James 2:14-26 A Call to Social Justice or a Call to Righteousness by Works?
Prepared by
Wayne Dawe
for
T. Hegedus
TH500D
March 29, 2006
14
What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if you say you have faith
but do not have works? Can faith save you? 15 If a brother
or sister is naked and lacks daily food, 16 and one of you
says to them, "Go in peace; keep warm and eat your fill,"
and yet you do not supply their bodily needs, what is the good of
that? 17 So faith by itself, if it has no works, is
dead.
18 But someone will say, "You have faith
and I have works." Show me your faith apart from your works, and
I by my works will show you my faith. 19 You believe that
God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe — and shudder.
20 Do you want to be shown, you senseless person, that
faith apart from works is barren? 21 Was not our ancestor
Abraham justified by works when he offered his son Isaac on the
altar? 22 You see that faith was active along with his
works, and faith was brought to completion by the works. 23
Thus the scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed
God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness," and he was
called the friend of God. 24 You see that a person is
justified by works and not by faith alone. 25 Likewise,
was not Rahab the prostitute also justified by works when she
welcomed the messengers and sent them out by another road? 26
For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without
works is also dead. (NRSV)
Introduction
These verses from the Epistle of James have proved to be a challenging interpretive task throughout the life of the Christian Church. Many have considered this passage to be an attack on Paul's theology of justification by grace through faith. Luther's views on James, whether misinterpreted or not, have coloured the exegesis of James until the present day and have been used to justify its treatment in a lesser light than other books of the New Testament. Was this easy dismissal of the ideas expressed in this passage the result of poor theology expressed in the epistle? Is this passage a call to righteousness by works, a theology that is anathema to Protestant Christians, or have Christians missed the call to social action and justice that can be found in the verses? Is this passage really part of an“epistle of straw”as Luther is so often quoted? Should this straw have been burned in the field after the grain had been threshed from it or is this the straw that when added to mud produces a brick to build a solid wall to protect against the wind, rain and cold?
Establishing the Text, Definitions and Textual Explanations
The NRSV translation will be used as the basis for this study but other alternate translations will be examined to explain and expand upon the textual choices made by the translators and comment how these textual choices may influence the interpretation of the passage. Are Jas' definitions of faith and works the same as those used by Paul? This is an important factor to consider as Jas is often seen as challenging Paul's theology of salvation by faith alone. Johnson states that “Comparisons between James and Paul are particularly difficult, not least because they have so often been overemphasised and distorted”. (Johnson 1995:58) He further suggests that theological concerns dominated the efforts to reconcile James and Paul in the historical-critical study of the Bible did not improve on earlier historical interpretation techniques. (156)
What does Jas mean when he uses the word faith? One interpretation is that this is the common meaning of faith and has no special doctrinal interpretation. (Dibelius 1976:152) It is interesting to note that in both the NRSV and NIV translations the usage of the word pistis in 2:1 (all scripture references from NRSV , references from James will include chapter and verse only) has been translated as the word belief or believers. The NRSV footnote offers the alternate translation “My brothers and sisters hold the faith of our glorious Lord Jesus Christ without acts of favouritism.” This slightly more difficult reading adds one more usage of faith to allow for James' meaning to be more clearly evaluated. For Jas faith and salvation comes from God. He states“Therefore rid yourselves of all sordidness and rank growth of wickedness, and welcome with meekness the implanted word that has the power to save your souls.”(1:21) and “Every generous act of giving, with every perfect gift, is from above, coming down from the Father of lights ...”. (1:17) In 2:14 says “say you have faith”and not “have faith”. This subtle distinction reinforces Jas' argument that saying one has faith is a pronouncement from the believer and not a statement from God. To Jas faith means membership in the Christian community, trust in God and belief in Christ. The distinction between different means of faith will be further developed during the discussion of James and Paul.
The understanding of Jas' meaning of works has significant implications on the further interpretation of the passage and in whether Jas' usage of works is inconsistent with Paul's. When Jas uses the word works it is never connected with the term law which is a common and important usage by Paul. The word works is used ninety-five times in the NRSV New Testament and its usage outside of the Pauline letters is consistent with its usage by Jas. It is used to denote a deed or effort, i.e.“In the same way, let your light shine before men, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father in heaven.” (Matt. 5:16) The NRSV Pauline Epistles use the word works twenty-one times and Paul's primary usage is for good deeds, i.e.“For we are what he has made us, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand to be our way of life.” Eph. 2:10) In only eight instances is the term works connected to the more restrictive usage of “works of the law” which Paul preaches against. “Works of the law” is Paul's description of ritual Jewish practices, including circumcision, that some Jewish Jesus followers want to impose on Gentile converts. Paul finds this practice and the requirement that converts follow the other rules of the Torah objectionable and consistently argues against the practice. Working from the Greek sources Johnson has developed a similar understanding in which he finds fifty uses of the word works that are consistent with Jas and the other NT authors and only seventeen instances where Paul uses the more restrictive “works of the law” usage. (Johnson 1995:60) Johnson suggests that in order to make a clear distinction between the works of the law and the works that Jas is speaking of that a more reasonable translation would be to use the word “deeds”in 2:14-26. The practice of using “deeds” instead of “works” in Jas has been adopted by the translators of the NIV, liekly for similiar reasons. In this passage of Jas works are good deeds that spring from a living faith, not ritual acts designed to lead to righteousness.
