In last week’s article, we examined a long list of passages in Paul’s letters, in which he hammered the fact that we cannot earn salvation.  We struggled to make sense of this, in light of his prediction elsewhere that each of us will “receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil” (2Co 5.10).  In the end, we found that our motivations in tugging one way or the other were, to say the least, suspect; and that we are supposed to trust God, do what he says, and let him sort out the details.

But what about James?  He tells us as plainly as you could ever want, belief is not enough!

You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder!

(James 2.19)

Demons believe, yet they are destined for destruction!  We can see an example of this, in one of Jesus’ miracles in Capernaum.

And immediately there was in their synagogue a man with an unclean spirit. And he cried out, “What have you to do with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are—the Holy One of God.”

(Mark 1.23-24)

This demon believed in God’s Son, Jesus Christ!  Yet it was an “unclean spirit,” who well knew that Jesus would eventually bring destruction to such spirits.  Why doesn’t that spirit get a pass?  After all,

with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved.

(Romans 10.10)

It’s reasonable to suggest that the demon’s works are the problem.  Recognizing Jesus doesn’t count for much, if you actively rebel against him!  This is what James meant.

What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him?

(James 2.14)

That’s a rhetorical question—the answer is no.  But James isn’t done there! 

Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar? You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works; and the Scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness”—and he was called a friend of God. You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. And in the same way was not also Rahab the prostitute justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way? For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead.

(James 2.21-26)

This seems obvious, and yet James has to point it out, and an enormous number of those of who profess to be Christians today cannot fully acknowledge what James says here, because it undermines their dogma.

Yet Paul was the Apostle who so clearly laid out Christ’s system of salvation by faith, not works (e.g. Ep 2.8-9), and it’s not as if he gave us no hints about the importance of what we do.  In addition to the 2 Corinthians 5 passage, he also wrote things like this:

[God] will render to each one according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury.

(Romans 2.6-8)

In fact, we can even hear this straight from the judge, himself!

“For the Son of Man is going to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay each person according to what he has done.”

(Matthew 16.27)

And,

“I am he who searches mind and heart, and I will give to each of you according to your works.”

(Revelation 2.23)

And again,

“Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense with me, to repay each one for what he has done.”

(Revelation 22.12)

This all leaves us confused.  On the one hand, in many New Testament passages God speaks of justification by faith, and his mercy—not giving us the penalty we deserve—as well as his grace—giving us the reward we don’t deserve.  Yet, on the other hand, in the very same New Testament God also speaks bluntly about repaying us in eternity for the works we have done in the body.  Which is it?

We can find some help in the account of the demon who recognized Jesus in Capernaum.

But Jesus rebuked him, saying, “Be silent, and come out of him!” And the unclean spirit, convulsing him and crying out with a loud voice, came out of him.

(Mark 1.25-26)

Wait a second—the demon’s belief obviously didn’t count for much, but didn’t it also obey?  Jesus gave the demon a command, and it immediately did exactly as it was told!  So the demon had both the belief, and the action to back it up!  Why does the demon expect to be punished, then?  Notice that the demon makes a spectacle of its obedience.  It’s an ugly scene, with an obviously unwell man thrashing and shrieking as the source of his suffering begrudgingly departs.  The demon obeys, because he’s compelled to do so.  He obeys unwillingly.  That’s not the faith that Jesus and the Apostles meant.  They meant a genuine, reverent trust in the one who claims to be our Savior, and our King—a faith that leads us to choose obedience, rather than having it forced upon us.  Instead of arguing bickering about words and semantics, we should be busy living faithfully.  Thus, by openly considering God’s word on the topic of works, we’ve drawn the same conclusion we drew last time, from God’s word on faith and grace—Christ is in charge, so trust and obey him, and he’ll take care of you.

Jeremy Nettles

So we are always of good courage. We know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord, for we walk by faith, not by sight. Yes, we are of good courage, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord. So whether we are at home or away, we make it our aim to please him. For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil.

