Read: John 7:5; 1 Cor. 15:7;
Gal. 1:18,19; Acts 12:17, 15:13, 21:18.
Let us remind ourselves of the
particular object that we have in view in this message on
Horizons. We are pointing out that Resurrection - the
Resurrection of Christ - sets the sphere within which, and by
which, everything in the New Testament is governed. Resurrection
pre-supposes death, but Resurrection is more than resuscitation
(which was the case in the 'sign-raisings' of the physically
dead, both in the Old and New Testaments). Resurrection, as
differing from resuscitation, carries with it an absolute
difference in character and spiritual position. Therefore
Resurrection, both in the case of Christ, and in that of
believers in relationship with Him, involves a test, a challenge,
a demand, and a possibility.
In order to understand this,
and all the teaching of the New Testament regarding believer's
union with Christ in death and resurrection, we are looking at
some of the people most closely in touch with Him before and
after the Cross. We are seeking to see what Resurrection required
where they were concerned. It is evident that it did mean
something very drastic in them, but the measure of that effect
varied in the different cases, although it was meant to be
utter in every one. So we come to the next in the group -
James -
The Lord's Brother
As in each previous case we are
to find our clue by identifying his human type. You should have
carefully read the Scriptures which we have given at the head of
this consideration, for it is they which lead to the verifying of
our conclusions.
It is far from easy to
delineate the category of James without doing injury to the very
real values of that category, and, while it is so necessary to
show how much the demands of Resurrection apply to this type, we
shall certainly seek to be both fair to, and appreciative of,
those values.
We must remember that James
lived with his brother Jesus in Nazareth for nearly thirty years.
That is a long time to be at such close quarters with an elder
brother. After that he was never far away from Jesus during the
three and a half years of His ministry and work. Then he was
somewhere not remote from Jesus during the scenes of the trial
and crucifixion.
Upon those thirty three and a
half years with all that they held the verdict as to
James is that he did not believe in his brother Jesus. No more
terrible verdict could ever be passed in the light of everything
that was true, and what an 'everything' it was!
This needs explaining and the
explanation can be largely found in the kind of person that James
was. That kind or type is not difficult to identify, for it is
the largest category of all, and it is all around us. There is
one word that defines and explains it, and into that word all the
truly good and the truly perilous is gathered. That word is the
word 'practical'.
It sounds good; yes, and it so
largely is, but if you have already found James a big question
and problem, it is because of this particular constitution. Let
us analyse it.
Firstly, the people of this
'Practical' category are the people for whom success is the
criterion of everything. They will reserve their confidence until
they are sure that you are going to make a success of life, and
be a success yourself. If you are successful according to their
ideas and standards you will be accepted and trusted. If you are
not a success - as they judge success - then they have no place
for you and nothing will substitute this with them. They will
just not believe in you. No doubt there was plenty in the nature,
behaviour, and disposition of Jesus in Nazareth that was not of
that tough and forceful and 'practical' (?) kind that James
believed was necessary to position and power, and this made him
definitely apprehensive and reserved as to Jesus and as to what
kind of a success He would be in the world.
But when it came to the period
of public life, every reserve was - as he believed - justified,
and all his natural susceptibilities were offended. This category
is the one which is absolutely unwilling to jeopardize position,
prestige, and standing, especially where the top people are
concerned. It will suspect and mistrust the common people's
reactions, and only be influenced by the attitude of 'the people
who count and matter'. The way that Jesus was taking was
positively dangerous and completely contrary to all 'success'
where the 'high-ups' were concerned. From his own standpoint and
according to his own standards the judgment of James was quite
correct; Jesus was 'riding for a fall', and the end of His life
would have 'failure' written large over it. His whole course was
- in spite of the temporary popularity - dangerous to success!
We leave the question as to
whether Jesus was - from Heaven's standpoint - really a failure.
There are some 'failures' which are immense successes.
