About Answering Error Salvation Mechanics
James 2 is obviously talking about forensic justification. Denying this produces dead faith
5 minutes to read Don your fighting trousers.
14 What doth it profit, my brothers, if a man say he hath faith, but have not works? can that faith save him? … 20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith apart from works is barren? 21 Abraham our father—was he not declared righteous out of works, having brought up Isaac his son upon the altar? 22 dost thou see that the faith was working with his works, and out of the works the faith was perfected? 23 and the scripture was fulfilled that says, And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness; and he was called the friend of God. 24 Ye see, then, that out of works is man declared righteous, and not out of faith only. (Jas 2:14, 20–24)
James 2 is transparently, indisputably, obviously dealing with forensic justification by faith.
Look:
In verse 14, the question is the kind of faith that saves. “Can that faith save him?”
So how does faith save us? We know it is by being the instrument of forensic justification (Ro 5:1). We are declared righteous on account of our faith—not because our faith merits anything, but because it unites us to Christ, whose merit then becomes ours as a gift.
James is therefore presupposing sola fide, “faith alone,” and instructing us on the nature of the faith that results in being declared righteous by God.
This is confirmed beyond doubt by his appeal to the locus classicus of forensic justification: “and Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness” (Ge 15:6). James says this was fulfilled when Abraham offered Isaac on the altar.
In other words, Abraham was declared righteous by faith when he did the work of offering Isaac.
Given the explicit connection to Genesis 15:6, it is impossible that James is referring to anything other than Abraham himself being declared righteous. In other words, he is using the word justified in the same way we normally do. This is why Young’s Literal Translation, which I am drawing on above, translates it as “declared righteous.” Young was tracking with the very basic logic that James uses to connect verses 21 and 23.
If you are unable to follow this connection, without slicing it through your systematic theology and making it come out as anything except forensic justification, then you are unable to rightly divide the Word—and your understanding of systematic theology is defective.
Systematic theology does not stand in judgment over scripture. Scripture is the source and judge of systematic theology.
How can James say that Abraham was justified by works, if he is presupposing sola fide? Young’s translation of verse 18 is helpful: “I will show thee out of my works my faith.” It is the works that reveal the faith, that embody the faith, that express the faith, that host the faith. The faith is “in” the works, and “shown out of” them, just like the spirit is in the body, “for as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also the faith apart from the works is dead” (v. 26). Works are the animating principle of faith—faith in action—just as the spirit is the animating principle of the body—the body in action. James straight-up tells us that faith is something like a living person. The body and the spirit can be distinguished—but they are both proper parts of the whole. What the body does, the spirit does, and what the spirit does, the body does.
In the same way, faith does things. The works are not separate from the faith—they are the faith in action. Sacrificing Isaac was Abraham doing faith. He was declared righteous by his works because they were the material expression of the living, doing faith by which he was united to Christ, and received Christ’s righteousness as a free gift.
This is neither complicated nor difficult. You might not like talking this way about faith and works. But too bad—the Holy Spirit does. Reform your mindset. Stop finding it alien to see physical things embodying spiritual meaning, and start thinking like God does. Stop insisting that physical forms don’t express spiritual realities, and see that God designed them that way.
It is a fact that internal states and their external actions are inseparable in scripture. By denying that works are faith doing, many pastors in NZ have become the very people James warns about. Simply apply their logic to love, and you will see this clearly: imagine if they denied that works were part of love. “Be warmed, be filled,” they might say—without giving any clothes or food.
And then, worse, they would condemn anyone who said that giving clothes and food is actually doing love, and instruct their flocks to divide from such people.
Such a view of love is obviously defective—and so is such a view of faith. Again, this is explicit in James; I’m not making these analogies up, they are the ones supplied by the Holy Spirit.
There are Reformed pastors in NZ teaching dead faith—and treating this as a badge of honor and a mark of orthodoxy. They are dividing from those, like myself, who affirm biblical language and categories.
This is shameful. Shame on any teacher of the church who is unable to discern the incredibly basic logic of what James says. Shame on any pastor who condemns another for preferring the natural language of scripture for faith and justification, rather than the artificial language of systematic theology. Shame on any theologian who is unable to distinguish between earning our own righteousness by doing works of the law, and receiving an alien righteousness by doing a working faith.
What a sad state our churches are in. What a dangerous thing for the sheep to be instructed that faith does not do anything—and that they should avoid those who say otherwise. Woe to those who teach dead faith to the faithful. Let us rather heed the great Puritan, John Owen, who exhorted us to always consider how we ought to act faith on Christ:
Let none be guilty practically of what some ware falsely charged withal as to doctrine;—let none divide in the work of faith, and exercise themselves but in the one half of it. To believe in Christ for redemption, for justification, for sanctification, is but one half of the duty of faith;—it respects Christ only as he died and suffered for us, as he made atonement for our sins, peace with God, and reconciliation for us, as his righteousness is imputed unto us unto justification. Unto these ends, indeed, is he firstly and principally proposed unto us in the gospel, and with respect unto them are we exhorted to receive him and to believe in him; but this is not all that is required of us. Christ in the gospel is proposed unto us as our pattern and example of holiness; and as it is a cursed imagination that this was the whole end of his life and death,—namely, to exemplify and confirm the doctrine of holiness which he taught,—so to neglect his so being our example, in considering him by faith to that end, and labouring after conformity to him, is evil and pernicious. John Owen, The Holy Spirit: Its Gifts and Power
5 comments
Toni
I appreciate the perspective presented in your article and the evident passion behind it. However, I would like to present an alternative viewpoint that aims to capture the original intention of the biblical author more accurately. Reformed readers will probably disagree, and I certainly can’t cover all the details, but here we go.
