Jesus, Paul, James, and Ringo
Posted By: Zach Hoag
So, yeah, it's a tiny bit dangerous to throw the great Ringo Starr's name up there with Jesus and some apostles, but I honestly think that the drummer's input might be helpful in deciphering a difficult biblical-theological issue: that of faith and works.
This is from his 1978 smash-hit "Heart on My Sleeve":
I WEAR MY HEART ON MY SLEEVE,
DON'T COUNT THE COST,
IF I CAN'T LIVE IN LOVE THEN SURELY I'VE LOST.
I TEND TO GET BURNED, TEND TO GET BRUISED,
BUT IT'S MY LIFE WHATEVER I CHOOSE.
OH, I JUST WANNA LET YOU KNOW,
SOMETIMES I, I FIND IT SO HARD NOT TO SHOW,
SO I SIGH AND I LET MY FEELINGS GO.
Profound.
But really, this kind of gets to the crux of the issue when we consider our recent mini-series on the Sermon on the Plain in Luke 6, a series we called "Justification by Heart." In the final pericope of that sermon, Jesus wants us to know that whether we like it or not we all wear our heart on our sleeve.
We all bear fruit, for good or bad.
A difficulty which has plagued evangelicals as long as I've known them (which is a long time) is how to factor in Paul's drastic statement in Romans 3: "For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law" (v. 28, emphasis mine). In the more Baptistic stream of the evangelical world, we are very conscious of James 2:24 ("justified by works," what?), and even now I can hear the thunder of Sinai in my old Baptist pastor's voice: "A faith that doesn't have works is demon-faith!"
Frightening.
And so we teeter from Paul to James in the most precarious of playground dances, unable to find balance in the bipolarity; and we seem to overlook Jesus (and Ringo, naturally). Quick, a theological nerdnote: in my view there also seems to be a tendency to perhaps unwittingly equate "faith" with "faithfulness" or some kind of redeemed lawkeeping, ya know, New Perspective style. James' repeated use of "law of liberty" or "law that brings freedom" seems to point many in this direction. My objection would simply be that the present-reality of justification would be nullified if it depended on some kind (even a redeemed kind) of lawkeeping. (I think that even NP coverboy NT Wright would agree with me there.)
But ah yes, back to Jesus and the little drummer boy. Is it really more about the heart (the tree) than it is about the fruit? I believe that the answer is Yes because the alternative option (to focus all attention on fruilt, i.e., actions or works) is a rather odious one in God's nostrils, leading as it must to the perils of self-righteousness (cf. Luke 6:37-42). No, the issue is to focus on the heart, and at the heart of the matter is one's spiritual relationship to God, whether it is a right relationship or a wrong one.
And this is where Romans 3 fits so nicely. For that relationship to be made right, there are no works of law that will do the trick. The Torah has failed us in this regard, or at least we have failed the Torah and the Torah just made us worse. No, the right relationship must be made for us through the work of another, and he is Messiah, Jesus, the one who takes all our Adamic sin on himself on the cross and gives us all his Son-of-God righteousness in the resurrection, for our own possession. Thus the relationship is made right, and we embrace this restored and reconciled position in the Father's family by faith alone and from the depths of our heart.
And in this we are transformed, and transforming.
From the good treasure of our (justified) heart, we then produce fruit. They are the afterthought, not the main thing. Sure, the absence of fruit may be reason for alarm - but the response is to go back to the Vine not to our own lawkeeping.
In regards to James' "justified by works" which may even be a good example of literary hyperbole, my Study Bible gives this nerdnote:
Thus James apparently has a different sense of the word "justify" in view here, as evidenced by the different Scripture passages [from Genesis], and the different events in Abraham's life, to which James and Paul refer. The primary way in which Paul uses the word "justify"...emphasizes the sense of being declared righteous by God through faith, on the basis of Jesus' atoning sacrifice (Rom. 3:24-26), whereas the primary way that James uses the word "justify"...here in James 2:21 seems to emphasize the way in which works demonstrate that someone has been justified, as evidenced by the good works the person does...
Yeah, I can roll with that.
And now, 70's Ringo (you're welcome):
Write a comment