05 How James Exposes Favoritism and Reframes Riches, Poverty, and Mercy (James 2:1-13)

Speaker: Welcome to Wednesday in the Word. Today is February 8th, 2012. This is the Fifth in a series of 14 talks on the Book of James. Our passage is James 2, verses 1 through 7, and our teacher is Krisan Marotta. You can find more talks in this series on our website at wednesdayintheword.com. Speaker 1: Good morning. Oh, it's so good to see all of you. It was like 10 after 9, and I was the only one in the room, and I thought, oh I'm not going to be all by myself today. All right. Um, just to remind you, I'm going to break chapter two a little differently. We're going to go through uh verses one through thirteen today, which is not what your homework said, and it's okay to keep doing the homework as it is, but I just found I couldn't stay in my time frame with the way the verses were broken up in your homework. So next week we'll do 14 through 20, and then the week after that, 21 through 26. Okay. There's an old joke about a poor man who enters uh the church seeking the Lord only to be rebuffed by those inside. And on his way out, he meets the Lord and Jesus asks him what happened. So the man says, Well, I I tried to go in, but they wouldn't let me in. And Jesus replies, Oh, I understand completely. I've been trying to get in that church for years. They won't let me in either. Oh, so you know, if you think about it, if you we understand the scriptures right, Jesus didn't fit our Hollywood kind of stereotype of what a real man should look like. Isaiah 53,2 says he has no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him. He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows familiar with suffering. And if you think about it, he was a working man, he probably had calloused hands from his years as a carpenter growing up. He was born in a stable of at least questionable birth in the world's eyes. He was a country bumpkin from Galilee, he didn't have letters after his name, he didn't start a business, and his family thought he was crazy. And he was a vagrant. So if we judged Jesus by his outward appearance, his social status, or his career success, we'd probably miss who he was. And that, judging by external appearances, is at the heart of our passage today. That's I that's I think that's the main point of what James is going to be talking about. So let me review where we are. We're starting chapter two today, and just to remind you, in chapter one, James started out his letter. He said, Consider it joy when you face trials, because those trials test your faith. And that process of testing your faith reveals to you that you actually have faith, and it brings your faith into maturity and wisdom. So it makes us into the kind of people that we should be. And then he ended the chapter with the encouragement to live out the gospel we came claimed to believe. So to eagerly respond to the truth, to let God begin that process of changing us and let it change our perspective on life, our perspective on trials, how we what we value, how we treat others. And so he gave us these two paths. The testing produces endurance, which produces strong faith and life, and then desire, which produces sin, which produces death. And he's saying, basically, those are your choices in life. So when you hear the gospel, what should your response be? Embrace the truth. So now in chapter two, he's gonna start applying all of that. And this is where it gets really, I think James gets at is most challenging. And but so I want you to keep chapter one in mind as we go through this, because I think he's building on that and saying, now, if that's true, this is how you should live your life. So let's look, we're gonna start with one through seven. My brothers, show no partiality as you hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory. For if a man wearing a gold ring in fine clothing comes into your assembly, and a poor man in shabby clothing also comes in, and you pay attention to the one who wears the fine clothing, and you 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? Listen, my beloved brothers, has not God chosen those who are poor in the world to be rich in faith, heirs of the kingdom, which he has promised to those who love him? But you have dishonored the poor man. 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 are called? Now he's already raised this theme in chapter one, that people are treating the rich well and the poor badly. And notice the construction. He this is an if-then construction. So in verses one through four, he says, if you're doing this, then this. So in 2-2, if a man wearing a gold ring comes in, and two, three, and if you pay attention to him, and then two, four, have you not then made distinctions? So he's raising a hypothetical question. And in four, it's a he asks a rhetorical question and the grammar expects an affirmative answer. So he's saying, have you not been? and he expects the answer, yes, yes, we have. Have we not become judges with evil motives? And he expects the answer, yes. In six and seven, he switches to reality. Notice he says, but you but you have. Now he's