← Back to sermon library

Chapter 2, James chapter 2. We're going to try and finish 
up that section in verses 14 to 26. Last week we looked at 
verses 14 to 17, so God willing this evening we'll finish up 
18 to 26. I'll just begin reading in James 2 at verse 14. What 
does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith 
but does not have works? Can that faith save him? If a 
brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, and 
one of you says to them, Depart in peace, be warmed and filled, 
but you do not give them the things which are needed for the 
body, what does it profit? Thus also faith by itself, if 
it does not have works, is dead. But someone will say, you have 
faith and I have works. Show me your faith without your 
works and I will show you my faith by my works. You believe 
that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons 
believe and tremble. But do you want to know, O foolish 
man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our 
father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the 
altar? Do you see that faith was working together with his 
works, and by works faith was made perfect? And the Scripture 
was fulfilled, which says, Abraham believed God, and it was accounted 
to him for righteousness, and he was called the friend of God. 
You see then that a man is justified by works and not by faith only. Likewise was not Rahab the harlot 
also justified by works when she received the messengers and 
sent them out another way. For as the body without the spirit 
is dead, so faith without works is dead also. Amen. Well, let us seek God's help. 
Father, we thank you for this passage of Scripture. We just 
pray for the ministry of the Holy Spirit to help us to understand, 
help us to appropriate what James is speaking to here, and help 
us to see he is not putting forth an alternate way of salvation. He is not contradictory to the 
Apostle Paul. that cause us to reflect upon 
the unity of Scripture, the blessed harmony that we find in the writers 
of Scripture. We would ask that you would just 
forgive us again for our sins and our transgressions, help 
us to take away from this study James's point That if we profess 
faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, the only saving faith is that 
which is accompanied with all other saving graces. And that 
faith must lead to and produce good works. Help us in this, 
God. Help us to engage in the almsgiving 
that Jesus speaks to in Matthew 6. Help us to put into practice 
the pure and undefiled religion. that James speaks to in chapter 
1, grant us grace, Lord God, not to just be empty professors, 
but to be those who indeed have a saving faith in our Lord Jesus 
that fleshes itself out in the way that we conduct ourselves. 
And we would pray these things through Jesus Christ, our Lord. 
Amen. Last week I introduced the sermon 
basically highlighting the various difficulties that persons have 
run into with reference to this particular passage of Scripture. 
The Apostle Paul, of course, insisting that we are justified 
by faith only, and then James says in verse 24, you see then 
that a man is justified by works and not by faith only. I cited Martin Luther where he 
said the epistle of James gives us much trouble. For the papists 
embrace it alone and leave out all the rest. If they will not 
admit my interpretations, then I shall also make rubble of it. 
I almost feel like throwing Jimmy into the stove." I would suggest 
that Martin Luther didn't have a good understanding of James. 
I suggest that he did not harmonize the two brothers adequately. That's kind of a funny thing, 
I want to throw Jimmy into the stove. Really a bad thing for 
Luther to say, but he was quite a colorful figure in the way 
that he said certain things. Certainly brings a smile to one's 
face. But that idea that we should labor, and I think it's the task 
of preaching, it's the task of systematic theology, to harmonize 
and to show the consistency of Scripture. I think John Owen 
is on the right track when he says, for his, James, whole inquiry 
in 14 to 26 is after the nature of that faith whereby we are 
justified. So James is not telling us that 
what Paul is saying is wrong. James is simply emphasizing, 
based on his particular context, the necessity of saving faith. Saving faith, as our confession 
states, is always accompanied with all other saving grace. So it's not a dead faith, but 
it worketh through love. And that is the emphasis of James 
in this particular section. We rehearsed a few items last 
week in terms of some hermeneutical helps or interpretative helps 
in harmonizing James and Paul. Paul, in the first place, the 
unity of the Scripture. The Holy Spirit's not going to 
have Paul write one thing and James write another thing. There 
is a unity of Scripture. As well, James' doctrine of salvation 
is exactly Pauline. It is precisely Paul's doctrine 
of salvation. Notice in James 1.18, he says, 
of his own will he brought us forth by the word of truth that 
we might be a kind of first fruits of his creatures. That is sovereign 
grace. That is election. That is effectual 
call. That is the power of God to bring 
sinners out of darkness, to use a Petrine expression, into marvelous 
light. So, Peter, James, Paul, they're 
all consistent that salvation is by God's grace alone, and 
as well, it is through faith alone. James emphasizes that 
in James 2.1. My brethren, do not hold the 
faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with partiality. One of the arguments as to why 
we ought not to show partiality is because of God's grace demonstrated 
to the poor. Notice in 2.5, has God not chosen 
the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the 
kingdom? God did not choose them because 
they were rich in faith. God chose them so that they would 
be rich in faith. Again, it sounds very similar 
to what we have in Ephesians chapter 1. Paul talks about sovereign 
election. He talks about the graces of 
faith and repentance, and James certainly agrees. As well, we 
