The book of James confused me a lot. Everywhere in scripture it says we are saved by faith alone, not works, so I got confused about James 2. I saw some preachers twisting scripture in a way that still did not make sense... Saying things like being saved from man and stuff like that.
To reconcile Paul and James some Christians will read Paul in light of James, advocating the idea that James is indeed talking about salvation by works of faith, and that Paul is also talking about salvation by works of faith but that where Paul seems to contradict James Paul is not talking about works of faith but some other category of work.
Other Christians read James in light of Paul, advocating the idea that salvation is by faith apart from issues of performance or works, but that James is talking about the effect of faith rather than the cause of salvation, which is contingent solely on faith.
And there's your eschatological/dispensational view.
However there is yet another position, a position which Martin Luther held. Namely that James is indeed talking about salvation by works, but that James is WRONG in comparison to Paul who preaches the gospel correctly advocating salvation by faith apart from works.
Luther's Astute Observation
I would start this introduction just as Martin Luther starting his introduction to this epistle saying,
"this epistle of St. James was rejected by the ancients" Martin Luther and
"I do not regard it as the writing of an apostle, and my reasons follow. In the first place it is flatly against St. Paul and all the rest of Scripture in ascribing justification to works 2:24). It says that Abraham was justified by his works when he offered his son Isaac (2:20); Though in Romans 4:22-22 St. Paul teaches to the contrary that Abraham was justified apart from works, by his faith alone, before he had offered his son, and proves it by Moses in Genesis 15:6. Although it would be possible to "save" the epistle by a gloss giving a correct explanation of justification here ascribed to works, it is impossible to deny that it does refer to Moses' words in Genesis 15 (which speaks not of Abraham's works but of his faith, just as Paul makes plain in Romans 4) to Abraham's works. This fault proves that this epistle is not the work of any apostle." Martin Luther
This particularly becomes an issue in the second part of chapter 2 where James' ACTUAL statements are in contradiction to Paul's writings, particularly Romans 4. In both cases they apply
Gen 15:6 to their argument which says,
"Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." In Romans 4 Paul uses this verse as proof that justification is by faith alone apart from works, interpreting the Gen 15:6 as being fulfilled right then in Gen 15:6 prior to Abraham doing any works of faith regarding that promise. And of course he couldn't have done any works of faith prior to the promise, since such "faith" would not have been in regards to that promise. Whereas James views Gen 15:6 as a prediction, a prophecy not being fulfilled until
Gen 22, when Abraham did a work of faith. For to James, justification is not attained until one has both faith and works.
Note how James phrases
James 2:23 And
the Scripture was fulfilled which says,
"Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness."
Every time in the Bible when this kind of phrase is used it's ALWAYS referring to the scripture as being a prophecy, a prediction of a future event. (Yes, I checked that out and you can to)
Thus James views Abraham as either not believing God in Gen 15, or believing God, but not being reckoned righteous until Gen 22, prior to which Abraham had faith but no works, of which James refers to as dead faith and not able to save. Thus James views Abraham as not saved until Gen 22 when he offered Isaac as a work.
If James interpretation is correct concerning Gen 15:6, then Paul can't use it to prove his point in Romans 4. Conversely if Paul's interpretation of Gen 15:6 is correct and thus Abraham was justified by faith alone apart from works, then James is wrong. And thus Luther said and I agree concerning James,
"it is flatly against St. Paul and all the rest of Scripture in ascribing justification to works"
In fact why would James bring up Gen 15:6 to begin with? It doesn't lend support to his argument. Unlike Paul he's not using it as "proof" validating his point, rather he's simply imposing an interpretation of Gen 15:6 which is explicitly and intentionally contrary to Paul's gospel.
Furthermore consider the phrasing James chose in direct contradiction to Paul:
Paul in
Romans 4:2-6
"if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt. But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works"
James 2:20,21
"But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar?"
James 2:24
"You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only."
And regarding the law, while Paul says in
Gal 3:10 "All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: 'Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.'" and being under the law he refers to as bondage. yet James again contradicts Paul by saying,
"speak and so do as those who will be judged by the law of liberty." James 2:12. And yes he is talking about the law of Moses as he quotes Deut and Exodus referencing the Law of Moses.
These facts provide evidence that James is intentionally contradicting Paul.
