Apostolic Antiquity

A great source of contention among Christians has been the apparent contradiction between Pauline soteriology and James’s epistle. In Scripture, we see the Apostle Paul goes to great lengths to emphasize the idea that salvation is by grace through faith alone and not by works, the most emphatic examples of which are found in Ephesians 2:8–9: “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast,” and in Romans 4:5: “But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.” At a surface-level view of these passages, Paul seems to be in sharp contrast with James when he writes in James 2:14: “What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? Can such faith save him?” Some try to reconcile this apparent contradiction by imposing an eisegetic interpretation of the word “save” to imply a temporal salvation. In this idea, James is not speaking of eternal salvation from hell and sin, but rather the consequences one might face in this life due to their inactivity or obscure faith through lack of works. There are two contextual problems with this interpretation, both of which I will now set forth.

(1) The context is talking about eternal judgment and the eternal consequences of sin. The verse prior to verse 14 talks about a merciless judgment: “For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment.” Who would honestly conclude that this “merciless judgment” is merely temporary? This would be an oxymoron, because for God to give judgment temporarily would be merciful, generally speaking, not merciless. That is, when we contemplate what mercilessness would really look like in light of God’s accessibility to the greatest kinds of judgment at His power, it would be a mercy of correction and sanctification in regard to the individual soul, not merciless condemnation, the latter of which is clearly what is being implied in the verse. I am not being too narrow with my definition of the word “merciless.” I am simply observing that the context does not allow for promiscuity, nor does the word “save” (James 2:14) or “dead” (James 2:17). James is referencing what Christ told the disciples: “For if you forgive others for their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. 15 But if you do not forgive others, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions” (Matthew 6:14–15). If we know that James is referring to these words of Christ, we must also ask what Christ meant by this. Is this referring to a temporary judgment? Surely not, because if we are not forgiven, there is no mercy, the lack of which results in damnation: “but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin” (Mark 3:29).

(2) The following passage, proceeding James 2:14, completely dismantles the idea that salvation can still be achieved through faith without works: James 2:15–17: “Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. 16 If one of you says to them, ‘Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,’ but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? 17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.” James is essentially saying that saving faith cannot be simply claimed but must be exemplified, or else there is great reason to believe that the faith being claimed is not true faith. Therefore, those who claim that faith without works can still save them must still answer as to how this “dead faith,” as James describes it, can justify them, or else they will be forced to eisegete the meaning of the word “dead,” also, which would be absurd. Proper exegetical hermeneutics without a pretense clearly shows that this dead faith refers to faith that is ineffective. Ecclesiastes 9:3–6 equates dead things with vanity and worthlessness: 

“3 This is the evil in everything that happens under the sun: The same destiny overtakes all. The hearts of people, moreover, are full of evil, and there is madness in their hearts while they live, and afterward they join the dead. 4 Anyone who is among the living has hope[b]—even a live dog is better off than a dead lion! 5 For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing; they have no further reward, and even their name is forgotten. 6 Their love, their hate, and their jealousy have long since vanished; never again will they have a part in anything that happens under the sun.”  So if dead things are vanity, so is dead faith.

The question still remains, however: does James contradict Paul? I believe the answer is, of course, no. Paul and James were speaking about the topic of justification with different terms, and Paul was more cautious in explaining the relation between faith, grace, and salvation as not to confuse (e.g., “law of faith”). James, however, spoke in looser terms (e.g., “works”), yet they did not contradict theologically. We see this within our own churches in how certain theological concepts might be explained differently. 

For example, some Apostolics might say, “Jesus is the Father.” This explanation is straight to the point and does not anticipate any further implications. Others, however, in order not to dismiss the distinction of the two natures of Christ (human and divine), might prefer to say, “Jesus is the image of the Father.” Neither use of terms would necessarily be wrong, nor would they contradict; only one might articulate with more nuance and caution than the other. 