saying, this is no longer hypothetical, this is what you've actually done. So he's saying his I think we can assume from that his readers actually were flattering rich unbelievers and mistreating the poor. So he uses this hypothetical to get their agreement and then say, now look at your what's really happening in your life. So just notice that that's the structure of these verses. Now, I don't think we should be surprised at that behavior. If you think about it, it's a pretty natural temptation. I mean the rich are attractive because money can solve a lot of problems. And if you treat the witch w the rich well, then they may help you out. So they typically have these positions of power and influence. If you get on their bad side, they can make your life miserable. They have the connections to help you get a job or maybe blacklist you, they have the means to offer scholarships or it to share excess in times of famine or whatever. So if you treat them well, they have the power to help you or to ruin you. Poor people, on the other hand, can't do much for you. In fact, they may need you. So they may need you to share your time and your energy and your resources, and they can potentially drain your already stretched budgets. So the temptation would be, why bother treating them well? Because they can only cause problems. So I don't think we should look at James Reed's and go, gosh, how could they possibly have done that? I think that left to ourselves, that's the place we'd all be in. But James isn't concerned with are we being nice to people or not? I think he's raising a more profound question and asking, how are you looking at the world? Does the gospel change your thinking? Are your actions in line with what you claim to believe? So he's concerned that we see and understand that the gospel makes a difference, that it changes the way we view the world and what we claim to value. So he's asking, the question I think he's asking is, is this faith you have that you claim to have real? Do you really have this relationship with your Heavenly Father? So being a believer is not conforming to this outward pattern of behavior, it's having your heart change, your values change, your attitude change, and it changes from the inside out so that you see the world differently. So as he said in chapter one, the real problem is that we're sinful. It's not the problem is not with God, the problem is not in his the way he treats us, the real problem is in us, we're sinful, and the solution is faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and what he did for you. And then the proper response is we let that belief change us and we see the world differently. So now he's gonna say, here's one of those areas where you should see the world differently. The natural temptation is to butter up to those who can help you and ignore those who can't help you. But think about how the gospel makes a difference. So that's what we're gonna try to understand. There's a single command in this section in verse uh one, which is show no partiality or do not show favoritism. The word literally means to receive the face. So if you receive the face, you're looking at just what's on the outside. And you're treating people in different ways based on what's on the outside, what you can see. So he sets up this situation where two strangers enter the church, and since they're new, they don't know where to sit, and since they're new, no one knows their characters or how they live their lives or anything about them as people, but one has all the outward trappings of the rich and the other has the outward appearance of the poor. And he's saying, in this situation, the rich man is shown the best seat and the poor man is shown the worst seat. So they're being judged by their faces, by their external appearance only. And James says, This is sin, it's forbidden, and he gives the answer in five and six. Why is it wrong? He says, Listen, my beloved brothers, has not God chosen those who are poor in the world to be rich in faith, heirs of the kingdom, which he has promised to those who love him, but you have dishonored the poor men. So what he says is, why is this showing this kind of personality and judging people on their outward appearance wrong? Because those who have faith stand to inherit life in the kingdom of God. So on the outside, it may look like the poor believer has nothing, but in fact, he is rich in the only way that truly matters. And on the outside, the rich unbeliever may look like he has it made and everything is going his way, but he lacks the only value, the only riches that truly matter. So the real question is, do you believe it? Do you live like that's true, that the one who looks like he has nothing actually has everything, and the one who looks like he has everything actually has nothing. So the poor person who has faith stands to inherit these credible riches, the same riches I inherit as a believer, and the they cannot be lost, they cannot fade away, and he is rich in the things that truly matter. And if the rich person is the one, notice he says, dragging me into court, blaspheming the name of Christ, and generally