ought to consider the immediate context. James is dealing with 
what appears to be a people that had professed saving faith in 
Christ, but were not bridling their tongues. They had professed 
saving faith in Christ, but they were not visiting orphans and 
widows in their distress. They had professed saving faith 
in Christ, but they were not keeping themselves unspotted 
from the world. They had professed faith in Christ, 
but they were showing partiality in the corporate gatherings of 
God's people. James's point is obvious. He is dealing with deadbeat professors. Paul is dealing with this idea 
that we are saved by grace, or we are saved rather by faith, 
plus works. He's saying, no, it's by grace 
alone through faith alone. James is dealing with the people 
who say they have that faith, and yet they are empty professors. The difference in terms of audience 
ought to be appreciated. And then I asked you to keep 
in mind our confessional statement concerning faith. It says, faith 
thus receiving and resting on Christ and His righteousness 
is the alone instrument of justification. Yet it is not alone in the person 
justified, but is ever accompanied with all other saving graces 
and is no dead faith but worketh by love," as Calvin says, with 
reference to their different purposes or focus. Calvin says 
Paul means by it, justification, the gratuitous imputation of 
righteousness before the tribunal of God. And James, the manifestation 
of righteousness by the conduct and that before men. So Paul deals with our justification 
before God, which is grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ 
alone. James uses the word justification 
in a different sense. It is the manifestation, the 
declaration, the evidence that we have indeed come to Christ, 
that we have indeed believed the gospel. John Owen says, James 
doth not at all inquire or determine how a sinner is justified before 
God, but how professors of the gospel can prove or demonstrate 
that they are so, and that they do not deceive themselves by 
trusting unto a lifeless and barren faith. And John Gill, 
the apostle Paul, speaks of justification before God, and James speaks 
of it as it is known, by its fruits unto men. I think if you 
keep those helps in your mind and in your heart, James 2, 14-26 
makes perfect sense, and there ought never to be a temptation 
for any of us to throw Jimmy into the stove, but to hold on 
to it, to pray it in, and to seek by the grace of God to apply 
it. As I said last week, we don't 
want to blunt James' sword. The emphasis in 17, 20, 24, 26 
is that if you profess faith in Christ, that faith that is 
indeed saving will always result in good works. Now, there's certain 
exceptions. John Gill highlights elect infants, 
dying in infancy, the thief on the cross. Certainly there are 
exceptions. There were not instances or opportunities 
for those persons to do good works. Not so for us. We have professed the saving 
faith, so it is our duty to bridle the tongue, just to use the examples 
in the context. It is our duty to visit orphans 
and widows in their distress. It is our duty to pursue internal 
sanctity, thus keep oneself unspotted from the world. It is our duty 
to not be partial in the worship of God, not to show that partiality, 
even not in the worship of God. We ought to be no respecters 
of persons. So we profess true and saving 
faith. There ought to be effects. There 
ought to be consequences. In short, there ought to be fruit. 
That's James' point, a point elsewhere made by the Apostle 
Paul in his epistles. But let's go back to our text. 
Notice, just by way of reminder, verse 14. James introduces here 
the specifics of his argument. He says, what does it profit 
my brethren if someone says he has faith but does not have works? So James is dealing with a particular 
type, a particular species, a particular kind of faith. It is a profession 
of faith, but there are no corresponding works, or rather, resulting works. And that's why he says at the 
end of verse 14, and it is literally, can that faith save him? That species, that type, that 
particular kind. Certainly we know that faith 
does save. We are saved by grace through 
faith, according to Ephesians 2, 8 to 10. But James is not 
dealing here with that kind of faith. He is dealing with this 
profession of a faith that does not have works. That controls 
the entirety of his discussion here. You've got to keep that 
in mind, so that when we get to, say, verse 18, and he says, 
someone will say, you have faith and I have works. The and I have 
works there is not a works versus faith. In the context, the works 
here are those works that result from faith. So, when he says, 
you have faith, he is talking about the 14a type of faith, 
that profession, but there is no consequent good works as a 
result. So, we need to understand that. 
So, let's look at first the challenge posed to those with false faith 
in verses 18 to 20, and then the appeal to Old Testament examples 
concerning true faith in verses 21 to 26. first the challenge 
presented in verse 18. Now this someone is very hard 
to identify. This someone is very hard to 
nail down. Some have, you know, alleged 
that it was Paul, some have alleged that it's James just making someone 
up. I think it's a rhetorical device wherein James is showing 
that those who possess genuine faith are now asking those who 
have a faith without works to show or to produce the evidence 
or the result. That's the someone in the passage. 
Again, very difficult to understand or to identify who this someone 
is. Most likely a true believer challenging one with false faith. 
The idea is that someone says, you have faith and I have works. 
In context, as I said, this isn't faith versus works, but false 
faith, the non-accompanied-with-all-other-saving-graces type, verse 14a, versus true 
faith. You see the essence of the argument. The true believer says to the 
false professor, you have faith and I have works. Again, not 
I have works as a means by which I'm going to enter into heaven. 
