How To Avoid Partiality (Part 2)
James 2:8-13
Preached by Pastor Tony Miano
Pico Canyon Community Church
March 25, 2001
Introduction: “A deplorable incident occurred in the life of Mahatma Gandhi. He said in his autobiography that during his student days he was interested in the Bible. Deeply touched by reading the gospels, he seriously considered becoming a convert. Christianity seemed to offer the real solution to the caste system that was dividing the people of India. One Sunday he went to a church to see the minister and ask for instruction on the way of salvation and other Christian doctrines. But when he entered the sanctuary, the ushers refused him a seat and suggested that he go and worship with his own people. He left and never went back. “If Christians have caste differences also,” he said to himself, “I might as well remain a Hindu” (H.G.B., Our Daily Bread, January 19).
This morning we are going to finish our look at favoritism and how we can avoid the sin of partiality in our lives and in the life of our church. Now, although it’s true that if God had wanted to call Gandhi to Himself, the ignorance of the Christian church would not have kept the man from coming to faith in Christ, the story illustrates how devastating favoritism can be to the witness of the Christian church.
Last week we studied James’ command against favoritism and his illustration of what favoritism looked like in the church. We also looked at two reasons why Christians should avoid playing favorites. One reason was that partiality contradicts the heart of God. The other reason we considered was that partiality trivializes the heart of God. This morning we’re going to look at the third reason in James’ argument against partiality. Partiality violates the Law of God.
Follow along as I read James 2:8-13. “If, however, you are fulfilling the royal law according to the Scripture, ‘You shall 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 yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all.”
“For He who said, ‘Do not commit adultery,’ also said, ‘Do not commit murder.’ Now if you do not commit adultery, but do commit murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. So speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty. For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment.”
In our passage for this morning, James shows how partiality violates the Law of God, the Royal Law—the Law of Liberty by giving an explanation of the law, an example of how all encompassing the law is, and an exhortation to obey the law. Once again, James comes to his readers and to us with hard truth that, if rightly applied, will draw our hearts closer to the Lord.
As we unwrap this passage of Scripture, we will see that the Law of God is not suffocating or limiting, but liberating in the life of the believer. We will see that following the law of liberty will not restrict our lives. We will see that following, living by the law of liberty will release us to experience the grace of God in our lives as we extend grace to others.
The Explanation (2:8-9)
James sets out to make his third argument for avoiding partiality, the fact that favoritism violates the law of God, by beginning with an explanation of the law.
We can see by what James says in verse eight that he’s anticipating an excuse from his readers for the behavior he had just brought to their attention. We can picture the discussion going something like this. James tells his readers, “You need to stop contradicting your faith in Christ by showing favoritism toward the rich while shunning the poor.” He then expects his readers to respond by saying, “But James, we’re just trying to live by the great commandment to love our neighbor as ourselves. That’s why we’re paying so much attention to rich visitors.”
What we have in verse eight is James setting up his readers for his next argument by seeming to give them the benefit of the doubt. James words verse eight, as a conditional statement that assumes what he is about to say is true, although in all likelihood it’s not. He does this to avoid lumping every believer who hears his letter into one large group that plays favorites to the rich.
The Greek word translated as “however” in the NASB, and “really” in the NIV, is only seen eight times in the entire New Testament. The word almost gives James a tongue in cheek tone of voice. It brings out even more the idea that James doesn’t necessarily believe what he is about to say about his readers is true. We can translate the phrase, “if, however, you are fulfilling the royal law according to the Scripture,” this way. “Let’s assume, for argument’s sake, that you are really, actually fulfilling [or keeping] the royal law according to the Scriptures.”
James refers to the law as having the quality of royalty. The law was kingly, regal, majestic, and superior in form and function to any other law. Kings have often been referred to as sovereign by their courts and subjects. The law James is talking about carries with it the sovereignty of God, for it is His law. Accordingly, just as an edict from a king would be binding, final, and not subject to appeal, even more so is the binding nature of God’s law.
And that law is to be continually kept “according to the Scriptures.” In effect, what James is saying is that the Law of God and Scripture are synonymous terms. This is a hugely important statement, especially in today’s climate of relativism and situational ethics. So often these days we hear God spoken of in terms that are inconsistent with Scripture. He is spoken of as one who is accepting of sin--that God understands our needs and desires, so He just looks the other way, as long as we don’t hurt anyone else through our behavior.