acting in ways that indicate he doesn't have faith, he in fact is not rich at all. He has nothing that matters. So the question is, why are you treating him as the better man? He is really much worse off. If he has no faith, he has nothing. So who is it that is proved to be your sister, the w and who has proved to be your enemy? The rich or the poor in this situation? And he's saying in this situation, the poor has proven faithful and the rich have proven unfaithful. And if you believed the gospel, you wouldn't judge them on their outward experiences or appearances. So let me make clear be clear what he's not saying. He is not saying that poverty is a virtue in and of itself. So he is not saying that if you're poor, you have a free pass to the kingdom of heaven regardless. Poor people are just as sinful as rich people. Poor people have the same need for grace, the same need for faith that that rich people have, they need we are all covered by the same blood of Jesus. So he is not saying that somehow if you're poor, that is a virtue in and of itself, and you get an excuse. He is saying it's irrelevant. Riches and or lack of riches are irrelevant to the kingdom of God. That's not even a factor. When God's starting to judge who gets who is going to be in the kingdom of heaven, who isn't, you how much money you have is not an issue. The issue is faith. So your economic status is irrelevant. So he's not saying that poverty is a virtue in and of itself, nor is he saying that rich people cannot have faith. So he's also not saying that if you're rich, you cannot get into the kingdom of heaven and you must necessarily be an enemy of God. We know that from the Bible. Other scriptures, Abraham was incredibly rich, David and Solomon were two of the richest men who ever walked the face of the earth. We can look to the New Testament for people like Mary and Martha, they were very well off. Lydia, the purple cellar, we meet in Acts, also well off, and they are clearly believers. So the rich are not in trouble just because they're rich. Riches are one of the many resources God can give you to be a good steward of, and you have to use it wisely. It always, this is just one of my pet paves, one of the most misquoted verses in the Bible is the love of money is the root of all evil. It's almost always quoted as money is the root of all evil. And that is not what it says. This is 1 Timothy 6.10, for the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil. It is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pangs. Notice he makes the point twice. It's the love of money and it is through the craving, the desire, the lusting after it. Hebrews 13 5 is the other one. Keep your life free from the love of money and be content with what you have, for he has said, I will never leave you or forsake you. Again, it's the love of money contrasted with contentment. The they're both of the those authors are pointing out the problem is not money, the problem is how we treat it. It's our attitude toward it. And that's the same thing James is pointing out. You can love money no matter how much you have or how little you have. So it's very tempting to butter up the rich man because he can oppress me, he can drag me into court, he can make my life miserable, and it would be highly tempting to try to, you know, seek his good graces if he were in fact the one in control of my life. But he is not. If I believe the gospel, the rich man is not ultimately in control of my life. He can do nothing to me that God is not involved in. He may be a trial that God is using to test my faith, but he is not my Lord and Master. So part of what James is getting at is if I believe the gospel, then I have to believe God is in control of my life, that he and his spirit are at work in my life, that the trials that come upon me show a purpose. That purpose we've talked about in chapter one, they bring about my mature and wise faith and make me more the person that I want to be, and that God wants me to be. And if that process involves a rich man dragging me into court and oppressing me, then so be it. So if I have the attitude that the gospel is true, my attitude toward that changes. So, and also one more c caveat, remember the command is show no partiality, and no partiality means no partiality. We can swing the pendulum the other way and fawn all over the poor people and treat the rich people like dirt. And I think James would say that's equally wrong. So it's very tempting, just as it's tempting to butter up the rich person, it's tempting to think I'm righteous because I give my money away. Or I'm I'm okay because I have given generously to those who are in need or in trouble. Uh and the gospel says I am still a sinner in need of grace. Now, giving and helping and serving are good and right things to do. I'm not denying that, but the outward acts alone will not make you acceptable to God. So it's not the command is show no partiality. The gospel says we're all sinners in need of the same Savior. So they're judging by the outside is what's wrong. Now, James picks on wealth, but I think there are many ways we can do this. I think his readers were