I have works that are the result of, the consequence of, the effect 
of my faith. You have faith, I have works. Now note, show me your faith 
without your works and I will show you my faith by my works. Someone here asks to see a demonstration 
of the person's faith without works. And essentially he says 
you can't do it. This all fits in with the larger 
context, the point being very simply that true saving faith 
is always accompanied with all other saving graces, that when 
a man, a woman, a boy, or a girl believes the gospel of our Lord 
Jesus Christ, good works will always result. Now, they won't 
be the good works, say, of, you know, the Apostle Paul or of 
James himself. James was noted to be a very 
godly and a righteous man. But they ought to be on sort 
of an upward trajectory. We ought to be pursuing these 
things. Doesn't Jesus emphasize this several times in the Gospel 
of Matthew? Let your light so shine before 
men that they see what? That they see your good works 
and give glory to God. The whole emphasis in Matthew 
25 at the end. He who has done these things, 
for the least of these my brethren has done them unto me. And in 
the context, it's good works, clothing those who are naked, 
visiting those who are in prison, visiting those who are sick, 
ministering to the needs of God's people, the least of these, my 
brethren. So the person here says, you have faith, I have 
works, show me your faith. Without your works, I will show 
you my faith by my works. That's the reality in the context. It is works that demonstrate, 
highlight, validate, confirm the existence of faith. Now, 
the reverse is not necessarily the case. Somebody can have good 
works and not have good or true faith. We've got to make sure 
we don't invert this. Just because somebody goes out 
and does a nice thing doesn't necessarily mean they're a believer. 
In fact, at times, unbelievers show us up in terms of practical 
sort of good deeds. Now, we'd have to go back and 
define what a true good work is. A good work ultimately is 
for the glory of God, for His honor, and for His name. But 
there are persons out in this world that do nice things. They 
do good deeds. That doesn't mean that they necessarily 
have faith. But when we have faith, the argument 
of James and the argument of Paul in Ephesians 2.10 is that 
good works necessarily follow as a result. John Gill says, 
though works may deceive and do not infallibly prove the truth 
of faith, yet it is certain that where they are not, that persons 
live in a continued course of sinning, there cannot be true 
faith. Matthew Poole says the apostles' 
meaning only is that wherever true faith is, there good works 
will certainly be. That's the essence of the challenge 
posed by the believer to those with a false faith or an untrue 
faith. Now notice the reproof in verse 
19. Still under the head, the challenge 
posed to those with false faith, verses 18 to 20. We see the challenge 
presented, verse 18, the reproof given in verse 19. He says, you 
believe that there is one God, you do well. Now, brethren, in 
the context, this commendation has to be ironic. Because in 
verse 20, he's going to say, foolish man, empty-headed man, 
vain man. So when he says, you believe 
that there is one God, you do well. Sort of a tongue-in-cheek, 
ironic statement. Sort of a thing to say, well, 
you know, you make this profession that there is one God. Some commentators 
say that entails the entire articles of the Christian faith. You know, 
I don't know specifically what all is involved here. It seems 
to have in the backdrop the Shema in Deuteronomy 6-4, hero Israel, 
the Lord our God, the Lord is one. And you shall love the Lord 
your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength." But 
with reference to this particular section, James is saying, the 
one posing the challenge is saying, you believe that there is one 
God. You do well. Now, notice he recognizes demon 
faith. He says, even the demons believe 
and tremble. Again, what is it that the demons 
believe? Is it all the articles of faith? 
Is it just monotheism? Is it whatever the case is? The 
bottom line that James is highlighting is this. The demons make a profession. Well, I don't think they make 
a profession, but they entertain notionally the same sort of thing 
that James' audience does. At least the demons tremble. I think that's the point. In other words, you make a profession 
of faith that there is this one God. You make a profession of 
faith that Christ is the way to this one God. You make a profession 
of faith that the Christian religion is in fact true. But it doesn't 
affect you one bit. Not only are you not, bridling 
the tongue, not only are you not visiting orphans and widows 
in their distress and keeping yourself unspotted from the world, 
not only are you not holding the faith with impartiality, 
but you don't even tremble at the thought of this God. At least 
the demons have this going for them. In the context, it is to 
underscore and highlight the emptiness and the futility of 
the verse 14a type faith. Someone says he has faith, but 
he does not have works. You are no better than a demon. 
You are no better in terms of your status before God than those 
diabolical wretches of the underworld. You are along the same lines, 
and yet they at least tremble at the thought of this one God. John Gill, or Calvin rather, 
says, the devil trembles, he says, at the mention of God's 
name. Because when he acknowledges 
his own judge, he is filled with fear of him. He then who despises 
an acknowledged God is much worse. Calvin says you're worse than 
the demons if you don't tremble, you don't bridle the tongue, 
you don't visit orphans and widows in their distress. You hold the 
same faith that there is this one God, but it doesn't move 
you. It doesn't affect you. It is 
not accompanied with all other saving graces. He's not saying 
demons go to heaven. He's not saying demons sing praises 
to God. He's not saying that demons have 
enjoyed salvation. He's saying that based on the 
information they have, it at least evokes a trembling from 
them. But James' audience doesn't even 
tremble. And I think we can bring that home to our own generation 
and to our own day and age. There's a whole host of people 
that say, well, yeah, I'm a Christian. In fact, I think if you polled 
the groups in Canada, we would probably be considered a Christian 
nation. You've probably heard that before. 
