Does James contradict Paul?

[98cwitr]

Romans 3:28
For we hold that a man is justified and made upright by faith independent of and distinctly apart from good deeds (works of the Law). [The observance of the Law has nothing to do with justification.]


vs.


James 2:24
You see that a man is justified (pronounced righteous before God) through what he does and not alone through faith [through works of obedience as well as by what he believes].

I understand that real faith is demonstrated in what you do...but just looking at the context and verbiage of the two verses leaves me puzzled.

Paul's talking limitedly about deeds done in the law?

 

[sealacamp]

Moses had faith yet that faith wasn't approved until he used it and acted.

Then the Lord said to Moses, “Why are you crying out to me? Tell the people to get moving! Pick up your staff and raise your hand over the sea. Divide the water so the Israelites can walk through the middle of the sea on dry ground.

Moses demonstration of his faith was asked for by God. What does this tell us about faith in action?

Sealacamp

 

[JSGuitarist]

Romans 3:28
For we hold that a man is justified and made upright by faith independent of and distinctly apart from good deeds (works of the Law). [The observance of the Law has nothing to do with justification.]


vs.


James 2:24
You see that a man is justified (pronounced righteous before God) through what he does and not alone through faith [through works of obedience as well as by what he believes].

I understand that real faith is demonstrated in what you do...but just looking at the context and verbiage of the two verses leaves me puzzled.

Paul's talking limitedly about deeds done in the law?

James isn't talking about justification before God though; contextually, it is limited to the proof of faith, with works serving as a validation for faith. Works are like the king's seal on a letter indicating that it is actually from the king. Works declare, "The faith is genuine." He has no language in here to indicate that he is talking about having a saving justification, while much of Paul's own language is judicial, detailed and specific. James only means to tackle one issue here: "You say you believe in Christ, but why are you acting like you don't?"

Start on the premise that we are justified by faith, but what good is the faith if it is dead and has no life to it? Like a body without breath. That really is no different than what Paul said in Romans: "Shall we sin so that grace may abound? May it never be!" "Sin will not have dominion over you, for you are not under the law, but under grace." "For if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you mortify the deeds of the body, you will live." This is the same man who said we are justified apart from the works, the same one who says, "To him who doesn't work, but believes on him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted unto righteousness."

Justification shows up in two ways: One is in the legal righteous state applied to the Christian by the Holy Spirit (by this he is saved), and the other is the justification/vindication before men. The people mentioned in James 2 have been justified in the sense of proof. At the last day, works will be the sign that the faith was authentic (Romans 2, Matthew 25 are clear), but they will not be what justifies or what makes the man right before God, that's a very important thing to distinguish. If anything, it is like the evidence brought into a court case to examine whether or not something was true. However, that is a very different thing from using works to gain legal standing before God, and it preserves the natural ordering of justification and sanctification. A man works because he is justified, and not to be justified, as the Roman Catholicism claims. James doesn't have any problem at all with this.

I would consider too that Paul is explicitly, loudly clear in Galatians that whoever tries to be justified by works of the law will be damned, and that they are under a curse. And Paul made a strong point in Galatians in the first chapter to authenticate that it was God who gave him this revelation concerning grace alone and faith alone, and it was not something that he had made up. Not any one of the apostles objected to the message when he verified it with Peter, James (who was Christ's earthly brothers, not sure if this one is the author of the epistle), and John, and they made no additions to what he told them, and that is the Gospel that is declared in the book of Galatians. To lean wholly on Christ is what Romans and Galatians order us to do, because the righteousness of Christ is the only thing that will bring us through the gates of heaven.

 

[98cwitr]

right on Jake...thanks for posting that. Very concise

 

[DeaconDean]

Martin Luther was quick to point out that in the example of Abraham, Paul and James use two different times in his life for their examples of justification.

Paul uses Gen. 15 as his example while James uses Gen 22.

IF the argument of those who side with the Arminian argument, are we to believe that Abraham had to wait some 50 years before he was really justified as James suggests?

Martin Luther was right in that men are justified before God by faith, but that in order to use the title of "Christian" James says they are justified by works.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Hupomone10]

I think it would have to be Paul that contradicts James rather than the other way around, since general consensus is that Romans was written after James. Or rather, complements and clarifies.
They were obviously addressing two different situations.

I'm sure at some point in my life I've told someone "there's nothing you can do." And then at another time may have told the same or a similar person "you better do something." Luckily, I'm not an apostle so there haven't been millions of people discussing how I contradicted myself.

