There was a significant lack of knowledge in the early years of the church. The cross and resurrection changed everything, resulting in the elimination of a covenant that had been in place for centuries. Consider if a Jewish person who believed in Jesus after the cross ... but still also believed the law of Moses was still to be applied for all Jewish people ... just exactly what did that mean for them? How did the blood of Jesus fit into that compared with the continued attempts to be doers of that old word? And what did it mean for Gentiles who never had the law?
When encouraging them to work at fulfilling that law, faith alone would be considered insufficient for salvation and justification. Righteousness would continue to be pursued by works plus faith. It formed a mindset that people such as Abraham and Rahab were not justified by believing, but by works being added in order to make faith perfect. How is this much different from the legalistic mumbo jumbo many of us have heard in works-based churches for so long? Let's take a closer look at the Rahab factor in the context of being justified.
Someone who out-performs the majority of Christians with extraordinary works and extends compassion towards others outwardly, could do so with great consistency without ever having claimed to believe in Jesus Christ. They could demonstrate what appears to be fruitful behavior through their works and actions without having faith that brings justification.
On the other hand, a believer in Jesus Christ may have faith without demonstrating it outwardly in ways that we or certain religious people think that it should be expressed. But that doesn't mean they are not saved and justified. The effort to produce and then boast in works is not proof of faith. Faith is the evidence of that which is not seen. Perhaps this is why Paul said we look at what is not seen ... because justification and righteousness is granted to those who-do-not-work but believe in Him who justifies the ungodly.
Understanding that James did not have a full revelation of grace apart from the law of Moses at the time he penned his letter to believers from the 12 tribes of Israel will clear up much confusion for Bible readers. After offering his perspective on Abraham in the attempt to make his case for law, he said this: "You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only." Is that the good news everyone was waiting to hear?
On the other hand, Paul also used Abraham as his example when he wrote this in Romans 4: "For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt. But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness."
Look carefully (and honestly) at the significant difference in what was said ... and this is just one example out of many. Buying into the human ideology that declares everything written by men in the New Testament was dictated from the mouth of God will force people into coming up with all kinds of interpretations based on conjecture. Feeling the need to make it appear as though the apostles said the same thing leads to inconsistency about the gospel message. The NT pages explain to us where James was coming from in the early years after the cross when it came to the law and works ... and Jews and Gentiles. Therein lies the story of the bigger picture of the gospel which has brought the gift of God's righteousness, apart from works.
When it comes to righteousness as a gift from God, the "faith without works" crowd struggles to explain their inconsistent approach. Some will appear to speak words about God's grace while later their lips leak legalism because the mindsets they have been clinging to are based upon false assumptions that have been hammered into them by the church Doctrine Department. If one who believes in Christ doesn't have works, does this mean their faith is phony and not genuine? The Apostle Paul didn't seem to think so.
In addition, they can never tell you specifically what precise works are required and how much. But James could ... because he was speaking about a specific blueprint—the works of the Mosaic law. It was the very thing Paul declared had been wiped out and deemed to be obsolete under a new and better covenant. Bearing the fruit of the Spirit is a good thing, but don't be deceived into thinking you are the one producing it. So which is it? It is important to come to the knowledge of the truth as to whether salvation is truly by grace through faith in what God has done through Christ ... or if it is only for the person who has faith and then has works to show for it.
We're wrapping up our recent series about some things found in the letter from James to believers in Jesus from the twelve tribes of Israel ... and the contrasts found with Paul's writings. One example we'll look at is in James 4, where an old covenant mindset is communicated about telling believers to draw near to God which will result in Him drawing near to them. He said they should work at cleansing their hands and purifying their hearts. How? By avoiding becoming a judge of the law but rather a doer of it. It was a follow-through to what was stated earlier in the letter.
Our identity is not meant to be found in what we do and see, but as believers who trust in the sufficiency of Christ and what He did. There is a theme within the letter that focuses much on works of the law and externals—compared to Paul who exhorted people to look at the things which are not seen—who are already declared as clean, justified and sanctified apart from their actions.
The summary here is that most believing Jews at this time thought the law was still in place for them and was to be mixed with faith in Jesus as a way to attain righteousness and justification. There was a greater grace—but the law was still part of their landscape. Paul came along with what was considered controversial teaching by many for which he was harshly persecuted because of his message that the Jews had been redeemed from the law and that they and Gentiles could be saved and inherit righteousness apart from such a law of works.
Does this mean the letter from James should not be in the Bible? We believe having it included actually validates the other things we find in the New Testament. There is an overall divine inspiration being provided ... but that doesn't necessarily mean that every "verse" is coming as a quote directly from the mouth of God. That is not an accurately pure interpretation of how the word "inspired" should be defined as a verse-by-verse assumption. Zoom out from the verses (which were never included in the original scripts) and we'll find the writings as a whole provide an inspiration of a much bigger picture regarding our need for God and how He met that need with the promise of His Son. Perfect grace. Perfect love. No quid pro quo. No strings attached.