We're a Christian nation, or the United States is a Christian 
nation. How in the world could a Christian 
nation engage in a million abortions a year? How in the world could 
a Christian nation engage in 100,000 abortions a year here 
in Canada? How in the world could a Christian 
nation authorize euthanasia? How in the world could a Christian 
nation openly promote sodomy? You see, we have a whole host 
of 14-A type people surrounding us. We have faith. We've said 
Jesus. We walked an aisle. We signed 
a card. When every eye was closed and 
every head was bowed, we shot up our hand. But you don't have 
works. You don't have fruit. You don't 
bridle your tongue. You gossip. You lie. You slander. You cheat. You don't visit orphans 
and widows in their distress. You don't keep yourself unspotted 
from the world. You look just like everybody 
else in the world. You don't engage in the worship 
of God with impartiality. Your churches are cliquish. People 
peel off together, and instead of having one sort of body of 
Christ, we've got these guys, we've got these guys, we've got 
these guys. That ought not to be, brethren. If 1 to 13 tells 
us anything in James chapter 2, we ought not to have white 
churches or black churches or rich churches or poor churches. We ought to have churches. And 
in those churches, we ought to love each other. not just those 
in our particular peer group, not just those who relate to 
us in a way that we enjoy, but we ought to go out of our way 
to engage in a harmony of the body, a unity of the body. You 
see, James is dealing with a very similar situation that we are 
dealing with today. You get people who go to church. 
You get people who say, yes, I'm a Christian. You get people 
who agree that Christianity is the right or true religion. There's 
no works. There's no fruit. There's no 
demonstrable evidence. James says, at least the demons 
who acknowledge these things tremble at the thought of God 
the judge. We've got a whole host of people 
that don't even tremble. In fact, the idea, the conception 
of the fear of God is mocked. We're not supposed to fear God. 
He's our big buddy. He's our big pal. I mean, Daniel 
1 has been put into service as a weight loss program by Rick 
Warren. I mean, that's the lengths to 
which we have devolved. If you get Daniel 1 as a means 
by which you ought to go out and lose weight, you're misreading 
Daniel 1. Now, by all means, go out and 
lose weight, but don't justify it based on Daniel's diet plan. We live in a dark age. As much as there are good things 
in terms of reform theology, in terms of great expositional 
preaching, we still live in a context very similar to what James is 
dealing with. We got people who profess the 
true religion. They not only don't fear, but 
they're pretty much being told that to fear God is an Old Testament, 
antiquated concept. It's intriguing because in Hebrews 
chapter 12, we are told to fear God because God is a consuming 
fire. That's James's point. The demons 
understand these things and they tremble. Gil says, wherefore 
it follows that a bare historical faith will not profit and cannot 
save any. A man may have all faith of this 
kind and be damned, and therefore it is not to be boasted of nor 
trusted to. Now note the assertion in verse 
20. It's very similar to what you see in verse 17. Again here 
in verse 20, verse 24, and verse 26. This is the constant refrain, 
said in a bit of a different way each time, but the emphasis 
and the point is the same. Notice in 17, thus also faith 
by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. Verse 20, but 
do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works 
is dead? Verse 24, you see then that a man is justified by works 
and not by faith only. Verse 26, for as the body without 
the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also. That's 
James' point. The type, the species, the kind, 
the variety of faith is the 14A faith he's dealing with. Someone 
says he has faith, but he doesn't have works. That's dead. It's 
false. It's fake. It's not genuine. 
It is not legitimate. True saving faith is always accompanied 
with all other saving graces. It's not a dead faith. It worketh 
by love. Galatians 5, 6. A Pauline passage. You see the harmony and the unity 
between these two brothers. Notice that assertion indicates 
the same sort of thing in this passage that we have seen throughout. 
And he uses pretty sharp words, but do you want to know, oh foolish 
man, empty-headed man, vain man. We're not supposed to commend 
people who say, well I'm a believer but I don't have any words. I'm 
a believer but I don't have any fruit. I'm a believer, but I 
don't really get into all that sort of practical stuff. I'm 
a believer, and I don't need to go to church, or I'm a believer, 
but I don't need to help people in the church. I'm a believer, 
but I don't need to give money. I'm a believer, but I don't need 
to do all that sort of thing. We don't kind of fawn on them 
and say, well, it's a good thing you're a believer. Let's just 
be one of those carnal sorts, and that's OK. No, they're fools. See, it's a foolish thing to 
imbibe the idea that somehow saving faith is just this ascent 
in the sense that there is no faith that is accompanied with 
all other saving graces. this notional, this idea, this 
sort of a nod toward Christianity, and somehow think that that's 
what is in view. I'm not suggesting there's more 
to faith in terms of, I've got to go out and climb a mountain, 
or I've got to go out and shimmy up a pole, or I've got to go 
out and live in the wilderness. I'm not suggesting that. Truth-saving 
faith is to believe the propositions, the truth of the gospel. When 
that saving faith is present, however, it will always be accompanied 
with all other saving graces. And those who do not have all 
those other saving graces have not true faith. And instead of 
coddling them, and instead of creating a category for them, 
perhaps we should say to them, you're a foolish man. You actually 
think that the type of faith that you profess is the legitimate 
article, the genuine article? You actually think that Jesus 
was kidding when He emphasized good works? You actually think 
that James was kidding when he emphasized good works? Do you 
think that the prophets, when they came to sue Israel for their 
wicked violations of the Decalogue, were kidding? Do you think they 
just, you know, really didn't mean that they should not commit 
adultery, they should not commit murder, they should not steal? 