What degree of destitution is implied in “If a brother or sister is naked and lacks daily food ...”? The NRSV translation makes it sound as if the believer in Jas' illustration in v15 is in dire straits when it speaks of nakedness. If this is the case then the response of the fellow believer who comes upon him or her is almost unbelievable. This may be an exaggeration used to heighten the rhetoric. Laws advances another interpretation, that Jas is attempting to portray is a person who is in a state of continual poverty and not someone who is utterly destitute. In this case the person would not be naked but instead be wearing undergarments without an outer garment or tunic. Daily food would be translated instead as food for the day, the range of interpretation being from “food even for that day” to “at that time they have no food for the day”. (Laws 1980:120) A more subtle translation would then be “If a brother or sister is poorly dressed and lacking food for the day ...” Laws suggests scantily dressed but the common usage of scantily has a degree of salaciousness that is not in keeping with the passage. If we use Laws reading then the situation becomes more nuanced and layered.
Dibelius refers to v18 as “... one of the most difficult New Testament passages in general”. (Dibelius 1976:154) One of the factors that makes the interpretation of this passage difficult is that the original Greek manuscripts do not use quotation marks to determine how far the “someone” or interlocutor is speaking. It is obvious that the author is again speaking in v20. Reading backwards v19 is an over the top example of the author's statement in v20. As v19 is a demonstration of how faith without works is worthless it makes most sense that the second part of v18 is spoken by the author and not by the “someone”. (154) Dibelius continues in his arguments to approach this question from a number of viewpoints and in the end decides that only the part of the verse shown in the quotation marks is part of the interlocutor's challenge. (154-158)
In v19 the demons are said to shudder. Shudder is used to denote fear or horror in the LXX, the version of the Bible most scholars agree was used by Jas. In the magical papyri from this time shudder is used in relation to exorcism as an effect that the power of the exorcist has on the demon. The magician is trying to get the demon to shudder as a result of his magical incantations. (Laws 1980:127) The demon is in fear of God because faith in the power of God will bring about destruction.
The NRSV has called the man to whom Jas responds in v20 a “senseless person”. This translation removes some of the vehemence and power that was in the original Greek and lessens the effect of the diatribe. A direct, harsh, response is more in keeping with the Greco-Roman diatribe style of which this verse is an example. (Laws 1980:128) Other scholars have translated this as “braggart”, “empty fellow” and “stupid man” (Dibelius 149; Johnson 241; Laws 119). The NRSV has also translated the second part of the verse as “faith apart from works is barren”. All of the commentators referred to above have instead translated this as “faith apart from works is useless”. This alternate translation is more in line with the original Greek and attempts to retain the flavour of the pun from the Greek which is literally “workless”. (Laws 1980:128)
In v21 the NRSV refers to Abraham as “... our ancestor Abraham”, this would be more properly expressed as “Our father Abraham”. Some scholars suggest that this is Jas' unequivocally claiming the heritage of Judaism and use this to help prove their assertion that the author of the epistle was James the Just, the brother of Jesus. (Johnson 1995:242) Others suggest that this doesn't necessarily hold as Paul claimed Abraham for gentile Christians and that Clement also described Abraham as “our father” in an address to a Christian community .(Laws 1980:133)
Scriptural References and Allusions
The most obvious usage of scripture is the quotation of Gen. 15:6 in v23 where Jas directly quotes from the LXX.. Verse 21 refers to the story of Abraham's faith being tested in Gen. 22 when God asked him to sacrifice his son Issac. Jas' use of these pieces of scripture in this way has created interpretative problems. It appears that what he means is that Abraham was justified by works when he acceded to God's request to sacrifice Issac. This certainly leads to accusations of a theology of righteousness by works. An alternate interpretation is that by quoting Gen. 15:6 Jas is agreeing that Abraham was declared righteous through faith. When he speaks of justification in v21 he is really talking about Abraham affirming and demonstration his faith through his works. This interpretation fits more closely with Jas' central argument. This may be case where in strengthening the polarity of the rhetoric Jas has unintentionally obscured his true intent.
