The Genius of Bob Marley’s “One Love / People Get Ready”

Bob Marley’s “One Love / People Get Ready” transforms Curtis Mayfield’s original song in the direction of mercy and grace for “hopeless sinners.”

“One Love” was clearly influenced by the Curtis Mayfield song “People Get Ready” (recorded with the Impressions in 1965). The way Marley quotes (and changes) the lyrics of the Mayfield song amounts to a critique of the self-righteousness of many in the church (and in the wider society).

Curtis Mayfield’s People Get Ready

Mayfield’s song is about the salvation train and what it takes to get on board. The second verse says:

Open the doors and board ’em
There’s hope for all
Among those loved the most

But the next verse goes on to say:

There ain’t no room for the hopeless sinner
Who would hurt all mankind just to save his own (believe me now)
Have pity on those whose chances grow thinner
For there is no hiding place against the Kingdom’s Throne

“People Get Ready” is a wonderful song that functioned as an anthem in the American civil rights movement. And I have no intention of denigrating the song or the way it functioned.

Mayfield’s song makes a clear distinction between “those loved the most,” who have a place on the salvation train, and “hopeless sinners.” It claims that there’s no room for these sinners on the salvation train; they are “hopeless.”

While the song goes on to say that we should have pity on these sinners, the reason is that they will inevitably experience judgment (with “no hiding place”).

Now, I don’t deny that there is a real distinction to be made between someone who seeks love and justice and the person “who would hurt all mankind just to save his own.” Nor would Bob Marley.

The question is whether we can decide who fits into which category and so who is excluded from the salvation train. Who do we think are the “hopeless sinners”? This is especially important in our time of toxic polarization and identity politics in American society.

Marley himself had to address this sort of polarization in Jamaica, given the tradition of warring gangs, each of which was aligned with one of the two main political parties.

Bob Marley’s “One Love”

So Marley uses these key lines from “People Get Ready” in “One Love,” while changing “against the Kingdom’s Throne” to “from the Father of Creation.” Whereas “Kingdom’s Throne” suggests judgment, “the Father of Creation” suggests one who loves us.

That is why Marley prefaces these lines with his desire that the sinners be saved (“there will be no, no doom”).

In the quote below, “Armagiddyon” is Marley’s phonetic spelling of Armageddon, the symbolic place of the final battle between good and evil. Marley suggests that we should be fighting this battle now; and we should be fighting against evil (not against the sinners).

Let’s get together to fight
this Holy Armagiddyon (One Love!)
So when the Man comes
there will be no, no doom (One Song!)
Have pity on those
whose chances grows thinner
There ain’t no hiding place
from the Father of Creation

But perhaps the most profound lines of all in the song come in the first verse, where Marley challenges those who are scandalized by the radical forgiveness the gospel offers to sinners (that’s why they and “pass all their dirty remarks”).

Let them all pass all their dirty remarks (One Love!)
There is one question I’d really love to ask (One Heart!)
Is there a place for the hopeless sinner
Who has hurt all mankind
just to save his own?
Believe me: One Love . . . .

Note that Marley rephrases the statement in Mayfield’s “People Get Ready” that there is no room for these “hopeless sinners” into a question, raising the possibility of their redemption.

You can download the entire lyrics to “One Love / People Get Ready” here.

Both in his music and in his life, Marley actively sought to turn even “hopeless sinners” from their ways so they could be reconciled to God and to others.

The 1978 Peace Concert

A famous example is the 1978 Peace Concert in Kingston, Jamaica, in which Marley got Michael Manley and Edward Seaga, the leaders of the two opposing political parties in Jamaica, to join hands on stage as he prayed a blessing over them.

You can read an account of the events that led up to the concert in this 2022 article in the Jamaica Observer.

This documentary about the concert also explains the situation that led up to the concert (and the temporary reconciliation between rival political gangs; sadly, it did not last).

The actual concert footage is quite long. If you want to see the section where Bob calls up the leaders of the two political parties and pronounces a blessing on them, go to the 1-hour and 17-minute mark (this section is about four minutes long). Bob’s antics on stage remind me of a Pentecostal preacher calling down the power of the Spirit.

