James vs Paul, again

Today’s topic is a difficult area, but one in which there are fine lines all over the place.  We are going to discuss the classic Paul vs. James false dichotomy. 

The starting point for this discussion is a conversation in which there is a hypothetical person whose normal temperament is bitter, angry and hostile.  The question is whether this behavior is evidence, in of itself, that the person who displays this unfortunate behavior habitually is lacking in the fruit of the spirit in accordance with both Paul and James.  My response in person lacked the depth necessary to tackle such a difficult issue.  The issue is the classic Liberal Hymn that we all know from our youth, “…they will know we are Christians by our Love.” Is that a fair statement? 

I like to begin this discussion with Luke 23:39-43.  In this example from Luke’s Gospel, we have a man who has clearly NOT demonstrated the fruits of the Spirit.  While we can argue that the Holy Spirit has not yet come into the world, there is another line of argument as well.  We can clearly state, based on the fact that he fully admits that he has earned his crucifixion by his less that wonderful works, that his righteousness before God is NOT based upon his works.  His righteousness is completely based upon his faith, a faith that he articulates at his death.  How do we make sense of this episode in light of James?  James seems to say that since a faith without works is dead, then this guy should have been damned.  But he is proclaimed righteous by none other than Jesus Himself.  All that he has demonstrable in his favor is his faith.

Paul and James have a history together.  Remember the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15.  The question before the apostles concerns the gentiles.  Do you have to be Jewish first to be Christian?  Notice first what Peter says in verses 7-11.  This clearly becomes the interpretation of the whole group.  Now, notice what James says in verses 12-21, quoting Amos 9:11-12.  What we MUST assume at this point is that James passes off on the notion of justification my faith alone.

Now, in their epistles, it is very important to keep in mind to whom each apostle is writing, when, and why.  Paul is usually writing to fledgling churches who are struggling with various issues, after the Jerusalem Council.  Paul never assumes the Gospel.  He always repeats the Gospel, restates the Gospel, teaches the Gospel, refers back to the Gospel, over and over again.  James, on the other hand, is believed to have written his letter prior to the Jerusalem Council.  What is amazing, therefore, is that reformed scholars do not believe that James is either disagreeing with Paul in his letters or with himself in Acts 15.  Here is why.

James argues that faith without works is dead.  But James is assuming that these Jewish Christians to whom he is writing already know the Gospel.  The question here is about antinomianism.  Neither Paul nor James believes that antinomianism is possible, but they go about discussing it from opposite sides of the argument.  Paul in Romans 6 argues that since we are dead to sin, should we go on sinning so that Grace may abound?  By no means, he says.  If you follow his argument through to the end of chapter 8, you will see that Paul does not believe that true faith will yield a person who lacks obedience.  But at the same time, because our bodies remain IN ADAM, we continue to sin despite our desire to be obedient.  And this forces us back to Christ in repentance.  This is Christian living according to Paul.  James argues in his second chapter that faith without works is dead.  But look carefully at the grammar of that passage.

14 What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? 17 So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.

The proposition is that someone says he has faith.  James is questioning, not Paul’s definition of faith that justifies, but rather the supposition that the someone in question had true saving faith in the first place.  James says that there is no such thing as an antinomian because that sort of faith is dead; in other words, it does not lead to life.  Remember that when these guys are talking about life, they are talking about eternal life, and therefore justification.  So, James is in agreement with Paul on the subject of people who do not express the fruits of the spirit.

Now, two questions remain.  First, what are the fruits of the Spirit?  Second, how do recognize the fruits of the spirit in others and in ourselves?  The first question we often forget to ask, and yet it is the important precursor to the second question.  What does the Holy Spirit do?  The Holy Spirit testifies to the truth of the Gospel and brings true and saving faith to believers as a free gift.  Therefore, it follows that the fruit of the spirit is true and saving faith in Jesus Christ and His work for His followers on the Cross.

The second question is then about recognition.  Before we talk about others, let’s consider ourselves.  Do we believe that we are fallen and sinful creatures, completely without hope for salvation?  Do we believe that we need to obtain some sort of righteousness before God or else we are going to hell, and we have no avenue to do this on our own?  Do we humbly repent and come before God as broken and defeated creatures?  Do we believe that God in His mercy sent Jesus to be our only mediator and advocate, to live the life that we could not live, to die the death that God requires on our behalf, to impute His righteousness to us, His elect, to give to us, a free gift of Grace, this belief in our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and His work for us on the Cross?  Then, yes, we have true and saving faith.  Now, relax for a second.  How does that make you feel?  Grateful?  Humbled?  In awe of His mercy and Grace?  Desperate to please Him?  Good.  Now, follow the commandments.  When you mess up, and you will, repent, turn back to Him and receive His Grace and do it again.

