# Reconciling James 2:24 and Gal 2:16?



## God'sElectSaint (Aug 29, 2015)

What's the best way to explain,understand and reconcile the letter of James with Paul's epistles. 
*Paul says* "Knowing that a man is_ not _justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: _for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified_."(Gal 2:16) 

*James says* Jas 2:24 Ye see then how that_ by works a man is justified_, and not by faith _only_. 
?


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Aug 29, 2015)

We don't need to reconcile friends. 

The problem is solved when we realize that James is condemning a profession of faith without any evident fruit. Paul everywhere notes that faith unites to Christ and that union produces fruit in the lives of believers. James is challenging the man who says he has faith in Christ but there is no fruit. His faith is like the bare belief that the demons possess about Christ but everything in his life points to something else than the kind of faith that is Spirit wrought and that produces Christ-likeness in real believers.

When James speaks of Abraham here he is speaking of Abraham's faith being justified not in a forensic sense but that his faith is justified by his works. It is shown to be genuine faith in the works that it produces. Thus the same notion that Paul has that faith and good works are distinct but never separated is maintained. One has to do more than simply quote the verse but to follow James' reasoning. He is clearly not saying: "Paul said a man is justified by faith but I say that a man is justified by faith and works." He even asks whether a false faith can save a man before pointing out how Abraham's faith was justified as genuine by the fact that, when push came to shove, Abraham's belief in God caused him to act in a way that demonstrated the fruit of the reality he possessed.


----------



## God'sElectSaint (Aug 29, 2015)

Okay we have two different concepts of justification right? Paul's justification is like a legal action declaring us innocent through faith in Christ but James' justification is more like maybe vindicated or proving something is true. Like my obedience to Christ vindicates or justifies my inner faith in him.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Aug 29, 2015)

Correct.


----------



## JimmyH (Aug 29, 2015)

Semper Fidelis said:


> Correct.



Rich, I am posting this to be sure I have the correct grasp of my faith as related to works. 

I'm drawn to Christ by the Father. John 6:44

The eyes of my understanding are enlightened by the Holy Spirit. Ephesians 1:18

God gives me the gift of faith. Ephesians 2:8

I am indwelt by the Holy Spirit. John 14:15, 14:16, 14:17

The Holy Spirit leads and guides me to sanctification leading to good works. Romans 8:9

I am transformed by a renewing of my mind, and old things pass away and, in my case, many things become new. Romans 12:2

I can see the transformation in my life, my thoughts, my habits, interests, desires and lifestyle.

If and when I 'miss the mark' ........ 1 John 1:9

Am I on the right track ?


----------



## timfost (Aug 29, 2015)

God'sElectSaint said:


> What's the best way to explain,understand and reconcile the letter of James with Paul's epistles.
> *Paul says* "Knowing that a man is_ not _justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: _for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified_."(Gal 2:16)
> 
> *James says* Jas 2:24 Ye see then how that_ by works a man is justified_, and not by faith _only_.
> ?



I think the easiest way to understand this is:

1: Paul was opposing justification by faith _and_ works.
2: James is proposing that we need faith _that_ works.

Like you were suggesting, Paul is speaking about justification as once and done (though perpetual for sure since we remain justified). James is speaking more to the assurance we have of our justification which is by seeing the fruit of our justification. I find it helpful to keep in mind that though our justification is always certain in God's eyes, we can lack assurance of it (WCF 28:4). James may have been opposing the idea of _eternal security_. He certainly promoted _perseverance of the saints_, a very different doctrine.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Aug 30, 2015)

JimmyH said:


> Semper Fidelis said:
> 
> 
> > Correct.
> ...



Yes!


----------



## MW (Aug 30, 2015)

Paul discusses the justification of the ungodly, who receive the imputed righteousness of Christ by faith alone; James discusses the justification of faith, which is shown to be genuine by the fruits which proceed from it. One is the justification of the person while the other is the justification of faith.


----------



## timfost (Aug 31, 2015)

MW said:


> Paul discusses the justification of the ungodly, who receive the imputed righteousness of Christ by faith alone; James discusses the justification of faith, which is shown to be genuine by the fruits which proceed from it. One is the justification of the person while the other is the justification of faith.



A little confused by this... is there a difference between the person being justified and the person being justified by the means of faith? I was under the impression that the justification in view was the same in both passages, though Romans from the objective perspective and James from the subjective.