Blessings,
H.

 

[DeaconDean]

I think it would have to be Paul that contradicts James rather than the other way around, since general consensus is that Romans was written after James. Or rather, complements and clarifies.
They were obviously addressing two different situations.

I'm sure at some point in my life I've told someone "there's nothing you can do." And then at another time may have told the same or a similar person "you better do something." Luckily, I'm not an apostle so there haven't been millions of people discussing how I contradicted myself.

Blessings,
H.

Let me also point out the very different views that Paul and James had of the "Law":

James called the “Law” a “perfect law of liberty.” (cf. Jas. 1:25) Paul viewed it as a Law that brings slavery, (Gal. 5:3) wrath, (Rom. 4:15) sin, (Rom. 7:7) and death (Rom. 7:10).

I too agree that they are complementary.

I wrote once:

It has been argued that Paul and James are not contradictory, but rather, complimentary. This can be seen by the statements by these men in that Paul says you are justified by faith, verse James’ teaching that you are justified by works and not by faith alone. Arthur W. Pink wrote:

“Unless the subject and scope of James’ Epistle be clearly seen, the apprehension of many of its statements can only issue in God-dishonoring, grace-repudiating, soul-destroying error. To this portion of the Word of God, more than any other, have legalists appealed in their opposition to the grand truth of justification by grace, through faith, without works. To the declarations of this Epistle have they turned to find support for their Christ-insulting, man-exalting, Gospel-repudiating error of justification by human works. Merit-mongers of all descriptions cite James 2 for the purpose of setting aside all that is taught elsewhere in Scripture on the subject of justification. Romanists, and their half-brothers the Arminians, quote "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only" (v. 24), and suppose that ends all argument.”
[*]

What is maintained is, that Paul addresses the fact of how a man can be justified before God, and James addresses how a man can be justified before man. Paul addresses our justification of persons, while James addresses our justification of profession. The one is by faith alone, while the other worketh by love and produces obedience. (Pink)

Both men use Abraham as an example. And the supposition that James addresses the empty profession rests on the fact that when James says:

“Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?” –Jas. 2:21 (KJV)

Whereas Paul says:

“For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.” –Rom. 4:3 (KJV)

A fact that most seen to overlook at are the differences between what Paul is quoting from, and what James quotes, rather, bases their statements on. Paul uses Gen. 15:6 as his basis in Romans 4, and James uses Gen. 22:1-19 for his basis. Abraham was seventy-five years old when he believed God in Genesis 15. However, Abraham was 100 years old when Isaac was born. (cf. Gen. 22:6) Tradition has it that Isaac was around twenty-five when Abraham took him to the mountain for the sacrifice. If the Catholics and Arminians are correct, then it logically means that Abraham had to wait fifty years in order to actually be justified! No! We merely point out that the offering of his son, gave evidence to Abraham’s faith in God.



[*]Arthur W. Pink, The Doctrine of Justification, Chapter 9, Its Evidence, book on-line, accessed 5/31/09, found on the World-Wide-web at: 9. Its Evidence

The Doctrine of Justification, Restated and Reviewed, Author: Me

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[savedfromdistruction]

Romans 3:28
For we hold that a man is justified and made upright by faith independent of and distinctly apart from good deeds (works of the Law). [The observance of the Law has nothing to do with justification.]


vs.


James 2:24
You see that a man is justified (pronounced righteous before God) through what he does and not alone through faith [through works of obedience as well as by what he believes].

I understand that real faith is demonstrated in what you do...but just looking at the context and verbiage of the two verses leaves me puzzled.

Paul's talking limitedly about deeds done in the law?

I am not sure what translations you are using but they are really bad. The passage become more clear if using some translation that does not corrupt the intent.
Paul is stating the fact of how one is saved and James is stating the evidence of the one saved. You have to read the previous verses in James to get the whole picture so no there is no contradiction.

 

[98cwitr]

would you be so kind as to provide a translation that you find to be more accurate and punctual?

 

[the particular baptist]

Dean, would you consider that James's perfect law of liberty is not the same thing as THE law ? What James means by the perfect law of liberty is the law of faith, the law of Christ, the law of the gospel, the law of Zion which is a contradistinction from the law of sinai.

Brother can i recommend to you two works which are infinitely better at describing it than i ? Both were strict baptists.

