Christians” believe these words in red? If so, then they must accept the teachings of the apostles as equal in weight with the words of Christ? Why, because the apostles were only teaching what Jesus sent them out to teach and they were only teaching what the Spirit of truth in them was reminding them to teach. If red-letter Christians do not accept the teachings of the apostles, then they do not accept the red-letter teachings of Jesus either, because He sent them out to make disciples, teaching people everything that He commanded, AND He promised to give them the Holy Spirit to help them in that task. The truth is that “red-letter Christians” do not truly revere the words in red, either. They only think that they do. The truth is that they do not really know the words of Christ well enough to even be worthy of the name “red-letter Christians.”

4) “Red-letter Christians” are often motivated by hatred of Paul, because they are feminists who despise Paul’s words about women or they are hearty approvers of filth, who despise Paul’s words about homosexuality. Such people, however, are often quite willing to quote 1 Cor. 13 at their weddings. This was written by Paul. Why accept 1 Cor. 13, but not Rom. 1? Isn’t it because people like to set themselves up as God and make their own determination about what is divine and what isn’t? Peter has never received quite the same level of hatred as Paul. What did Peter think of Paul’s writings? We see what he thought in 2 Pet. 3:15-16:

“and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.”

In 2 Peter 3, Peter is discussing the return of Jesus Christ and the destruction of the earth that will occur at that time. He calls Paul “our beloved brother.” He says that Paul’s words on “these things,” that is eschatology (the doctrine of the last things), are hard to understand, and some people distort Paul’s words. He then says such people also distort the rest of the Scriptures to their own destruction. We see here that Peter equates Paul’s writings with the “rest of the Scriptures.” Peter considered Paul’s writings to be scripture, and Peter was indisputably sent out by Christ. The apostles of Jesus accepted the apostleship of Paul. They judged him to be a true and sincere follower of Christ who was commissioned by Christ and was accurately teaching the gospel of Jesus Christ. The early church also accepted the teachings of Paul. It is only “red-letter Christians,” motivated by a hatred for Paul’s teachings, who do not accept him.

5) “Red-letter Christians” ignore Christ’s reverence for the Old Testament scriptures. Over and over again, Jesus quoted the Old Testament and when He did so, He treated it with reverence as the Word of God. Consider the dialogue between Christ and Satan as recorded in Matthew 4:3-10:

“And the tempter came and said to Him, ‘If You are the Son of God, command that these stones become bread.’ But He answered and said, ‘It is written, 'MAN SHALL NOT LIVE ON BREAD ALONE, BUT ON EVERY WORD THAT PROCEEDS OUT OF THE MOUTH OF GOD.'

Here, Jesus quotes Deuteronomy 8:3. It is obvious that Jesus considers Deut. 8:3 to be the Word of God (not the word of Moses) and utterly reliable, authoritative and applicable thousands of years after it was written. Notice Christ’s emphasis on “every word.” What would Jesus think about those who pick and choose verses out of Deuteronomy, keeping what they like and dispensing with what they don’t like? Man lives by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God, not merely the ones “red-letter Christians” like. Let’s go further in the passage.

“Then the devil took Him into the holy city and had Him stand on the pinnacle of the temple, and said to Him, ‘If You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down; for it is written, 'HE WILL COMMAND HIS ANGELS CONCERNING YOU'; and 'ON their HANDS THEY WILL BEAR YOU UP, SO THAT YOU WILL NOT STRIKE YOUR FOOT AGAINST A STONE.' Jesus said to him, ‘On the other hand, it is written, 'YOU SHALL NOT PUT THE LORD YOUR GOD TO THE TEST.' Again, the devil took Him to a very high mountain and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory; and he said to Him, ‘All these things I will give You, if You fall down and worship me.’ Then Jesus said to him, "Go, Satan! For it is written, 'YOU SHALL WORSHIP THE LORD YOUR GOD, AND SERVE HIM ONLY.'" (Matt. 4:3-10)

In each of Jesus’ replies to Satan, He quotes from Deuteronomy, the latter two instances from Deut. 6. In each case He demonstrates that He views the Old Testament as the Word of God, as reliable, as inerrant, and as applicable thousands of years after it was written. Furthermore, it is obvious that Jesus considers it irrelevant that it was written down by Moses, a mere man! Apparently, Jesus thinks His Father is stronger than sinners. God is able to write a book using a human sinner to write it and still ensure that the book is absolutely truthful and reliable.

Many more examples could be given. All one needs to do is go through the Gospels and find every reference where Jesus quotes the Old Testament. In each case, he will find the same attitude of reverence. At times, Jesus corrected the false interpretation of the Pharisees regarding certain OT passages. We see this in the sermon on the mount. You have heard that it was said … but I say to you. Sometimes, what had been said was not even in the Bible. Sometimes it was, but was attended with a false interpretation. When Jesus said, “But I say unto you …” He was not suggesting that the OT was out of date or untrustworthy. He was giving them the true meaning of the OT passage in question.