facing that particular trial. I think we can conclude that from six and seven, that he could just as easily have picked beauty or lack of beauty. He could have picked youth versus age. He could have picked, you know, those who have a PhD versus those who never graduated from high school, or race or skin color, or gender, or accent, or body piercings, or whatever. He could have picked anything that we can judge on the outside. And this came home to me. I was at a a large PCA women's conference where we had believers there from all over the country, and I was in one of these large workshops and we were at these big round tables, and we were asked to pair off and find a partner to discuss this question. And one of the women at my table, I'm not exactly sure what was wrong with her. I think she was a dwarf, so she was she was about this tall, you know, like came up just below my waist, and her figure, her features were very misshapen, and and they were misshapen in a way that made it uncomfortable to look at her. And when we started pairing up, the table split around her. So she was on her own. And of course, I noticed this. So I thought I have to go over there and be her partner, and of course, I felt stupid because here I am, you know, a six-foot-tall Amazon woman standing next to her, and it was kind of uncomfortable to look at it, but I am ashamed to admit that was my reaction, because that was a purely external reaction. When I went over to talk to her, she very graciously pulled out a chair for me to sit down, and she remained standing, so we were eye to eye. I thought, ooh, she's done this before. And we had one of the best conversations I had at the conference. She was a very deep thinker. She had God had taught her a lot through her physical trials, and I learned so much from her, and I I'm ashamed to admit, I judged her by her outward appearance, and I would have been worse off if I had not gotten over that. So that kind of judging, it can be money, it can be appearance, whatever it is, it's wrong. If you're looking at the outside, that's not where we are to judge. So no partiality means no partiality, however, you want to divide it up. Okay. So James's concern again is am I living what I say I believe? So having understood the implications of the gospel and adjusted my life and my have I adjusted my life, my actions, my values accordingly. Now let me make one more observation before we move on to the next set of verses. I don't think he's arguing that we must treat everyone exactly like we treat everyone else in every situation. So there are sometimes good reasons to make distinctions. So we can reserve the front row for those whose eyesight is dim or whose hearing is going. Or we can ask the tallest person to stand in the back of a crowded room, or put the person with the best singing voice in the center to help everyone else sing. I mean, we can those are those kinds of distinctions I think are okay. You can ask gifted teachers to teach, mature saints to lead in prayer, gifted servants to to help lead and organize service, you know, gifted evangelists to explain the gospel. He's not outlawing all of that. But notice all those distinctions are not necessarily based on outward appearance. Sometimes they're based on who God is gifted in what ways. So I don't think that's wrong. I think differences among us can provide opportunities for blessing, but it's that's a different than showing favoritism. So that's a different kind of thing than what he's got in mind. So we can use our differences to encourage each other. We can learn and grow from someone who's different and had different experiences and benefit from them that way. So he's not outlawing, he's not saying we all have to be cookie-cutter Christians and everybody be treated exactly like everyone else in every situation. So where we are different, we and that difference can encourage and grow and edify the body, I think we are free to encourage that. Okay, so let's go on to the next to 8 through 13. This is what gets w a little trickier here. If you really fulfill the royal law according to Scripture, you love your neighbor as yourself, you are doing well. 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 accountable for all of it. For he who said, Do not commit adultery also said, Do not murder. If you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. So speak and so speak and so act as those who are to be judged under the law of liberty. For judgment is without mercy to the one who has shown no mercy, and mercy triumphs over judgment. Okay. The hardest part of this section, I think, is figuring out how it fits in the context with what he's just said and what he's gonna go on to say. And he is quoting from Leviticus 1918 here, and I want to read that section to you because I think actually he's got this whole section in mind. So I'm gonna read you Leviticus 1913 through eighteen, and he's quoting from eighteen. So he said this is nineteen thirteen. You shall not oppress your neighbor or rob him. The wages of a hired servant shall not remain with you all night until morning. You shall not curse the deaf or put a stumbling