DrIBEX Ideas

Today I am at work revising my EEC commentary on James Two before I head off to Nevada for T-giving. Here is my brief conclusion to a “long” subject - namely the apparent contradiction between Paul and James about justification. There are more detailed explanations, but this is a blog post! To benefit most from this, you should read James 2:14-26.

“Readers may notice that no mention has been made in this entire discussion about the controversy over James’ and Paul’s differing emphases on justification. That absence has been deliberate. I wanted to make an effort to demonstrate that the argument of James makes perfect sense by itself without any reference to Paul. Too often James has been read only as a foil to Pauline theology. I argue that while James is not anti-Pauline, he should be viewed as ante-Pauline. This is not only because he is writing prior to Galatians and Romans, but because I believe that James and Paul are using the same words in different senses.

Furthermore, it may be helpful to see the differences between the two by looking at the views of their opponents, as best we are able to reconstruct their views. I think it is clear that Paul is opposing those who desire to make “works of the law” as an essential component in what makes a person right with God, in addition to the role of faith in that process. James seems to be opposing advocates of a faith-only position that does not require works as a part of that process. Look at it this way: James and Paul are not opponents facing each other with swords drawn. They are standing with their backs to each other, each drawing swords as they face a different opponent.

In addition to the above, I also propose the idea that Paul’s focus is on the “deeds of the law,” while James’ focus is on “deeds of love and kindness.” Paul also emphasizes a believing person’s entrance into justification by faith, while James emphasizes what a valid faith looks like. Any definition of the great Reformation distinctive of “sola fide” should always be nuanced in light of Jas 2:24. According to Paul, New Testament faith is never absolutely alone since it is always accompanied by hope and love (1 Cor 13:13). In one of the two books where Paul teaches justification by faith “alone,” he offers the following balanced statement, “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith (πίστις) working (ἐνεργουμένη) through love” (Gal 5:6). To that statement, I am sure that James would have uttered a hearty “Amen.”

The following balanced treatment of Abraham and Rahab in James 2:21-26 can serve as an appropriate final word on the passage.

“Paul and James are both right here. Unless Abraham had faith, he would never have answered the summons of God. Unless Rahab had faith, she would never have taken the risk of identifying her future with the fortunes of Israel. And yet, unless Abraham had been prepared to obey God to the uttermost, his faith would have been unreal, and unless Rahab had been prepared to risk all to help the spies, her faith would have been useless” (Barclay, 91).*

*For further treatment of the relationship of James and Paul in the matter of “faith,” the reader is referred to the discussion of “faith” in the Introduction to my forthcoming commentary in the Evangelical Exegetical Commentary, under “The Theology of James.”