One of the saddest commentaries about the state of today’s church is the great effort some are making to minimize God’s role in the salvation of man and His sovereignty over situations, circumstances, and creation itself. More often now we hear about what we must do to help ourselves. We’re told that God cannot intervene in our lives unless we give Him permission to. We’re told that God longs for us, but can’t have fellowship with us until we initiate the relationship with Him. You will still here phrases like, "God is in control," but it’s now made out to be conditional upon man giving God that control. Ultimately, when people think this way of God, they make man sovereign--not God.
In matters of faith and practice, there can be no law apart from what we are given in the Word of God. When James says, "the Scripture,” he is not only citing a particular verse as we will see in the next phrase of verse eight, he is specifically referring to that writing which, inspired by the Holy Spirit, has been penned by chosen authors, in order for God to reveal specifically what He wanted revealed of himself to fallen man.
Certainly there are civil laws created by men, laws of federal, state and local governments to govern and protect believer and unbeliever alike. But any law attributed to God must be completely consistent, completely supportable, by the Royal Law of God’s Word. Anything else is a fallible work of man.
We see these fallible works in those religions that try to add to the Word of God with there own writings. We see it in the way religions will hold the traditions of men with the same esteem, or even greater than, God’s Word.
James makes it very clear. The only barometer we have for knowing if we are truly fulfilling the will of God in our lives, they only way we can claim with any modicum of assurance that we are following the ways of God, is by checking our behavior, our beliefs and practices, against His Word--or as the royal Law is more literally translated, the "law of our King."
That was a bit of a tangent off the subject we’re looking at today. But I think it’s very important for us to not only remind ourselves, but reaffirm the doctrine of sola scriptura, “Scripture Alone."
For it is through Scripture alone that we can hope to understand the mind of God. It is through Scripture alone that we can hope to understand the ways of God. It is through Scripture alone that we receive the direction of God. It is not through the new revelations of man. It is not through man’s traditions. Nor is it through man’s opinions of who God is. It is through Scripture alone.
Again, when James writes, "according to the Scripture," although making a reference to the specific revelation of God we find in the Bible, he is citing a particular verse--Leviticus 19:18.
In its entirety, Leviticus 19:18 says, “You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the sons of your people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself; I am the Lord.” Jesus referred to this command as the second greatest command in all of Scripture. In Matthew 22:37-40 we read, “And He said to him, ‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ This is the great and foremost commandment. The second is like it, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets.”
In the Old Testament passage, the word “neighbor” refers to only fellow Israelites. But Jesus broadens the meaning of the word to include “foreigners [in the parable of the Good Samaritan], and enemies [in the Sermon on the Mount]” (Moo, p. 112). In Matthew 5:44 we read, “But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.”
James, once again, affirms his position that there is absolutely no place for discrimination against anyone who enters the church. He tells his readers if they are really, actually adhering to this law of love, and they continue to do so, they “are doing well.”
In verse nine, James makes a very sharp contrast with what some could have mistaken as a pat on the back in verse eight. Verse nine begins, “But if you show partiality.” James uses another conditional statement. This time he is saying, “If you show favoritism to rich visitors, and you know you do, you are committing sin.”
James uses the same word in verse nine for partiality that he did in verse one. And again, the word literally means, "to lift up the face of." James is saying that since you are showing partiality to the rich, you are committing sin. This kind of statement flies in the face of today’s culture. James, in no uncertain terms, is telling his readers that you can’t claim to be abiding by the law while you are breaking the law. James, if he lived in our society, might say it this way. "You can’t determine what is right and wrong based simply on what you think is right and wrong for you." Contrary to what the world would tells us, there has to be a standard. The most reliable and unbiased standard given to man is God’s Word.
In this verse, James uses two different words for "sin." He uses one word, translated as "sin," which literally means, "missing the mark." The other word he uses, translated in this verse as "transgressors," refers to the person who has the willful intent to violate God’s Law.
The first word could include sins of omission. These would include those sins that result from a lack of wisdom, maybe an oversight, or something that is seemingly unintentional. The other word, "transgressors," would include those sins that are premeditated, intentional, or malicious. These are sins of commission. By using the two words the way he does, in the same verse, James is setting up his readers for a very important truth that will be explained in greater detail, in verses ten and eleven. Simply stated, it is this. Sin is sin regardless of type or intent.
