The next seven verses are some of the most fought-over verses in the Bible. These verses led Luther to his famous "right strawy epistle." It led him to put James further back in the German New Testament. Calvin wrestled these verses into shape.We fight over these verses because they appear to be teaching what post-Reformation Christians don't teach. Here are the verses from James 2:
20 You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless? 21 Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? 22 You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. 23 And the scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness," and he was called God's friend. 24 You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone. 25 In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction? 26 As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.
Now he's put to the test and he comes out swinging with a question that assumes an answer and the answer will prove his point: "You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless?" (2:20). James 2:20-26 is an attempt to show that key figures of faith (Abraham and Rahab) demonstrate a work-y faith. The messianists that concern him are workless faith people.
"Useless" here needs to be connected to 2:14-17 where the terms used revealed faith that did not save.
I doubt we need to press James' language beyond his intent, which is to prove that faith without works is not saving faith.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
I don't understand why this is so complicated. James' intent throughout these verses (both previous and these) is clear: "faith" has not meaning if it does not result in changed behavior. He is making a distinction between an intellectual understanding of something and -having faith- in that thing. Many people -understand- the theology of being a Christian but have no actual -faith-. This is apparent because their behavior is completely unimpacted by this understanding that they have.
He is not wading into the "faith" vs. "works" debate as we understand it in hind sight. He is drawing a distinction between those who -claim faith- but really only have understanding and those who -have faith- which results in new, Jesus-like behavior.
He is -defining- what real faith is, not creating some distinction between faith-based salvation and works-based salvation.
Do people really, genuinely not get this?
Dr. McKnight,
So how does this relate to sola fide? Often times my Muslim friend uses these passages of the Bible to attack the Protestant stance (and my stance) of "Salvation by faith alone." Hmmm...I've read John Piper's take on it...but it was all very complicated and full of theological technicalities. How exactly are Sola Fide Christians supposed to deal with this obvious tension in the New Testament?
I mean, how does this passage manage with Romans 1:17 "For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: "The righteous will live by faith." and Romans 10: 9-10 "That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved."
If nothing else, James makes clear that we must not separate works and faith. Conceptual distinction, sure. Practical separation? No.
Yet the age old argument rages on, whether the gospel "Tastes great" or it's "Less filling."
Good remarks Scott and others!
George, I think the key is seeing the two, faith and works, as part and parcel of the righteousness that is from God. Why would righteousness NOT include works? Both are the gift of God worked in us by the holy spirit.
I have come to believe that the reason some people really, in fact, do not get this is because they do not have covenant context in mind -- like Scot is talking about over in his post on Luke.
There is the "saving" faith that brings us into covenant community relationship with God and those who name Jesus as Lord. This faith is in the work that Jesus did on the cross.
There is work, however, that WE must do as faithful covenant keeping partners. This is not a faith that saves -- it is the faith that perseveres and is evidence of sanctification.
This would, of course, be another reason some don't like this passage, or the epistle of James in general -- it bring up the issues of the sheep and goats ... those whose faith "worked" and those whose "faith" has no appropriate "working out" of their salvation with fear and trembling.
And of course Paul wonderfully adds love to all of this fuss about what is most important in 1 Corinthians 13. Yes, indeed.
The Gospel is a magnificent tapestry.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.