Reading from Romans 1, Romans
4, 1 through 3, What shall we say then that Abraham our father,
as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? For if Abraham were justified
by works, he hath whereof to glory, but not before God. For what saith the Scripture? Abraham believed God, and it
was counted unto him for righteousness." Now, James chapter 2, and we
notice that both of these authors refer to the man Abraham. James says in chapter 2, 21 through
24, Was not Abraham our father justified
by works when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? See thou how faith wrought with
his works, and by works was faith made perfect, and the scripture
was fulfilled which said Abraham believed God and it was imputed
unto him for righteousness and he was called a friend of God. You see then how that by works
a man is justified and not by faith only. Now we're going to
try to reconcile those two. I begin by conceding that it
is no secret, it is known to all, that there are enemies of
the Bible, there are skeptics of the Gospel, and haters of
Christianity, and critics of the infallible view of the Word
of our God, who love to point out the contradiction what they
call, quote, the inconsistency that they find throughout the
scripture, and to them they are many, they abound. When they
find what they perceive to be a contradiction in God's blessed
word, they feel that they have just reason for be leery of the
Scripture and not take it as the infallible Word of God. Some even say it's just another
book. It's a book written by men and
they openly and freely say, that it has mistakes in it. They do
not take it to be divinely inspired, but we do, do we not? Some have searched through the
scripture for what they call contradiction in the book so
that they might discredit the word of God and say to others,
see here, this is full of contradiction. Thus it is that they might perceive
that there is a great contradiction between Paul and between James. What Paul says, one is not justified
by works, but by faith in Jesus Christ. What James said, that
one is justified by works and not by faith only. And again,
it is common in many of the churches to set one passage over against
another and emphasize the one that seems to best favor their
particular position and ignore those others that seem to be
contradictory to what they believe and to what they are preaching
and teaching. And I think that a very good
example of this would be those who find such text as John chapter
3 and verse 16 and they weigh that over against Romans chapter
9, for example, and verse 13 and say here God loves everyone
and it cannot be said that God hates any. Now our present task
and text is for us this evening to see if we can reconcile what
James said with what Paul has already said in regard to the
doctrine of justification and the relationship of works under
that. Paul saying that sinners are
justified apart from works and James saying we have seen how
that by works a man is justified and not by faith only. That's
in chapter 2 and verse 24. Now this presented such a problem
to Martin Luther in days gone by that for a while, so I have
read, He rejected the book of James altogether as not being
worthy of a place in the sacred scripture. Some others also did
that early on in the history of the Christian church. Also,
the epistle of James was slow to be accepted in and counted
in and put among the canon of the scripture. In some version,
it was placed in the back of the Bible rather than where we
have it in ours today. And for a few years, passed before
Luther ever accepted it as canonical, what he called a right stroy
epistle, unquote. He accepted it as having a right
among the canon of the scripture after a while in his life. And
the reason is perhaps Luther read with great delight when
he found the just shall live by faith, and found that great
doctrine in the Scripture. And he seemed to stumble when
he came to James, saying, So we see then that a man is justified
by works and not by faith only. Now what are we to make of these
two New Testament passages and these two New Testament authors
that seem to contradict one the other? For Paul is very emphatic
in dealing with the doctrine of justification, which by the
way is the leading subject of the book of Romans and the book
of Galatians. But he also completely excludes
works in other epistles as being an affront to the doctrine of
salvation by grace. So the question for us is of
utmost importance How is a guilty sinner, without any strength
and without any merit, an enemy of God in his mind by wicked
works, dead in trespasses and in sin, how is one to come to
be justified in the sight of God? How can such a one as that
be made righteous? How can they escape the guilt
of their sin? What will justify a guilty sinner
in the sight of God? How can they go from condemnation
to justification in the sight and eye of God? Now to repeat,
This is the major doctrinal part set forth in both the Roman and
the Galatian epistles by Paul. They both have their major thrust,
and that is to overthrow the Jews, great and strong proclivity
to make justification to be by the works of the law and the
keeping of the law. They being ignorant of God's
method of justification and going about to establish their own
manner of justification or righteousness, have not submitted themselves
unto the righteousness of God. And so they fail to attain a
justifying righteousness because they sought to attain it by the
works of the law and the keeping of the law. This always results
in failure. No man can ever move into a state