block before the blind, but you shall fear your Lord. You shall fear your God, I am the Lord. You shall do no injustice in court, you shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness shall you judge your neighbor. Notice how similar that is to what James has said. You shall not go around as a slanderer among your people, and you shall not stand up against the life of your neighbor, I am the Lord. You shall not hate your brother in your heart, but you shall reason frankly with your neighbor lest you incur sin because of him. You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself, I am the Lord. Now notice how similar that section of Leviticus is to what James has just been saying. He actually quotes nineteen eighteen, The love your neighbor as yourself, but Leviticus is talking. About not oppressing your neighbor, which is what the rich have been doing in James, not withholding wages, which will come up actually again in chapter 5 of James. He's in 1915 he talks about don't show partiality between the great and the poor, and that you should judge righteously as opposed to that partiality. And James says if you're showing that partiality, your judges with evil motives. So there's a lot of similarities, and a lot of scholars think James has this passage in mind as he's writing, and that certainly seems likely. So why is that important? I think it helps us figure out the flow of thought. Because at first glance it's not obvious how, especially 10 and 11 fit in with the rest of what James has just said in 1 through 8 or 1 through 9. So here's how I think this flows together. I think his readers are trying to justify their behavior, as if they're saying to James, but look, I am good. I'm doing just what I suppose I am supposed to be doing, and he's answering that objection. And he's saying, Well, you're only doing part of what you need to do. You can't pick and choose which laws you will keep and which laws you will ignore. So the law says you keep all the law, not just the parts that are easy. And if you don't keep the whole law, then you're guilty of the whole law. And he gives an example. It's not enough to avoid adultery, you have to avoid murder as well. So we would look at someone who says who did not commit adultery but did in fact commit murder and say, wait, you're still guilty. Yes, you you kept one law, but you broke another. So that's kind of the overview. So I think what he's anticipating is his reader saying, But James, we are living what we believe. We are doing what the law says. We keep the Sabbath, we keep kosher, we tithe, we say our prayers. And James is saying it's not enough to keep the easy parts of the law. And I think that's how it fits into the flow of thought. So he said, Look, the way you're treating the rich and poor is out of line with the gospel. It's wrong to treat the poor like dirt and the rich unbeliever like kings. And that raises the question, well, but James, what about all the commands that say I'm supposed to love my enemies and I'm supposed to turn the other cheek? And I'm not supposed to bear a grudge against those who oppress me, and I'm supposed to leave vengeance to God. See, I'm doing that by treating the rich this way. That's me. I'm doing a good thing. I'm turning the other cheek. I'm treating my my enemy as uh I'm loving my enemy and I'm I'm not bearing a grudge. So see, I'm keeping the law and I'm doing exactly what I'm supposed to do. So how can you say that we're in the wrong? Where because we're, isn't that exactly the kind of behavior the law commands us? Turn the other cheek, love your neighbor, be kind to your enemy. See, we're doing it. And then that's how James answers. He says, look, if you're fulfilling, if you really fulfill the royal law according to Scripture, you shall love your neighbor as yourself, you're doing well. So he's saying, okay, if you object, but I am keeping the law, if you really are keeping the law, then you're doing well. If in fact you are loving your neighbor as yourself. But, verse 9, if you show partiality, you are committing sin or convicted by the law's transgression. So remember, you have to love all your neighbors as yourself, not just the rich folks. So the law is convicting you. So if in fact you're showing partiality by not loving everybody that way, then you're sinning. Um and why, how do we know that? But very section of Leviticus talks about not showing partiality and judging with justice. There are two relevant laws here. It's not just loving your neighbor, it's also showing no partiality. And in fact, when you treat the poor guy like dirt, that betrays your motives, that betrays your heart. So then intending goes on, for whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it. You can't pick and choose which laws you want to keep. You have to keep everything, not certain pace pieces. So you're saying, look, I'm in the right because I kept law A, and James is answering, you can't justify your behavior by saying you're keeping law A, you have to keep A through Z. You have to keep all of them. Now, I don't think he's saying that they can save themselves if they are keeping the law. He's