What about your neighbor?  How do know that he has true and saving faith?  If works have nothing to do with it, how can you tell?  The truth is that you can’t tell.  That is the point.  We are not given the job of fruit inspector.  Jesus is the fruit inspector general, not us.  We might suspect one way or another, but let me give you two examples.  The Dali Lama is a rather pious sort.  He is generally regarded as righteous before man.  But he has no righteousness before God, unless he believes in the redeeming work of Jesus on the Cross.  Some would claim that he is a better Christian than most of us because of his civic righteousness.  Now look again at the thief in Luke 23.  He had so little civic righteousness that the Romans killed him for his works.  This is the danger of fruit inspection.  We just do not know.

Therefore, keep your own efforts in front of you.  Be obedient to the Lord in Gratitude and Obedience.  Love God and Love your neighbor.  Do these things because you are one of the elect, you understand the Gospel, and now you want to spread the good News about what Jesus Christ has done for you.  What did he do for you?  For me, He lived the perfect life that I couldn’t.  He died the death that I deserved.  He has declared me righteous before God on the Last Day.  He did all of this to save me from the Wrath of God in His infinite mercy and Grace.  Through the Blood of Christ, I live.  They will know we are Christians because we declare the Gospel of Christ, not because we actually lived in a way different from them.

--Troll--

Lions, Orges and Trolls! Oh, my!

Continuing on the theme for the week, I have had a strange confluence of events that have pointed me to a better understanding of the Paul/James discussion.  If you read my words, you will know that last week was a real low point in the blogosphere for me.  The Pirate Christian Radio interview that I tagged last post did cause some waves.  At seemingly an opportune moment, Bible study came to the end of 2 Corinthians 5 today.  My wife is studying James, and so I’ve read James within the last week as well.  And so this mix came together this morning in a loud *figuratively* crash.

To begin this discussion, let’s look at the basic pattern of a Pauline Epistle:  Gospel, gospel, law, gospel, doctrine, doctrine…THEREFORE…practical stuff that is based on Gospel, gospel, law and doctrine.  Certainly, Romans follows this pattern, defines this pattern if you like.  But 2 Corinthians has a different structure upon closer review.  In this epistle, Paul uses a number of metaphors to illustrate how we are to live both in this age and in the age to come through our faith, by dying with Christ in Baptism, being arisen with Christ as a new creation, truly born again, and being indwelled by the Holy Spirit whose seal guarantees the covenant.  He builds up to his doctrinal statement at the end of chapter 5.  You can see parallels in the arguments to the types of arguments made by James concerning imperatives about Christian living.  The concept of Ambassador not only connotes Evangelism, but a standard of behavior consistent with the message.

The charge of antinomianism that often rises from the doctrine of Paul is refuted by the Apostle himself in Romans 6.  The paradox of the two kingdoms is illustrated in Romans 7 where Paul describes the Christian life in terms of his own struggles with the flesh of this age.  But the idea of Christian living, although rooted heavily in doctrine, is clearly defended in terms of obedience to the Law.  This language is more rooted in discussion of the Holy Spirit in others of Paul’s letters, particularly those to the churches in Corinth and Ephesus.  This discussion leads to the fruit of the spirit metaphor.  In addition, there is the language of being alive in faith or dead to sin.  This idea is further developed by James.

James talks about faith that is dead is a faith without fruit.  He assumes the doctrine and Gospel, something that Paul never does, and gets right to the imperatives.  But it is clear that James and Paul are talking about the same thing, living in true faith in the resurrected Jesus.  Both of them make charges against the idea of living without fruit of the Spirit.  Following this logic through, any true faith will necessarily manifest itself in good works and obedience to the law.  Antinomianism is not even a category for these guys, as this behavior is inconsistent with true faith.  Therefore, the antinomian charge is by category the same charge as heretic.  James goes farther making the point that civic righteousness is not the same as righteousness based in true faith in Christ.  The former convicts us while the latter is evidence of our salvation.

And so we come to the issue of Christian living.  If a careful reading of Paul reveals an imperative that is akin to James, and James does not deny the indicatives of Paul, we must address the logical conclusion of Christian Liberty.  One of the issues of a works based righteousness is that even the good civic works of man are tainted by sin and earn us nothing in righteous capital.  Works through faith by virtue of the Holy Spirit are freed from the bondage of sin.  This means that the normal paralysis of analysis that is the natural state of man, being in sin, is null and void in transformed believers.  Being free from the bondage of sin, we are free to act righteously, with no regard to our salvation as that issue is already assured through Christ.  This freedom to obey allows us to obey the Law and love our neighbor without regard to the implications to our own righteousness.  This is only because our righteousness is assured external to ourselves and our efforts and works.  Therefore, Christian Liberty is much greater than enjoying a beer with dinner.  Christian Liberty is freedom from sin so that our works can be done in a pure motive of good through the power of the Holy Spirit, who receives all of the credit as it is He who provides us with the seal of our election, per Ephesians 1 and 2 Corinthians 3.

Therefore, the Reformed are properly rebuked if their actions are not worthy of both Paul and James, both of whom anchor righteous works in the faith of the elect in Jesus Christ.  The issue of the application of the Gospel to our individual lives then does come full circle to a study of the Law.  The difference is the motive behind the obedience and the freedom to actually pull it off.

--Ogre--