In v25 Jas refers to the story of Rahab the prostitute sheltering Joshua's spies in Jericho in Joshua 2:1-24. Jas is using these two examples to show where people of faith expressed their faith through deeds. This does raise some additional questions. In v22 -23 Abraham is said to be justified by his works in the plural. His willingness to sacrifice Issac is only a single act and the deed was never completed. One possible explanation is that Jas was referring to the tradition of Abraham being a hospitable man and speaking of his multiple acts of hospitality. The Haggadah expanded on the tradition of the trials of Abraham. A number of historical Jewish texts speak of these trials, including the doctrine of the ten trials of Abraham. Through all of these tests, of which the request to sacrifice Issac was the most difficult test, Abraham retained his faith. This line of reasoning suggests that Jas was deeply steeped in Jewish history and tradition. (Dibelius 1976:169). An alternative explanation is that Jas used works in the plural to mirror its usage in the earlier verses. (Laws 1980:135). This is the most reasonable explanation especially when taken in light of Jas' use of the plural for works in his description of the actions of Rahab in sheltering and helping Joshua's spies to escape. This is the only deed demonstrating her faith that is mentioned in the Bible.
Why mention Rahab at all? Rahab lodges the two spies from Joshua so it can be inferred that apart from her profession as a prostitute she provides an example of a hospitable woman to parallel the example of Abraham who is often seen as an innkeeper in Jewish midrash. (Laws 1980:135) She could also have been included to show an example of a pagan who had come to faith in God and demonstrated it through her good deed to Joshua's messengers. If Jas expected his audience to include a mixture of Jews and Gentiles he may have thought it worthwhile to include an example of a faithful person who had some resonance with a Gentile audience. Dibleius remarks that in the genealogy of Jesus found in Matt. 1:5, Rahab is included as one of the descendants of Jesus. It would have been unthinkable for the author of Matthew to have stuck a woman of ill repute into the genealogy of his own accord. When Matthew was written, Jewish tradition had already given Rahab a place of honour as an ancestor of David. He continues to note that in the list of the pious mentioned in 1 Clement the three major examples from the Hebrew Bible are Abraham, Lot and Rahab. (Dibelius 1976:167) The dating for 1 Clement is 80-140 C.E., which is around the time that most scholars believe Jas was written. (Kirby 2006) Lot is lauded for hospitality and piety while both Abraham and Rahab are held up as examples of faith and piety. If a modern reader concludes that because Rahab was a pagan prostitute she would have been seen as a sharp contrast to Abraham they may be mistaken. There is also nothing to preclude the example of Rahab serving a double purpose. She would have been an example of piety and faith to Jewish listeners while serving as an example of a pagan who had seen the light and demonstrated her faith in God through her deeds to any Gentiles who heard Jas' letter read.
The uncertainty of the dating of Jas makes it difficult to determine whether Jas would have had access to the gospel writings. He night also have relied on oral tradition or whatever written materials that may have existed at the time of the letter's composition for his usage of the sayings of Jesus. Wachob suggests that one of the most fascinating features of Jas is the epistle's numerous allusions to the saying of Jesus. (2000:17) Many scholars have suggested that v15 is a possible allusion to Matt. 25:34-41 “... for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you gave me clothing ...”. The similarities between the two verses is too striking to be ignored.
Literary Form
Jas 2:14-16 is an example of classical Greco-Roman rhetorical form called diatribe. In diatribe the speaker begins by engaging the audience with questions, an interlocutor raises objections or offers false conclusions expressed as questions. These are not neutral questions but form a discourse where the teacher condemns the practices and beliefs of opponents while extolling the virtues of the speaker's point of view. The goal is not only to instruct but also to point out the errors of the audience and correct them. (Neyry 1998) Diatribe is also characterized by “vivid and graphical examples, and rhetorical questions”. (Wachob 2000:59) Verse 14 starts out with two rhetorical questions. Jas asks the questions and then offers a vivid example of what he considers to be an example of faith without works. The difficult question is the second one “Can faith save you?” The expectation is that the listener will answer no. Jas has previously stated in 1:21 that salvation comes from the implanted word from God. The caveat is that the hearers of the implanted word can easily deceive themselves, hearing is not sufficient, they must become doers of the word. (1:21-22) The example of the person who hears the word but doesn't act upon it is especially troubling because by calling those in need of help brother and sister Jas makes it clear that they are members of the community, known to the one who speaks to them. This is a much more striking example than the priest and the Levite who ignored the injured man who Jesus spoke about in Lk. 10:30-33. This man offers a pious hope that they will be better off in the future. Laws suggests that this passage be translated as “Go in peace, may you be warm and filled.” (Laws 1980:121) This almost takes the form of a prayer that suggests the man is leaving the care of his community members to God. Jas has already suggested in 1:17 that every generous act comes from God but that pure and undefiled religion requires believers to care for orphans and widows in their distress. Verse 16 ends with a repetition of the original statement to drive home the point. Both Laws and Johnson have rendered the passage in a more striking manner by strengthening the parallelism . Laws begins v14 with “What is the good of it,...” and ends v16 with “... what is the good of it?” Johnson has used “What is the use in it,....” and “... what is the use?” in the same places. (Laws 1980:118; Johnson 1995:236) Jas then completes the first section of his argument with a restatement of his point. He is suggesting that deeds grow out of a true living faith, not that faiths an deeds are separable.
