You can turn in your Bibles to James chapter 2. beginning in verse 1, "'My brethren, do not hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with partiality. For if there should come into your assembly a man with gold rings and fine apparel, and there should also come in a poor man in filthy clothes, and you pay attention to the one wearing the fine clothes and say to him, "'You sit here in a good place,' and say to the poor man, "'You stand there,' or, "'Sit here at my footstool.'" Have you not shown partiality among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts? Listen, my beloved brethren, has God not chosen the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him? But you have dishonored the poor man.
Do not the rich oppress you and drag you into the courts? Do they not blaspheme that noble name by which you are called? If you really fulfill the royal law according to the scripture, you shall love your neighbor as yourself, you do well. But if you show partiality, you commit sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors.
For whoever shall keep the whole law and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all. For he who said, do not commit adultery, also said, do not murder. Now, if you do not commit adultery but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. So speak and so do as those who will be judged by the law of liberty.
For judgment is without mercy to the one who has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment. What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can 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." Well, let us pray. Our Father in heaven, we come to a passage of Scripture that we require the aid of the Holy Spirit as we investigate.
We pray, Father, that He would illumine us, that He would guide us, that He would direct us and help us to appreciate the focus of James in this particular section of Scripture. Again, forgive us for all of our sins and all unrighteousness. and grant us the grace, Almighty God, to do the things that you call us unto, to be a faithful people, not saved because of our faithfulness, but saved because of the work of the Lord Jesus Christ, the active, the passive obedience of Christ, the beauty that you impute to us His righteousness, and you forgive us of our sins. Certainly, as we receive the grace of faith, we know that that saving faith is accompanied with all other graces. Grant us help to pursue the things that are pleasing in your sight, and we pray through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Amen.
Introduction
Well, we're going to spend a few weeks on chapter 2, specifically verses 14 to 26, because in the history of the church, this has been a notoriously misunderstood passage of Scripture. There are those who see a difference between James and the Apostle Paul, so I think it's good for us to indeed seek to have clarification concerning this passage. I know in my time here as a pastor, many times I've been asked about this whole section, because James says that apart from works, you're not actually saved, and Paul says just the opposite. So, we ought to be able or we should want to pursue harmony between these two brothers.
For instance, in Romans 3.28, Paul says, therefore, we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law. Here in James 2.24, he says, you see then that a man is justified by works and not by faith only. So, you see, at least on the surface, there is this tension that certainly needs to be dealt with. Well, I know you've heard of Martin Luther, but his view of the epistle to James.
He believed it should be in the canon, but he certainly was troubled by it. He said that James is flatly against St. Paul and all the rest of Scripture. It ascribes righteousness to works.
In another place, Martin Luther 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 make rubble also of it. I almost feel like throwing Jimmy into the stove. So that was Martin Luther's take on this particular section of scripture.
He believed that it was contrary to the Apostle Paul's emphasis on justification by faith alone. I think that John Owen represents a much saner approach to the interpretation of this passage. He says, for his, James, his whole inquiry is after the nature of that faith whereby we are justified. So James is dealing with a particular species or kind of faith, that which is not accompanied by all other saving graces, what Owen would call a barren faith, or what Gill would refer to as a historical faith.
And as a result, James highlights that that's not genuine saving faith. We are justified by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. But that faith is indeed accompanied with all other saving graces, so that those who are justified will indeed pursue those things that are pleasing in God's sight. So I want to do two things tonight.
I want to first of all set forth some hermeneutical helps in harmonizing James and Paul. I'll explain my terms in a moment. But first of all, the hermeneutical helps in harmonizing James and Paul, and then secondly, the question concerning the validity of a particular kind of faith. So we'll just look at verses 14 to 17, God willing, tonight.
So the question concerning the validity of a kind or species of faith there in verses 14 to 17. But first, what do I mean by hermeneutical help? Hermeneutics are the principles or the science of interpretation. They are those things employed by exegetes, hopefully by all of us, that help us to understand the Scripture.
Hermeneutics is not confined to the Scripture. If you were a student of Shakespeare, At university, there would be hermeneutics, there would be helps, interpretive tools by which you uncover the meaning of Shakespeare. But when we refer to the Scripture, it's oftentimes called sacred hermeneutics, as we apply rules or principles of interpretation to the text of Scripture. And so the idea being, with reference to this first point, just some things to help us from the outset to harmonize James and Paul, to realize that we're not dealing with contradictory statements in Romans 3.28 and in James 2.24.