In the same way, Paul decided to place careful emphasis on the fact that works do not save us. James, however, put more emphasis on the fact that true faith is accompanied by works, and in emphasizing a separate yet related subject, he used different terms in relation to works, such as “justify.” However, James is not speaking about works as a first cause of justification; rather, he is speaking about works justifying faith (which is by biblical definition more than mere mental assent) and, by extension, the person, because “we have been justified through faith” (Romans 5:1). In regards to faith and works, James affirmed that both faith and works justify:

“21 Was not our father 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 considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone.”

James was clearly writing to a people or a church that had fallen into a heresy—that faith was only justified by, and consisted of, mental assent or dogma, and that by those things alone a person was justified. In contrast, Paul, in his epistles, was usually writing to people who had the exact opposite problem. Both those to whom James wrote and those to whom Paul wrote thought that they were living by faith, yet they did not have faith in God but in themselves. The only contrast is that those to whom James wrote put their faith in their own mental assent to justify them, rather than in the one in whom they believed, who was able to produce true righteousness in them; and those to whom Paul wrote put their faith in their own works rather than in the one for whom they worked. If Paul was writing to people with a different problem, then it is no mystery as to why he emphasized something concerning that issue, rather than resembling James, who was addressing something else.

James was saying it’s not faith alone, but works which confirm that faith; and Paul was saying it’s not works alone, but the faith that produces those works. This is not a contradiction but complementary to each other. Paul says you can’t drink water (works) without the sink (faith), and James is saying you can’t rely on the sink alone to quench your thirst, but the sink is that which produces the water. Paul is not steering us to the right and James to the left, but rather Paul is correcting those who are to the right to lean left to reach the middle, and James is correcting those who are too far to the left to lean right to reach the middle, where faith and works coincide.

What does Paul mean when he says “by faith alone”? He is not rejecting “works,” as James calls them, but works of the law (i.e., efforts of the flesh). In Romans 3:20–31, Paul distinguishes works of the law from the righteousness of God that comes through faith in Christ: “But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law . . .” He also distinguishes the law of works from the law of faith: “Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith.”

What is the law of faith? Jeremiah 31:31-33 answers this question eloquently:

“‘The days are coming,’ declares the LORD, ‘when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them,’ declares the LORD. ‘This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel after that time,’ declares the LORD. ‘I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people.’”

Jeremiah is describing the New Covenant, in which people would no longer follow the law out of effort of the flesh, because by this the patriarchs and ancestors of Israel failed: “they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them.” Under the Old Covenant, people had to put God’s law in their hearts themselves: “I have hidden your word in my heart that I might not sin against you.” (Psalm 119:11). Yet they failed to keep that law despite their best efforts. Why? Because the human condition had not been crucified, nor could it be by human efforts. Their hearts and minds were corrupted by sin.

“The Lord says: ‘These people come near to me with their mouth and honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me . . .’” (Isaiah 29:13). “The ox knows its owner and the donkey its master’s crib; but Israel does not know, My people do not consider.” (Isaiah 1:3).

God was saying, “Because they fail to come to my righteousness, my righteousness will come to them: ‘I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts.’” Paul affirms that this law has been given to us, but not by the law of works, rather by the law of faith. The law of faith is that law which has been written on our hearts. It is by faith that we receive the Spirit, which enables us to fulfill the law of faith:

“This is the only thing I want to find out from you: did you receive the Spirit by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith?” (Galatians 3:2).
“For it is God who is at work in you, both to desire and to work for His good pleasure.” (Philippians 2:13).

Furthermore, Paul says we are dead to sin. Romans 6:

“What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3 Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life. 5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly also be united with him in a resurrection like his. 6 For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body ruled by sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin.”

This is cross-referenced with John 8:34–36:

“Jesus replied, ‘Very truly I tell you, everyone who sins is a slave to sin. 35 Now a slave has no permanent place in the family, but a son belongs to it forever. 36 So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.’”

He said, “Who the Son sets free”—this is the New Covenant promise prophesied in Jeremiah 31: “I will write my law on their hearts.” This prophecy doesn’t just mean to know about the law or be convicted of the law, because that was the Old Covenant, which condemned:

“Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God; 20 because by the works of the Law none of mankind will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes knowledge of sin.” (Romans 3:19–20).