James was such a great writer even though, as far as we know, he was not a formally educated man. He subtly weaves a courtroom drama just under the surface of the text. He specifically mentions a court appearance in verse six. Although the word "court" is not seen again anywhere in the passage, James continues drawing the picture of a courtroom scenario.
We see more of the courtroom drama unfold in verse nine. As he speaks about the sin of favoritism, James talks about the commission of the sin and the resulting verdict after a court trial. James’ courtroom is a little different from what we find in America today. In James’ courtroom, the idea of being innocent until proven guilty would be a foreign concept.
The point James is making is that if you commit the sin of favoritism, you are guilty of that sin. In the American courtroom, particularly in traffic court, a person can plead “guilty with an explanation.” Motorists will come up with the most interesting explanations for violating traffic laws.
I always liked when I gave someone a ticket on the freeway and they would confidently go into court and demand that the judge dismiss the ticket because I wasn’t a Highway Patrol officer. The judge would then try to explain what the words Los Angeles County meant on my uniform patch. I also liked the people that argued that their ticket should be dismissed because the only reasons they were driving so fast was so they could get home before they ran out of gas. Speeding for the purpose of keeping up with traffic was popular, too.
But regardless of the explanation, it never changed the fact that the person violated the law. As soon as we show partiality toward someone, as soon as we play favorites with impure motives, we find ourselves not only convicted of the sin, but God’s Word considers what we have done as malicious and premeditated. That, in and of itself, should serve as a sobering reminder that we should avoid favoritism at any cost.
The Example (2:10-11)
In verses eight and nine, James is setting up his next point, which is the Royal Law, the Law of God, is all encompassing. He drives his point home by giving a very clear example, and we find it in verses ten and eleven.
I think I’ve shared with you before about how little remorse I saw in juvenile offenders when I worked as an investigator for the sheriff’s department. One of the toughest hurdles I had to overcome when I tried to get a kid to understand that what they did was wrong was convincing him that it didn’t matter how much or little he participated in the crime. The kids I talked to would typically rationalize away their involvement in the crime by focusing on what others did instead of taking responsibility for their own actions.
One effective tool I used was to put the kid I was talking to into a hypothetical situation. I usually set up the scene this way. I would place the kid in a situation where he could easily see himself as doing nothing wrong. Then I would explain to him the law, watch his countenance change, and see the light bulb go on in his or her mind mind.
Probably the one I used most often was this. I would tell the kid that he was driving his car around town, enjoying the day, and he sees one of his friends standing on the street. He pulls over to give his friend a ride. The friend asks him to go to 7-eleven so he can get a slurpee. He obliges and parks in front of the store while his friend runs inside to get a drink. As he sits there in his car, he sees his friend walk up to the cashier and pull out a gun. He shoots the cashier, runs out of the store, and gets back in the car. His friend hollers at him to “take-off!” The kid drives his friend away from the store, leaving the cashier to die on the floor.
I would let the kid stew on that picture for a moment and then I would tell him that he is guilty of murder. Of course the kid would get upset and say, “Wait a minute! I didn’t shoot the cashier! I didn’t do anything wrong!” Then I explained to him that in a robbery/homicide, like the one I described, even though all he did was drive the car, even though he had no intention of harming the cashier or even participating in the robbery, in the eyes of the law he was as guilty of murder as if he had pulled the trigger himself. In a murder, a person dies. You can’t be guilty of half of a death.
In verse ten James writes, “For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all.” It would seem that James is suggesting that there are those people who are able to keep the whole law, that there are those who can live the perfect, sinless life. Does anyone here believe that? Are any of us capable of living to such a high standard? Well, let me put your mind at ease. There was only one person throughout all of recorded history who could live up to such a standard—and that was Jesus Christ. The rest of us may fall into the category of people James is actually speaking about.
You see—the people James is describing here would include those who characteristically are close followers of the law. These would include the moralists, legalists, and pious within the community. They passionately regard strict adherence to the law as a way of life. Others would look upon them as the “good people,” those who others in the community would consider to be squared away. But this is only part of their description.