There is harmony, there is blessed unity, and there is blessed consistency. So I want to offer up a few things by way of help in terms of interpretation.
Hermeneutical Helps: Harmonizing James and Paul
In the first place, we ought to appreciate the unity of Scripture. The unity of Scripture. Now, there's a lot of things written about this particular section. Some say that James, because he wrote early, probably in the early to mid-40s, wasn't aware of the Apostle Paul's letters.
And conversely, when Paul wrote, perhaps he wasn't aware. But that is to ascribe a dichotomy between the two men that argues against the unity of sacred Scripture. There is one divine author of the Word of God. He has certainly used a whole host of men from different places, different backgrounds, different sort of socioeconomic status, from different regions, and over a period of a great number of years.
But all of the Scripture is unified. All of the Scripture is harmonious. All of the Scripture is consistent. In fact, Turretin comments, since Paul and James were inspired by the same spirit, they cannot be said to oppose each other on the doctrine of justification, so that one should ascribe justification to faith alone and the other to works also.
This is an important point in terms of interpretation. As Bible-believing Christians, we never approach the Scripture as if it's wrong. We are those who have given allegiance to the Word of God. We are those who hear the voice of God in the Word of God, and we understand that the Scripture is unified, it is consistent, it is the infallible, and inerrant Word of God.
It's trustworthy in all that it affirms concerning history, science, doctrine, ethics, religious practice, or any other topic. It is to be believed, and there is not a contradiction. There is not tension. There is not...
Now, on the surface, there may be some things that are tension for us, But we need to work harder to unravel the truth as it is in the Lord Jesus Christ. So the unity of Scripture argues against any sort of a disjunctive view of Paul and James on the matter of salvation.
Author's Own Doctrine of Salvation
A second hermeneutical help in harmonizing James and Paul, and we have labored this over the last several weeks in terms of James' doctrine of salvation. Whatever James is saying here in chapter 2, verses 14 to 26, he is not going against what he's already said in chapter 1 at verse 18, chapter 2 at verse 1, and chapter 2 at verse 5. Now, it's one thing to suggest that James didn't know what Paul wrote, though I think that is completely unlikely. But it's one thing to suggest that, and quite another to say that in the space of two chapters, James undoes everything he's already done.
In other words, He has stressed sovereign grace in James 1.18. Of His will, He brought us forth by the word of truth. He doesn't ascribe that to works. He doesn't say we are saved because of our good works or God chose us because we are good men, good women.
No, it's of His own will. He brought us forth, effectual calling, ascribed to God Most High. Regeneration, ascribed to God Most High. So whatever James is teaching here in 14 to 26, it is not contrary to his doctrine of God's sovereign grace in effectual calling.
It's not contrary to his emphasis on faith in the Lord Jesus. Notice in chapter 2, verse 1, my brethren, do not hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with partiality. So effectual calling, sovereign grace, James 1.18. We see the emphasis on the instrumentality of faith in James 2.1.
But then thirdly, notice in James 2, 5. Listen, my beloved brethren. Has God not chosen the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him? Again, sovereign election of God unto faith.
God didn't chose us because of our faith, God chose us in order to faith. He chose us to grant us this particular blessing in terms of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. So when we get to chapter 2, verses 14 to 26, we ought not to forget James' insistence upon sovereign grace, upon regeneration, upon effectual calling, upon the instrumentality of faith, and upon the reality that sinners don't have faith apart from the sovereign election of God.
The Immediate Context
Thirdly, we ought to appreciate the immediate context. The immediate context, we need to know what the authors of Scripture are addressing when they write. Well, the immediate context is obvious here in James chapter 2, for it starts back in James chapter 1. Notice in verse 22, but be doers of the word and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves.
This alerts us to one of the things that James has in mind, or the focus, or the purpose for which he writes. He is dealing with persons who had professed faith in our Lord Jesus, but they were living, not as doers, but as hearers only. They were living as those who had faith, but no works. They were living as those who, in some sense, made this confession, but then did not live consistently with it, or live in accordance with it.
James gives concrete examples on what this doing of the Word looks like. Verse 26 in chapter 1, you need to bridle your tongue. If anyone among you thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue, but deceives his own heart, this one's religion is useless. Now for James, pure and undefiled religion in the sight of God and the Father is this, to visit orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself unspotted from the world.
