Robert Stein on faith & works

Robert Stein has written a meticulous article comparing and contrasting Pauline with Jacobean usage.

http://www.sbts.edu/resources/publications/sbjt/2000/2000Fall2.pdf.

I’ll excerpt the parts most germane to Sandemanian antinomians like Ryrie, Kendall, and Hodges.

Note that I’m not citing Stein’s scholarly opinion. This is not an argument from authority. Rather, I’m citing his exegetical arguments.

I’ve bracketed the major footnotes.

***************************************************

“The false views which Paul and James are opposing, in Rom. 4 and here respectively [James 2:14-26], are different. Paul is combating the idea that men can put God under an obligation to themselves...James is opposing the idea that a real faith can exist without producing works of obedience. The difference of aim accounts to a large extent for the differences of language. There is no need to infer any significant disagreement between their fundamental positions.”12

[C. E. B. Cranfield, “The Message of James,” Scottish Journal of Theology 18 (1965) 341]

The Terminology of Paul and James

Individual words in any language usually bear a range of possible meanings… It should not therefore surprise us that the same word may be used by James and Paul in different ways and possess different meanings. There are two terms used in James 2:14-26 that possess meanings quite different from the normal way that Paul uses these terms. These terms are: “faith” and “believe (pistis– pisteuo)” and “works (erga).”

In 2:14-26 “faith” is viewed quite differently, and it appears that the faith being discussed is that of a real or hypothetical opponent whom James has engaged in a diatribe. This opponent’s understanding of faith is quite different from that of James himself. This can be seen by observing how this faith is described:

2:14a—It is a faith that possesses no works;
2:14b—It is a faith that cannot save;
2:17—It is a faith without works that is dead;
2:18a—It is a faith that is distinct and separate from works;
2:18b—It is a faith without works;
2:18c—It is contrasted with a faith shown by works;
2:20—It is a faith without works that is useless;
2:22a—It is contrasted with a faith that works along with works;
2:22b—It is contrasted with a faith perfected as a result of works;
2:24—It is a faith that is alone; and 2:26—It is a faith without works that is dead.

The verbal cognate “believe” also helps us to understand the kind of faith possessed by James’s opponent:
2:19a—It is assent to the biblical proposition that God is one;
2:19b—It is a kind of faith that even demons possess;
and 2:23—It is contrasted with the kind of faith Abraham possessed.

From the above it is obvious that a distinction must be made between “faith” as it is understood by James and “faith” as it is understood by his real or imaginary opponent. It is doubtful that James would acknowledge that his opponent’s kind of faith is true or real faith. He hints at this in 2:14a when he describes his opponent’s faith as follows, “What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has not works.” As numerous commentators point out, James does not say, “What use is it, my brethren, if someone has faith but has not works.”17

[Cranfield, p. 338, rightly points out, “This fact should be allowed to control our interpretation of the whole paragraph.”]

James appears to have intentionally worded his introductory statement in a way that indicates that his opponent does not have true Christian faith. This interpretation finds support in 2:14b where James states, “Can that faith save him?” The use of the article he indicates that James is asking whether the specific kind of faith he has just described can save the man. Still further support for this view comes from 2:18. Here the imaginary opponent describes his faith as being one totally independent of works. “But someone may well say, ‘You have faith and I have works.’”

In Paul “faith” almost always refers to a whole-hearted trust in God that salvation can be received as a gracious gift apart from any meritorious works because of the death and resurrection of his Son, Jesus Christ. Faith for Paul involves “man’s total response to and involvement with Jesus Christ.” Accompanied with the gift of the Spirit it involves a new creation (2 Cor 5:17) in which the believer has been raised to newness of life and has become a slave to righteousness (Rom 6:18). It involves an obedience of faith (Rom 1:5). Thus Paul would never say that “demons believe,” as James does in 2:19, because of the different meaning he gives to the terms “faith” and “believe.” The faith of James’s opponent involves merely intellectual assent to propositions such as “God is one.” It is a belief that certain propositions are true. Paul’s use of the words “faith” and “believe” involve faith in God and his Son. It is not merely propositional, although that element is present. It is also relational! Faith for Paul involves a relationship of grace and love toward God that results in a transformed life; for James’s opponent faith involves nothing more than assent to doctrinal truths. Yet even the demons possess a correct understanding of such doctrinal propositions and assent to their truth. In fact their theological understanding of doctrinal propositions is undoubtedly more correct than ours due to their supernatural nature, but such knowledge does not result in their salvation!