No, the scriptures throughout tell us that when a man believes 
the truth as it is in Jesus, that affects him. It fleshes 
itself out. There's this head, heart, hand 
context that we find in the scripture. And James is condemning that 
variety that does not have works. Again, one more quote from Owen. 
The reason I'm quoting these guys is just so you don't think 
I've come to make, you know, made this up. And there's some 
tricky stuff in here, I'm not going to kid you. You may not 
get all the satisfactory answers that you want when we're done 
tonight, because it's tricky. Not tricky in terms of what does 
it mean, I think it's crystal clear, but some of the grammar 
and some of the things and some of the way that James writes 
or says certain things, it takes better men than I to get in and 
unravel all of the intricacies. But I love what Owen writes here. 
He says, he doth not direct any how they may be justified before 
God, but convinces some that they are not justified by trusting 
unto such a dead faith. That's his point. He's not telling 
here. This isn't an evangelistic plea. Okay, here's how you get 
right with God. This is a pastoral rebuke. You 
see the difference? Evangelistic appeal. When a preacher 
is conscious that there's a whole host of sinners out there, what 
does he do? He makes an evangelistic appeal. 
He preaches the gospel. He sets forth Christ. He emphasizes 
grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. He says, come 
to the Savior. Be reconciled unto God. But in 
a pastoral rebuke, James is dealing with a people that have made 
a profession, but there is no consequent good works. There 
is no fruits as a fact. And so Owen goes on to say, he 
declares the only way whereby any man may really evidence and 
manifest that he is so justified indeed. And here's what I love 
about this particular quote. This design of his, talking about 
James's point in the context, this design of his is so plain 
as nothing can be more evident. I agree with Owen there. Luther 
was wrong, absolutely, positively wrong for ever having the idea 
to throw Jimmy into the stove. He should have never said such 
a thing. Now, I know this is a bit of Monday morning quarterbacking, 
but I'd say it to him if he were right here. Don't try to yell 
at me and smack me around or something like that. He was a 
colorful sort of fellow. As Truman said, he was the Donald 
Trump of the 15th century. This design of his is so plain 
as nothing," I'm sorry, 16th century, this design of his is 
so plain as nothing can be more evident. And they miss the whole 
scope of the apostle who observe it not in their expositions of 
the context. If you learn anything in our 
exposition of 14 to 26 at all, learn. Context is king. Context is paramount. If you 
wrench James 2.24 out of the context and set it next to Romans 
3.28 and say, see, there are contradictions in the Bible. 
You will never make advances as an exegete. You gotta deal 
with it in its context. You gotta see what his scope 
is. You gotta understand who the audience is. You gotta see 
what he's doing. So that's the challenge posed 
to those with false faith. Let's look finally quickly at 
the appeal to Old Testament examples concerning true faith. I'm sorry, 
that might have been a lie that quickly. It's not going to be 
longer than a half hour, but it's probably not going to be 
shorter than five minutes, so stick with me. Verses 21 to 26, 
the appeal to Old Testament examples concerning true faith. In the 
first instance, we have the example of Abraham. in verses 21 to 24, 
and then we have the example of Rahab in verse 25. But again, 
I think this shows harmony with Paul. Paul's use of Abraham in 
Romans chapter 4 and in Galatians chapter 3. And then if Paul wrote 
Hebrews, which many of us are convinced that he did, Paul's 
use of Rahab in Hebrews 11, verse 31, in that great hall of faith. 
So it'd be pretty odd for two men that are at odds to use the 
same two examples. I mean, that would just be crazy. 
The fact that they use the same examples indicates their approach 
to and their appreciation of both Abraham and Rahab in redemptive 
history. But note in the first place with 
reference to Abraham, justification by works. Verse 21, was not Abraham 
our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son 
on the altar? Now, Paul teaches or Paul deals 
with justification of Abraham before God. Remember the scope 
of the whole is that Paul is dealing with how a sinner is 
just before God. James is dealing with how a believer 
is validated or confirmed or approved or evidenced before 
men. So, the justification of Abraham 
before God, Paul teaches in Romans 4, Galatians chapter 3. When James says that he is justified 
by works, he is using justification there in a sense different than 
Paul. And I've said this so many times 
that I hope it doesn't make you yawn because, again, Justification 
in Paul is our status before God by grace through faith in 
Jesus Christ. Justification as used here by 
James are those who have faith demonstrating, affirming, confirming, 
validating, showing forth the proof that they have faith. That's 
the justification by works that is in view here specifically 
with James. Now, note very specifically what 
he says. Verse 21, was not Abraham our 
father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the 
altar? Now, we read that in Genesis 
chapter 22. It's an amazing passage, isn't 
it? I had the privilege to teach the older Sunday school group 
this morning and that passage came up. Somebody mentioned Genesis 
chapter 22, that it was a bit of a tough passage. It is a tough 
passage. But if you look at the passage 
and you see what's happening and you see how James utilizes 
it, it's perfect in the context. Not that James needs me to applaud 
him or to pat him on the back for his use of Abraham, but look 
at what Abraham is told. He is told to take his son, his 
only son. Do you hear echoes of New Testament 
in that statement? The son whom you love. If Abraham 
and Isaac aren't a picture of the Father and Christ, I don't 
know who is. Abraham had other sons, but it 
was his only son, the son whom he loved, he was to take to Mount 
Moriah. For those who have read the rest 
of the Old Testament, what's the significance of Mount Moriah? 