In verse ten the words “keeps” and “stumbles” go together. Again we might look at the sentence as if James was describing a person with the capacity to keep all of the law, but makes a mistake along the way. The person James is describing is the person who, try as they might to follow all of the commandments of God, will inevitably fail to do so some time in there life. In other words, even the most religious, the most sincere, the most moral person is going to slip up from time to time. But at least they’re not as bad as some people—right? Well, what does James think?
James’ use of the word stumble is very important here. When you think of the word stumble, what picture comes to mind? When someone stumbles do they always fall completely to the ground? Does a person stumble on purpose? I can’t ever remember a time when I waited until I was walking in a crowd of people, made sure there were several eyes upon me, and then went out of my way to make a fool out of myself by tripping over my shoelaces. Have any of you? Of course not.
Stumbling is usually the result of carelessness, a moment of diverted attention, but not a premeditated act. Now, have you ever stumbled in public and quickly looked around to see if anyone saw you? Were you relieved when you realized that the embarrassment was yours alone, and that no one would be going home after a trip to the mall to tell their family about you, the person they saw trip at the mall?
Well, guess what? James says that even if you’re a person who tries to live a sinless life and, as a result of a momentary lapse in judgment, an unintentional careless act you stumble and sin, even just once, you are as guilty as if you broke every single law in the book with malice in your heart.” Now, how’s that for a warm fuzzy?
Granted, there are sins, crimes if you will, which are more serious than others. If I cited someone for rolling through a stop sign, I didn’t put him or her in the same category as a gangbanger who just committed an armed robbery, but for one exception.
Did they not both break the law? Certainly the violent gangster will suffer greater consequences for his or her actions than the inattentive motorist. But the fact still remains that in the eyes of the law, they are both violators of the law.
Returning our attention to favoritism, James is telling his readers and is instructing us that we cannot selectively choose to obey certain aspects of God’s Law, while willfully pleading guilty to other aspects of the law, such as playing favorites, with an explanation.
I particularly like what D. Edmond Hiebert writes on the subject. “Our obedience to God’s will cannot be on a selective basis; we cannot choose that part that is to our liking and disregard the rest. God’s will is not fragmentary; the entire law is the expression of His will for His people, it constitutes a grand unity. To break one corner of a windowpane is to become guilty of breaking the whole pane” (Hiebert, p. 148).
Now, if you think what James is saying is a bit harsh, a bit judgmental, let’s compare James’ words to that of Jesus Christ. Jesus said, “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.”
“Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:17-19a).
James illustrates his point in verse eleven by choosing what most people, certainly his readers, would think were the most grievous of sins—adultery and murder. James quotes verses from Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5. James writes, “For He who said, ‘Do not commit adultery,’ also said, ‘Do not commit murder.’ Now if you do not commit adultery, but do commit murder, you have become a transgressor of the law.”
James makes it clear that the two commandments he is citing are God’s commands and not simply legalistic rules and regulations added to the Law by man. It’s interesting that James, while speaking against favoritism, would illustrate his point with such immoral and unethical acts. Why didn’t he use commands like “do not steal,” or “do not bear false witness?” After all, in the grand scheme of things, how bad is favoritism—really?
Think about this. James uses the first two commandments listed in the section of the law that deals with our relationships with one another. When we show favoritism, for whatever reason, we damage existing relationships and we ruin opportunities to create new relationships with others. James is using every means at his disposal to show the seriousness of what he is talking about. This is not a lightweight issue in James’ eyes, nor should be with us.
James says, “Now if you do not commit adultery, but do commit murder.” James writes this phrase in such a way as to suggest that murder was actually happening within the fellowship of the church.
There’s no historical evidence to support that actual killings were taking place within the fellowship of the church family. Favoritism, although certainly an ugly thing, hadn’t got that ugly. So what is James talking about? Let’s look again at Matthew 5.
Jesus had this to say. “You have heard that the ancients were told, ‘You shall not commit murder’ and ‘Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the court.’ But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, ‘You good-for-nothing,’ shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, ‘You fool,’ shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell” (Matthew 5:21-22).
James is likely looking at murder in the broadest sense of the word, just as his older brother, Jesus, did. What James saw in the favoritism the church was showing to the rich was hatred toward the poor. Hatred is often associated with murder and “murder is frequently associated with discriminating against the poor, which is the failure to love one’s neighbor” (Martin, p. 70).
