"Can a gentleman be a jerk and still be a gentleman?"

As we use certain words their original meaning sometimes changes. Like the word 'gentleman'. The writer C. S. Lewis made the point that when people use the word today to describe a man, they generally mean he is polite, considerate and well-mannered. That was not the primary use of the word in the early days of our nation. In Noah Webster's 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language, the primary definition pertained to a man's rank-not his character. A gentleman was "…every man above the rank of yeoman…[who]…bears a coat of arms, or whose ancestors have been freemen…[and]…holds a middle rank between the nobility and yeomanry." Thus, a person could have said, "That gentleman is a jerk!", and been correct on both counts.

Another example is the word 'righteous'. The primary definition in Webster's New Encyclopedic Dictionary as an adjective is "…acting rightly…". You may say, "That definition sounds right to me. What's wrong with it?"

Quite a bit, actually. You see, from the Biblical perspective, a person is righteous when he/she is 'right with God', when nothing exists that causes any alienation between that person and God. Our modern definition indicates our society has come to believe that a person attains this 'rightness with God' purely by "acting rightly". Since this state of being right with God is measured by outward 'right actions', people object vociferously when anyone who claims to be 'right with God' falls below the high standards of righteous living. When a person who claims to be a Christian commits a wrongdoing of any kind, the gossip lines go into high gear in order to ensure an accurate reading of that person's righteousness index. Personal righteousness has become a quantifiable virtue that others can measure by the presence or absence of good deeds.

Contrary to our modern definition, Scripture is clear that "acting rightly" does not make one 'right with God'. Why? Because God has extremely high standards a person must reach in order to be 'right with Him'; so high, in fact, that no person will ever be declared righteous by their actions. Romans 3:20 says,

Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his (God's) sight by observing the law;

If 'acting rightly' (observing the religious law…being a good person) isn't the way to be righteous in God's sight, what is? The answer is given two verses later:

But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.

A person is righteous because of faith in God, not because of "acting rightly". Does this mean that since the righteous become so through faith alone that they have no standards for "acting rightly"? Of course not. It is simply means we need to be sure we don't get the cart before the horse. Ephesians 2:8-10 clarifies:

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God-- not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

The first sentence makes it clear that salvation is by faith-not works. The second sentence makes it clear that after salvation, acting rightly-doing good works-is expected of the righteous. "Acting rightly" does not lead to righteousness, but righteousness leads to "acting rightly".

So, if someone asks, "Can a man be a gentleman without being righteous?", what will your answer be?