Secondly, this category
consists of those who seriously lack imagination. They just
cannot see beyond what they would call 'present hard facts'.
Everything for them lies on the surface, and what is to them
'obvious' is the last argument. Their watchword being 'Be
practical', they are intolerant of the 'spiritual' and what they
would (wrongly) call 'mystical', and 'up in the clouds'. For them
the hard facts are the immediate or short-term results. Yes,
'results' are more important than how you get them:
get results, that is what matters. Policy is more than principle
with them. Get your end and don't worry too much as to how.
The result is very often a cold
cruelty; insensitive to the feelings of others. The finer
elements of sympathy, kindness, consideration, and even courtesy
do not occur to them to be important or indispensable. They have
a 'blind-spot' where the sensitive feelings of others are
concerned. They are strangers to true imagination, and foes of
what they interpret that word to mean. Their idea of
imagination is that it means conjuring up pictures - mental
pictures - which are unreal and impossible, whereas true
imagination is the faculty which enables one to place himself in
circumstances which demand understanding.
The 'practical' makeup can
crush down anything which gets in the way of its set purpose, and
ride rough-shod over friendship, family relationships, and all
that is deemed competitive. It is the temperament of commerce and
commercialism.
Of course, the intensity of the
temperament varies in different individual cases. Some are softer
and kindlier than others, but, nevertheless, the disposition is
more or less a distinct one.
There are paradoxes and
anomalies in this category. Full of activities of real value,
service of necessity, and hard-working - often sacrificial -
labours, without which the world would be a desolate place, they
- at the same time - cannot stay to go beneath the surface, and
are impatient with those who do. We just must have our Marthas as
well as our Marys or we might not get our dinner, but a balance
of the two would make the ideal, whereas Martha before
Resurrection thinks that everybody ought to be a Martha and that
Mary is a time-waster and not 'practical'.
We go on. This type is that
which holds things with an iron hand and will never let go unless
forced to do so by being completely frustrated. It is marked by a
superiority of judgment. Seldom do they know what they do not
know. Indeed, they can do things better than anyone else, and
they find it the most difficult function in the orchestra to play
'second fiddle', while often they are not qualified to do
otherwise.
While this is a general and by
no means exhaustive delineation of this particular category of
human nature, it is sufficient for us to delineate the natural
class to which James, the Lord's brother, belonged.
Up to the Crucifixion of Jesus,
James was evidently rigidly true to type, and was definitely an
unbeliever in the deity and Messiahship of his brother (John
7:3-5). At some time - probably late - in the forty days after
the Resurrection, Jesus made a personal appearance to James (1
Cor. 15:7). Thereafter James comes into view as holding a
prominent position in the Church in Jerusalem, firstly as equal
with Peter, and then, as Peter moved out to wider ministry (which
James seems never to have done), James takes leadership there.
All the relevant references
need to be read, but a very significant statement occurs in
Galatians 2:12: "...certain came from James", with
serious immediate effects - even with Peter.
There is no question as to the
conversion of James regarding the Person of Jesus. His
Letter has such statements as: "James, a bondservant of the
Lord Jesus Christ" (1:1), "...our Lord Jesus
Christ" (2:1); and "...the coming of the Lord"
(5:7,8).
As we have said, there are
things of great importance in his Letter and it is not a matter
of either rejecting or discounting them. But - and it is a very
big 'but' - we can only feel that there was an element of tragedy
in James. The Cross and the Resurrection went no further than
halfway into the constitution of James, and therefore we have to
regard him as for ever a halfway Christian. He kept one foot in
Judaism and the other in Christianity, playing for safety. He
always maintained a 'go slow' policy over extra-Jewish expansion.
He cautioned care in opening the door to what was not of the
tradition; what was not the 'established order'; to any
innovation or change. His influence kept a large part of the
Church in Jerusalem in fear and bondage. Dr. Alexander White has
some rather strong things to say about James in his Bible
Characters.