(2 Corinthians 5.6-10)

This passage has much to offer.  Tallying up the major points from start to finish, Paul points toward our imminent meeting with Jesus, reminds us that reality is not limited to what we can see, inverts our perspective on the fear of death, and charges us to please God in all we do, in order to be ready for that meeting, and the reward that lies beyond it.  Any one of these points could command our attention for some time, but that last one, although it didn’t seem at all controversial in its context, is a jarring statement, for some. Paul tells us we will stand before Jesus to be judged, and each of us will “receive what is due for what he has done in the body” (v10).  Isn’t this the guy who wrote Galatians 2.16?

…yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.

What about Galatians 3.11?

Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for “The righteous shall live by faith.”

Or Romans 4.4, referring to God’s gift of the righteousness that brings about salvation:

Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due.

Another one, Romans 3.20:

For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.

And finally, the pièce de résistance:

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.

(Ephesians 2.8-9)

Perhaps Paul should take some time to get his story straight!  Considering the number of times he seems to have said the opposite, surely this little quip in 2 Corinthians was an oversight—an instance of Paul forgetting the basics for a moment.  Right?

Well, no, that’s not right, at all!  Not only was Paul fully aware of how God grants salvation, but his words in 2 Corinthians 5 do not contradict any of these other passages.  How can we show this?  A legalist might point to the the presence of “the law” in three of the five passages in question.  The argument might go like this: Paul meant that works of the Law of Moses could not entitle a person to salvation, but he didn’t say any such thing about works of the Law of Christ!

That would be compelling, if not for passages like Ephesians 2.9, which says salvation is “not a result of works”—not works of the law, but works.  And then there’s the matter of Romans 4, from which we extracted one verse earlier, whose context lays out the argument with no mention of any Law:

For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness…

(Romans 4.2-5)

Law in general, and in particular the Law of Moses, feature prominently in the rest of the chapter and book, but Paul’s point here isn’t limited to that specific Law, which had not yet been given when Abraham was first pronounced righteous—not on the basis of any works, but on the basis of his faith.

We can’t explain away everything Paul said about works by appealing to the now defunct Law of Moses; he means works.  So then, how can he say justification and salvation are a “gift,” not a “due” (Ro 4.4) for the things we have done, and then turn around and say that Jesus will give us our “due” (2Co 5.10) for the things we have done?

Part of the trouble comes from translation—the ESV showcases this tension more prominently than other versions, and the Greek text does not make use of all the same vocabulary; but the ideas are there!  More fundamentally, the trouble comes from our desire for a systematic theology—a textbook of the science of salvation, so to speak.  We want to know the exact boundaries of the rules, so we can use them to our advantage.  But that’s not what God wants, or he’d have given us a book of cold and consistent vocabulary, detailed mathematic proofs, procedural notes, and exercises, half of whose answers could be found in the back of the book.  In a sense, each of these elements can be found in the Bible, but it’s not a book of these things.  Instead, it’s a book of oracles, narratives, poetry, and prophecy, and we’re left to find our way through life by its guidance as a whole, rather than following the procedures on page 1 on the day of our birth, page 2 the next day, and so on until death.  It’s not a step-by-step instruction manual, it’s a document for human beings, by which God shares with us “a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life” (2Co 3.6).

Don’t overthink it.  Don’t try to systematize it.  Don’t try to game the system.  It’s not game-able, because it’s not a game.  The “system” is very simple: Christ is in charge, so trust and obey him, and he’ll take care of you.

Jeremy Nettles

We increasingly live on the internet.  Facebook’s short-lived “Metaverse” received abundant mockery, was used by few people, and was more or less abandoned after just a year as the social media giant’s new flagship product; but still, in many ways the blending of internet and spatial reality was already the default for most of the world, and that trend is only accelerating, regardless of one company’s failed attempt to monopolize it.

We interact with each other using screens, we learn about what’s happening throughout the world using screens, we let the screens tell us how to get to places we’ve been many times before, we work on screens, we play with screens, we get our music and entertainment from screens, we do our reading, banking, shopping, taxes, bills, and education on screens.  And, crucially, all of these screens, and all of these activities, are now connected to the internet at all times.  They’re generally connected to our hands, too—everyone has seen a family out to dinner, all silently scrolling though their phones instead of interacting with the flesh-and-blood humans sitting at the table.