You see, he says, when you believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, when you confess faith in the Savior, there must be sanctification. Justification, if it has occurred, will always result in and produce sanctification. True, saving faith will always result in good works. The pursuit of internal sanctity after the visiting of orphans and widows in 27a.
We saw last week, or rather a couple weeks ago, the rejection of partiality in chapter 2, verses 1 to 13, and the emphasis on fulfilling the royal law in verse 8. So before we even get to verses 14 to 26, we might surmise that James is dealing with a bunch of deadbeat professors. He is dealing with a bunch of people that had said they trusted in Jesus for salvation. James's point in 14 to 26 is that genuine saving faith is always accompanied with all other saving graces.
In other words, it is not a barren faith, a la Owen. It is not a historical faith, a la John Gill. But true saving faith will always result in good works. You won't be partial or you'll struggle against it.
You won't be a man who is reckless with his tongue. You'll visit widows and orphans in their distress. You'll be the kind of person that indeed saving faith is captivated.
Different Purposes of Paul and James
Fourthly, we ought to appreciate the different purposes of Paul and James. Paul's emphasis is upon justification by grace to provide a right status before God. It's obvious, that's what Paul's dealing with. Therefore, by the deeds of the law, no flesh shall be justified in his sight, Romans 3.20.
For by the law is the knowledge of sin, and then he engages in this exposition or explanation of justification by faith alone before God. In other words, Paul is addressing the issue, how is a man right before God? James is dealing with how is a man approved before men? So when we see the different uses of the word justification between Paul and James, the context makes it evident what's in view.
James is dealing with persons who profess faith but are not living according to their profession. Again, Francis Turretin says, Paul disputes against the Pharisees who urge the merits of works. James disputes against the Libertines and Epicureans who, content with the profession of faith alone, denied not only the merits of works but also their necessity. Against the former, Paul rightly urges faith alone for justification.
Against the latter, James properly commends the necessity of works for the confirmation of justification. So you see the audience and the various things that are occurring and the various focus or purpose that the apostles have in terms of writing help us to understand what's going on in verses 14 to 26. It's a different situation, it's a different setting, it's a different context. So Paul uses the word justification in terms of a sinner standing before God.
James uses the word justification in terms of a believer's validation before men. Again, several men in the history of the church have rightly understood and we ought to give heed to what they say. 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.
He's reading Owen on in chapter or volume five, when he discusses Paul and James, he says, I'm amazed that people don't see this. It's something to that effect. I'm amazed that it's not as obvious as what I'm suggesting tonight. It is obvious, isn't it?
We're not supposed to freak out and see Romans 3.28 and James 2.24 and lose it. They're in contexts. They have specific theological ends in view. There's a focus.
There's a purpose. There's a reason. There's a discourse. There are things that we need to appreciate with reference to the usage of terms.
Owen says, he, 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. Brings out another element here that is necessary in 14 to 26. We ought not to blunt James' sword. What do I mean by that?
I'm gonna spend a lot of time tonight telling you what the passage doesn't mean. But brethren, we can't miss what it does mean. If you profess faith in Jesus and you don't do anything, it is not accompanied with all other saving graces. You're not holy, you're addicted to porn, you're addicted to drugs, you're an alcohol abuser, you're two-faced, you're a hypocrite.
Brethren, do not deceive yourselves. This is James' point. We don't want to blunt his sword. We want to feel the full weight of it.
In other words, James is condemning this idea that if we can just articulate the name Jesus, then everything is going to be hunky-dory. No, genuine saving faith is always followed by the application of biblical principles in one's life. To put it in theological language, sanctification, or justification rather, inevitably produces sanctification. Salvation by grace through faith alone is then indeed followed up by persons who have been saved pursuing those things that are pleasing to God.
John Gill said, the apostle Paul speaks of justification before God, and James speaks of it as it is known by its fruits unto man. And Thomas Manton, in this whole discourse, the apostle's intent is to show not what justifies, but who is justified. In Paul's sense, a sinner is absolved. In James' sense, a believer is approved.
And then notice the demonstration verbs throughout the section. In other words, what James is doing is obvious on a bare reading of the passage. Notice in verse 14, what does it profit my brethren if someone says he has faith? He's dealing with a profession of a specific type of faith.