Rather, it refers to the New Covenant, in which God empowers His people to live righteously and be set free from sin.

God asks only one thing from us:

“Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.” (Matthew 11:27–30).

In this passage, Jesus is offering to take away the burden of sin and law, and that we will find rest. What is this rest?

“For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people. 12 To whom he said, This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest.” (Isaiah 28:12).

This is the Spirit that gives us rest and gives us power to overcome sin: “But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you” (Acts 1:8). God chose tongues as the accompanying sign of receiving that power. Why? Because “the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.” God chose tongues as a way to communicate that He has entered into our hearts and is taming our mortal bodies and putting our flesh, which has put us in bondage, into submission to Him. Therefore, tongues is more than a sign of the indwelling of the Holy Ghost; it is also a sign that the sanctification of the Spirit has begun, and can continue if we let it.

Zephaniah 3:9 talks about this sign in relation to sanctification:
“Then I will purify the lips of the peoples, that all of them may call on the name of the Lord and serve him shoulder to shoulder.”

I present all this to say that the “works,” as James calls them, and the “law of faith,” as Paul calls it, are not produced by human efforts but by the sanctifying work of the Spirit when we submit ourselves to it. James was not writing to the audience about their need to return to the works of the law, but rather he was calling them to repent of their turning away and non-compliance with God’s sanctifying work. He was calling them to yield to the power of the Spirit, not the works of the law by human efforts. This distinction is made in 2 Timothy 3:1–5:

“There will be terrible times in the last days. 2 People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3 without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, 4 treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— 5 having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with such people.”

What did Paul mean by this? “Godliness” usually refers to righteousness or holiness (i.e., producing righteous acts/works). What Paul is essentially saying is that these people will be like the Pharisees, who “outwardly appear righteous to men, but inwardly you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.” (Matthew 23:28). They may outwardly refrain from immorality by the works of the law, but lust, hate, and covetousness (all of which are sins of the heart) remain, because they deny the power thereof—that is, the sanctification that comes through the power of the Holy Ghost.

Here is also an example that Paul did not reject “works,” but he did reject works without power. Often, when he was writing about the topic of faith or works, he was addressing not the works themselves as vain, but the vanity of those works in that they were not being worked through faith. He was not saying, “By belief we have been saved”—although belief is certainly important—but rather: “By grace you have been saved through faith.”

However, this begs the question: just what is faith? There is no doubt that faith means to have belief. However, the concept we call “belief” didn’t usually mean what modern people mean by intellectual assent to propositions. Instead, it conveyed relation, covenant, and practice under that dogma. All faith means in Scripture is to entrust oneself to God’s word. What does that look like? Believing in Christ as our substitutionary atonement and sanctification (i.e., being freed from sin and its power over us). When we are claiming genuine faith, we are claiming that “God is working in us to will and to work.” This makes sense in light of Hebrews 11, which says:

“By faith Abel brought God a better offering than Cain did . . . By faith Noah, when warned about things not yet seen, in holy fear built an ark to save his family . . . By faith Abraham, when called to go to a place he would later receive as his inheritance, obeyed and went, even though he did not know where he was going . . . And by faith even Sarah, who was past childbearing age, was enabled to bear children because she considered him faithful who had made the promise. All these people were still living by faith when they died.”

The passage shows that living by faith is more than just “believing,” but “by faith,” they acted or worked. Now, I must note that the writer of Hebrews is unknown, but many have believed the author to be Paul, or at least a close follower of Paul. In Galatians 6, Paul makes a sharp and convicting contrast between walking in the Spirit and walking in the flesh:

“Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. 8 For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.”

Here, Paul is explicitly saying that when we walk in the flesh, we produce sin and corruption, but in the Spirit, we produce righteousness and eternal life. Thus, Paul affirms that righteousness saves us and sin condemns us, but he made clear that righteousness comes through the sanctification of the Spirit, and corruption from ourselves.

