James 2

James 2:1-13

Division 2. (James 2:1-13.)“Against such there is no law.” We have now what is very characteristic of the epistle, according to what we have seen as to it. It is addressed to those still under the law -not assuredly as seeking by it life or righteousness, (for they would be no Christians who did that,) but still bound by it, as people say still, as a rule of life; only carrying this further as Jews, than men would now carry it, -although there is a teaching, reviving even in the present day, in which it is contended that, after all, the Christian Jew is still a Jew, and that he is right to cleave, as such, to the ordinances given to his fathers. This is the state of things which we find amongst those addressed in the epistle, to whom as yet the word to go outside the camp had not come. Thus, as we said in Acts, they would persuade the apostle of the Gentiles himself to go with those among them who were under a vow in such a way as to show that he himself walked orderly and kept the law. At the same time we have to remember, in what is before us here, that the “righteousness of the law,” all its moral perfection, “is fulfilled in us who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit;” and that against the fruits of the Spirit there is no law. This is as far as the teachings of the apostle here go.

He is kept by the divine wisdom of inspiration from anything that would seem yet to bind the law upon those who were, as we have seen, in conscience under it. He appeals simply to its witness, and condemns even by it such as did not manifest a Christian conduct. It is indeed faith that the apostle is really insisting on all the way through, but faith “worketh by love,” and “love is the fulfilling of the law;” so that it is easy to convict by it that in which faith does not work. That is what we shall find is done here.

1. This faith is fixed upon one blessed Person in whom God has revealed a glory so far beyond any other, that, in respect of it, there is no glory at all. James presses how this must of necessity influence one in matters which may be considered of the smallest importance. The poor place given in a synagogue to a poor man (the apostle, as has already been noticed, uses a Jewish term) may exemplify this. One cannot hold the faith with regard to the Lord of glory unobscured where there is respect of persons after this manner. If one finds glory in the gold ring and the fine clothing of one, and promoting him to a good place while banishing to another the poor man with his vile raiment, is not this, asks the apostle, to make a difference among themselves and to become judges with evil thoughts?

Alas, how many Christians today may fail to see the point of the apostle. Are there not, then, these differences, and is there not such a thing as place amongst men, which is in the meantime to be respected, even though we know it is not going to last eternally? Nevertheless, it is plain what is said here, and the apostle emphasizes it. Hearken, my beloved brethren, hath not God chosen the poor as to this world?" Are they not the very people amongst whom Christians are, for the most part, found? Are they not those most ready to lay hold of the true riches, as “heirs of the kingdom which God hath promised to them that love Him”? We see in how practical a way Christianity would manifest itself in those times of its first freshness, and yet even already was not that first freshness tending somewhat to fade? 2. But, as a matter of fact, the case that the apostle is putting is not hypothetical. He has to urge upon those he is addressing that they have “despised” the poor. One would judge that this state of things must already have been becoming common, or he would hardly speak of it in this way to the many whom he was addressing: “But ye have despised the poor,” he says. And this was all the worse in view of the notorious oppression on the part of the rich, for whom that which was the blessed grace of Christianity was but a mere “strait gate.” “How hardly,” asks the Lord Himself, “shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!”* But thus the edge that it had for their consciences only roused them to violence. “Do not the rich oppress you and drag you before the judgment-seats? Do they not blaspheme that excellent name by which ye are called?” “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself” was the royal law according to Scripture.

In the second table it is plain that it was, in fact, supreme, that which gave the spirit of all the rest. This respect of persons, therefore, was a sin against the law also, for it was the neighbor as the neighbor that it required one to love; and here, it is plain, no earthly distinctions could be of force.

If, then, they had respect of persons, they committed sin, and were convicted by the law itself as transgressors. And it was in vain to plead the keeping of other points; they were but questions of detail. If a man were to yield true obedience, it would have to be entire obedience, and a man was a transgressor, therefore, if he violated any one point. It would not do to say, “I am no adulterer,” if a man killed his neighbor; and the law was, in fact, now, according to the new covenant which had come in for Christians, if not for the nation, a law of liberty. “I will write my laws,” says the Lord, “upon their hearts.” A law written upon the heart becomes the nature of the man in whom this takes place, so that there is no slavery in obedience, but delight. And by this law of liberty, plainly, Christians then were to be judged; that is to say, it was to be expected from them that they would answer to the character implied in it; and the lack of mercy shown would necessarily bring down judgment upon the one who showed no mercy; but “mercy glorieth over judgment;” yet they were, in fact, judging the poor man for his poverty. \

James 2:14-26

Division 3. (James 2:14-26.)The manifestation of faith by works. We come now to that part of the epistle which has been more commented on, perhaps, certainly more misinterpreted, than any other part. Faith, as we have seen, is indeed, in a certain sense, the apostle’s subject all the way through. The works upon which he dwells are the works of faith. If that is not found in them, they are no good works for him. On the other hand, faith that hath not works is not faith. It is not to the dishonor of faith to say so: no, his argument is, that faith is such a fruitful principle that if the tree be there, its fruit will be surely found. The apostle’s subject here is the manifestation of faith by works. He is not in the least speaking of justification before God, as we have already said.