he's, I think, would challenge them on the fact that they don't have anything to repent about. So they're saying we're keeping this law, loving our neighbors, so we're fine. We don't have any need to repent, our behavior is justified. And James answers, keeping one law is not enough to say you have no need of repentance. And if you'll recall, Paul made that exact same point in Galatians 3 when he was talking about who is really a child of Abraham. He said, You have to keep all the law to be justified. So just one more place where they agree. So in 10 he says, you have to keep the whole law or you're accountable for all of it. And in 11, for he gives an example, for he who said do not commit adultery has also said do not murder. If you do not commit adultery but do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. So you know intuitively that a murderer who hasn't committed adultery is still guilty. If you avoid run one crime while committing another, it doesn't make you blameless before the law. And that's the justification he's speaking against. So speak and act as those who are to be judged under the law of liberty, for judgment is without mercy to the one who has shown no mercy, mercy triumphs over judgment. Okay, so now we have to figure out how these two fit into the argument. And what he means by the law of liberty and the royal law. So the law of liberty in verse 12 and the royal law in verse 8. And I think he's talking about two different things here. Because he's going out of his way to distinguish the royal law from the law of liberty. So in eight he says, if you're keeping this royal law, you're doing well, but you're not actually keeping the whole law. So don't think you're righteous because you're doing this one thing. And then in eight, he kind of says, instead, here's how you should view view yourself. You should live as if you're keeping the law of liberty. So he's contrasting the two ideas, and they function differently. In eight through eleven, the royal law judges us. If we fail one piece, we're fine-failing all of it. In the law of liberty, he talks about mercy triumphing over judgment, and that judgment will be shown to those who lack, uh, will not be shown to those who lack. Wait a minute. I've got to get all my negatives right. Judgment will be shown to those who lack mercy. And that's a different kind of law. So he's he's contrasting the two ideas. So here's what I think he means. I think by royal law, he's using the phrase similar to the phrase we would use, the golden rule today. So the Mosaic law summed up by the phrase, love your neighbor as yourself. And the law of liberty, I think he means the gospel, the message that we will be saved by the blood of Christ. And he rema recall he used that phrase in chapter 1, and I think he means the same thing here as he did in chapter 1. So, in 12 and 13, he's saying, act as people who are going to be judged by a law, but realize the law you're going to be judged by is the gospel. Under this law, you can find mercy. And how do you know if you will be judged by the gospel? You will find you will be merciful yourself. Your heart will have changed and you will start acting as if you believe the gospel, and you part of that will be showing mercy. So when you believe the gospel, you have genuine saving faith, such that God, in his grace, gives you the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit begins to change your heart, your mind, your attitudes. And when you see yourself wanting to show mercy, willing to let go of anger, willing to forgive a grudge, that's evidence that the Holy Spirit is working in your life and strengthening your faith. And the person who does not have faith will not act this way and will not be merciful. So the outworkings of mercy in your life are evidence that God has changed your heart. So see how that concludes his argument. He's saying, you object, I am keeping the law because I'm loving my rich neighbor as myself. James says, but you're failing to keep the law because you're loving your poor neighbor the same way. So what you should you do? You should live as one who believes the gospel. You should live as one who has received mercy that you did not deserve, and show that same mercy to others, whether they're rich or poor. No partiality. Okay, so why royal law? Where does that phrase come from? I can't tell you definitively. Every commentator I looked at had a slightly different explanation for where the phrase comes from, and they were all plausible, and I take from that we don't really know. Um but my here's my good for nothing personal opinion, and I think it comes from most likely from Jesus' teaching that the law could be summed up with love the Lord your God with all your heart and love your neighbor as yourself. So it's a royal law in that the king gave that to us as Jesus as the king and king. It became kind of like we use the phrase the golden rule to summarize the teaching of the king. So we don't really know, but almost everyone agrees he means something that he means a summary of the Mosaic Law, but how it actually that phrase comes about, there's a lot of differences. So I