1 Corinthians 6:9–11:

“Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.”

This passage is yet another strong case for Paul’s affirmation of righteousness coming through the sanctification of the Spirit. But not only this—he also says, “you were washed… in the name of the Lord Jesus.” This is water baptism in the name of Jesus, through which we “were buried with Christ by baptism,” and “our old sinful selves were crucified with Christ so that sin might lose its power in our lives.” (Romans 6:4, 6). Why is Paul emphasizing sin as destruction and righteousness as reaping eternal life, when in Romans 4:5 he says, “However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness”?

Firstly, the “works” he is talking about in this verse are not referring to reaping and sowing in the Spirit. Rather, he is talking about the “form of godliness but denying the power thereof”—i.e., righteousness by human efforts, rather than sanctification of the Spirit that cleans both the inside and the outside of the cup. Secondly, Paul talks about the justification of the ungodly. Now, in 1 Corinthians 6:11, Paul attributes freedom from sin to justification. Now, what about Romans 4:1–3:

“What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, discovered in this matter? 2 If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God. 3 What does Scripture say? ‘Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.’”

This seems to be in direct contrast to James 2:20-24, which says:

“20 You foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless? 21 Was not our father 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 considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone.”

How do we reconcile these seemingly irreconcilable passages? Context is key. The verse preceding Romans 4:1, which is Romans 3:31, says: “Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law.” This is crucial. Paul goes on to say:

“What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, discovered in this matter?” This shows that Paul was using Abraham as an example that faith upholds the law, not the law upholding itself. As James also testifies: “You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did.” Paul later goes on to give an example of the work by which Abraham’s faith was made manifest, or upheld:

“Is this blessedness only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? We have been saying that Abraham’s faith was credited to him as righteousness. 10 Under what circumstances was it credited? Was it after he was circumcised, or before? It was not after, but before! 11 And he received circumcision as a sign, a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. So then, he is the father of all who believe but have not been circumcised, in order that righteousness might be credited to them.” (Romans 4:9–11).

Here he is showing that Abraham was justified by faith, but as a sign of that faith, he was circumcised. Now, if he had not been circumcised, but instead refused the covenant, could one conclude that Abraham had faith? Surely not. That is what Paul is saying: his circumcision was a sign of his faith. In other words, Abraham was justified by faith, and his faith was justified by the sign of circumcision. This is yet another example of James and Paul agreeing, only with different usage of terms. James says, “You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did,” and Paul says: “He received circumcision as a sign, a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith.” When taking both of these passages in their original context and intended meaning, we find that they do not contradict one another, but rather confirm each other.

Conclusion:
James 2:14 is not in contrast with Pauline theology, but rather it complements it. Both Paul and James affirm that true faith is accompanied by sanctification. I believe the main source of this confusion among believers is the difference in Paul’s terminology and James’s terminology. However, we must remember that a difference in terminology is not a difference in theology. One might shift their terminology depending upon their audience and/or the message they are trying to convey.

As I stated earlier, it’s obvious that James was speaking to a different stumbling block concerning faith than Paul, and therefore required different terminology. When Paul says “works,” he is often referring to attempted righteousness by human efforts; however, when James uses the term, he is referring to something different—he is referring to the reaping and sowing of the Spirit.

Paul does not distinguish sanctification from faith in the operational sense, but rather he is making a distinction between faith and works of the law. Sanctification, which is a part of salvation, comes by grace through faith, not by human efforts. And when James is distinguishing faith and works, the works he is referring to are the works of God perfected in us by His Spirit. When he is referring to faith in verses such as James 2:14, he is not referring to the same thing as Paul, but rather to a so-called faith. Therefore, James 2:14 might be rewritten as:

“What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such ‘faith’ save them?”

His use of the word “such” indicates his disagreement with the definition of faith that his initial audience held. Rather than disregarding faith as Paul defined it, he is disregarding faith as his initial audience held it—as a mere mental assent of belief without accompanying action. Both James and Paul are pointing towards reliance on Christ for salvation—not by human works but by God’s power, grace, and love.