William Gadsby - Questions About The Law As The Believers Rule Of Life

William Huntington - The Rule And Riddle or The Believers Rule Of Life

Also here is a relatively inexpensive booklet by Gadsby The Perfect Law Of Liberty.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

James isn't talking about justification before God though; contextually, it is limited to the proof of faith, with works serving as a validation for faith. Works are like the king's seal on a letter indicating that it is actually from the king. Works declare, "The faith is genuine." He has no language in here to indicate that he is talking about having a saving justification, while much of Paul's own language is judicial, detailed and specific. James only means to tackle one issue here: "You say you believe in Christ, but why are you acting like you don't?"

If that is what James intended to convey to his readers, he was a very poor writer for he wrote,

James 2:14. What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him?
15. If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food,
16. and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and be filled,” and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that?
17. Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself.
18. But someone may well say, “You have faith and I have works; show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works.”
19. You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder.
20. But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless?
21. Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?
22. You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected;
23. and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “AND ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS,” and he was called the friend of God.
24. You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.
25. In the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way?
26. For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead. (NASB, 1995)


In verse 2:14, James begins a new topic,

James 2:14. What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him?

Is faith without works sufficient to save a man?

In verses 15-17, James writes of the futility of faith without works,

15. If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food,
16. and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and be filled,” and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that?
17. Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself.

In verse 18, James reminds his readers of the Jewish belief that faith is inseparable from works, which are an integral and essential part of that faith rather than a mere consequence of that faith,

18. But someone may well say, “You have faith and I have works; show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works.”

In verse 19, James cites the belief of demons to illustrate the ineffectualness of belief apart from works,

19. You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder.

In verses 20-23, James further argues, “faith without works is useless,” using Abraham as an example of a man who had genuine faith in God.

20. But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless?
21. Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?
22. You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected;
23. and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “AND ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS,” and he was called the friend of God.

In verse 24, James summarizes his argument thus far,

24. You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

In verse 25, James continues his argument, using Rahab as an example of a woman who had genuine faith in God.

25. In the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way?

In verse 26, James summarizes the whole of his argument,

26. For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.

This is the position of James on faith and works. What is the position of Paul on faith and works? What is the position of Jesus on faith and works? Do the accounts in the synoptic gospels of the teaching of Jesus on faith and works contradict the accounts in the Gospel According to John of the teaching of Jesus on faith and works?

 

[DeaconDean]

Well folks, faith without works is dead, that is what the Apostle James said.

And it is the position of one person in this thread also.

A person comes to church, under conviction of the Holy Spirit and repents. confesses, and believes. On the way home they are involved in a car crash and die.

To use the standard of James and this person, we have no other alternative than to say that that individual was not saved. Why? Because he had faith, but no works.

Sorry all you billions and billions of people who on your death bed who repent, confess, and believe, your going to hades anyway.

No works, no salvation. (Jas. 2:24)

However, John Gill comments:

Moreover, the Apostle Paul speaks of justification before God; and James speaks of it as it is known by its fruits unto men; the one speaks of a justification of their persons, in the sight of God; the other of the justification and approbation of their cause, their conduct, and their faith before men, and the vindication of them from all charges and calumnies of hypocrisy, and the like; the one speaks of good works as causes, which he denies to have any place as such in justification; and the other speaks of them as effects flowing from faith, and showing the truth of it,

John Gill's Exposition of the whole Bible.

Which is what I have said all along.

And if that is what James indeed teaches (no works, no salvation as it is being advocated), then I agree with Martin Luther and say we need to rip the book of James from the canon of scripture.

And that is the primary reason why DeaconDean is not of the Arminian faith. It is a works based salvation. Period.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Hentenza]

I am surprised that no one has pointed out the result of faith as manifested in works as described by the writer of Hebrews in chapter 11. By faith is how we can do the things that are pleasing to God. Works flow naturally from saving faith. James is teaching that but what he is not teaching is salvation by faith AND works. There is no contradiction between James and Paul.

 

[JSGuitarist]

If that is what James intended to convey to his readers, he was a very poor writer for he wrote,

Didn't you read the rest of my post?

 

[His_disciple3]

Galatians 6:12-18
12 As many as desire to make a fair shew in the flesh, they constrain you to be circumcised; only lest they should suffer persecution for the cross of Christ.
13 For neither they themselves who are circumcised keep the law; but desire to have you circumcised, that they may glory in your flesh.
14 But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.
15 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.
16 And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.
17 From henceforth let no man trouble me: for I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus.
18 Brethren, the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit. Amen.
KJV
it was obedient to God to be circumcised, just as well as keeping the law, but neither justification of the Flesh availeth anything, nor uncircumision, keeping the law, doing works . but God forbid that I should glory, saved in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[Hupomone10]

I am surprised that no one has pointed out the result of faith as manifested in works as described by the writer of Hebrews in chapter 11. By faith is how we can do the things that are pleasing to God. Works flow naturally from saving faith. James is teaching that but what he is not teaching is salvation by faith AND works. There is no contradiction between James and Paul.