We all know this isn’t particularly good for us, and we also know that the screens are here to stay—useful but dangerous tools that we must learn to manage and use in moderation.  These interconnected electronic devices already blend the real, physical world with a virtual world of our own making, and what happens on the internet is often just as real as what happens in the “real” world.  An entire generation has now grown up taking for granted the ubiquitous smartphone; but in terms of human development, we’re still very early on the timeline of this virtual reality.  It often takes several generations to figure out what to do with a new and groundbreaking technology—how best to use it, and how best to prevent or discourage its misuse.  In some cases we never figure it out.  This generation will be long dead before this disruptive technology becomes no longer a disruption but a fixture of civilization, but Christians should be ahead of the curve, using not the slowly-accumulating wisdom of man to guide them through these troubled waters, but instead the eternal principles of wisdom laid down in God’s word.

And the tongue is a fire, a world of unrighteousness. The tongue is set among our members, staining the whole body, setting on fire the entire course of life, and set on fire by hell.

(James 3.6)

James isn’t telling us to take a vow of silence, but he is warning against saying everything that comes to mind.  In our internet-driven world, there is more opportunity than ever before to speak directly to people all over the globe.  Even with friends and family, it’s easier to say hurtful things through a screen, than face to face—why do you think most couples break up via text message now?  How much worse is the temptation, when you’re talking to someone you don’t know?  Or worse still, when you’re hiding behind a false name and picture?  These trends bring out the worst in humanity, but as Jesus said:

“Nothing is covered up that will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be known. Therefore whatever you have said in the dark shall be heard in the light, and what you have whispered in private rooms shall be proclaimed on the housetops.”

(Luke 12.2-3)

Many people spew ignorance, folly, and hatred all across the internet, every day, and while it’s good to recognize their sin and point it out, it’s also very easy to go about it in the wrong way.  It may feel good to fire off a scathing reply that you believe will humiliate the sinner; but in that case, you’ve only joined him in his sin.  What’s the goal?  Are you the judge?  Or are you God’s deputy, sent to mete out punishments on his behalf?  Shouldn’t your goal instead be to draw the sinner away from his sin and toward God?

Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person.

(Colossians 4.6)

For most of us, there’s very little value in getting into arguments online.  Most of the people you’ll encounter are not receptive to the gospel, and so the pitfalls outweigh the potential benefits.  But occasionally you’ll have the opportunity to speak with a random stranger who seems to be somewhat open to God’s word.  In these instances, speak up—but do it carefully, for the other person’s good and not your own self-righteousness.  Often, this means fielding insults and other verbal abuse.  You may be tempted to lash out in response—but “Be angry and do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your anger, and give no opportunity to the devil” (Ep 4.26-27).  Or, you may be tempted to be genuinely wounded by the things people say to you, or about you—but “Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on [Jesus’] account” (Mt 5.11).

The advice, “be careful what you say,” applies throughout life, but we particularly need to hear it, where the internet and social media are concerned.  Whether it’s gossip, or slander, or betraying trust, or getting involved in fruitless battles of words, there’s enormous potential for us to reject Jesus and pursue something else that we think will bring us satisfaction in this life.  It’s not inevitable.  As with most things, it’s fine to participate in life in the internet age, in moderation and within limits; but we must also be willing to give it up entirely, if necessary, for the sake of our own souls.

“And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell.”

(Matthew 5.30)

Jeremy Nettles

In those days there was no king in Israel. Everyone did what was right in his own eyes.

(Judges 21.25)

“He will take the tenth of your flocks, and you shall be his slaves. And in that day you will cry out because of your king, whom you have chosen for yourselves, but the Lord will not answer you in that day.”

(1 Samuel 8.17-18)

What a contrast!  The first passage is an explanation of how things got so out of hand in Israel.  It follows the story of the tribe of Benjamin forcibly abducting young women from their homes and families to become unwilling brides to the few remaining Benjaminites, while the wise elders of the nation defended this mass rape to the victims’ families and refused to prosecute their cases.  How did it get this bad?  Well, that was before they had a king, you see!

But in the second passage, Samuel warns Israel that submitting to a monarchy is a terrible idea.  Were things really better, under the judges?  Perhaps some taxation and forced labor are a price worth paying, for stability and order!  There were costs and advantages to each system, and the potential for both good and evil outcomes.  What determined the direction things would go?