That's where the temple would be built. That's where Solomon 
would construct the temple and where animal sacrifices would 
be offered. So Abraham takes Isaac, and he 
takes the fire, and he takes the wood. And note the expression 
of Abraham's faith. You see, this is what is on display 
in Genesis chapter 22. And you'll see how it functions 
in James's argument here. Evidence of Abraham's faith is 
communicated to us all throughout Genesis chapter 22. When he says 
to his servants, I want you to stay here, the lad and I will 
go and worship and we will return. That's faith, brethren. God has 
told Abraham to take his son, his only son, the son whom he 
loves, up to Mount Moriah to take a knife and to bury it in 
that sun. You see, Abraham doesn't have 
the privilege of Genesis 22, verse 1, We the reader do, but 
Abraham didn't. In Genesis 22-1, we are told 
that God did this to test Abraham. Now there's all sorts of what's 
called improper predication going on concerning God. God always 
knew that Abraham would stand the test. God always knew that 
Abraham was indeed a faithful man. God always knew that Abraham 
was indeed his friend. But the text is written to accommodate 
us. He is testing Abraham so that 
when this all transpires, in 2212, God can say, now I know 
that you fear me. Again, it's not as if God learned 
something, God came to grips with something new. It is confirmatory. It is evidentiary. It is demonstrable. It is for the sake and the benefit 
of us. ultimately. But that expression 
that he says to the servants, me and the lad will go worship 
yonder and we will return. What's the significance of that? 
He thought, as far as he knew, that he was going to end Isaac's 
life that day. What does Hebrews 11 tell us 
about that? He was confident and he believed 
that God was able to raise the dead That's what Abraham says 
to the servants. I'm gonna take my son up there, 
I am going to kill him, and I trust that God is able to raise him 
from the dead. You see, there's great faith 
on display with reference to Abraham there in Genesis chapter 
22. It's a beautiful display of Abraham's 
faith. Another thing that we see as 
they're traveling to Mount Moriah, Isaac wasn't 5, he wasn't 3, 
he wasn't 2, he was probably 17 or 18. Is that accurate in 
that framework? So Isaac wasn't a dim bulb. I'm not suggesting that 5-year-olds 
and 3-year-olds are dim bulbs. But in this instance, Isaac knew 
enough to identify, we've got the wood, We've got the flame, 
we've got everything necessary for sacrifice, Father Abraham, 
but where's the sacrifice? What's Abraham say? The Lord 
will provide. Do you hear the theology of Abraham 
in Genesis 22? It oozes New Testament theology. So Abraham then goes about this 
particular deed. He ties Isaac to the altar. He raises the knife. The angel 
of Yahweh comes and stops him. And then what is the next scene? They see a ram caught in the 
thicket by its horns. And then the text is conspicuous. 
In case we miss it, it is crystal clear that he sacrifices the 
ram instead of Isaac. Substitutionary atonement is 
going on in Genesis 22. It's typological. It's pointing 
forward to a father that doesn't stop in bringing the knife down 
to bear upon his son. The Lord God Most High takes 
his son, his only son, the son whom he loves, and delivers him 
up for us all, according to Romans 8.32. So that's the work that 
James holds up as a demonstration of the faith that Abraham had. 
Now, that gets us really right back to the context, because 
James says in verse 23 in chapter 2, do you see that the scripture 
was fulfilled? That said, Abraham believed God 
and it was reckoned unto him, or it was imputed unto him, or 
it was accounted to him for righteousness. Now, just go back to Genesis 
chapter 22. Follow James' logic. When did 
this scripture be fulfilled or become fulfilled? I think the 
idea being is that James is giving us this snapshot. Genesis 22 
is the demonstration, the consequent effect of Abraham's previous 
faith. In other words, the faith that 
Abraham had in Genesis 15-6 was not a 14a type faith. Abraham didn't say, I have faith, 
but had no works. Abraham had faith and works followed. There's about a 30-year gap between 
Genesis chapter 15 and Genesis chapter 22. James' point is simple. In Genesis 15.6, Abraham was 
justified in the Pauline sense before God. Remember the context 
in Genesis 15. God tells Abraham, you're going 
to have a whole host of children. Now, Abraham was no spring chicken 
and neither was Sarah. This was probably a difficult 
sort of thing to wrap one's mind around. But Abraham believed 
God and it was accounted unto him as righteousness, justification, 
by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. Now as 
Abraham there in chapter 15 continues on, he asks the Lord, well how 
do I know that this is indeed going to happen? And that leads 
to that ratification ceremony where Abraham is told to cut 
the animals in two pieces, wherein the two parties walk between 
the animals, basically saying that if we break covenant, then 
what happened to these animals happens to us. It is very intriguing 
that the only party that walks between those two animals is 
not God and Abraham, it's God alone. The surety of the covenant 
is upon Yahweh. very specifically. But James' 
point, brethren, the scripture was fulfilled which says Abraham 
believed God and it was accounted to him for righteousness and 
he was called the friend of God. You see it in James' argument. 
