Theological term
Royal Law
2 sermons · All terms
The Nature of Saving Faith, Part 1
James 2:14–17 has provoked sharp disagreement in the history of the church, with readers perceiving a direct contradiction between James and Paul on the doctrine of justification. This sermon works through five hermeneutical tools for harmonizing the two apostles — the unity of Scripture, the internal consistency of James's own doctrine of salvation, the immediate context, the different audiences and purposes of each writer, and the statement of 1689 LBCF 11.2 — before turning to the question James poses in verses 14–17 concerning the validity of a particular species of faith. The central distinction is not faith versus works or faith plus works, but false faith versus true faith: genuine saving faith is never alone in the person justified, but is always accompanied with all other saving graces, producing the practical Christianity James demands.
The Prohibition Against Partiality, 2
James 2:5–13 grounds the prohibition against partiality in three interlocking arguments: a soteriological argument from God's sovereign election of the poor, a practical argument from the church's inconsistency in tolerating the very oppression it suffers, and a theological (decalogical) argument from the indivisibility of God's royal law. The sermon insists that partiality is not a minor social failing but a violation of the whole Decalogue, a rejection of the lawgiver himself, and a possible evidence of a heart still a stranger to sovereign grace. Because God has chosen the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom, his people must receive and honor those whom he has loved, letting the law of liberty — not license — regulate their conduct toward one another.