Woe to you, O land, when your king is a child,

        and your princes feast in the morning!

Happy are you, O land, when your king is the son of the nobility,

        and your princes feast at the proper time,

        for strength, and not for drunkenness!

(Ecclesiastes 10.16-17)

The earlier system of judges afforded the people great freedom—but what did they do with their freedom?  The monarchy provided much more order—but what kind of order?  The king’s conduct had enormous influence, for good or ill, on the whole nation.  This is visible in the comparison between Saul and David, the first two kings of Israel.  Let’s consider just a handful of the many differences between these two men.

Basis for selection

Saul was chosen by God, it’s true; but God picked him because he satisfied the people’s expectations—after all, they wanted to “be like all the nations” (1Sa 8.20).  What are the first things we learn of Saul?  He came from a well-off family of the tribe of Benjamin, he was “handsome,” and he was “taller than any of the people” (9.1-2).  What more could you want in a king?

David, while he possessed some of those qualities, was chosen on a different basis.  God “sought out a man after his own heart” to replace Saul (13.14), and “rejected” David’s taller brother, who seemed the more likely choice in Samuel’s eyes, because “man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart” (16.7).

Readiness

Saul was reluctant to take on the role God assigned to him.  After anointing Saul, Samuel called an assembly for the nation to proclaim him king.  Saul was eventually found,  “hidden … among the baggage” (10.22).

When David had likewise been anointed but remained unknown to the public, he was running an errand for his father when he discovered a Philistine spewing blasphemies at the Israelite army, along with a challenge that not one of these warriors was willing to accept.  David couldn’t understand why no one else had stepped up to put a stop to this.  He told Israel’s big, strong, warrior king, “The Lord who delivered me from the paw of the lion and from the paw of the bear will deliver me from the hand of this Philistine” (17.37). 

Godliness

Saul made a show of devotion to God.  He “cut off the mediums and the necromancers from the land” (28.9), made sure to offer sacrifices before battle (13.12), rebuked his army for eating blood in hunger and haste (14.32-34), and encouraged David to “fight the Lord’s battles” (18.17).  But many of these were self-service masquerading as piety.  In reality, Saul rebelled against God and “rejected the word of the Lord” (15.23).  This is, perhaps, most clearly observed in his numerous attempts to Kill David, despite David’s consistent, humble service.

David, on the other hand, put his own life on the line for the sake of God’s reputation (ch17), and for his people’s well-being (chs 18, 23, 29 & 30), and—most tellingly—to make peaceful gestures toward Saul, even as Saul was trying to kill him (chs 24 & 26), vowing, “I will not put out my hand against my lord, for he is the Lord’s anointed” (26.11).

Which would you choose?

There are many more contrasts to draw between Saul and David—between the bad king whose reign is regrettable, and the good king whose reign is a blessing.  If you could choose between these two, who would it be? Saul might have looked the part, but now that we see the character of these two men, it’s plain that David is the better choice, despite the many—many!—flaws he showcased later in his life.  It may seem like a silly question, since Saul and David lived and reigned more than three thousand years ago, and we don’t get to choose between them.  But in fact, a more important version of the same choice faces each of us, just as it faced the Israelites to whom Joshua presented the following dilemma:

“And if it is evil in your eyes to serve the Lord, choose this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your fathers served in the region beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.”

(Joshua 24.15)

Whom will you serve?  The “ruler of this world” (Jn 12.31) who looks like “a great red dragon” (Re 12.3), or the King of Heaven, who looks like “a lamb” (4.6)? 

Jeremy Nettles

And all the people said to Samuel, “Pray for your servants to the Lord your God, that we may not die, for we have added to all our sins this evil, to ask for ourselves a king.” And Samuel said to the people, “Do not be afraid; you have done all this evil. Yet do not turn aside from following the Lord, but serve the Lord with all your heart. And do not turn aside after empty things that cannot profit or deliver, for they are empty. For the Lord will not forsake his people, for his great name’s sake, because it has pleased the Lord to make you a people for himself.