In my next post, I’ll recommend some writings that analyze the lyrics of Marley’s songs:

Kwame Dawes, Bob Marley: Lyrical Genius

Dean MacNeil, The Bible and Bob Marley: Half the Story Has Never Been Told 

Hugh Hodges,  Soon Come: Jamaican Spirituality, Jamaican Poetics, chap. 7: “Walk Good: Bob Marley and the Oratorical Tradition”

The Subversive Spirituality of Reggae

On February 17, 2023 I gave a presentation called “The Subversive Spirituality of Reggae: ‘Resisting against the System’ in the Music of Bob Marley & the Wailers,” in Rochester, NY. It was held at the Joy Gallery. Thanks to artist and RIT professor, Luvon Sheppard, for hosting us. The presentation was sponsored by the Rochester Jamaican Organization in celebration of Reggae Month.

Biblical Eschatology—My New Course from Seminary Now

Back in April of last year I recorded a video course on Biblical Eschatology with Seminary Now. The course will be available soon. I’m excited for you to see it. You can access 3 free sessions by signing up here!

Here is an outline of the video course:

1. What Is Biblical Eschatology?

2. The Renewal of All Things

3. Creation is Our Home

4. The Cosmic Temple

5. Humanity as the Image of God

6. Massive Fail—And Restart with Israel

7. Exile and the Hope of God’s Return

8. Jesus and the Coming of the Spirit

9. The Church in the Power of the Spirit

10. God’s Presence on the New Earth

11. What About the Rapture?

12. Epilogue

Deconstruction, Classical Theism, and Abraham’s Silence: Conceptual Connections between Three Blog Posts

I had a revelation about the last three blog posts I’ve written, specifically about how they are all connected.

One post was on deconstruction and reconstruction of faith. One was on why I am not a classical theist. And the third was my creative proposal for what Abraham should have said to God in Genesis 22 (instead of his silent attempt to sacrifice Isaac).

I have come to realize there are multiple connections between these blog posts. I was aware of some of them at the time, but other connections seem to have been subconscious.

Deconstruction and Reconstruction of Classical Theism and Abraham’s Silence

I already understood that I was “deconstructing” classical theism and the traditional interpretation of Abraham’s silence.

My “reconstruction” of the former was to suggest that a relational view of God was more faithful to Scripture than a view of God as unmoved by anything outside of the divine nature.

My “reconstruction” of the latter was to argue that Abraham should have protested God’s command for him to sacrifice his son and prayed for Isaac, rather than silently attempting to obey the command (that was the basic argument of my book Abraham’s Silence).

God’s Relationality as the Basis for Critiquing Abraham’s Silent Obedience

In Abraham’s Silence, among the reasons I gave for why Abraham should have pleaded with God for his son was the prominent biblical pattern of vigorous prayer (found in the lament psalms, Moses’s intercession for Israel, Job’s protests, Abraham’s bold intercession for Sodom, and Jesus’s teaching on prayer in the New Testament).

This understanding of prayer is grounded firmly in a relational view of God—a God who is impacted by the human dialogue partner, in distinction to the the immovable God of classical theism.

I guess that this view of God is so ingrained in me that I didn’t have to consciously think about it.

(Neo)Platonism and Abraham’s Silence

Then, some comments by Brian Walsh and Sylvia Keesmaat in response to my blog about classical theism suggested a further connection between the three posts—namely, Neoplatonism, or at least the traditions of Platonic and Aristotelian philosophy that preceded Neoplatonism proper.

It was in those traditions of Greek philosophy that we get the idea that God is unaffected by emotion or by any outside influences.

And if humans are made in the image of this God, then we would naturally valorize (in Sylvia Keesmaat’s words) “the strong silent male who doesn’t demonstrate any emotion when asked to do something that should tear his heart out, and who believes that God is not open to dialogue and challenge.”

This is remarkably similar to how Abraham is thought of in many traditional interpretations of Genesis 22.

So—wonder of wonders—it actually looks like there is some coherence to my thinking about disparate subjects (even when I am not aware of it).