of justification by works or by the keeping of the law because
of man's inability to perfectly keep it, which of course God
required. For unless he keeps all of the
law, He is cursed in the sight of God. So said Moses in Deuteronomy
27 and 26, and Paul quotes that in Galatians 3 and in verse 10. So Paul writes that sinners are
justified freely by the grace of God through the redemption
that is in Christ Jesus. Romans 3 and verse 24. but that
by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in
God's sight." Romans chapter 3 and 28. That it is not of works,
Ephesians 2 and 9, that it is not of works, Romans 9 and verse
13, not according to our works, 2 Timothy chapter 1 and verse
9, not by works of righteousness that we have done, Titus chapter
3 and verse 5. Then of Abraham, Paul writes
in Romans 4 and verse 2, if Abraham were justified by works, then
he hath an occasion or a ground to boast, an occasion to glory
about that. For if it were by works, it would
be then a reward bestowed upon him because of his works. It
would be the just recompense of a debt if Abraham were justified
by works. This would take it completely
then out of the realm of the grace of God. Not only so, but
Abraham was justified by faith and an imputed righteousness
was put to the account of the good man. But David also said
in Romans 4 and verse 6, Describe the blessedness of the man unto
whom God imputeth righteousness without works. That's a quotation
from the 32nd Psalm verse 1 And verse 2, so Paul uses Abraham
in his writings, Romans and Galatians particularly, as the prototype
of justification by faith and concludes in Romans 4.16, which
was our text a couple of Sundays ago, that it is of faith in order
that it might be a matter of grace. Now Paul hangs his whole
argument with the Jews on the case of Abraham, their paternal
father. That that patriarch was justified
by an imputed righteousness and that it came by faith and came
not at all by works. that it came not at all through
circumcision, for he was justified prior to receiving the circumcision
in the flesh, Romans 4, 9 through 12. It also was apart from law. He establishes that in Romans
4 and 13 through verse 16. So with Paul as our guide, we
trust him on the matter of justification, for he it is that has laid out
this great doctrine in the scripture. That brings us now to consider
the words of James in such text as chapter 2 and verse 21, Was
not our father Abraham justified by works? Then again in verse
24, you see then how that by works a man is justified and
not by faith only. Now how can it be that we have
two apostles here both of them speaking under the
inspiration of the Spirit, both of them referring to one and
the same individual, Abraham, going, it seems, in two different
ways, how then can we reconcile these two so that there is no
contradiction between what one says and the other. Now, the
solution is not to discredit James or to tear down his epistle
or to call it or to call in question the inerrancy of the Holy Scripture
at all. We quote other parts of it as
being the Word of God. We consider all of it to be so. So, let's set forth a premise
or two as we proceed. Number one, it is the consent
of all who possess the faith of God's elect that there are
no such contradictions in the word of the Lord as people say
that they are. We're not forced to set one author
against the other, take one author against the side of the other,
or advance one contrary to another. Never will true faith Never will
the faith of God's elect say that the Bible contradicts itself
and therefore is unreliable. We cannot understand it. John
Owen said something that I quote now, quote, wherefore these words
of Paul and of James are certainly capable of a just reconciliation."
Secondly, it is a rule of scriptural exegesis that on any matter of
doctrine, the larger body of the text The fuller teaching
on any matter, the expanded discussion is to have a greater consideration
over those places where it is mentioned only briefly or in
passing or to some other purpose or connection. Just as 1 Corinthians
chapter 15 The definitive passage on the resurrection is 1 Corinthians
chapter 15. It is discussed there very extensively. Thus as the example, the 13 verses
of James. chapter 2 verse 14 through verse
26 or not, to overturn Paul's argument and exegesis in Romans
as to the manner of justification. Then number three, the point
made by the Puritan John Owen, I think is wise in his works,
the doctrine of justification. The doctrine of justification
before God, he said, is to be learned from the writing of the
Apostle Paul principally. Justification must not be studied
apart from Paul's great doctrine of justification or apart from
his Romans and his Galatian epistle. God has by his grace and wisdom
made the Apostle Paul the leading exegete on the doctrine of justification
or of the doctrine of justification according to Paul. is a worthy
study. So having cleared that, we next
must ask the purpose and the end of their writing on the subject
of justification. How is Paul writing on it? How
is James writing on it? How does it figure in the writing
of each one of them. Well, Paul writes to declare
the way of justification. The way, the manner. The way
and the manner of justification, and let me add two words, before
God. He's writing on the manner of
the justification of a sinner before God or in the sight of
God. How guilty sinners may be acquitted
and received by God as righteous and righteousness imputed unto
them. So then the question comes up,