The interlocutor then interjects a puzzling question, “You have faith and I have works”. This seems to be the exact opposite of what would be expected. Jas has just finished a statement about how faith without works is barren or dead. Most scholars offer three possible explanations, the first being that an ally of Jas has taken it upon himself to interject in support of Jas' argument. Scholars generally dismiss this argument because it is unlikely that the author would introduce a new voice and then so quickly dismiss it just to make this one point. In addition the Greek wording is standard usage in the rhetorical diatribe tradition to introduce an opponent. The second option is that the man Jas has attacked as having a dead faith is asserting that he has works different from what James is expecting, perhaps even works of the law. This explanation would require the introduction of a new form of works that isn't explicitly stated or otherwise followed through in the later arguments. The third option is that the “you and I” does not refer specifically to James and an opponent but instead is the expression of two contrasting positions. (Laws 1980:122-124) This option seems to provide the best fit though it is a loose fit at best . Dibelius suggests that what the interlocutor is instead proposing is a complete separation of faith and works which is not the argument Jas is attempting to combat. Jas has simply introduced a contrived opponent who makes a hypothetical statement which is contrary to fact. Jas wants to develop his own argument in contrast to this statement and quickly dismisses the opponent. (Dibelius 1976:156) Both Laws and Dibelius have attempted to resolve this puzzling statement and their results are not wholly satisfying. Either option is equally valid as Jas continues to develop and refine his argument. The interlocutor has played his role and Jas moves on. Jas then continues the attack on his opponent by offering another example of a case where dead faith doesn't lead to salvation and instead leads to destruction when he offers the example of the believing demon. He then insults his opponent when he calls him empty, senseless or stupid and follows up with another rhetorical question that leads into his contrary example of a person of faith who demonstrated that faith through their works. To help drive home the point Jas quotes scripture using Abraham as an illustrative example. Jas then offers another rhetorical question when he offers the example of Rahab as a person who demonstrated her faith through her works. Jas restates his major argument using a final metaphor when he compares the deadness of a body without a soul to the deadness of faith without works.
It must be noted that Jas never argues on the severability of faith and works. His primary argument is that a true living faith will by necessity produce good deeds in the faithful. Good deeds are the visible face of faith in the believer. The vehemence of his argument is a hallmark of the diatribe style. Perhaps one of the reasons Jas' argument is misunderstood and misinterpreted is because most modern readers are unfamiliar with this rhetorical style.
Author and Audience
There is great deal of scholarly debate on the authorship of the epistle. The two major theories are that the letter was written quite early (40-62 CE) and that the author was James the Just, the brother of Christ. The second theory, which is more widely held, is that the epistle is pseudonymous and that it was written later (60-132 CE). A third compromise theory is that the letter was written after James' martyrdom but draws heavily on James' teaching. (Wachob 2000:30) Each of these theories has their proponents and detractors but the lack of any firm evidence to prove or disprove them means that any assertions based on authorship are tenuous at best. The true identity of the author will probably always remain a mystery. Dibelius is a very influential interpreter of James and he further muddies the waters with respect to authorship and audience. Dibelius suggests in his treatise on James that the literary form of the letter is paraenesis. Dibelius defines paraenesis as a “... text which string together admonitions of general ethical content”. (Dibelius 1976:3) Dibelius continues to suggest that this reduces the importance of the author in the enterprise. The author becomes more of a collector and an editor than an author which makes the author's true purpose for writing the document much more difficult to discern. Dibelius suggests that Jas has taken ancient thoughts and admonitions and given them a Christian focus. He further argues that large parts of Jas show no continuity of thought which he uses to advance his argument that Jas is more editor than author. (Dibelius 1976:3-6) This paraenetic characterization of the letter of James also suggests that no information can be gleaned from the letter about the character of the communities to which the letter was addressed, the best we can do is question what sort of Christians Jas expected to read his letter. A number of scholars disagree with Dibelius' assertions, Wachob discusses in great depth what he considers to be problems with Dibelius' definition of paraenesis and how the rhetorical character of Jas is minimized by the paraenetic paradigm. Wachob instead suggests that Jas is a sophisticated rhetorical treatise. (Wachob 2000:36-58)
Laws also disagrees with the suggestion that we cannot discern anything about the communities to which the letter was written. She admits that there is very little that can be asserted with certainty but she believes that the author would have selected material for his letter that held interest both to him and would have been applicable to the communities to which the letter was addressed. Jas would have selected examples that would have had resonance with his audience in order to make his exhortation more effective. It seems safe to assume that the audience would have included a mixture of the rich and the poor. He talks about discrimination at community meetings., and believers being dragged into courts. Jas talks about a community that invites visitors to its meetings. (Laws 1980:7-11) He uses farmers and day labourers in his examples. Jas also has a strong eschatological focus. Many of these same themes are discussed in the letters of Paul. The early Christian communities that Jas was writing to certainly shared many of the characteristics of the communities that Paul was writing to. A mix of socio-economic classes, tensions between the rich and poor members of the community and a need to exhort the community not to fall back into their old pagan ways.