Amen, Amen, and Amen. Thank you brother.

 

[dies-l]

When we read the epistles in Scripture, we need to be cognizant of the fact that we are reading one side of a conversation. The Bible gives us clues as to what the other side of the conversation was, but often we have to read between the lines. When understood in the context of the conversation and controversy that each was responding to, there is no contradiction at all.

Paul's primary audience was Gentile churches. It seems that a common problem in the Gentile churches was an attempt to Judaize Gentile Christians, by convincing them to live in compliance with the Mosaic law. Paul's intent, largely, was to dissuade Gentile believers from being convinced that they needed to obey the Jewish law, or any particular legal standard for that matter, to be saved. His point, throughout his epistles, was that blind obedience to any law or moral standard, for the sake of obedience to the law or moral standard, is a sheer waste of time. One does not become a "righteous" person simply by following an external set of rules to the best of his ability. Rather, one becomes righteous by having faith, which is a condition of heart and mind from which naturally flows character traits like love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control, etc.

James' principal audience was the Jewish church of the dispersion. It appears from the context that, in response to Pauline teaching, an error had arisen among Jewish Christians that salvation by faith means that we can now live in sinfulness and ambivalence without consequence. And, James is correcting this by pointing out that a person who lives by faith will not want to live in sin and ambivalence. IOW, the very fact that some were arguing that "salvation by faith" was an excuse to sin indicated that they lacked the very faith that were basing their salvation upon.

 

[phoenixdem]

The idea that James is trying to get across is that works follow faith, i.e. if you have saving faith, you will do good works. It isn't works that saves, it is the faith. As an analogy, a disease displays symptoms. Symptoms shows the existence of the disease. In the case of faith and works, the works are the symptoms and faith is the disease (This is an analogy only, faith isn't a disease. We are getting into hard times when I have to pick my words so carefully.)

 

[PrincetonGuy]

The idea that James is trying to get across is that works follow faith, i.e. if you have saving faith, you will do good works. It isn't works that saves, it is the faith. As an analogy, a disease displays symptoms. Symptoms shows the existence of the disease. In the case of faith and works, the works are the symptoms and faith is the disease (This is an analogy only, faith isn't a disease. We are getting into hard times when I have to pick my words so carefully.)

If that is the idea that James was trying to get across, he did a very poor job it. Indeed, if that was the idea that James was trying to get across, he could have simply said so and the position of the Epistle of James in the New Testament Canon would not have been questioned. James wrote what he wrote, and Martin Luther observed that according to James, both faith and works precede justification and salvation.

James 2:14. What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him?

James 2:21. Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?

James 2:24. You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.
25. In the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way?
26. For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead. (NASB, 1995)

I do not believe that we should attempt to rewrite what James wrote, but take it as it is, the understanding of James at the time that he wrote his epistle. That date, however, is impossible to ascertain and scholars of the epistle have argued for a wide spectrum of dates.

My understanding of the relationship between faith, works, and justification is very different. I believe, as do the vast majority of Christians today, that works are a consequence of faith, and that they need not be present prior to one’s justification. However, I do not find that teaching in the Epistle of James.

 

[JSGuitarist]

If that is the idea that James was trying to get across, he did a very poor job it. Indeed, if that was the idea that James was trying to get across, he could have simply said so and the position of the Epistle of James in the New Testament Canon would not have been questioned. James wrote what he wrote, and Martin Luther observed that according to James, both faith and works precede justification and salvation.

James 2:14. What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him?

James 2:21. Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?

James 2:24. You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.
25. In the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way?
26. For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead. (NASB, 1995)

I do not believe that we should attempt to rewrite what James wrote, but take it as it is, the understanding of James at the time that he wrote his epistle. That date, however, is impossible to ascertain and scholars of the epistle have argued for a wide spectrum of dates.

My understanding of the relationship between faith, works, and justification is very different. I believe, as do the vast majority of Christians today, that works are a consequence of faith, and that they need not be present prior to one’s justification. However, I do not find that teaching in the Epistle of James.

Aren't you going to respond to the actual arguments that have been made?