“Works”

The term “works” also possesses a range of possible meanings, and it is used quite differently in James and Paul.

It is clear that, although Paul and James are using the same terms for “works,” they attribute different meanings to them, just as in the case of “faith.” These meanings lie well within the semantic range of these terms, but they are not identical. In fact they are antithetical. As a result Paul’s words in Romans 3:28 (“For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law”) can be interpreted, “For we maintain that a person is justified by a whole-hearted trust in God’s grace and mercy and not by seeking to merit favor with God through such acts as circumcision and the keeping of the ritual law.” On the other hand, James’s words in 2:24 (“You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone”) can be interpreted, “You see that a person is justified by a faith that works through love and not by a sterile assent to religious propositions unaccompanied by works.”

We have already noted the fact that James does not state that the person has faith but only says that he has faith, and that this [literally—the faith just referred to] faith cannot save. He is not saying that faith, in the sense that both he and Paul understand it, cannot save, but that the faith referred to in 2:14a and described in 2:15 cannot save.

“Even so” introduces James concluding summary of this section (2:14-17). This same expression is used in similar fashion in 1:11; 2:26; 3:5 to draw a conclusion from a preceding analogy or example. “Faith, if it has not works, is dead, being by itself.” It is difficult in an English translation to indicate the article that stands before “faith.” It is clear in the Greek text, however, that James is referring specifically to the faith noted in 2:14 and illustrated in 2:15-16. “If it has no works” parallels the exact same expression in 2:14. This so-called “faith” is described as “dead.” In 2:20 such a faith is referred to as “useless.” The reason is that it is “by itself.” Similar expressions for “by itself” are “without works” (2:18, 20, 26) and “alone” (2:24).

“You believe that God is one.” This can be understood either as a rhetorical question or as a statement. The faith being challenged by James centers on the Shema, which plays an important role in the history of God’s people. The faith being described is essentially creedalism, i.e., an intellectual assent to some proposition about the nature of God. Faith here is simply the approval of a theological statement. It does not involve belief in or personal trust in God but belief that or a belief about God. The response “You do well” indicates that the confession is both correct and good. Its inadequacy becomes immediately apparent, however, by the next statement. “The demons also believe, and shudder.” Here James describes clearly the kind of faith he claims cannot save. The fact that such a faith cannot save is self-evident. The demons, allies of Satan doomed to hell, can also claim the kind of faith that James’s opponents possess. They even possess a better “creedalism,” because of their supernatural knowledge!33

[Note Mark’s statement concerning the accurate perception of the demons with respect to Jesus’ identity. Cf. Mark 1:24, 34c (this Markan editorial comment is especially important); 3:11; 5:7.]

Their knowledge is also more existential than that of James’s opponents, for the demons “shudder”34 as a result their knowledge. For James such a faith is dead. Correct confession apart from works of love rises no higher than the faith of demons. True faith must be accompanied by works of love.

[See Sophie Laws, A Commentary on the Epistle of James (Harper’s New Testament Commentaries; San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1980) 126-128, who sees this term (“shudder”) as coming out of the practice of exorcism.]