----------



## NB3K (Aug 31, 2015)

> Romans:4 What then shall we say was gained by[a] Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” 4 Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. 5 And to the one who does not work but believes in* him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, 6 just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works:
> 
> 7 “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
> and whose sins are covered;
> 8 blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin.”*


*

I have always had the same issue trying to reconcile James 2:24 with Romans 4.*


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Aug 31, 2015)

Here is the BDAG entry for the word in question:

*δικαιόω* fut. δικαιώσω; 1 aor. ἐδικαίωσα. Pass.: 1 fut. δικαιωθήσομαι; 1 aor. ἐδικαιώθην, subj. δικαιωθῶ, ptc. δικαιωθείς; pf. δεδικαίωμαι Ro 6:7; 1 Cor 4:4; ptc. δεδικαιωμένος Lk 18:14 (Soph., Hdt.; Aristot., EN 1136a; et al.; pap, LXX; En 102:10; TestAbr A 13 p. 93, 14 [Stone p. 34]; Test12Patr; ApcSed, 14:8 p. 136, 15 Ja.; Jos., Ant. 17, 206; Just.; Ath., R. 53, 1; 65, 14) to practice δικαιοσύνη.
*① to take up a legal cause, show justice, do justice, take up a cause* τινά (Polyb. 3, 31, 9 ὑμᾶς δὲ αὐτοὺς … δικαιώσεσθε ‘you will (find it necessary to) take up your own cause’ = you will sit in judgment on yourselves; Cass. Dio 48, 46 ‘Antony was not taking Caesar’s side’ in the matter; 2 Km 15:4; Ps 81:3) δικαιῶσαι δίκαιον take up the cause of an upright pers. 1 Cl 16:12 (Is 53:11); τινί χήρᾳ (χήραν v.l.) 8:4 (Is 1:17 ‘take up the cause of the widow’).

*② to render a favorable verdict, vindicate.*
*
ⓐ as activity of humans justify, vindicate, treat as just* (Appian, Liby. 17 §70; Gen 44:16; Sir 10:29; 13:22; 23:11 al.) θέλων δ. ἑαυτόν wishing to justify himself Lk 10:29; δ. ἑαυτὸν ἐνώπιόν τινος j. oneself before someone=‘you try to make out a good case for yourselves before the public’ 16:15 (δ. ἐαυτόν as En 102:10; but s. JJeremias, ZNW 38, ’39, 117f [against him SAalen, NTS 13, ’67, 1ff]). ὁ δικαιούμενός μοι the one who vindicates himself before (or against) me B 6:1 (cp. Is 50:8). τελῶναι ἐδικαίωσαν τὸν θεόν βαπτισθέντες tax-collectors affirmed God’s uprightness and got baptized i.e. by ruling in God’s favor they admitted that they were in the wrong and took a new direction (opp. τὴν βουλὴν τ. θεοῦ ἀθετεῖν) Lk 7:29 (cp. PsSol 2:15; 3:5; 8:7, 23; 9:2).


*ⓑ of experience or activity of transcendent figures, esp. in relation to humans*
*α. of wisdom* ἐδικαιώθη ἀπὸ τῶν τέκνων αὐτῆς is vindicated by her children (on δικ. ἀπό cp. Is 45:25. S. also Appian, Basil. 8: δικαιόω=consider someth. just or correct) Lk 7:35; also ἀπὸ τῶν ἔργων αὐτῆς Mt 11:19 (v.l. τέκνων). On this saying s. DVölter, NThT 8, 1919, 22–42; JBover, Biblica 6, 1925, 323–25; 463–65; M-JLagrange, ibid. 461–63. Of an angel Hm 5, 1, 7.
*β. of God be found in the right, be free of charges* (cp. TestAbr A 13 p. 93, 14 [Stone p. 34] ‘be vindicated’ in a trial by fire) Mt 12:37 (opp. καταδικάζειν). δεδικαιωμένος Lk 18:14; GJs 5:1; δεδικαιωμένη (Salome) 20:4 (not pap). Ac 13:39 (but s. 3 below); Rv 22:11 v.l; Dg 5:14.—Paul, who has influenced later wr. (cp. Iren. 3, 18, 7 [Harv. II 102, 2f]), uses the word almost exclusively of God’s judgment. As affirmative verdict Ro 2:13. Esp. of pers. δικαιοῦσθαι be acquitted, be pronounced and treated as righteous and thereby become δίκαιος, receive the divine gift of δικαιοσύνη through faith in Christ Jesus and apart from νόμος as a basis for evaluation (MSeifrid, Justification by Faith—The Origin and Development of a Central Pauline Theme ’92) 3:20 (Ps 142:2), 24, 28; 4:2; 5:1, 9; 1 Cor 4:4; Gal 2:16f (Ps 142:2); 3:11, 24; 5:4; Tit 3:7; Phil 3:12 v.l.; B 4:10; 15:7; IPhld 8:2; Dg 9:4; (w. ἁγιάζεσθαι) Hv 3, 9, 1. οὐ παρὰ τοῦτο δεδικαίωμαι I am not justified by this (after 1 Cor 4:4) IRo 5:1. ἵνα δικαιωθῇ σου ἡ σάρξ that your flesh (as the sinful part) may be acquitted Hs 5, 7, 1; δ. ἔργοις by (on the basis of) works, by what one does 1 Cl 30:3; cp. Js 2:21, 24f (ἔργον 1a and πίστις 2dδ); διʼ ἐαυτῶν δ. by oneself=as a result of one’s own accomplishments 1 Cl 32:4. (cp. κατὰ νόμον Hippol., Ref. 7, 34, 1).—Since Paul views God’s justifying action in close connection with the power of Christ’s resurrection, there is sometimes no clear distinction between the justifying action of acquittal and the gift of new life through the Holy Spirit as God’s activity in promoting uprightness in believers. Passages of this nature include Ro 3:26, 30; 4:5 (on δικαιοῦν τὸν ἀσεβῆ cp. the warning against accepting δῶρα to arrange acquittal Ex 23:7 and Is 5:23; δικαιούμενοι δωρεάν Ro 3:24 is therefore all the more pointed); 8:30, 33 (Is 50:8); Gal 3:8; Dg 9:5. For the view (held since Chrysostom) that δ. in these and other pass. means ‘make upright’ s. Goodsp., Probs. 143–46, JBL 73, ’54, 86–91.