If we, as a church, if each of us as individuals, show favoritism to the rich at the expense of those less fortunate in our society, it is tantamount to harboring a hatred for a certain group of people—the same kind of hatred that can result in murder. It’s not comfortable to think and talk about such things. I know. It’s not always a comfortable thing to look at the stark realities of sin, to truly weigh it in light of the Law, God’s Word. But the integrity of our faith demands that we do.
You see—unless we do, unless we, out of a genuine sense of obedience to God, deal with sin issues, or the potential for future sin in our lives, we destine ourselves to a shallow Christian walk and we limit our potential to do great and mighty things for Christ.
Although James is specifically referring to favoritism as it relates to the rich and the poor, let’s broaden the principle to include another group of people. What we’re going to talk about is critically important to the future of our church. One of the things we desperately want to avoid as our church matures and grows is developing an inward focus. We want to avoid what so many churches struggle with today. We want to avoid establishing lines of partiality between believers and unbelievers.
I may have shared this with some of you before. I’ve actually talked to pastors who have been approached by unhappy church members who complained about too many unbelievers coming to the church. I’ve talked to youth pastors who have had concerned parents tell them that they don’t like the idea of unbelieving kids being involved with their kids in the youth ministry. What people with such opinions fail to realize is that they are discriminating against unbelievers much the same way the early church discriminated against the poor.
We can never let this happen in our church. God’s Word is clear. We are to do as Christ did. We are to seek every opportunity to bring the good news of Jesus Christ to people who do not know Him, without the slightest hint of partiality.
Refusing to do this, refusing to have a burden in your heart for the lost, for those who have not received the free gift of eternal life through Jesus Christ, is like saying to the unbeliever, “I am deserving of God’s grace, but you’re not.” I said last week that we should see only two classes of people in the world—those who know Jesus and those who don’t. The reason for the distinction is not to set ourselves apart from or above the unbeliever, not to play favorites, but to focus our attention on those we should try to reach with the gospel—everyone who doesn’t know Jesus Christ.
The Exhortation (2:12-13)
James has hit a touchy and weighty subject head-on. He has explained the true nature of the problem. He has given an example to make sure his brothers and sisters in Christ understood the gravity of the situation. Now, he will close with a powerful exhortation in verses 12-13. James writes, “So speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty. For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment.” The exhortation is intended to move his readers to action. It should move us to action as well.
James gives two imperative commands in the first phrase. The fact that we find the word “so” before each shows that James considers the two commands to be of equal importance. Both commands are in the present tense. That means the commands are to be followed habitually and continually.
James is telling his readers that they are to speak and act in such a way that is consistent with his earlier command to avoid an attitude of personal favoritism. They are to constantly show the love of Christ to all regardless of the person’s social or financial status. They are to do so with the ever-present mindset that they “are to be judged by the law of liberty.”
Every believer will one day stand before the Lord. James’ wording confirms this to be inevitable for all who know Jesus Christ. “Since partiality (favoritism) is based on false judgment and turns believers into unjust judges [believers need] to remember that they too [will] be judged” (Richardson, p. 123-24).
We’re given a glimpse of what this future judgment will look like as far back as Abraham’s conversation with the Lord regarding the impending destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Abraham said to the Lord, “Far be it for You to do such a thing, to slay the righteous with the wicked, so that the righteous and the wicked are treated alike. Far be it from You! Shall not the Judge of all the earth deal justly” (Genesis 18:25)?
The psalmist spoke of the judgment to come. “The Lord judges the peoples; vindicate me, O Lord, according to my righteousness and my integrity that is in me” (Psalm 7:8).
Again in Psalms we read, “But God is the Judge; He puts down one and exalts another” (Psalm 75:7). And “Say among the nations, ‘The Lord reigns; Indeed, the world is firmly established, it will not be moved; He will judge the peoples with equity” (Psalm 96:10).
Peter and Paul both spoke about the future judgment. In a sermon to the Gentiles, the same sermon we looked at last week, Peter said, “And He [Jesus] ordered us to preach to the people, and solemnly to testify that this is the One who has been appointed by God as Judge of the living and the dead” (Acts 10:42). And Paul wrote this to the Corinthian church. “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may be recompensed for his deeds in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad” (II Cor. 5:10).