What is lacking in this Jamesan community is the charismatic character that is seen in Paul's communities. Speaking in tongues is not disrupting the community, members gossiping about each other is the concern. The activity of the Holy Spirit isn't mentioned, prophets are wise men of the past, not part of the current reality. Healing is not a spiritual gift but instead performed by the elders of the Church. Teachers are lauded but there is no suggestion that teaching is a spiritual gift. (Laws 1980:32-34) From this description the communities to which James is writing seem very similar and also radically different than the churches to which Paul is writing. Jas was writing to address general concerns in a number of communities as opposed to the specific communities to which Paul's letters were addressed. The more general nature of Jas could explain the lack of more specific problems being mentioned as Paul does. Jas' audience could have been any of the small developing Christian communities. These communities were struggling to keep their religious identity in the face of the Roman Emperor worship and patronage system. They were attempting not to draw too much attention to themselves while practicing their faith. Jas' double minded man of 1:7 could be a reference to someone who is having difficulty giving up his pagan ways. Exact authorship notwithstanding the implied author of the letter is important. James was known to be a pious man. It would not be out of place for him to write a letter to Christian communities encouraging them to pray, practice their faith by good deeds including treating the poor with respect and dignity.
Community Reaction and Response
How did this passage make the community members to which it was addressed feel when they sat down for the first time to hear this letter from James? Is this section of the epistle effective in communicating Jas' message and inspiring his audience? This letter is trying to exhort people to more ethical behaviour, is there enough sugar to help them get down what to some might be a bitter pill? As our community gathers to hear the latest letter that has arrived there is an air of anticipation. Many of them are poor, they live on the margins and getting a letter from afar is the only entertainment they have. They have given up the pagan ceremonies when they became followers of the risen Christ and struggle with trying to get by and to live a life modelled after their Lord and Saviour. By the time we reach this part of the letter they have heard how their faith will be tested and this testing will produce endurance. They must not doubt but ask God for wisdom and their faith will be rewarded. They have been assured that the rich will be brought low and the poor raised up, both of these exhortations illustrated with vivid metaphors from the natural world. They are to resist temptation and not to make excuses if they fall prey to temptation. They are warned that desire leads to sin and death illustrated again by a vivid metaphor. They are warned that they should be quick to listen but think carefully before they speak, especially in anger. They are reminded that salvation comes from God. They are reminded that hearing the word isn't enough, the word produces action. Another metaphor is used to explain this point. They are then reminded to watch what they say and that true faith is expressed through charity to those in need. The letter then shifts to a more rhetorical style with an attack on favouritism. This is the first extended section of the letter and is illustrated with an example that may have occurred in this group of believers, a rich person being welcomed while a poor person is shunted aside. Jas then offers some examples of how the rich oppress the poor. The letter offers a definition of the perfect law which not only affirms the “love your neighbour as yourself” law from Lev. but also equates the act of favouritism that is being discussed as being a transgression of the law. Just before we enter the passage we are studying Jas reminds us that “…judgment with be without mercy to anyone who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment”. (2:13)
Now we enter the second long rhetorical passage of the letter, the audience is primed, another rhetorical question is posed, “What good is it … if you say you have faith but do not have works.” , “Can faith save you?” The audience already knows the answer, God saves through the implanted word. Jas then launches into his illustration of the person of supposed faith and his response to the destitute members of the community. Every person listening can identify with one of the characters in this illustration. Life was hard at the time of the early church and the poorer members of the community could easily have seen themselves as just a step away from the poor brother or sister of the illustration. Likewise a rich member of the assembly might be feeling uncomfortable as they remembered a situation where they dismissed the needs of someone in the community with an empty platitude. Furtive knowing glances would be exchanged. The opponent then interjects his question. Jas replies and demolishes him with the illustration of the faithful demon who is doomed. People in the audience would have been familiar with demon possession, perhaps they had seen an exorcism or had heard the stories of Jesus exorcising demons. Jas then insults his opponent and moves on to the examples of Abraham and Rahab two faithful figures who would be familiar to the members of the assembly. He asks questions and then answers them, advancing and reinforcing his argument. The use of the rhetorical form and the illustration produces a passage that is both entertaining and memorable. Jas has taken another swipe at the rich who ignore their obligation to the poor while reminding all that a faith that is not expressed through good deeds is not a faith they should be proud of. Dead faith is the faith of demons. Living faith is not only expressed through the deeds of great men of history like Abraham but even a harlot that can be commended for the deeds that grew from her faith. Any good teacher knows that illustrating your point with a memorable example will help your audience to remember it later. The more well off members of the group would certainly remember this illustration the next time they were confronted with the situation of someone in the community in need. They would remember the empty platitude of the story and the shuddering demon. The poor members of the community will hear a reinforcement of the message of the previous passage, those who show no mercy will be shown no mercy. The rich who fail to show their faith through works will be judged. This passage has built on what has come before and reinforced Jas' message that real faith is a living faith and those whose faith is dead must beware.