That is not his subject, nor has the apostle Paul, whose subject it is, left such an important modification of his doctrine (as by many this is thought to be) to come in this disjointed manner from the mouth of another long afterwards. If it were indeed so, it would be a hopeless matter to follow the reasoning of any one writer by itself. He might have left out some important thing which should have been considered, and the absence of which would vitiate the whole argument. As has already been said, the apostle Paul distinctly leaves room for what James says here, when he says of Abraham that if he were justified by works he would have whereof to glory, and adds, “but not before God.” No one can find, throughout what is said here, any hint that a man is justified by works before God. The whole question is one of the reality of profession. Christians are professedly believers, but what doth it profit if any one say he hath faith but hath not works?

It is simply a question of saying it -professed faith. But can faith that is in profession merely, as here, save him?

It was but a fair word. Who would think that it could profit if any were naked or lacking daily food, and one should say to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” and yet do nothing to furnish them with that which was needful? What would they think of it? The profession of faith merely would be nothing better than such a profession of works, which would falsify itself at once to any one. Faith, then, that has not works is dead in itself. There is no principle of fruit in it, and this, for us, is the test of its reality.

We see at once that he is not thinking of God who knows the heart, but of man who does not know it, and who can only judge of it by the outward conduct. “Some one will say, Thou hast faith, and I have works. Show me thy faith apart from works, and I will show thee my faith by my works.” It is plain that that is the only possible way, and it is equally plain that it is simply a question of manifestation before man.

He does, indeed, assert that the faith that saves is that which is fruitful, but who questions that? and who could possibly desire to have it otherwise? It is a blessed thing to know that that which in itself is the humblest thing possible, and which turns one away from self to Another, is yet that which, by bringing into the presence of the great unseen realities, must of necessity have its corresponding fruit in life and walk. He takes in the mere Jew here, orthodox in his monotheism; but what had it wrought in him? It was, surely, well to believe that God is One, and the demons believe that too, but their faith is thus far fruitful that at least it makes them shudder; but the faith that is merely of lip, and cannot demonstrate itself, is really of no value. And now he brings forward the case of Abraham, our father, to whose faith God Himself had borne witness. It is not, of course, in his purpose here to cite the Scripture which speaks thus simply as sufficient, however sufficient it was to that there was faith in Abraham. He does not say, as Paul does, that Abraham was justified by faith when “he believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness.” Was that not true, then? It must certainly have been true, for the Scripture itself asserts it. But his point is that this faith, as to which God had pronounced, issued in works which justified Abraham as a believer -justified what was said by God, that “he believed God.” Thus, he does not refer to what the fifteenth of Genesis brings before us, but takes us on to what came long years after in that magnificent display of faith on Abraham’s part, when he offered Isaac his son, his only son, upon the altar, at the command of God. Plainly, that was a work that needed itself to be justified by the faith that was in it.

It was a faith which this rendered indisputable. It was plain to see how faith wrought with his works in this case, and by works the faith was made perfect; that is, it came thoroughly to fruition. Paul’s argument is as to the justification of the ungodly; James’ is as to the justification of one already accepted as a believer. It is a justification which we have to pronounce. The Scripture was here fulfilled which saith, “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness.” It was not merely now that Scripture spoke, but that Abraham’s conduct spoke as to the truth of the Scripture. God had said that Abraham believed Him.

His own conduct made it plain he did so. Thus he came into the blessed place of one whom God could call His friend; and thus “we see that a man is justified by works, and not by his faith only;” for if he had only his faith to speak of, no one could take account of it at all. In Rahab the harlot we find even more conspicuously, in one way, the truth of this. She was but “Rahab the harlot.” There were no good works, in the way men speak, that she could produce, surely, for her justification; but the works which justified her now were simply works that evidenced her faith, and which had all their value in it. She realized that the messengers were, as it were, the messengers of God. She saw and owned God in them. In that way she received them, although they had come to spy out the city in which she dwelt, that they might destroy it. Plainly, if it were not before God that she bowed in this, her works were not merely unprofitable, but only evil. The seeing God made the whole difference. It was God Himself who was pronouncing the judgment: how could she resist Him?

Thus she had a faith which did not ennoble her: it was, as we know, accompanied, in fact, by deception, although such deception, no doubt, as men think all right in similar cases. But if the apostle were seeking moral works by which faith was to be enriched, works which had in themselves that natural excellence which men see in works of charity and such like, certainly he would not have taken up the poor harlot Rahab as an example of them. No, it is simply the evidence of faith that he is seeking, and that in order to show us that profession merely is nothing; there must be reality; and “as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.” It is mere barren orthodoxy, as we are accustomed to say; and yet, with a Jew, how much his faith counted for! There was, and there is continually, the need of the warning; and the warning is simple enough if, instead of taking merely fragmentary expressions, we look at what is put before us here in its proper connection. He will not dishonor faith, as men so often dishonor it, by putting it as if it were something merely to stand side by side with works, so that one is to be estimated by the two together. No, says the apostle, the faith is that which produces the works, the life of them, and that which makes a man’s works to be acceptable to God in order to be acceptable at all.

Such is the character of the faith that saves, and that does not make it, then, the works that save, or that help to save. The works simply distinguish it from the mere barren profession, which, barren as it is, men will at all times seek to make something of.