It's a kind, it's a species, it's a faith that is not true. But then notice along the way, verse 18, show me your faith without your words and I will show you my faith by my words. Notice in verse 22, do you see that faith was working together with his words? Verse 24, you see then that a man is justified by words.
What I would term these demonstration verbs highlights James' purpose. The idea is simple. Those who have believed the gospel, those who possess genuine saving faith, it is demonstrable, it is manifest, it is evident to others. It won't be in the same case in every single person, but there will be a demonstration of righteousness on the parts of those who have indeed been conquered by sovereign grace.
The Confession's Clarifying Statement
And then a final hermeneutical help in harmonizing James and Paul is in the Second London Confession of 1677-1689. I suggest and I submit that if you get chapter 11, paragraph 2 down, you will never have problems with a harmony between James and Paul. Second London Confession, 11.2 says, faith thus receiving and resting on Christ and His righteousness is the alone instrument of justification. We all affirm that on the basis of Paul.
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. You see, that's what James is taking to prove. That's what James is showing. That's what's on James' mind when he says, brethren, let me share my heart.
This is his heart. He wants us to understand that the faith by which we are justified 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. So, in terms of some interpretative helps, the unity of Scripture, the author's doctrine of salvation, the immediate context, the different purposes of Paul and James, and this confessional statement in chapter 11, paragraph 2, hopefully goes a long way to setting the passage in its proper context and helping us to understand there is no contradiction between James and Paul whatsoever.
The Validity of a Kind of Faith
Now let's move secondly to the question concerning the validity of a kind of faith in verses 14 to 17.
The Question: Profit of Professed Faith
Note the question proper. What does it profit my brethren if someone says he has faith but does not have works? The question concerns a profession of faith. James, as it were, is taking this kind or this species of faith, and he is setting it under the microscope, and he is going to analyze it, and he is going to display it, and he is going to come to grips with the reality that it's not genuine saving faith.
The description concerns a kind of faith that is not accompanied by other graces. Remember paragraph 11? 11, paragraph 2, but is ever accompanied with all other saving graces. Not this species of faith that James is treating in James 2.14. What is it, prophet, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works?
You see, it's a faith that is not accompanied with all other saving graces. And the question sets the stage for the entirety of James' discussion and highlights that James is not attacking belief in the gospel. James is attacking hypocrisy. The issue with James is not faith versus works.
The issue with James is not faith plus works. The issue is false faith versus true faith. False faith is the species or the kind given us in verse 14. Someone says he has faith but does not have words.
True faith, as our confession rightly articulates from the teachings of the New Testament, saving faith is always accompanied with all other saving graces, so that when those who, by God's grace, believe the gospel, they engage in practical Christianity. Again, not perfectly, always standing in need of the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ, but they attempt, by God's grace, to be a 122 doer of the Word. They attempt, by the grace of God, to be a 126 bridler of the tongue. They attempt, by the grace of God, to be a 127A visitor of orphans and widows.
They try, by the grace of God, to be a 127B, one who keeps himself unspotted from the world. So, James's point, brethren, is simple. If you are not bridling your tongue, if you are not visiting those in distress, if you are not keeping yourself unspotted from the world, then what you profess is not the genuine article. James tells us that when we believe the gospel, when we are justified before God by His grace, through faith in Jesus Christ, we as the people of God have the law internalized upon our hearts.
We have been given the Holy Spirit. We have been given forgiveness of sins. We now know Jehovah and it is our desire to pursue those things that are pleasing in His sight. James is not dealing in verse 14 with saving faith.
He is dealing with hypocrisy. He is dealing with barren faith. He is dealing with historic faith. He is dealing with a faith that is not accompanied with all other saving graces.
That's what he treats unto verse 26. If we don't get that But we need to, we need to understand the issue for James is not faith versus works or faith plus works, but false faith versus true faith.
The Article: 'That Faith'
Now note, after James asks the question in 14a, he says in 14b, can faith save him? Now, this unfortunately is an inaccurate translation. The new King James and the King James miss it here in 14b. Can faith save him?
Well, yes, in Paul, because it is by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. So we might have to answer the question, can faith save him? Yes, certainly. But it's the faith that James has introduced in 14a.
It's a specific species or kind of faith. So when James says, can faith save him, the ESV gets it better. Can that faith save him? Well, the answer, of course, is no.
No, because it's not saving faith. The NIV gets it right. Can such faith save them? These translations highlight James' point and better reflect the Greek grammar, because faith there appears with the article.