James and Paul
It is impossible to discuss this passage in Jas without referring to the writings of Paul. Many scholars agree that this was passage not written in reaction to Paul's written letters but instead in response to what others had said Paul was preaching. Paul was also fearful that his teaching on justification by faith alone would be used to excuse immorality and promiscuity. James is more concerned in this passage with quietism, that contemplation of God and divine things is enough and action is not required. (Laws 1980:132) As was mentioned earlier Paul also exhorts his readers to good works even when he is stating that grace is all that is required, “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God-- not the result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are what he has made us, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand to be our way of life.” (Ep:2 8-10) What is missing in Paul is the assertion that faith without works is not a saving faith. Johnson suggests that Paul and James are more in agreement than first appears citing Gal 5:6 “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love.” and “For he will render to every man according to his works” (Rom 2:6) as examples of where Paul suggests deeds are important. (Johnson 1995:61) He further suggests that Paul and Jas are not speaking to each other at all, that both authors use language consistently internal to their writing but are not necessarily speaking about the same things. Instead they are addressing specific concerns of each of the authors. They use the same words in different ways. They both use Abraham to prove their points because they were from a first century Jewish midrashic tradition where Abraham was often used. (Johnson 1995:63-64, 250)
Dibelius also addresses the Paul vs. James question by pointing out that neither Paul nor Jas have defined faith. In Paul we have relatively large body of work in comparison to only one short letter from Jas. Paul has proposed a novel and grand view of faith while Jas is intent on pointing out and correcting a type of faith which he sees as being fruitless. Faith is multifaceted, a supernatural reality that is tied in with Paul's experience of his conversion from a persecutor to a proponent of Jesus Christ as the Messiah. Faith is also the acceptance of the divine decree that justifies the sinner through the death of Christ. Faith is the inner process that occurs when we hear the preaching of salvation and proclaim that Jesus is Lord. Faith is also a descriptor for membership in a community of Christians. In Paul's writing faith is a complex and nuanced concept. The question then becomes what does Jas mean when he speaks of faith? Dibelius argues that Jas is speaking of the faith that describes membership in a Christian community. Jas is not speaking from a dogmatic point of view but is instead exhorting Christians to practice their Christianity. To Jas works are not the works of Jewish law such as circumcision that Paul was preaching against but good deeds. Jas was not writing directly against Paul but in response to worries he had about the ideas of Paul being misinterpreted. Most Christians have not had the soul shaking experiences that Paul had. They haven't suffered the persecution, opposition and ecstatic experiences that Paul did. Jas writes for Christians who would be perplexed by Paul, they have found their God without the ecstatic experiences that characterized Paul's life. These Christian's instinctively understand that a life of faith without a commitment to good deeds is lacking and unsatisfying. (Dibelius 1976:175-180) James has become “... the spokesman for a circle of Christians whose Christianity found its affirmative expression in good conduct which was religiously motivated”. (180)
When one looks at Jas from this point of view it is not surprising that it is difficult to reconcile Jas and Paul. Just as a church needs visionaries and mystics who burn with evangelical fervour it also needs pastors and teachers like Jas who are willing to slog through the daily grind with hope and faith to produce incremental small improvements in the situation. This is not too suggest that Paul was not an extremely competent teacher and preacher, only that the body of work we have from him also highlights his mystical character. We can only draw our picture based on the material we have so our portrait of James is a pencil sketch as opposed to the more fully realized painting we have of Paul. In the end it may not be possible to reconcile Jas and Paul on all points but they are certainly closer together than they might first appear.