But our purpose is to show one
thing. If the Cross and the nature of Resurrection-life do not go
more than half-way into our natural constitution, while our
'Fundamentalism' or 'Evangelicalism', our personal faith and
devotion to the Lord Jesus may be unquestionable, we may yet be a
spiritual tragedy.
Do think of all that
James was associated with: thirty years of the closest contact
with Christ; three-and-a-half years of His ministry, teaching,
and work; a personal witness and experience of the risen Lord,
and Pentecost! But - he had never seen the immense universal
significance of that One. The apprehension of Stephen and Paul
was almost foreign to him, and he found no difficulty in holding
things locally into a set, historic mould. 'Heavenliness', 'Spirituality',
'Universality', such like terms as are characteristic of Paul and
John are not the vocabulary of James, indeed they are suspect.
Were it not that we are
familiar with this tragedy in our own time we would not have
believed it possible. To have so much and be so limited; to have
been so closely in touch with greater fulnesses and then to show
that we have not really seen their meaning and reality. To be so
full of devotion, of good works, of sacrificial service, but that
people should meet so little of the Lord Himself in us, and that
our effect should be to limit the Lord rather than magnify Him,
this surely is tragedy.
It would seem that the real
explanation was that James had never been really broken.
He remained intact. The devastation and desolating which came on
Paul, and in a lesser degree on Peter, never was allowed to get
through the frigid soul of James. We value so much in what he
wrote and recognize the great importance of practicality in the
Christian life. We cannot do without this contribution. We see
the beauty of the Bethany home when, through sorrow, suffering,
death, and resurrection, the friction has gone and Mary and
Martha are complementary and adjusted, both necessary.
James holds a warning, it is a
historic warning. The slogan: 'Back to Jerusalem', if that means
back to the Jerusalem of James, may mean back to limitation, back
to the static and legal.
Dr. Campbell Morgan had very
real insight when he said in his lectures on 'Acts ' (chapter 8:1-13):
'The martyrdom of Stephen
created a crisis in the history of the Church. In reading the
Acts, we find that from this point onward Jerusalem is no longer
the centre of interest. It almost fades from the page. This is
not loss; but great gain. When Jerusalem ceases to be the centre
of interest, the record does not suffer in any way, nor does it
reflect upon Jerusalem. The local, the temporal, the material,
are of little importance in the Church of God. The universal, the
eternal, the spiritual are supreme. It was of the very spirit of
an old and past economy to fasten upon a geographical centre, and
to depend upon material symbols. The Church now moves out on the
great pathway of her victorious business, independent of
Jerusalem. This is the supreme revelation of this book of the
Acts of the Apostles. Not easily did they learn the lesson, for
the Apostles clung to Jerusalem, but the great spiritual
movement, independent of Jerusalem... went forward; not slighting
Jerusalem, not unmindful of Jerusalem, nor careless of its past
history and early contribution, but far more influenced by the
vision of Jerusalem from on high, the mother of us all... No
longer hampered by localities and temporalities, the surging
spiritual life of the Church swept them all away, and quietly and
majestically on to new quests and new triumphs. Church failure
has invariably resulted from an attempt to check that spiritual
movement which is independent of locality, and of all things
material. Whenever the Church is governed from Jerusalem, or
Rome, or from anywhere other than from Heaven, it is hindered and
hampered and prevented from fulfilling the great function of its
life.'
There is no doubt that the book
of the 'Acts' is the record of an essentially spiritual
movement, but who will say that it is not practical. The truly
spiritual is really practical and the rightly practical should be
truly spiritual. These things should not be confused. But the
adjustment and balance will only be found on Resurrection ground
where the Cross has deeply touched our natural life, correcting
its disorder, and establishing that true government of the Holy
Spirit - the disposition of Christ.
Take all that James has to
offer, but recognize that there is vastly more when "the
power of his resurrection" is ever going deeper. The 'horizon' of resurrection is a very great one.