Does James 2 contradict the rest of Scripture?
By Brian Rich
The short answer is no. Books like Romans and Galatians make it very clear that a person is ‘saved’, or declared righteous in his standing before God, by grace alone through faith alone. There are no works involved. One part of Romans even goes so far as to say, “But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness.” (Rom. 4:5 NKJV)
But what about James 2:24, which reads, “You see then that a man is justified by works and not by faith only”? This appears to directly contradict what Paul says and has confused Christians throughout the ages. Martin Luther, one of the starters of the reformation, could not reconcile the paradox and was not sure what to do with the book of James.
First, we must establish which James wrote this book. He was obviously a very prominent man if he could just call himself ‘James’ and everyone knew which James he was. There are three possibilities, two of them being Jesus’ disciples: James (son of Zebedee) the brother of John, and James Alphaeus. Herod killed James the brother of John (Acts 12:2), making him an unlikely candidate. However, James the brother of Jesus became a prominent figure in the early church. Later on in Acts 12, Peter told some people to go tell something to ‘James and the brethren’, indicating that this James was a prominent man. Paul also meets with a James in Jerusalem in Acts 21:18. Galatians 1:19 clearly shows that the prominent man in Jerusalem referred to as James (Gal. 2:9,12) was indeed the brother of Jesus.
In order to understand what is taught in James 2, it is important to understand the book as a whole and James’ flow of thought as the Holy Spirit spoke through him. Probably the most crucial piece of information is the book’s intended audience. This is because once we can determine who the audience was, or primarily, whether they were believers or not, we will know whether the book was written to evangelize people or to tell them how they should live as believers. We know that it was written to a Jewish audience, because James said that this letter was to the twelve tribes who were scattered abroad. This dispersion could be referring to the Jews, possibly believing and unbelieving, who were living in Gentile lands all around (John 7:35). The other possibility is that he is referring to those believing Jews who were scattered abroad in the persecution around the time of Stephen’s martyrdom, which included everyone except the apostles (Acts 8:1). The latter option seems to fit better, since James would have a reason to send a letter to the persecuted believers who were scattered abroad. This would also explain the beginning of the letter speaking of fiery trials. It is not a problem that he called them the ‘twelve tribes’, because at this point James probably saw the believers as true Jews, much like Paul did (Rom. 2:28-29). Not only did James call his audience ‘brethren’, but he told them not to “hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with partiality”, indicating that they had faith (James 2:1).
Now that we know which James wrote the book and who it is probably written to, we need to get an approximate date for when it was written. The very Jewish flavor of the book points to an early writing date. Generally, when there is talk of partiality in Paul’s epistles, he talks about Jews and Gentiles being equal. Not so with James. Even though these ‘dispersed’ Jews were living in Gentile lands, he did not mention anything about how they should be treated, but instead focused on partiality toward wealthy people. He also did not mention what was decided at the Jerusalem council (approx. A.D. 47-49) about how Gentiles should act. He talks a lot about the law in a positive tone, but does not mention a developed doctrine of the Church, which contrasts with most of the later books. This could possibly put the writing of James in the early to mid 40′s A.D.
In studying James, it is important to realize that the book was not written to tell people how to become born again. The book has a lot to say about wisdom, good works, and humility, but I do not believe that it is written to unsaved people. Verse 12 of chapter 1 talks about receiving the ‘crown of life’ when you have been approved, but this is not to be confused with eternal life, which is a free gift (Rom. 6:23). Verse 21 sounds like it is talking about being born again, because it has the phrase “save your souls”. However, if we back up to the preceding statements, it becomes apparent that he was telling them to embrace something that they already had. He said, “…embrace with meekness the implanted word, which is able to save your souls.” The Greek word translated ‘soul’ could be translated as ‘life’. An example of this is in Mark 8:35. “For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel’s, the same shall save it.” Embracing the implanted word may be James’ way of saying what Paul said in Colossians 2:6, “As you therefore have received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in Him.” It wasn’t something new they needed to receive, but something they already possessed and should have lived out.
Exposition
James 1:19-20 seems to be an outline for the rest of the book. Chapter 2 fits into the first point: being quick to listen. Chapter 3 begins talking about the tongue and James eventually talks about being slow to become angry, but we will focus on the first point. Listening, in this context, implies more than simply the brain receiving signals from sound waves bouncing off ear drums. It implies heeding or doing what you were instructed. In the first half of chapter 2, James dealt with the recipients showing partiality, especially to the rich people. He brought up the law and said that they should not show favoritism. Instead they should be quick to listen, because there will be a judgment for believers at some point (vs. 12-13).
Verses 14-26 are probably the most debated passage in the Bible and are used by many to attempt to lend Biblical support to the heretical idea that eternal life comes to us by our works. The important thing to notice when approaching this passage is that dead faith is not the absence of faith, but unprofitable faith. The point of the passage seems to be that James wants these people to live consistently with what they believe. Believers are declared righteous in the eyes of God at one point in time by simply putting their trust in Christ and this declaration is irreversible. It cannot be earned nor maintained by anything that we can do. The only way to be righteous on your own would mean that you would have to be born sinless and never break any law, because James says that if you break one law, you are guilty of breaking the whole thing (2:10).