There is a clear difference between James’s and Paul’s use of Abraham as an example, even though both appeal to the same text, Genesis 15:6. James, when he refers to Abraham’s faith, refers to his offering up of Isaac. Paul refers to Abraham’s faith as occurring before his circumcision and his offering of Isaac (Rom 4:10-14) as he trusted in the promises God made to him (Rom 4:18). Like Paul, James refers in these verses to Abraham’s “justification.” Again, however, as in the case of the terms “faith” and “works,” we should not assume that James and Paul mean the same thing in their understanding of the term “to justify” in Genesis 15:6. The terms “justification” and the English synonym “righteousness” refer to the same Greek term. These terms and the verb “to justify” all stem from the same Greek root. For Paul, this refers to the gift of righteousness based on the work of Christ that is appropriated by faith alone. It is primarily a forensic or legal term referring to one’s status or standing before God. It is not primarily a word describing human virtue. Some “righteous” people were in fact far from virtuous (cf. Gen 38:26; Luke 18:14). For Paul, justification comes instantaneously upon initial faith. It is not a virtue that develops after initial faith. It is a judicial pronouncement of innocence, not a moral quality of personal piety. For James the adjective “righteous” and the noun “righteousness” refer primarily to a moral quality. In 1:20 it refers to the moral quality of life that God demands. In 3:18 it is used in the expression “fruit of righteousness.” The exact meaning in James of this common expression is unclear. What is certain, however, is that the meaning is ethical in nature and not forensic. When compared to Pauline usage (cf. Rom 1:17; 3:10; Gal 3:11), it is clear that the adjective “righteous” in 5:6 and 16 bears an ethical and moral meaning rather than a forensic one.

When James refers to “works,” he is clearly not referring to “works of law.” He is also not referring to deeds of mercy and love isolated from faith. The works that he refers to are always associated with faith in the Lord Jesus Christ (2:1).

True, Paul refers to the initial, proleptic pronouncement of God’s judicial verdict upon faith. James is referring to the verdict in the final day when a person stands before God.

If we translate this verse [Rom 3:28] according to James’s usage of these terms, we have the following: “In conclusion you see that a man is justified by a living faith that works through love and not by a dead faith that involves merely an assent to certain doctrines.” It is doubtful that Paul would disagree with this, although it is equally doubtful that he would have phrased this thought the way James did.

[Cranfield, p. 341, comments, “The clue to the understanding of verse 24 . . . is the recognition that here, as in verse 14, the author is making a concession to his opponents’ use of terms. He does not himself believe that a faith which does not produce works is really faith at all, but for the moment he accepts his opponents’ way of speaking, and so is forced to deny that a man is justified by faith alone. ‘By faith alone’ is right, if what is called ‘faith’ is really faith; but, if something which can exist without producing works is meant, then the formula sola fide will not do.”]

First of all we can begin by comparing the message of James with that of John the Baptist. John proclaimed, “Repent . . . bear fruits in keeping with repentance” (Matt 3:2, 7). The message of Jesus also demanded repentance and faith (Mark 1:15) accompanied by “good works” (Matt 5:16). Jesus also warned that mere profession of him was insufficient, for “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven . . . ”(Matt 7:21). In 1 John 3:17-18 we read, “But whoever has the world’s goods, and sees his brother in need and closes his heart against him, how does the love of God abide in him? Little children, let us not love with word or with tongue [in James—faith and hearing], but in deed and truth [in James—works and doing].”

What about Paul, however? We should not assume that the places where Paul is engaged with his opponents and argues for faith “alone” apart from works of law are the totality of his message. There are numerous places where Paul gives teachings that seem to be in complete accord with that of James. We have already quoted Galatians 5:6—“For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love” . Elsewhere Paul refers to: “obedience of faith” (Rom 1:5; 6:16; 15:18; etc.); “every good deed” (2 Cor 9:8); “faith and love” (1 Thes 1:3; 3:6; 1 Tim 2:15; 4:12; 6:11; 2 Tim 1:13; 2:22; 3:10; Tit, 2:2; Phlm 5); “word or deed” (Col 3:17); “work of faith” (1 Thes 1:3; 2 Thes 1:11); etc. The relationship of the “indicative and imperative” in Paul should be noted. Paul believed that faith in Christ involved having died with him and that this led to a new life in which faith worked through love (Rom 6:1-23). Thus the indicative (faith) and the imperative (works) are not separate teachings but are intimately associated. In a similar manner, Paul also knew that the faith was not the greatest of Christian virtues. Love was more important still (1 Cor 13:2, 12).