An Unsettling, Yet Freeing, Discovery

Almost daily I make new discoveries in the Bible, even after 66 years of studying the texts in preparation for preaching and writing. I can't find it now, but recently I read that we should never get to the point that we confuse the pursuit of truth with the possession of it.

Shakespeare wrote, “The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool.”  And St. Paul wrote, “Those who think they know something do not yet know as they ought to know.” (I Corinthians 8:2)

I found the new discovery in a text found in all three Synoptic Gospels, viz., the familiar story of the rich, young ruler[1] (Matthew just calls him “someone,” Mark calls him, simply, “a man,” Luke calls him “a certain ruler”)—isn’t it strange how words, phrases, and ideas get attached to scriptural accounts? In this case it’s not inaccurate. Later in the narrative Matthew does say he is “young;” Luke calls him a “ruler,” and all three accounts mention his wealth. It’s just not generally good practice to take two or three accounts of what seem to be the same story, toss them in a blender and create one smooth, congruent story. Very often the differences are important.

For example, in Matthew the conversation about what is good focuses on “deeds”—“What good deed must I do to inherit eternal life?” Jesus’ response is, “Why do you ask me about what is good?” As the narrative develops, it’s about achieving some quality of perfection, perhaps moral or spiritual. Eternal life is not mentioned in Matthew; although, when Jesus tells the man to sell his possessions and give to the poor, he adds, as do Mark and Luke, “…you will have treasure in heaven…”

In contrast, in Mark and Luke, the conversation begins with, “Good Master (or Good Teacher)…” and Jesus’ response is, “Why to you call me good? No one is good but God alone.”

Side Bar: for those who say Jesus is God, in Mark and Luke, Jesus clearly distinguishes himself apart from God.

In all three accounts, the quest is “to inherit eternal life.” My new discovery is that Jesus response focuses totally upon deeds/behaviors—works.

The first response boils down to keeping the commandments. When the man replies, “I have kept all these since my youth,” Jesus throws a knuckleball: “There is still one thing lacking. Sell all that you own and distribute the money to the poor.”

All three accounts have Jesus concluding, “…you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me.”

Not once does Jesus state or imply that eternal life is inherited through belief, faith, or even grace.

Of course, it’s not difficult to interpret the story in such a way that belief, faith, and grace are inferred. One does not sell everything one owns and distribute the proceeds to the poor if one does not believe pretty strongly in the person or the cause that is at stake. And to follow is, itself, an act of faith that does not need a prerequisite confession or a sinner’s prayer (and I affirm both confession and sinner’s prayer as valid spiritual disciplines).

If I have a theological axe to grind, it would relate to the valid concern about works righteousness. In my observation, the argument against works righteousness too often leads to a total rejection of works as a valid part of faith, a rejection Jesus appears to address in this story. Indeed, the very word, righteousness, implies and assumes behavior within relationships—how we treat each other.

So, to believe in Jesus—to accept him as Lord (oops) and Savior—is a two sided coin, one side or the other of which too often gets forgotten or outright ignored. And it’s not too difficult to discern what a person truly believes by observing his or her behavior, and particularly how he or she treats other people.

Faith is not produced by works, but it is the motivation behind works. The familiar comment from the Epistle of James puts it, “Faith without works is dead. …Show me your faith apart from works, and I by my works will show you my faith.” (James 2:17-18)

But defending the story of the rich, young ruler against the threat of “works righteousness” is not my point. My point is that after decades of reading and preaching from a text of Scripture, I discover things previously unnoticed. It’s a point about the necessity of humility in all things, especially in this case, all things biblical and theological.

That’s the way it looks through the Flawed Glass that is my world view.

Together in the Walk,

Jim


[1] Matthew 19:16-26, Mark 10:17-27, Luke 18:18-26

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

On Crying Out in the Wilderness

Isaiah 40:3 (NRSVUE) “A voice cries out: ‘In the wilderness prepare the way of the  Lord ; make straight in the desert a highway for our God…’” That familiar verse has been on my mind today. Immortalized in George Frederick Handel’s Oratorio, “Messiah,” it’s from the prologue to what is known as “Deutero (Second) Isaiah” (chapters 40-55). It came from the school of Isaiah’s disciples, dating around the end of Babylonian exile. Its mood is both encouraging and empty. Encouraging because it lifts up a hope for a coming of God and calls for preparation. Empty because the announcement is made in the wilderness. What image comes to mind as you read about a voice crying out in the wilderness? I see a lone figure standing in some barren landscape, all alone, crying out some important message, and I’m reminded of the philosophical discussion starter, “If a tree falls in the wilderness and no one is around to hear it, does ...
Read more

Spiritual Abuse/Religious Trauma

  Spiritual abuse and religious trauma are epidemic. The church has lost credibility; indeed, the whole of Christianity and virtually every other expression of organized religion are suspect. For those who have somehow escaped the epidemic, this blog will attempt to offer two ways (there are more than two ways) to understand the origins and causes of the mental and emotional pain. Hopefully, some empathy can be found and exercised. For those whose lives are tormented by the epidemic, I hope to offer a word of encouragement without making it worse by seeming to pressure you to respond in any specific way. I write in the spirit of the 1927 poem by Max Ehrmann, “Desiderata,” with which I will close. There is a perceived lack of integrity on the part of some of the most vocal and most prominent leaders of Christianity. When television became widespread in the 1950s and 60s, the cat was out of the bag. They preach a Jesus who, “Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but...
Read more

Post-Truth Culture

  A recent article suggests the term, “post truth”, as a description of today’s culture. Its point is not that truth no longer exists, but that it has grown irrelevant. There is a general apathy about truth. It has succumbed to a constant wash of opinion. By the 19 th century the Enlightenment had authenticated scientific inquiry. Some authorities in the church saw science as a threat to their power, which they sustained in large measure by keeping the common people illiterate and pliable. Free thinking might lead to questions of their authority, so a vigorous science-versus-the-Bible dogma emerged. Part of the backlash against enlightenment thinking was manifest in the Second Great Awakening, a neo-Calvin/neo-Puritan movement. Unlike the First Great Awakening's focus on predestination, the Second Great Awakening was a quasi-enlightenment movement that emphasized free will and individual responsibility for salvation; nevertheless, the dichotomy was reinforced and science ...
Read more