2:14 What is the profit of believing the truth, but not living consistently with it or not doing anything about it? It doesn’t benefit the people around you and it won’t ‘save you’. Every time we see the word ‘save’ it is necessary to ask the question, “save from what?” In this case it seems to be deliverance from being unprofitable and probably continues the theme of saving your ‘life’ as stated in 1:21. It also may be a reference to deliverance from unmerciful judgment mentioned in vs 12-13. This judgment seems to be the same concept Paul calls the judgment or bema seat of Christ (Rom. 14:10, 2 Cor. 5:10).
15-16 Believing something and not acting consistently with it is like seeing a person in need and telling them you hope they get what they need, but you don’t give them anything. This is not beneficial to them. In the same way, faith without works is not beneficial to others. Paul says that “…those who have believed in God should be faithful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable to men.” (Titus 3:8b)
2:17 If something is dead, how useful is it? Have you ever seen a dead tree produce fruit? James probably uses the term ‘dead’ to contrast the saving of ‘life’, which is a central theme throughout the book (1:21, 5:20).
18-19 James brought in an imaginary objector, probably because there would be someone reading the letter who might say this. Since this is a letter and not a dialogue, James brought up the idea himself in order to refute it. There is some controversy about where the quotations end, since punctuation isn’t apparent from the Greek manuscripts. Some translations put quotations around “you have faith, and I have works.” Others include the rest of verse 18. It seems most likely that the quotation extends through the end of 19, because in verse 20 he starts refuting the argument and restates what he said before the objector came in, that faith without works is dead. He also makes a strong negative statement in v 20, calling the objector: “…O foolish man…” This indicates that James is refuting the statement right before it, in verse 19, which therefore is best understood as the objector’s statement. The argument that the objector brings seems to be that there is no connection between faith and works, that having faith doesn’t mean that you should do good works. He says you can show your faith with or without works, so why does it matter? He affirms that believing is good, but even demons believe in God and the only ‘work’ they do because of it is tremble. It is difficult to understand exactly what the objector’s point is. Whatever it is, it must be contrary to the idea that faith should produce works, since James keeps trying to show the connection between faith and works. This connection seems to be the whole point of this section. In essence James says, “Your action needs to change in order to line up with what you believe.”
2:20 He addresses the objector and reiterates his point that believing something without acting accordingly makes your faith pretty much useless.
2:21 He then brings up a huge historical figure, Abraham, who was tested and trusted God. It is important to note that Abraham was counted righteous in Genesis 15, but did not have this test until chapter 22. That is because this had nothing to do with his position before God, but merely his walk of faith. Abraham was neither made a saint (positionally declared righteous, saved from hell) nor did he prove that he was one, by offering up his son. He merely walked consistently with what he believed to be true. It seems there are two kinds of justification mentioned in the Bible. Like any other word, ‘justified’ does not always mean the same thing every time it is used. Paul in Romans speaks of justification by faith alone. It is interesting that he says, “For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God.” (Rom. 4:2) By throwing in the qualifying statement “but not before God” indicates there may be a way to be justified or ‘declared righteous’ before man. I believe this may be similar to what James is talking about.
2:22 Faith was made perfect or complete by Abraham’s works. It was made mature and useful, because it actually accomplished something. The singular form of you translated “do you see” (blepeis) indicates that James is still addressing the objector. He returns to addressing his audience again in v24 when he uses horate, the plural form of ‘you’.
2:23 When God declared Abraham righteous, it was on the basis of faith alone. When Abraham acted consistently with what he believed, that declaration was fulfilled (pleroo) or verified because he was showing, by his works, what God said was already true of him. Abraham was called the friend of God, which goes beyond initial justification by faith, and has to do with the walk of faith. This is similar to Christ’s words: “You are my friends if you do whatever I command you.” (John 15:14)
2:24 Here he returns to his original audience, having illustrated his point with the objector. The key to understanding this verse is the grammar. Remember how we talked about there being two kinds of justification. James is not saying here that there is one kind of justification and it is arrived at through faith and works. The word ‘only’ is monon in the Greek. However, contrary to what you might expect, it is not an adjective describing faith, which would imply that there is one kind of justification and you cannot get it through only faith. If this were true, the word would be mones, an adjective. His conclusion is that a man is justified by works and not justified by faith only. In the second half of the verse, the word justified is understood and not written, but it is necessary to realize that it does belong there, since it is the word that ‘only’ refers to. There is not only a justification by faith, but also one by works.
2:25 Rahab is cited as an example of someone who was ‘justified by works’ because she acted on what she believed.
2:26 Again, James’ last statement in this section summarizes his argument that believing without acting consistently is as useless as a dead corpse. Believers who live this way are saved, but they are not being useful and may be ashamed at Christ’s coming.
So then, let us live consistently with the truth that God has declared us righteous. “Walk worthy of the calling with which you were called.” (Eph. 4:1)
Sources:
Thomas L. Constable’s Commentary on James http://soniclight.com/constable/notes/pdf/james.pdf
Zane C. Hodges, The Epistle of James
Latest posts by Chester McCalley (see all)
- Jonah 3:1-4:11 – The Obedient Prophet – February 7, 2013
- Jonah 1:1-2:10 – The Disobedient Prophet – February 7, 2013
- Setting for Ruth: “The Days When the Judges Governed” – January 27, 2013
- The Tragedies of Moab: Ruth 1:1-18 – January 27, 2013
- The Welcome to Bethlehem: Ruth 1:19-22 – January 27, 2013