He believes the gospel, Genesis 15, he is justified before God. 
Works follow. Works flow. Works are the consequence. Works are the result of that 
faith. It is the type of faith that 
is true faith. It is a faith accompanied with 
all other saving graces. That's why James invokes Abraham 
specifically. Gil says, the sense is that hereby 
his faith was, or this specifically, notice on verse 22. I skipped 
right over that. It's a bit of a difficult thing 
here. Do you see that faith was working together with his works, 
and by works, faith was made perfect. That word perfect can 
throw us off a bit. It can almost seem like in Genesis 
15, He sort of started, and then in Genesis 22, 30 years later, 
the faith was completed, the faith was perfected. Now, I think 
it's conditioned by the context. It was legitimized, it was confirmed, 
it was evidenced, it was manifested, it was demonstrated. James is 
not suggesting that works complete faith. The whole context argues 
against that. James is suggesting that works 
evidence faith, and in that sense, it completes it, or it perfects 
it. Gill says, the sense is that hereby his faith was declared 
to be sincere, unfeigned, true, and genuine, just as love is 
said to be perfected in 1 John 4, 17. Poole says, faith is the 
cause and works of the effects, but the cause is not perfected 
by the effect, only its perfection is demonstrated by it. As good 
fruit does not make a tree good, but shows that it is so. And 
that's the relationship that we ought to appreciate in this 
particular section. And that brings James to another 
one of his implications. Again, same sort of thing that 
was in 17, 20, and 26. You see then that a man is justified 
by works and not by faith only. That passage should give us absolutely 
no trouble whatsoever if we understand the context. Justification, as 
James uses it, is that manifestation, that confirmation, that approval 
before men. Now let's look finally at Rahab. 
Likewise, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when 
she received the messengers and sent them out another way? She hid the messengers, didn't 
she? And think about what she did in that particular section. 
Now, I know that the question is often asked, well, she lied. 
She lied. And there's a whole host of ink 
written on how to, you know, sort of explain that and deal 
with that. You know what I have to say? James 2, Hebrews 11, 
show her as a hero. Shor is a hero. They don't devolve 
into a discussion on ethics and when it's right or okay to lie. 
She's a hero of the faith. Let's not miss that. In her particular 
instance, though, that lie was also an act of treason. Why were 
the spies, or as James calls them, messengers, angels, angelos, 
why did the spies come to Jericho? Were they there to check their 
internet speed? Were they there to see if there 
were gas stations and a Costco? No, they were there on a reconnaissance 
mission to bring back intel to General Joshua because the city 
was going to be destroyed by General Joshua and the troops. 
So when those spies were on that particular mission, to give them 
harbor, to give them quarter, to give them safe space was an 
act of treason against the city of Jericho. Now I think the contrast 
that James develops here is striking. Remember back in verses 15 and 
16. He says, if a brother or sister 
is naked and destitute of daily food, and one of you says to 
them, depart in peace, be warmed and filled, but you do not give 
them the things which are needed for the body, what is it profit? 
James is saying there, you deadbeats, profess faith in Christ, and 
a believer comes to your door and he's cold and he's hungry, 
you don't even give him a ham or a hot dog and a shirt or a 
jacket, you don't do anything for him? Look at Rahab. Rahab 
at risk to her own life. Rahab at risk to her own status. Rahab at risk to everything. 
Give safe haven to these foreign spies that have come to survey 
the land so they can return word to Joshua who is going to destroy 
Jericho. You see, Rahab's faith here is 
demonstrated by her work. The fact that she hides the spies 
gives us manifest proof that she has genuine faith in the 
living and the true God. You can see that even in the 
context as she rehearses to these men concerning God. In other 
words, she hides them and then she tells them of her faith. She knew of God's promise to 
give Israel the land, Joshua 2.9. She knew of God's power, 
Joshua 2.10. She confessed God's majesty, 
Joshua 2.11. She cast herself on God's mercy, 
Joshua 2.12 and 13. A mercy, not only in terms of 
salvation that she received, but a mercy in terms of temporality 
that she received. You see, when you get to Joshua 
chapter 6, guess who you find with the covenant people? Rahab 
the Pornei, Rahab the Harlet, as well. Ruth 4, 20 to 22, Salmon 
begot Boaz by Rahab. You know who tells us that? Matthew 
1, verse 5. That places Rahab, the harlot, 
in the genealogy of our Lord Jesus Christ, whom Davis calls 
the shady lady of Jericho, finds herself in the genealogy of our 
Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. So the hiding of the spies, the 
hiding of the messengers, was the work that demonstrated that 
Rahab indeed had true faith. Now, if we ask the question, 
and we are coming to a close, if we ask the question, why Rahab? Like, why? I mean, we get Abraham, 
right? He's the father of the faithful. 