to what end does James then write on the subject of justification? How is it pertinent to the argument
that James is following. Why does he take up the subject? Is it that he might contradict
Paul? Is it that he might disgrace
Paul? Is it that he might correct Paul
in what he has written earlier to make works a part of justifying
righteousness in the life of a person? Now, the epistle of
James is by some said to be the first of the, quote, universal
epistles that we have in the scripture. And James exhorts
the believer to a moral life, living a moral, godly life before
God based upon their profession of faith and their relationship
unto the Lord Jesus Christ. So that James writes, not to
correct Paul, but to defend Paul's doctrine of justification being
turned into lasciviousness by some, to insist that true faith
will have proper roots. that justified person must not
abuse the gospel by living contrary to their profession, and contrary
to the teaching of the Word of the Lord. And chapter 2 contains
two special exhortations in regard to the exercise of fruits of
faith. First of all, in verse 1 through
verse 13, verse 1 he says, My brethren, Have not the faith
of our Lord Jesus Christ with respect of person. In other words,
have the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, but do not exercise the
faith of our Lord Jesus Christ with respect of person. That
is, practice not the Christian faith with respect unto persons
by looking at the more important or the more wealthy or the social
elite and elevating them above the more common folks. Secondly, in that chapter in
verse 14 through verse 26, he deals with what James calls dead
faith. Now we need to get those two
words. He is talking here about what he calls dead faith. Twice
in verse 17, again in verse 26, James is condemning what he calls
dead faith. And this section opens with the
question, can such faith be saving? We look at verse 14 there in
the second chapter and it says, What doth it profit, my brethren,
though a man say he have faith, and have not works? Can faith
save him? In other words, can this kind
of faith become saving unto him? Note the person that James has
in mind. Keep in mind whom James has in
his mind. It is the one who says, S-A-Y-S,
it is the one who says that he has faith. Now twice he uses
this formula as we have pointed out. A man may say, I have faith. You find it in verse 14. And
then again in verse 18, James is focusing in verse 14 on a
person who one, says he has faith, but two, has no works to go with
that faith. He professes the faith, but he
bears no fruit. It is not even that he has faith,
this is not James' poem at all, but he says that he has faith. He claims that He has faith in
Christ, yet this person has no corresponding good works. After all, Paul said, we are
created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before
ordained that we should walk in them, back in Ephesians chapter
2 and verse 10. Now this reminds us of James
chapter 1 And verse 26 and 7, and if you'll follow, I'd like
to read that into the record. James 1, 26 and 27. You see the mind of James in
his epistle. If any man among you seem to
be religious and bridles not his tongue, but deceives his
own heart, this man's religion is vain. Pure religion and undefiled
before God is this, to visit the fatherless and the widows
in their affliction and to keep themselves unspotted from the
world. Now the question is, verse 14,
again, chapter 2, can that faith save him? It's generally understood
as asking, can that faith save him? That is, profess faith without
works. Faith which is only in word and
not in deed. James gives the illustration,
you see there, in verse 15 and 16, a brother or a sister lacking
food and lacking clothing, and the person such as the one in
verse 14 that James talks about would say to them, Oh, God bless
you. Peace be with you. Go and put
on some clothes. Go and get you something to eat. God bless you. Go and pee. Now, what would that fate do
is the question of James. He says, give them the things
that they have need of. One who says that he has fate
would indeed act in a situation where a brother or a sister had
nothing to eat and no good clothes to put on. So note, a brother
or a sister lacking and does not help them, what is the profit
of their professed faith? It has come not into play. He repeats in verse 17, such
faith without works is dead. Look at verse 18. James gives
a possible dialogue here between two persons. One claiming faith,
but one with God but one with good works and one without. Both men claim or both persons
claim they have faith. One has good works to go without
faith and one does not. Now in verse 19, the claimer
of faith with no works, is challenged further. Does he believe there
is one God? In his profession, he is a monotheist,
is that it? Is this as he separated him from
the heathen? He professed of one God only? Well, It is the same thing that
is believed by demons. You believe in one God, so do
the demons. In other words, James is saying. But the truth remains in verse
20, faith without works is dead. Being alone, if you look at verse
17 and the last part. Verse 21, James brings to bear
upon his argument the case of Abraham, and if we might let
us re-read that section. Well, let's just think about
it. verse 21 through verse 24 without taking the time to read
it again. But his intent is to prove from
the experience of the patriarch Abraham that justifying faith
will indeed manifest itself in good works and in obedience unto
God, asking Was not Abraham our father justified by works when
