This past week we had our small group go through James 2:1-13; we rotate teachers and it was my turn this week, so I figured I would use my notes + the input from others as a post.
James is usually a great book to hold up as a mirror, because it will convict us Christians who want to do nothing and us believers who want to the right thing wrongly. And not that any of us are always in the right or always wrong, but we are always swinging from one to the other and this book can help re-anchor us.
As of right now, the evangelical church is trying to decide where on the pendulum is the right place to be when it comes to social justice; one side might be too caught up with social justice, allowing it to dictate their view of the gospel while the other side might be too comfortable allowing them to ignore what's going on and just be okay with only their personal relationship and "getting deep." As high as the number of arguments about which side is right, so is the response we typically hear, "the middle." I don't suggest the middle so everyone can compromise, but both sides do express truth. I believe there are gospel-centered hearts on both sides who are trying to figure out how to navigate through these opinions together, then there also those who are looking at the issue through a political/race/class lens and are either using this "conviction" to not have to help the poor or a minority race.
The Bible is clear about the church being one body and this season we're in is probably an example of Jesus teaching the bride how to walk properly, with both legs, on this bumpy terrain so we don't sprain an ankle and then have to sit out for a while. Regardless of where we land with the church's participation in social justice, James 2 (most of the book + the entire Bible) is very clear about the Imagio Dei and rebuking anyone (or any assembly) that doesn't uphold it with the highest honor...and doesn't defend it. (you can choose how to)
As a side note, I don't claim to have 10 years of church staff experience (which, unfortunately, determines credibility), I've only had the opportunity of being as active as anyone can be in the church as a member and as close as anyone can be to their pastor in several different churches in several different cities. So, when I write an opinion it's not coming from someone who shepherds, but as one of the flocks (so if you Eph 4 your flock well then maybe you think this can be worth two cents, if you don't like Eph 4 then..keep collecting them tithes.)
For the record, I by no means think this post is worth more than 2 cents.
2:1 My brothers, (show no partiality) {as you hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory.}
James does not continue his call against favoritism and discrimination without planting the reasoning 1st in Jesus.
While Social Gospels will use Jesus as an example/means for justice, James recognizes Jesus as "Lord". Literally "Master, ruler, authority." This means we don't dictate what Justice means or what it doesn't mean, how justice should or shouldn't be carried out, or what is or isn't Justice. We go to Jesus and the scriptures for those answers. (which is very clear)
He also recognizes Jesus as the Christ/Messiah and "Lord of glory": we are to take awe of him and remember that he is our beloved savior who sits on the throne of heaven with Earth as his footstool.
In light of the supremacy of Christ and his way of living, now when we read "show no partiality" we can understand it in the covenantal language that is expressed in Eph 6:1-9 & Phil 2:1-11, where serving others in humility and the image of God are weaved together.
2:2 For if a man wearing a gold ring and fine clothing comes into your assembly, and a poor man in shabby clothing also comes in, and if you pay attention to the one who wears the fine clothing and say, "You sit here in a good place," while you say to the poor man, "You stand over there," or, "Sit down at my feet," have you not then made distinctions among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts?
While none of us will say out loud these things, the sin isn't only in the words but the thoughts and the heart.
The issue at hand deals with the treatment the poor are receiving in this assembly, but the sin of partiality doesn't stop at rich vs poor.
He says "pay attention to," he highlights not only actions, but even our natural inclinations. We pay attention to things that.. catch our attention. And in this scenario the issue is simply the well-off are being given the attention because of a status, while the neglected remain neglected. It's not bad to give people who are rich attention, and we'll never be able to give everyone equal attention but the sin of partiality is giving one better treatment because of "distinctions" that we've placed value on (good looking, race, gender, class, age, no disabilities, etc).
While it's common for the church in the states (especially middle-class and up) to over-spiritualize a text so the literal message becomes empty and only something to philosophize about, it's important to note that the poor are the literal focus and at the same time an example. This passage could have mentioned any "distinction" that the world classifies as weak or a lesser human. For a middle school student where financial identities might not be the highest, the kid who is the best at sports or the funniest kid are seen as the ones with fine clothing, but the "nerdy" kid who sits by herself might be the one in shabby clothing.
my beloved brothers, has not God chosen those who are poor in the world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom, which he has promised to those who love him? But you have dishonored the poor man.
James sternly rebukes the assembly for not viewing the poor as royalty.
This isn't a simile or a metaphor..he doesn't say the poor are "like" heirs. They are heirs (just as everyone else who believes), they are God's heirs and the assembly just treated the King's children as peasants. In any other kingdom, that's execution or exile, so a rebuke is merciful.
Are not the rich the ones who oppress you, and the ones who drag you into court? Are they not the ones who blaspheme the honorable name by which you were called?
This is why the scriptures lift up the poor, weak, or the neglected throughout it, and in a way, suggest preferential treatment. The rich don't need defending, they are usually the ones that have to be defended against.
These "rich" could be non-believers or not truly believers (or maybe believers who don't want to help the neglected like in today's context)
We know that there are plenty of believers who are rich and don't do any of this. And it's good to note that the rich have the image of God as well and lessening their value as human is not the right direction either.
James here is giving an example of why being "rich" doesn't entitle someone to better treatment, being "rich" in of itself doesn't inherently make someone worth the attention.
If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself," you are doing well.
"According to the scriptures".. James is again planting our definition of justice within the Bible's overall narrative. He does this because there's no way the assembly (as a whole) is doing it the right way (the biblical way).
"According to the scriptures" include passages like Isa 58:6-7 “Is not this the fast that I choose:..Is it not to share your bread with the hungry and bring the homeless poor into your house.."
James potentially mentions this line as sarcasm. "If you really fulfill.." since no one will/can truly uphold it. He might be trying to get ahead of anyone who might be thinking to themselves that they are not included in this rebuke, because he goes right into...
(BUT if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors.) →→For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it. For he who said, "Do not commit adultery," also said, "Do not murder." If you do not commit adultery but do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. So speak and so act as those who are to be judged under the law of liberty. For judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment.
"So speak and so act as those..under the law of liberty" because there's no way anyone will really fulfill the whole law.
Mercy triumphs over judgment is something we can all agree on, we all want to receive mercy vs judgement, but the arrogant will 9/10 not show mercy. The proud most of the time will pass the judgement and believe people deserve to get the punishment with the crime, but they themselves want the mercy. But God resists the proud and gives grace to the humble.
Through the book, James is constantly pointing back to a form of humility, because an arrogant, "rich" heart will do no good..in anything. Whether it's worshiping God, not showing partiality, building up the assembly, recognizing every soul as having the image of God, upholding the royal law at least half way..only a humbled spirit can do these things.
And no one can properly do this without Jesus as their savior (James 2:1)
Again, this is not too over-spiritualize it, because he does make it clear that faith without works is dead and pure and undefiled religion includes watching over the widows and the orphans, literally.
Read More: Are your Small Groups Working?
Comentários