*③ to cause someone to be released from personal or institutional claims that are no longer to be considered pertinent or valid, make free/pure* (the act. Ps 72:13) in our lit. pass. δικαιοῦμαι be set free, made pure ἀπό from (Sir 26:29; TestSim 6:1, both δικ. ἀπὸ [τῆς] ἁμαρτίας) ἀπὸ πάντων ὧν οὐκ ἠδυνήθητε ἐν νόμω Μωϋσέως δικαιωθῆναι from everything fr. which you could not be freed by the law of Moses Ac 13:38; cp. vs. 39. ὁ ἀποθανὼν δεδικαίωται ἀπὸ τ. ἁμαρτίας the one who died is freed fr. sin Ro 6:7 (s. KKuhn, ZNW 30, ’31, 305–10; EKlaar, ibid. 59, ’68, 131–34). In the context of 1 Cor 6:11 ἐδικαιώθητε means you have become pure.—In the language of the mystery religions (Rtzst., Mysterienrel.3 258ff) δικαιοῦσθαι refers to a radical inner change which the initiate experiences (Herm. Wr. 13, 9 χωρὶς γὰρ κρίσεως ἰδὲ πῶς τὴν ἀδικίαν ἐξήλασεν. ἐδικαιώθημεν, ὦ τέκνον, ἀδικίας ἀπούσης) and approaches the sense ‘become deified’. Some are inclined to find in 1 Ti 3:16 a similar use; but see under 4.
*④ to demonstrate to be morally right, prove to be right, pass. of God is proved to be right* Ro 3:4; 1 Cl 18:4 (both Ps 50:6). Of Christ 1 Ti 3:16.—Lit. s. on δικαιοσύνη 3c.—HRosman, Iustificare (δικαιοῦν) est verbum causativum: Verbum Domini 21, ’41, 144–47; NWatson, Δικ. in the LXX, JBL 79, ’60, 255–66; CCosgrove, JBL 106, ’87, 653–70.—DELG s.v. δίκη. M-M. EDNT. TW. Spicq.




Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., & Bauer, W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed., p. 249). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.[/quote]


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Aug 31, 2015)

I present that to show the nuance with which language is used. We all innately understand this. When I say I love chocolate chip cookie dough ice cream it doesn't mean the same thing as when I say I love my wife. The context and how I use the word determines the case.

Matthew re-states in brief what I noted. What is being found "free of charge" is Abraham's faith in James 2:24. Follow the argument. James is going after those who claim to have faith and asking them to have their faith put "on trial". He then offers Abraham's faith and demonstrates that the faith of Abraham is free of charge based on the actions.

But Abraham's faith is not something that needs to be reconciled with God. It is a quality of a _man_ Abraham who needed to be reconciled with God. How was he reconciled? By faith! His faith was the instrument by which he (Abraham, the person) was accounted as free of charge.


----------



## Peairtach (Aug 31, 2015)

Paul says this, among other things:



> For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith *which worketh* by love.(Galatians 5:6)



James is dealing with those who are abusing the doctrine of justification by faith alone, and takes it from there.

Also Paul is addressing legalists and those under their influence, whereas James is addressing those using justification by faith alone as a basis for antinomianism. It shows that justification by faith alone was the common apostolic doctrine.


----------



## MW (Aug 31, 2015)

timfost said:


> A little confused by this... is there a difference between the person being justified and the person being justified by the means of faith?



There is no difference there. Justification of the ungodly person is always and only received by faith -- sola fide. It is forensic. The person who in the eyes of the law is considered a transgressor can only be accepted as righteous by receiving the imputed righteousness of Christ, and this reception is only by believing in Christ. The question in James, however, is whether the faith of the person is true and lively. Verse 17, "Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone." Verse 18, "I will shew thee my faith by my works." It is not the justification of the person, but the justification of the person's faith, which James discusses. Is the person a genuine believer? If so, his actions towards his fellow men will demonstrate it and declare that the profession of faith is true.


----------



## timfost (Aug 31, 2015)

Gotcha! Thanks for clarifying. I agree.


----------