James and Luther
Just as it is impossible to discuss this passage in Jas without discussing its relationship to Paul it is equally impossible to discuss this verse without discussing the effect of Luther's comments and interpretations of Jas. Luther cast a long shadow over the study of James, he is mentioned in almost every commentary on James. Johnson argues that Luther has had such an enormous influence on historical-critical model that the same judgements on James have held sway over a large part of the discipline. He offers the work of F.C. Baur as an example of a scholar whose works has been profoundly shaped by Luther's work (Johnson 1995:125)
The one quote that anyone who has had a passing acquaintance with the bible has heard is from Luther's 1522 Preface to the New Testament. In the preface he states that “St. James' epistle is really an epistle of straw, compared to these others, for it has nothing of the nature of the gospel about it”. (Luther's Works v35 362) This is generally misquoted as “Luther said James is an epistle of straw”. When read in context Luther is comparing James to John, 1 John, and the works of Paul and not commenting on James in the abstract. Just previous to his statement about James Luther states “Therefore John's Gospel is the one, fine, true, and chief gospel, and is far, far to be preferred over the other three and placed high above them.” (362) It is clear that in this preface Luther was not shy about commenting on his opinion on the books of the Bible and their relative worth. It is also important to note that this section of the preface was omitted in any editions of the complete bible and in the New Testament published after 1534. The footnote in Luther's Works v35 suggests this was due to Luther wishing to normalize the New Testament preface texts to the those of the later Old Testament books and not as a result of criticism from other scholars. (LW v35:358, n.5) An additional footnote suggests that Luther may have been particularly harsh in his assessment of James as a reaction to the excessive praise of James by Karlstadt. (LW v35:362, n.11) Whatever the reason Luther decided not to continue to refer to James as an Epistle of straw in his bible after 1534. In his preface to the Epistle of St. James and St. Jude, Luther comments that he considers James to be a “good book” then continues on to question its apostolicity. Though his critique is based more on religious arguments than a more modern methodology Luther also questioned the apostolicity of Hebrews, Jude and Revelation. Luther was after all a theologian and scholar and was not shy about expressing his scholarly opinion. It is interesting that Luther's comment on the book that James appears to have collected some sayings and then thrown them together in a chaotic manner sounds very similar to Dibelius' description of paraenesis. Another theory Luther offers is that Jas was written based on the preaching of James the Just by one of James' followers. This theory is still supported by some scholars.
The other negative comment by Luther than is quite inflammatory is the comment Luther is purported to have made in one of his Table Talks in 1542. Luther is supposed to have said “We should throw the Epistle of James out of this school, for it doesn't amount to much”, along with a few more very negative assessments. (Stoutenburg 1982:45) Stoutenburg suggests that the validity of the recording of these informal discussions can be called into question and that many scholars challenge the authenticity of these comments. The groups at these Table Talks are referred to as a “promiscuous crowd” and the scene is described as a “great and constant disturbance”. (46-47)
Luther referred to James one hundred and sixty six times between 1513 and 1544 based on references in the American version of Luther's Works. (115-124) More importantly Luther used James ninety-nine times in his commentaries to clarify, support and interpret other scripture. (51) Luther also deals with reconciling faith and works a number of times and is surprised that some of his readers had difficulty doing so. (100) In none of these cases does Luther suggest that James should be ignored but instead uses Jas as he does other books in the Bible to interpret other scripture passages. Luther never stated that James was not canonical, doubted the authority of the text and near the end of his life stated that he was accustomed to interpreting and dealing with James as he did with any other scripture. (108) He doubted that Jas was written by James the Just but then so do many modern theologians.
In his lecture on Rom. 3:20 Luther reconciles Paul and James. He makes a distinction between “works of the law” and works that arise out of faith. Luther maintains that works of faith only arise after one is justified. Luther ends his argument by stating “Therefore when the blessed James and the apostle say that man is justified by works, they are disputing the false conception of those who contend that a faith without its works would be sufficient. However, the apostle does not say that faith is without its characteristic works – for then it would be no faith at all, since ‘activity reveals the nature of a thing' according to philosophers – but that it justifies without the works of the Law. Therefore justification does not require the works of the Law; but it does require a living faith, which performs its works”. (Plass 1959:720-721) In 1722, the same year he made his epistle of straw comment Luther suggests that what James means in 2:26 when he speaks of dead faith is “… the fact that works do not follow is a certain sign that there is no faith, but a dead thought and dream, which people falsely call faith.” (1232) Luther did not change his mind later on in his life. In 1536 in his Disputation Concerning Justification Luther produced what Stoutenburg (1982:103) considers “one of the finest exegesis of James 2:17-16 printed”. Luther agrees that justification is effective without works but does not agree that faith is without works. A faith that lacks works is in not an effective but a false faith. True faith does not exist without works.