It is dealing with a specific kind of faith, that introduced by way of question in 14a. The type of faith that says, I have it, but I don't have works." James is not saying, can faith save a sinner? James is saying, can that faith that I just mentioned, that is not accompanied with all other saving graces, can that faith save? Well, the answer is a resounding no, because it's not true faith.
That's what James is doing in this particular section.
The Illustration: Empty Well-Wishes
Now, notice illustration in verses 15 to 16. 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? Now, this is a pretty common sort of illustration. We've already seen James use such in the beginning of Chapter 2 with reference to the two men that enter into the public assembly, one dressed in finery, the other dressed in poverty, and we praise the man in finery, we give him the front seat, and the guy in the poverty, we tell him to sit in the back.
James uses these concrete illustrations to demonstrate or to highlight or to validate the sorts of things that he is speaking to. Perhaps in the backdrop is Jesus' words in Matthew 25 concerning service to the least of these my brethren, the sorts of service wherein we feed those who are hungry, we give water to those who are thirsty, and we visit those who are in distress, and we clothe those who are naked. So James is using a pretty common illustration here. So there is a brother or a sister that is naked and destitute of daily food.
And note what we typically do or what we can do if we are false professors. We say to them, depart in peace, be warmed and filled. That's pretty brutal, isn't it? Now, it's not necessarily.
I mean, a well-wish isn't a bad thing. Right? I mean, if I say, you know, have a great day, that doesn't necessarily mean I have to follow you around and make sure your day is great. There's nothing wrong with a well wish, but as James continues, a well wish not backed up with some concrete application is wretched.
It's unholy, it's ungodly, it's unrighteous. It's certainly not the spirit of mercy that James enjoins in 127. The idea wherein persons visit orphans and widows in their distress, wherein persons don't show partiality. wherein persons give themselves lovingly and charitably to others. So this brother or sister is naked, destitute of daily food.
And we say to them, depart in peace, be warmed and filled. And now notice he follows up and says, but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body. What does it profit? Thomas Manton says the belly is not filled with words.
We can't eat words. And the back is not clothed with wishes. This is James' point in the illustration. But if we ask the question, how does it illustrate, specifically, this faith without works?
I mean, broadly and generally, we might suggest that works are the types of things that are evidenced here in this illustration by James. But if we think a little bit further and a little bit harder and a little bit deeper, we will see that the illustration is really an analogy. In other words, this profession of faith without works is akin to telling someone be warmed and be filled without giving them a hot dog and a shirt. And James says, if the latter, telling them to be warmed and to be filled without giving them a hot dog and a shirt, if the latter is useless, if it is unprofitable, if it is dead, if it is void, if it is nothing, then so is a profession of faith without corresponding words.
And the corresponding works aren't unto justification, but they are the result of, or the consequence of, or the effect of justification. Allison says, an illustration by way of analogy, James compares faith without works to expressions of goodwill without works. The worthlessness of the latter suggests the worthlessness of the former.
The Verdict: Dead Faith
And that brings James to his implication or to his conclusion in this subset of the larger context. Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. Again, dealing with the kind of faith introduced in the question in 14a. Someone says they have faith, but they don't have works.
James says it looks like this. We tell someone to be warmed and filled, but we don't give them food or clothing. James' conclusion here is thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. You have to appreciate and see that James is not teaching faith plus works in order to be saved.
James assumes true saving faith will always be a working faith. because it is accompanied with all other saving graces. He is not suggesting an alternate way to God. He is not suggesting a hybrid. He is not suggesting a little Paul and a little bit of work and we will make it on onto heaven.
No! He is dealing with a different situation or context, specifically, those who profess and yet are void with reference to practical Christianity. And when we compare verses 14 to 17, you see the empty declaration in verse 14, someone says that he has faith. Verse 16, the empty declaration is, one of you says to them, go in peace.
You see the absence of deeds in verse 14, but has not works. Verse 16, but fail to give them what is necessary. You see the inadequacy of faith alone. Is faith able to save him?
Verse 14, faith of itself, if it has no deeds, is dead. Again, we're justified by grace through faith alone, but that faith is never alone, but is always accompanied with all other saving graces. You see how 11.2 should hopefully help you to navigate your way through this passage of scripture. So the verdict for James in verse 17 is thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.