(1 Samuel 12.19-22)

Despite being “broken in pieces” by the kingdom of God (Da 2.35), the Roman Empire was the most important in a long line of earthly kingdoms in many ways.  It was the political structure of the world into which God sent his Son to save us.  Its language—Latin—although dead today, still speaks, exerting its influence in science, medicine, law, government, and a host of other fields, including the everyday vocabulary of billions of people who speak languages that either descended from it directly, or borrowed from it heavily.  Most countries’ governments today are modeled, in part, on the Roman system.  But one of the major turning points in that system is noteworthy for its contrast to the Israelites’ experience a thousand years prior, summarized in the passage above.

Only God knows the full truth of Rome’s early history, but according to Roman legend, the city was ruled by a succession of seven kings, the last of whom was deposed and exiled due to numerous abuses of his people.  This supposedly took place in the year 509 BC, and over the next four centuries the Roman Republic was ruled by a system of checks and balances including a senate, a voting citizenry, and a small number of executives who served generally short terms and then relinquished their power.  You can probably see many similarities, at least in principle, to today’s representative governments, and this system came with an intense aversion to monarchy.  The Romans, to put it simply, hated the idea of being ruled by a king again.

Then along came Julius Caesar, and the Republic, already faltering, collapsed in on itself.  Caesar wasn’t formally recognized as a king, but everyone could see the direction things were headed, even before the senate, mostly full of his toadies, voted that he should be dictator for life.  A group of several dozen senators decided to put a stop to this madness, and hatched a plot to assassinate him, which they carried out on the infamous “ides of March” (i.e. March 15), in the year 44 BC.  The conspirators had no plan for what to do next, because they thought the people were on their side, and expected things to go back to normal.  In fact, what was “normal” had changed, without them noticing.  The people loved Caesar, and made their feelings known by burning the Senate house, eventually putting a latrine in its place.  The assassins meant to rescue the Roman Republic from Caesar, but by murdering him, they instead sealed the Republic’s fate.  Rome was plunged into civil war, and when the dust finally settled, it was no longer a Republic, but an Empire, ruled by a single man, Augustus Caesar.

Israel’s situation with their newly successful King Saul mirrors Rome’s story in many respects, but the ending was different.  The Israelites had demanded a king over Samuel’s protests and warnings (1Sa 8).  Even after Saul’s great victory over the Ammonites (1Sa 11), Samuel reminded the people of their mistake, calling it “wickedness” to ask for a king (1Sa 12.17).  Yet, his instruction for them was not to get rid of Saul.  He didn’t tell them to go back to judges and local rule by each town’s elders.  Instead, he told them,

If you will fear the Lord and serve him and obey his voice and not rebel against the commandment of the Lord, and if both you and the king who reigns over you will follow the Lord your God, it will be well.

(1 Samuel 12.14)

It must have crossed many men’s minds, that they could be rid of the king rather easily, and thus, seemingly, rectify their sin in asking for a king in the first place.  But that’s never the way it works.  What’s done is done, and can never be undone.  God provided wise counsel through Samuel, who simply told them to make the best of it, and move forward.

Our sins, too, have consequences in the present world, and even when God wipes them away from our record in heaven, their earthly consequences often remain, and can even outlive us.  That’s sobering enough; but another lesson is in teaching us to look to the present and future rather than mourning what is past.  Another wise counselor tells us,

Say not, “Why were the former days better than these?” For it is not from wisdom that you ask this.

(Ecclesiastes 7.10)

The past matters, because it’s what teaches us—we learned something from the past just now!  But living in the past is unprofitable, whether pining after the good old days, or hanging on to old sins.  The past is past; the present is now; the future awaits.  What are you going to do about it?  Whether you like it or not, and whether you asked for him or not, a new King reigns.  Will you get with the program, or try to get rid of him and go back to the way things were before?  Samuel, looking forward not only to Israel’s immediate future, but also to Christ, finished his counsel to ancient Israel:

Moreover, as for me, far be it from me that I should sin against the Lord by ceasing to pray for you, and I will instruct you in the good and the right way. Only fear the Lord and serve him faithfully with all your heart. For consider what great things he has done for you.

(1 Samuel 12.23-24)

Jeremy Nettles