Luther's biggest problem with the Epistle of James was what he considered to be its misinterpretation by his opponents. Luther vowed to destroy any interpretation of James that Luther believed did not agree with what Luther considered to be the proper interpretation. (105) Luther believed that the righteousness and certainty of salvation that we receive as a free gift from God leads us to joyfully serve God by joyfully serving our neighbour. This service comes from our faith. If these good works come from out faith their existence is the basic for knowing we have faith. We need to have this tool for identifying faith because not all faith is real. What distinguishes real faith from false faith is the work of the “new obedience” (Althaus 1966:247) to God that grows out of the faithful persons love and gratitude. God's justifying forgiveness is partially dependent on us taking up the battle against the flesh. If we continue in gross sins, then we are not Christians and our salvation is not assured. (Althaus 1966:246-247)
Luther addressed Jas in an academic manner, he did not avoiding using Jas in his exegesis, he had no problems reconciling it with Paul and agreed with Jas assertion in 2:14-26 that true faith produces good works. Luther did disagree with Jas' exegetical use of Abraham in 2:14-26 but this did not prevent him from continuing in dialog with Jas and his ideas. He appreciated the subtly in Paul and Jas differing usage of the word works and the distinction between “works of the Law” and good deeds that spring from a true faith. Luther's negative assessment of Jas is not as clear cut as it first seems. Many have ignored Luther's positive usage of Jas throughout his theological career and improper assessed Luther's viewpoint on the epistle.
Conclusion
Up until this point no comment has been made on Jas' statement that Abraham was called the friend of God. This statement occurs right after Jas has used Abraham as an example of someone who's works demonstrated their faith. Why use the term friend of God? This simple statement encapsulates all the Jas is trying to say in this passage. When good deeds follow from faith we become friends of God. God and Jesus may be our Lord and Saviour but they are also our friends. True friendship can be elusive but a true friend will put up with inconvenience and adversity to help in a time of need. A true friend doesn't ask why or require long explanations but is instead there when needed to offer a helping hand, a shoulder to cry on in times of sorrow. A friend is there to celebrate in times of joy, a friend is someone we enjoy spending time with. Friends sometime quarrel but true friendship survives times of tension and the bond between friends is often strengthened by these times of tension. Friends share according to their ability and don't keep a balance sheet of who did what for who and when. What friendship can't survive is indifference.
Jas wants everyone to be friends of God and what he is preaching against in this passage is indifference. He isn't trying to say that salvation doesn't occur without work but instead that when through faith we understand how much God loves us works are sure to follow. Many scholars are now revaluating long held interpretation of New Testament biblical texts by looking at these texts as examples of the Greco-Roman rhetorical tradition. The diatribe and Paul's Letter to the Romans by SK Stowers is one often cited example. The sophistication of the argument may be obscured or misinterpreted if the forms of this tradition are not taken into account. The combative and argument nature of 2:14-26 is then seen as a example of Jas' intolerance and officious, legalistic nature which distorts the interpretation.
Jas like Paul was expecting the parousia and this would have heightened his concern that those he was writing to behave in an ethical and loving manner to help spread the word of salvation through Christ to as many as possible. Christians helping each other and showing a compassionate and caring face to the world would an effective tool to assist in the spread of the Gospel. Jas cares about the small struggling communities of Jesus followers and wants to offer them encouragement and guidance in how best to practice their faith.
Dietrich Bonhoeffer is an example of a person of faith whose faith was expressed in good deeds. Though he does not quote from James 2:14-26 in his book The Cost of Discipleship one cannot help but hear echoes of Jas in his discussion of the difference between cheap and costly grace. When Bonhoeffer speaks of Luther realizing the grace he had received “…was costly, for, so far from dispensing him from good works, it meant that he must take the call to discipleship more seriously than before.” (41) It's almost impossible not to think of Jas' call to avoid dead faith when Bonehoeffer speaks of the difference between cheap and costly grace.
Jas does not ask us to perform works to ensure that we are justified but instead challenges believers to let faith spring forth and show the world that God's love does make a difference.
References
Althaus, Paul. 1966. The Theology of Martin Luther. Philadelphia: Fortress Press
Bachmann, E. Theodore (ed). 1960. Luther's Works. Philadelphia: Muhlenburg Press.
Bonhoeffer, Dietrich. 1959. The Cost of Discipleship. Alva. SCM Press
Dibelius, Martin. 1976. James: A Commentary on the Epistle of James. Philadelphia: Fortress Press
Johnson, Luke. 1995. The Anchor Bible: The Letter of James. New York: Doubleday
Kirby, Peter. 2006. "First Clement." Early Christian Writings. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/1clement.html checked 25 Mar. 2006
Laws, Sophie. 1980. A Commentary on the Epistle of James. London: Adam and Charles Black
Neyrey, Jerome. 1998. “Questions, Chreai, and Challenges to Honor. The Interface of Rhetoric and Culture in Mark's Gospel.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 60:657-81. http://www.nd.edu/~jneyrey1/questions.html checked 25 Mar. 2006
Plass, Edward. 1959. What Luther Says An Anthology. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House
Stoutenburg, Dennis. 1982. Martin Luther's Exegetical Use of the Epistle of St. James: Toward an Understanding of Luther's Viewpoint of the “Epistle of Straw”. M.A. Thesis, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School
Wachob, Wesley. 2000. The Voice of Jesus in the social rhetoric of James. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.