John Owen nails it when he says, for this was that which he undertook to prove. Not that we are not justified by faith alone without works before God, but that the faith which is alone without works is dead, useless, and unprofitable. That's the point of our brother. He will make it several other times from verses 18 to 26, and God willing, we'll notice those in the coming weeks.
Further Harmony Between Paul and James
But I want to end by showing further harmony between Paul and James. We've already seen the difference in scope, audience, and their use of the term justification. We see their consistency in the way of salvation. You see, I didn't even have to elucidate or even have to parallel Paul in that presentation of James' emphasis on sovereign grace.
No one's going to dispute that Paul taught James 1.18. No one's going to dispute that Paul would heartily, amen, of his own will, he brought us forth by the word of truth. I mean, Paul says that everywhere, doesn't he? Romans 9.16, it doesn't depend upon him who wills or upon him who runs, but on God who shows mercy.
We see their harmonization in the terms or by what their consistency in terms of the doctrine of salvation. But then there are some other considerations. Notice in Galatians 2. Galatians chapter 2.
I mean, if an exegete of the status of a Martin Luther messed up here, then we need to make sure we're not messing up. So I think it bears, by way of necessity, to emphasize this. Notice in Galatians chapter two, very specifically beginning in verse six, but from those who seem to be something, this is something of Paul's sort of defense of the gospel to be sure, but his part and portion in the preaching of the gospel. Notice in verse six, but from those who seem to be something, whatever they were, it makes no difference to me.
God shows personal favoritism to no man. For those who seem to be something added nothing to me, but on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter, you see what he's saying? I was the apostle to the Gentiles, Peter was the apostle specifically to the Jews. That's what circumcised, uncircumcised means here.
And then verse 8, for he who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles. And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship. If there is this contradictory attitude between Paul and James, Paul and James didn't see What is it suggesting when we spot contradictions that the biblical authors didn't? Are we supposed to suppose that they were that foolish, that James just, you know, revolutionized the way of salvation, it's by works now, without any conscious recognition that Paul had been writing? that Paul is writing and there's no conscious recognition that James is writing and Paul's just, you know.
Some suggest that when we get specifically to verse 18 and James says, but someone will say, some posit Paul as James' interlocutor, that it's Paul there debating with James when it comes to this whole matter. That is to miss it completely. That is to misread not only James and Paul, but the entirety of the Bible. Brethren, you can rest assured that if what appears to you to be a contradiction in the space of a few verses or chapters, we can't suppose that the author didn't see that.
Someone asked me recently about the reference in 1 Samuel 17, where at the beginning of the chapter, Saul doesn't know who David is. And he's introduced, rather, he's told who David is as the son of Jesse. And at the end of chapter 17, Saul doesn't know that he's the son of Jesse. How do we reconcile that?
Well, in the first place, we're not to assume the author didn't see it. You mean he wrote a chapter and he forgot what he said at the beginning, and by the time he got to the end, it's completely the other? No, brethren, there's ways to interpret and to understand that. In that particular instance, so I don't leave anybody hanging, I think the idea being at the end is because the victor over Goliath was promised Saul's daughter and was promised tax-free status in Israel, it was probably a more formal registration in terms of who is David's father.
Because if David's father is going to receive tax status or tax-free status in Israel, then the king needs to approve of such a thing. You see, the idea being is that there aren't contradictions in the Bible as is suggested by so many. And we're not to suppose that James and Paul had this great antinomy one to another that the later church found out. But here Paul says, no, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.
They only, or they desired only that we should remember the poor, the very thing which I also was eager to do. And then notice as well the use of Abraham as an example by both Paul and James. Strange, they're teaching different things but they're using the same Abraham. And you'll see when we get to the example of Abraham in James, it makes perfect sense in the context.
James is concerned with the validation or the demonstration or the manifestation or the evidentiary value of works in the approval of believers. So in Genesis chapter 22, Abraham marches up to Mount Moriah with his son Isaac, his only son, the son whom he loved, in order to sacrifice him to God. James then goes on, you see then that the scripture was fulfilled. And he goes back 30 years to Genesis 15.6.
Abraham believed God and it was accounted unto him for righteousness. So what happens in Genesis 15.6 is justification by faith alone before God. 30 years later is manifested, demonstrated, evidenced by his journey up to Moriah to sacrifice his son Isaac. That's James's point when he invokes Abraham. And then certainly, if we accept Pauline authorship of the book of Hebrews, both authors appeal to Rahab the harlot, who is a champion of the faith, brethren.