don't think we know. So I think because Jesus summed up the laws, love the Lord your God with all your heart and love your neighbors yourself, we can call it the royal law because he was king. Okay, now why law of liberty for the gospel? We covered this last week, so I'm just going to review because I think he means the same thing by it, and that is that the gospel is a kind of law and that it requires me to respond. It requires an ob a step of obedience. And if I don't respond in faith, then I haven't actually received the gospel. If I do respond in faith, then I have accepted the gospel. So that's a the in that sense it's like a law that I ought to obey. But it's a law that brings me liberty and freedom, freedom from sin and freedom from guilt. So just like we learned in Galatians, let's fall, the Mosaic Law is this kind of drill sergeant, this disciplinarian that shows me my sin and drives me to see my need so that I run for a savior. So it can't save me, it can only condemn me. But in condemning me, hopefully I see my need and cry out to God for mercy. Unlike that kind of law, the gospel is a law that sets me free. It bec it the inherent message is that I am now forgiven my sins because of the blood of Jesus Christ, and God can give me his Holy Spirit to change me so that I am freed from both my guilt and from the tyranny of sin. So it's a law of liberty in that it sets me free. And then he concludes in 2.13, for judgment is without mercy to the one who has shown no mercy, and mercy triumphs over judgment. I think he's concluding with basically one of the key teachings of Jesus. You know, we find this in the Lord's Prayer, forgive our debts, as we uh have forgiven our debtors. We find it in the parable of the unforgiving servant in Matthew 18, where the servant is unwilling to forgive a small debt, even though his master forgave him a huge debt, and of course he's the one condemned. I think what James is pointing at is when I confront someone who sins against me, that's one of those places where my belief is put to test. Because the gospel tells me I'm sinful through and through, and I have been forgiven a lot. And if I am unworthy and I am broken, and I stand in need of grace and mercy because of the blood of Christ, then by what law am I judging my neighbor that does not also condemn me? So how can I say to God, this person hurt me, this person sinned against me, judge him, and not also condemn myself. So there's a sense in which when I'm looking at someone who sinned against me, I'm looking at myself, in the sense that I am looking at someone just like me who has committed great sins. And if I demand that they pay for their sins, then what do I deserve? By what law can I judge them that does not also condemn me? So part of understanding the gospel, if I understand how sinful I am, then I must understand how sinful my neighbor is and how he or she needs mercy just as much as I do. And that should change my heart toward them. Well, here I am a sinner just like you, just you know, in need of the same grace. So mercy can be forgiving people's sins. I think that's the first step, but it's also then showing compassion to someone in need. So the gospel tells me I'm a sinner and I ought to be compassionate towards sin, but it also tells me I got help when I couldn't help myself. And a poor person not only needs the same grace and forgiveness, but they may need particular physical assistance in this life. So if someone in trouble comes into my world and I reach out to them in compassion, that's another way I can show mercy. Because I should look at them and see myself, see that there but for the grace of God, I would have the same need. So the world may say they're insignificant, they have no social standing, no social value, but that's not that's true of me in God's eyes. That's true of all of us. So the gospel calls us to be merciful in several senses. It starts with the recognition that I need help and I'm sinful. Then it moves to the recognition that God will indeed solve my problem through Christ, and if that's true, then when people sin against me, I should forgive them in the same way and recognize they need the same forgiveness. But then it moves farther and says, Well, if God can show kindness to an unworthy person such as me, then I can show kindness to someone the world considers unworthy, just like I was. And it so it I think he's encompassing mercy as a response to the gospel is m is kind of inevitable, if you will. It's logical. If I really believe the gospel, then this is how I will view what is true of me and those in the world. So again, I think that's his primary concern. What do I believe to be true? Do I believe what the gospel says about me in my desperate situation? And if I do, and I see someone else in a similar desperate situation, I should say there's someone just like me. I have no right to say I am more worthy in any way than they are. So let me just kind of wrap all this up a little bit. How how should we respond to this then? Well, should you go out and find a poor person uh to help in some way? I think his primary concern is that the gospel calls me to think about