We call him Father Abraham. He was the friend of God. He 
was this man distinguished by having these sort of insurmountable 
things. But who, contrary to hope, in 
hope believed. But why Rahab? Well, first, the 
specimen of her faith is magnificent. That she hid these spies was 
a great risk to her own life, to her own family. But as well, 
she is a Gentile. As well, she is a wretch. Not that Abraham wasn't a wretch. 
You know what Abraham was doing before he got out of Ur, the 
Chaldeans? He was an idolater. He worshipped 
the same idols that his father, Terah, did. You see this in Joshua 
chapter 24. Abraham wasn't brought up in 
the church. Abraham didn't have, you know, Reformed Baptists. 
Well, it used to be cassettes we'd keep in our pockets. Whatever 
happened to cassettes? Now they're all on phones. He 
didn't have, you know, podcasts of James White. That just wasn't 
his story. He was converted out of paganism. 
But Rahab, the harlot, is a beautiful display of God's grace in the 
life of this woman. Gil says, this instance, Rahab, 
is produced with the other, Abraham, to show that wherever there is 
true faith, whether in Jew or Gentile, in man or woman, in 
greater or lesser believers, or in such who have been greater 
or lesser sinners, There will be good works. That's the point 
germane to James' dealing. Manton has this beautiful observation. Believers, no, notice, the New 
Testament authors still call her Rahab the porne. I don't 
believe that means she continued to be a porne, a harlot, after 
her conversion. But it's a way of identifying 
her. It's a way of remembering. Not for her shame. See, when 
I think of Rahab the harlot as a believer, I don't think, oh, 
that Rahab the harlot. I think, praise God from whom 
all blessings flow. Praise God that Rahab the harlot 
is going to sit down at the marriage supper of the Lamb. Praise God 
that this woman who was a porne has been washed in the blood 
of Jesus. That's what Manton says. Believers, 
though they justify their profession, are still monuments of free grace. It is Rahab the harlot justified 
by works. The scars and marks of old sins 
remain, not to our dishonor, but to God's glory. So James's 
point, whether you're a patriarch or a prostitute, true and saving 
faith will always be accompanied with all other saving graces. 
In Genesis 15, Abraham believed God. It was accounted to him 
for righteousness. Genesis 22, he's ready to obey 
God to even killing his son Isaac. That is the demonstration, the 
justification by works. And of course, in Rahab's situation, 
she hid those spies. And then the conclusion of the 
whole is a fitting summary, again consistent with 24, 20, and 17. 
For as the body without the spirit is dead, So faith without works 
is dead also. Now, it's a bit of an interesting 
thing. He's got faith corresponding 
with body. You'd almost think that faith 
would correspond with spirit as the animating principle. But 
I don't think we're supposed to parse it out into those details. 
James' point is simple. If you profess faith in Jesus 
and you don't bridle the tongue, again, in context, you don't 
visit widows and orphans or orphans and widows in their distress, 
you don't keep yourself unspotted from the world, your faith is 
a dead body. It's a dead carcass. Got flies 
buzzing around it. Pastor Porter referred to Lazarus, 
I think, earlier today, very specifically in that idea that 
Lazarus was called to come forth. Remember the report when Jesus 
says, roll away the stone? What did they say? The old King 
James has it well. Behold, he stinketh. Behold, 
he stinketh. What are they saying? You don't 
roll away a stone from a tomb and call a dead body forth. Well, 
James's point in verse 26, as the body without the spirit is 
dead, so faith without works is dead also. So let us ponder 
that refrain. Let us ponder that consideration. 
Let us not blunt James's sword. Let us see the harmony between 
James and Paul. They both insist upon sovereign 
grace. They both insist upon faith in 
Jesus Christ as that alone instrument of justification, and they both 
insist that that faith is not alone, but is ever accompanied 
with all other saving graces. And it is no dead faith, but 
it worketh by love. Let us indeed imbibe that, let 
us appropriate it, and let us by the grace of God put our money 
where our mouth is. We have professed the true religion, 
we have professed faith in Christ. Let us go, therefore, and live 
like it. Well, let us pray. Our Father, 
we thank you for Abraham and the examples of Abraham and Rahab. 
We thank you for James' argument in this passage of Scripture. 
Give us grace and wisdom to see the blessed harmony and unity 
with James and Paul And let us see the emphasis in James and 
in Paul that we are saved unto good works. We are saved. For 
this cause, God has saved us so that we would walk in good 
works, those things He has prepared beforehand that we should walk 
in them. Give us grace in these things, 
Lord God, and give us a desire to obey Your law, not for salvation 
but because we have been saved. Go with us now, watch over us, 
watch over the church. Bless Pastor Porter in the coming 
weeks as he preaches the Word of God. Give all the brethren 
ears to hear and hearts to receive. And may Christ ever be glorified 
and praised and exalted in this local body. And we ask in Jesus' 
name, amen.