Paul uses the word justify to mean being declared righteous by God on the basis of faith in Christ (Rom. 3:24; 4:5). This is a judicial act of God that frees us from the penalty of sin and grants us eternal life. Paul shows that Abraham was justified by faith in this sense when he believed God’s promise in Genesis 15:6. He was justified on the spot, without any kind of demonstration or “proof” needed (Obviously, God knew Abraham did indeed exercise faith and did not need further evidence).
James uses the word justify to mean being proven righteous by our actions before others (James 2:21, 24, 25). This is a practical demonstration of our faith (not in the gospel per se, mind you) that validates our claim to be doers of the word and not hearers only (James 1:22). James shows that Abraham was justified by works in this sense when he obeyed God’s command to offer Isaac in Genesis 22. This vindication before others is seen when they call him the friend of God (2:23). Thus, Abraham’s faith was made perfect or mature by the demonstration of his faith (2:22).
So, when James speaks of being justified by works (2:21, 24, 25) he is not speaking of the imputed justification which saves us eternally as Paul uses the term (Rom. 3:24; 4:5). James is speaking of a vindication before others. Paul even recognizes this use of the word justify in Romans 4:2.
Paul in Romans explains faith in the context of the gospel, while James explains what a living and vindicating (not forensically justifying) faith should look like in the lives of his believing, born again (James 1:8), audience. That way, they would be saved from the result of being useless hearers of the word only.
Although Abraham’s and Rahab’s demonstrations of faith did not result in forensic justification, it had a profound impact on their lives and the lives of those around them. Their acts of faith contributed significantly to their ongoing process of salvation, i.E. their sanctification. James aimed to encourage his fellow believers towards a similar path of growth, maturity, and transformation.
Dominic Bnonn Tennant
This is a standard interpretation of James 2, but as I have shown in the OP, it simply fails to deal with the straightforward meaning of James’ own words.
Derek Ramsey
Toni,
Even if this is true, …
…this does not logically follow. Genesis 15:6 does not say…
…rather it says…
…and Paul is quite clear that…
…if a man works, payment for that work is merited, but Paul had already made it clear in Romans 3:28 that a person is (forensically) declared righteous on the basis of faith alone apart from the law, so any vindication of righteousness under the law is a matter of the cause (faith) preceding the effect (works). That is, Abraham’s behavior was consistent with his profession of faith.
Because Abraham was “justified by faith without the deeds of the law”, then he must have been justified by faith alone in order for his faith to then be vindicated by his works. It is as the OP suggests:
Abraham was chronologically declared righteous by faith (the cause) well before he did the work of offering Isaac (the effect).
Toni
Derek,
Thanks for your feedback. I’m not 100% sure I understand the disagreement, but I’ll try to clarify.
I acknowledge that the vindication of righteousness does not logically follow imputed righteousness. That’s precisely why James felt the need to exhort his readers. Justification by faith alone does not guarantee the vindication of faith through works in the lives of believers. James’ exhortation was necessary to urge his readers to take action and vivify their faith by works.
Imputed righteousness by faith serves as the foundation for righteous works of faith. However, it is not the direct cause, as true believers can possess faith that is devoid of life/works (contrary to reformed doctrine). James did not call into question the genuineness of his readers’ justifying faith, but he did exhort them to vindicate their faith in God’s word generally speaking.
Anyway, I am not suggesting that the imputation of righteousness contributes to our ongoing sanctification. The former is simply presupposed by James, while the latter should be the fruit of their faith in general. I say “in general” because the faith that leads to justification is rooted in the gospel, while the “living” or “working” faith manifests afterward as believers apply God’s full counsel to their specific situations. So, when James advises against being hearers only but encourages them to be doers, he is not referring to hearing and doing the gospel message (obviously). Instead, the living faith of a justified person acts on the knowledge that caring for others is God’s will. Therefore, if a believer neglects to provide for a needy brother, their faith is considered “dead” or “useless.”
In conclusion, the faith that saves from sin’s penalty through imputed righteousness is distinct from the faith that saves from sin’s consequences in this present life. The former can be referred to as salvation in the past tense, while the latter can be referred to as salvation in the present tense. The former does not guarantee the latter. James discusses salvation in the present tense (sanctification), not past tense (justification). Besides, simply reading a passage with the word “save” and concluding it refers to forensic justification is bad Bible study practice. The meaning of “salvation” depends on its context.
GW
Loved this part:
“Systematic theology does not stand in judgment over scripture. Scripture is the source and judge of systematic theology.”
Also, “biblical language and categories” is a concept that needs to be furthered developed in the church. Way too much systematic thinking in today’s seminaries and pulpits, which can all-too-often reinterpret the Bible.
This straight-forward interpretation of faith/works (as being a unified system) also helps us understand teachings like the Sermon on the Mount, which seem to be very “works-based” to our Protestant minds.