life differently. So I would say, here's what you should do. You ask yourself, what do I think is truly valuable? Because the gospel tells me the most valuable thing in this world is inheritance in the kingdom of God, and that nothing else will make you rich. So left to myself, I would think money is a great problem solver, and it is a great problem solver in this life, and it can give you peace and stability in this life, but it is not what I truly need. Because peace and stability in this life is not the goal. Those that may make my life easy, but it won't save my soul. So believing the gospel should change what I think is valuable. So start there. Where do I really believe this? And then I think apart from that, the second question to ask is who do I think I am, or who do you think you are? So who are you to judge if someone is worthy or not? You know, we the world tells us that I should avoid all those problem people, I should hate the people who sin against me, that I should ignore the poor because they can't help me climb the corporate ladder, they have nothing to offer me in my situation, so I can ignore them. You know, they just aren't the right crowd to hang with. But the gospel says we're all unworthy. I don't deserve a good place in the world or the kingdom of God. And if I have a place, it's only because of the blood of Christ. So every good gift comes from God. And I have them because God is merciful and kind and gracious, not because of something in me. So those who sin against me confront me with that question, well, what about my sin? Those who I deem unworthy confront me with a question, well, how worthy am I? And the gospel has a different answer to that than the world. And if God overlooks my guilt, then what should I do with others? So I think that's his primary concern and why he's bringing it up. I don't think he's trying to say you are responsible to help every poor person in the world. Remember, he's confronting them with the conflict between what they say they believe and how they're living. So we are not God. It is not our job to solve every problem that exists in the world around me. So we all have different roles in this life, and the role of Savior is already taken. And none of us here got it. So don't feel like it's not that's not a burden any of us can bear. Now, through wisdom and prayer, we may learn specific things God is calling us to and specific people or causes or programs or whatever. But I don't think James would put the burden on you that you must solve the problem of poverty even in the world or any even in Charlottesville. That's not that is beyond us. He is concerned with underlying attitude. So he is concerned with saying with who do I think I am and what do I believe. He is not saying, go out and do something to prove you're a Christian. Okay, if you're if you're taking that message away, I think you're you're missing his point. So he is not saying, go work in a soup kitchen to prove you have faith. If only it were that easy. I mean, we could do that. We could all make time in our schedules to go work in a soup kitchen e every week, but it the harder part is loving your bratty kids day in and day out. You know? I mean, that's a lot harder, right? That's a challenge, that's a trial. Um, so he is not saying, go prove your faith. Our obedience is not meritorious, it's responsive. In other words, we don't obey to prove our worth, to merit our worth. We obey out of response and gratitude to what we have been given. So we show mercy and compassion not to make ourselves worthy before God. That would be meritorious obedience. We show mercy and compassion because we have received it ourselves. And out of gratitude for that mercy and compassion God has showed us, we show it to others. So what he's getting at is how do you see yourself? What do you think is true? So you've heard the gospel, but have you applied it to your life, to your heart, to what you value, to how you want to spend your time and your efforts? Have you come to grips with what the gospel is actually saying about you and letting it change your life? Okay, n we'll stop there so we have some time for questions. And next week we're gonna do 14 through 20, but if you want to just do the homework as it is, um feel free to keep doing that. Okay, let me pray for us. Um Father, we've just come before you knowing these are hard truths. That we would all look at ourselves and say, I'm not worthy. I'm not this kind of person. I have not always shown mercy where I should have shown mercy, or forgiven where I should have forgiven. I'm um not compassionate when I ought to be. And we just thank you that you know that and you love us anyway, and that you sent your son to die to solve that very problem. Because we could not solve that problem on our own. And I pray that you would take these truths and work them into our hearts to change our hearts, our attitudes, our values, our lives, the way we think, the way we respond, so that we come become more and more people who respond in faith and respond in gratitude, and respond with the kind of love and compassion that you have shown us. In Jesus' name. Amen.