Rahab was someone we ought not to be embarrassed about. But then a final observation in terms of this harmony is the necessity of good works in Paul. Notice in Galatians 5.6. Galatians 5.6, for in Christ Jesus, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything but faith working through love.
That's how faith functions. It's not how it's formed. Just like James is dealing with the nature of saving faith. How does genuine faith function?
Genuine faith is always accompanied with all other saving graces. So genuine faith will take Isaac up to Moriah to bury a knife in his belly. Genuine faith will, with Rahab, hide the spies. And notice the contrast there.
The empty professors there in the illustration in verses 15 and 16, they say, be warmed and be filled, and they give them nothing for their food or their clothing. Rahab, in an act of treason against her own civil polity, hides spies in her own house. She outshines everyone who has ever professed faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. It's easy to give a hot dog and a shirt.
Go ahead and commit treason against your civil state and see what happens then. That is the kind of faith, or that is the faith demonstrated in the life and ministry of Rahab the harlot. Rahab the porne, Rahab the sexually immoral one. Now when the scripture identifies her as that, it doesn't mean she continued in that.
It's just the identifier to highlight from whence she came. So you see the both of them use these same illustrations. in terms of Abraham and Rahab, and then Paul specifically with reference to good works. Here, Ephesians 2, 8 to 10, 1 Thessalonians, Titus in several places. In fact, look at the Titus passage, Titus 2.
In the space of two chapters, Paul hits good works three times. Notice in 2.14. who gave himself for us that he might redeem us from every lawless deed and purify for himself his own special people, zealous for good works." Notice in chapter 3 at verse 8, this is a faithful saying, and these things I want you to affirm constantly, that those who have believed in God should be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable to men. And then notice in 3.14.
And let our people also learn to maintain good works, to meet urgent needs, that they may not be unfruitful." That's a lot of emphasis by Paul on good works, isn't it? Sounds just like James. But if we ask the question, why? Why in the space of two chapters does Paul hit good works so hard?
Well, I have a hypothesis. If you go back to chapter 1, notice in verse 12. One of them, a prophet of their own, said, Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons. This testimony is true.
Therefore, rebuke them sharply that they may be sound in the faith. Now, when Paul says this testimony is true, it probably goes one of two ways. This testimony is true, that one of their own said this, or this testimony is true, what one of their own said happens to be the case. Cretans are these kinds of people.
Cretans have these issues. In fact, we use that language today. He's a real Cretan. If you haven't heard that, you don't get out enough.
So imagine this, in this young church, having a Cretan-like background, what do you think Paul's gonna hit them with over and over and over again? The necessity of good works. You believe the gospel, you're justified freely by grace, Jesus gave himself for your sins, Now be faithful. Now be solid old men, solid old women, solid young women, solid young men, solid workers.
Be faithful. Exhibit good works. Do the things that are called, that you are called by God to do. So the emphasis in both his justification by God's grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, unto good works.
So let us, as we treat the passage, remember, we don't want to blunt James' sword. If you find yourself tonight with the type of faith that is being examined in 14a, you say you have faith, but you do not have works here, James. Can that faith save you? Again, it's not a matter of, I need to believe a bit, I need to work a bit, and then God will accept me.
No, the issue is, if I have, by God's grace, looked to Christ, believed the gospel, looked unto Jesus alone, that faith is accompanied with all other saving graces. And I will strive to be a faithful man. a husband, a father, and a worker. I will strive to be a faithful woman, wife, mother, and worker. I will strive to be a faithful child.
I will strive to be obedient to the Lord. I will look to the royal law as my marching orders, and I will, by the grace of God, pursue those things which are pleasing in His sight. Well, let us pray.
Closing Prayer
Our Father in Heaven, we thank You for Your Word. We thank You for the blessed unity and harmony that we find in Scripture. We ask God that You would cause us to think clearly concerning these matters, cause us to have a ready answer for Roman Catholics or any and all that would would challenge this interpretation. Help us, God, to see the harmony between James and Paul.
Help us to see their emphases and help us to see, Lord God, their focus. And may we understand that justification before God is by grace alone through faith alone. But that faith does not remain alone, but is accompanied with all other saving graces. Grant us grace to pursue those things that are pleasing in your sight and not to be found out as the hypocrite of 14a.
We ask these things through Jesus Christ, our Lord. Amen.