James 2 - Is faith without works possible?
In my last post, I attempted to explain James’ assertion that faith without works is dead. I re-read my post, and though I said it was now simple, what I wrote isn’t. Sorry about that. Sometimes I get a picture in my head, and the picture is simple to look at… in my head. How to get you to see it?
20You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless? 21Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? 22You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. 23And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,” and he was called God’s friend. 24You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.
There are several words that are in question: righteous, justified, saved. It’s easy to say they are all the same thing. Most of the time they are, because most of the time they occur together. Where you see one, you see the other two. However, these verses, particularly the bolded passages, separate them out.
The one thing that I really like about this passage is that James has clearly expressed the separate functions of belief (faith) from obedience (deeds). Unfortunately, his expression of them is confusing for the modern church, but it’s pretty clear that they are different things. Well, we know that from our study in righteousness, so that is nothing new. What James adds to the discussion is salvation. We may have assumed that righteousness is salvation, or that justification is salvation, but James frames the issue in such a way as to blur the line. In his zealousness for God’s word, he confuses us.
Where is salvation in the verses above you might ask? Well, nowhere, and everywhere. He seems to leave it for the reader to insert salvation into the passage. We do it, but we all do it differently, disagreeing on where it goes. Does it go with belief? Or does it go with obedience? With salvation on the forefront of a Christian’s mind (”Are you saved?”, “Oh, I don’t want to go to Hell”, “I’m born again”), it’s confusing. Why? Because Paul so clearly teaches that we are not saved by the Law, but by faith… that is, believing God, specifically that Christ died and rose again for our sins. Why else? Because Christ says that we are known by our fruit… not saved by it. With everyone other than James appearing to agree that we are saved by our believing God, how could James mean anytyhing but that? Unfortunately, even after you’ve sorted it out for yourself, it can be hard to explain to someone who disagrees.
Let me try another approach. It would seem that Paul’s passage in Romans 4 and James’ passage in James 2 are practically talking to each other… nay, yelling. Let’s see if we can get Paul and James to work this out:
James: Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar?(JM 2:21)
Paul: If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God. What does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.” (RM 4:2)
James: You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did.(2:22) You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.(2:24) And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,”(2:23)
Paul: However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness.(RM 4:5)
James: You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless?(2:20) Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do. (2:19) You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.(2:24)
Mike: Guys! I have to interrupt. James! Hold up! (sorry Paul) I notice your wording… “and not by faith alone.” It would seem that you are not disagreeing on whether it is faith or works that justify, but whether it is faith or faith+works that justifies. So, once you believe, must works follow for you to be justified? Clearly not according Paul (RM 4:5); but clearly so according to you (2:24)! I’m confused.
James: What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him? Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, “Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead. But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.” Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do. (JM 2:14-22)
Mike: Wh-wh-what? James. Wait minute. Are you saying that a faith without works cannot save? Really? Can you give me an example?
James: You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.
Mike: And they’re clearly not saved. Paul. You’ve been kind of quiet. What do you think?
Paul: For if those who live by law are heirs, faith has no value and the promise is worthless, because law brings wrath. And where there is no law there is no transgression. Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham’s offspring—not only to those who are of the law but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham. (RM 14-16)
- - -
Okay, I’ve had my fun. Basically, James and Paul are making two different points. But, notice how easy it was for me to make it seem like they were disagreeing. But were their points?
I’ll start with Paul. Paul’s point is about obeying the Law of Moses vs. believing in Jesus Christ. As for whether you obey God or not, it’s not Paul’s point. After all the Law is not God. James on the other hand is not talking about obeying the Law, but about obeying God. If a person believes the Gospel but foresakes it, how can you call them saved? It’s a different point.
Now, both men used Abraham as an example, which made it particularly fun to “get these guys talking.” However, again, their points were different. However, it does provide a common ground from which to see both points. From Paul’s perspective, if you consider God’s command to sacrifice Isaac, Abraham was considered righteous just for believing God’s promise. Once Abraham believed him that was that. Nothing he did in response to it was going to make him righteous. However, as James points out, Abraham’s obedience was in fact the fulfillment of his belief. After all, what if Abraham had not done it? Well, one can play philosophical games and try to imagine the conditions under which Abraham truly believed God, didn’t obey, and there was nothing wrong that. However, that’s just mind candy, and in this case misses the point. In reality, when you really believe God’s promise about something, it emboldens you. It just does, and you obey. This is what happens when you believe, not just in your head, but right down into your heart.
Acts of obedience to God do not make you more righteous… you are doing it precisely because you are righteous. That is Paul’s point. But, if you don’t obey, then James is correct to challenge your very righteousness, for if you were righteous, would you not obey? So, it either means that you really did not believe God, or your believing God is doing you no good. As James puts it, your obedience fulfills your belief. But you believe and obey, it was the belief that saved you, and obedience that demonstrated it, as Paul would say.
Now, there is one other question I haven’t answered… justification. When are you justified? When you believed? or when you obeyed? Well, being justified is the state of being brought to justice before God. It is God’s response to you when you believe, as Paul would say. However, in a practical sense, it does not appear in your life until you respond back with obedience. So, Paul is referring to your justification as obeserved by God; James is referring to your justification as observed by men. And both men are right on the mark. Until you obey before men, there is no evidence that you believe God. And so, the people around you really cannot trust you are saved until they see your actions (per James), even though God knows you are saved by merely looking at your heart (per Paul).
So, my apologies to James and Paul. It looks like they were never arguing after all. I thought at as much.