he offered up Isaac? Now Abraham was justified before
God, before Isaac was ever born into the family or born into
the flesh. And this justification of him
at that early time is said to be by faith. Genesis 15, 6, Romans
4. 1 through 6. Abraham believed God. It was reckoned to him for righteousness
way before Isaac was ever born. But James shows that Abraham's
faith was not a dead faith as he is speaking about in this
particular play. He did not say, I have faith. But having received God's command
in Genesis chapter 22 and verses 1 and 2, he went out and was
about to offer up Isaac as God had commanded him. He proceeded
to do so by faith. He offered up Isaac. Hebrews 11 and verse 17, and
besides Abraham, was stopped from offering up Isaac before
he did the actual deed because God was pleased with what he
had done. It was not the justification
of his soul, not the justification of his sin before God, but the
justification of his having true faith in God and God's revelation. Being justified from sin, he
by faith obeyed the command of God. He withheld not his only
beloved son, Isaac. Genesis 22 and verse 12. He proved
that he feared God, it is said in that verse, Genesis 22 and
12. So from this James can say in
the 22nd verse of our text, see then how faith wrought with works
and by works was faith made perfect. faith in Abraham produced works
of obedience unto his God. Our faith worked with the works
of Abraham. His faith rested not in his bare
profession, but as the Puritan Thomas Manton said, his faith
was active. It obeyed God. It went when God
said go. He did what God said do. Now the word used by James, perfected,
means to bring to an end, to accomplish, to bring to a fullness
or to a completeness. And as Dr. Jackson put it, quote,
not by communicating or imputation of perfection to it, but by stirringly
in exercise intending the natural vigor of the faith in James'
man, or in Abraham. Going back to verse 18 for a
minute, where James sets up what Manton called that dialogue between
two. One who says that he has faith,
but no works, another that he says he will manifest his faith
by his works to God, or toward God. Who can prove their faith
without works? This is dead faith, James is
saying, if there are no good works. Now, suppose someone should
say, here's a hypothetical case, I have faith, I believe in God,
and I believe in Jesus Christ. Suppose a person said that, but
they do not go to church, they don't pray, they don't read their
Bible, they don't support the preaching of the gospel of our
Lord, they don't care for Christian fellowship, they have no interest
in the things of God. Can this kind of faith be saving
faith? It is what James calls dead faith. James uses a second example in
verse 25, that of the converted harlot Rahab in Joshua chapter
2 and verse 6. chapters 2 and chapter 6, I think,
who received the Jewish spies with peace. Hebrews 11, 31. She
manifested her faith by protecting the spies that Moses had sent
into the land. And she perished not with the
unbelievers. When the city fell, she was spared. We read in Joshua 6 and 23, James
closes his argument with a comparing conclusion. Chapter 2 and verse
26, as the body without the spirit is dead, that is, the body is
lifeless when the spirit leaves, having no vital animating principle
left in it, Even so, faith without works is dead. It is an empty
faith. It is a vain faith. For true
saving faith manifests itself in good works and good action
and obedience unto God. So the conclusion here is, justification
is not by works. They have no part in justifying
the soul of the sinner before Almighty God. Even good works
form no part of the justifying righteousness that Paul sets
before us in the Scripture. This is Paul's perspective in
Galatians and again in Roman. But true, justifying faith, the
faith of God's elect, is manifested in good works. It is manifested
in help to our brother and our sister, in living a pious, devoted
life unto the God who has saved us. This is James' perspective,
that a man who says that he has faith in God will manifest that
faith in good works and outreach to others. This Paul and James
are reconcilable. Paul defends justification from
the corruption of works. James defends against making
it a license to sin. Paul excludes works as producing
justification. James contends that justification
will produce good works. In summation, as so well stated
by John Owen, quote, they speak not of justification in the same
sense nor unto the same end, unquote. That is Paul and James. Paul treats of the absolute justification
of a sinner before God and the full meaning of its accomplishment
through the death of Christ. and by faith. James treats from
the standpoint, those who have the faith of God's elect, it
will be manifest, it will be evident in their obedience and
service to God, in their good works and in pious living. it will manifest itself in those
things. And thus they will display their
faith by their works, by their good works and their kindness
to their brother and sister and their love towards one another.
They will display that faith by their works as Abraham did
when he bound that beloved son and put him upon the altar. And as Rahab did when she risked
her life to save the spies who came into the city of Jericho. In other words, justification
will issue into sanctification. Justification will issue into
sanctification. Those that are justified will
live a sanctified life because of the great work of God in them. Thus we see that they are harmonized
and are reconcilable, we trust.