Finally, the Lord Himself said, “For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and will then repay every man according to his deeds” (Matthew 16:27). Simon Kistemaker wrote these strong words in his commentary on the Book of James. “All the words man speaks and all the deeds he performs are going to be judged by the law of God. Judgment is going to come and is inescapable” (Kistemaker, p. 84).
But the law by which the believer will be judged is the “law of liberty.” Unlike the Mosaic, or Old Testament Law, which pointed man to the understanding that they were utterly incapable of adhering to it in all ways, at all times, the law of liberty, the gospel of Jesus Christ, not only fulfills the entirety of the law, but it brings freedom to those who are in Christ.
Where the Jews looked to the Old Testament Law, and the way it was adulterated through suffocating additions by the religious elite, with fear in their hearts; the Christian can look to and live by the law of liberty with joy in their hearts. The freedom that comes with following the law of liberty, being counted as one who belongs to Christ, is the kind of freedom experienced by one who is no longer a slave to sin. For those of us who know Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior, we are free to obey Him and serve Him with our whole heart.
Those who look to God’s Law as restrictive and oppressive follow it only out of a sense of fear or out of a sense of obligation to their religion. Those who look to God’s Law as liberating, because they were first drawn into a relationship with Jesus by the power of the Holy Spirit, follow the Law out of love for God and a God-given willingness to obey the One who saved them.
One way to check ourselves to see if we are really in the faith is to carefully consider our response when we violate the Law of God, when we sin. An unbeliever who violates God’s Law becomes upset (if they are going to be upset with anyone) with God because His Law is too restrictive, or with the person who holds them accountable because they are being too judgmental. The true follower of Christ, when he or she violates the Law of God, is also upset. But the believer is upset to the point of repentance, to the point of seeking God’s forgiveness for falling short of His glory. And through that acknowledgement, through the liberation that repentance brings, the believer is freed to again follow God’s commands and walk in His ways.
James ends his exhortation with one last sobering reminder. We find it in verse thirteen. “For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment.”
If our life reflects a habitual attitude of favoritism, if we shun the poor as a normative practice, we cannot claim to be merciful. As believers we are to love our neighbors as our self. Love and mercy go hand in hand. In Luke we read these words of Jesus. “But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High; for He Himself is kind to ungrateful and evil men. Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful” (Luke 6:35-36).
If we do not have love and mercy in our hearts, if the love we have is a warped sense of devotion to the rich or those people of influence in the community who being near gives us a sense of greater self-worth or importance, then it is reasonable to wonder if Jesus is even in our hearts.” Partiality is inconsistent with the Christian faith because the Christian faith is consistent with the nature of God—and God is wholly impartial” (MacArthur, p. 117).
The way we treat others, whether through our words or our actions, is evidence of the genuineness of our faith. Being merciful does not save us. We will not be able to stand before the Lord and say, “Let me into Your heaven because I showed others mercy.”
Those who will enter into the kingdom of heaven for all eternity will say, “Lord, I was merciful because You first showed mercy to me through the gift of eternal life in Your Son Jesus Christ. And the mercy I have shown others is proof that I truly received that precious gift.”
For the believer, the mercy we show to the poor, the mercy we show to the unbeliever will always be triumphant over judgment. “Just as [Christ’s atoning work on the cross] turns away wrath, mercy turns away condemnation” (Richardson, p. 127). “Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” (Romans 8:1). What great joy there is in that truth!
Since all of us—believer and unbeliever alike—are utterly incapable of keeping the whole Law of God, what each of us deserves is the judgment of God. But just as God is holy, righteous, and just, He is also merciful. For that reason, the believer, the one who knows Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior and has committed their life to Him, can live freely, give of him or herself abundantly, and love others without partiality.
When I stand before the Lord one day, about to enter into His kingdom forever, not by my will or work, but by His will and finished work, I pray that He will show me lines of people to whom I showed mercy. And as I say that, my heart is filled with the anticipation of my next opportunity, my next divine appointment, to do just that. The test of my faith will be whether or not I take hold of that next opportunity for God’s glory. How about you? To whom will you next show mercy to avoid the sin of partiality in your life? May your answer glorify Him!