Throughout the pages of the New Testament, we see numerous examples of how there were Jewish people coming to believe in Jesus, but understandably also believed the law of Moses was still in place for them. The Apostle Paul came along a short while later with a gospel message he claimed was taught directly to him by divine revelation ... to declare the former law had been put aside and nailed to the cross. His message was that life could not be found in the law which had now come to an end, and that the Jewish people had been delivered from such a burdensome ministry of death and condemnation.
But he was in the minority and suffered much persecution because of it. Various places within the New Testament show how James and his council of leadership within the Jerusalem church were part of this persuasion who believed that the Mosaic law was a component towards attaining salvation/justification (for the Jew). They also encouraged at least portions of it for the believing Gentiles. By not ignoring this important part of the big picture within the scriptures, we can begin to see how all of these books (including the works-based letter from James) harmonize with each other to tell the story. The story of what was happening with the struggles in the early church at that time—but more importantly—the message of Jesus and how eternal life is found in Him as a gift by grace through faith ... apart from works.
Here's the playlist for our previous series, "Faith and Works, Paul and James."
Continuing with program #3 of our series on being a "doer of the word" and what this was meant to be about...
The "law of liberty" is seen twice in the New Testament, both times used by James in the first two chapters of his letter written to the twelve tribes of Israel which had been scattered to different regions. If doing an online search to find out what the law of liberty is ... like many other Bible topics ... be prepared to see no fewer than hundreds of different opinions. But as we springboard off the context from chapter 1 of his letter and move into chapter 2, we'll notice clearly how James is using this phrase as a reference to the law of Moses—something he also refers to as the royal law.
Within this context, he encourages his audience to follow all of that law and to speak "and do" as those who will be judged by that law—what he calls a law of liberty—but had just defined it as the Mosaic law. James would double-down to say faith without works is dead (useless) and that one cannot be justified by faith without works (of the law). He will declare that faith is perfected by works ... the precise opposite of what Paul said in his writing to the Galatians at the beginning of chapter 3. Even when using the example of Abraham, there is a conflict with what Paul said along the same lines, which we will cover more on the next program.
James made a statement in his letter to the twelve Jewish tribes ... believed by most historians to be the earliest writing in the pages known as The New Testament. "Be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves" (James 1:22). This passage, along with what follows has a consistent but curious theme of externals, doing and works—and all under the topic of righteousness, salvation and justification.
In program #2 in this brief series, we continue to take a closer look at the entire context of what James said shortly before this (and after). Have you ever stopped and asked yourself what he meant by "the word?" Modern-day believers may skim over it and think that James is telling us to be a doer of the Bible (whatever that means). But in order for these Jewish believers to be able to meet this goal of identifying as a doer, it would have to be something specific that they were already familiar with ... and something they could see, hear and do—dare we say—something being read and heard in synagogues every week on the Sabbath.
The popular phrase from the Old Testament known as, "The Ten Commandments" is more rightfully interpreted as "The Ten Words." Is it a big deal? Perhaps not, but we wanted to point out a few things about this to lay some groundwork before getting into something that James wrote to his believing Jewish brothers and sisters from the twelve tribes.
James made a statement to them about being a doer of "the word" and not a hearer only. It's easy to brush past this, but let's put on the brakes and check it out in context. Just exactly what did James mean by being a doer of the word? How we answer this becomes a bigger deal. He also said that the anger of man does not produce the righteousness of God. So what is it precisely that James believes will produce the righteousness of God? What did he mean when referring to the law of liberty? Is it a grace thing found within the New Covenant or something else? We'll dive into it and offer some perspectives over the next few programs.
We're concluding our series on salvation coming to the Gentiles (this is the 10th program). After the endeavor by James and the church leadership in Jerusalem of trying to convince Paul to deny what he was teaching and to participate in an Old Covenant cleansing ceremony in the attempt to make peace with Jews who were zealous for the law ... Paul was nearly killed by the zealots — many of whom believed in Jesus — and ultimately he was arrested. His course was now completely changed for the rest of his earthly days, living in chains. Having been warned twice by the Spirit not to go to Jerusalem, Paul could have avoided all of this, but he wanted to go and was prepared to be bound and even die on this journey.
Ultimately, Paul would end up under "house arrest" for a couple of years in Rome, where he invited leaders of the Jews to come to him — who were unfamiliar with "the sect" of the Jesus movement other than they knew it was spoken against everywhere. Perhaps Paul's former reputation as a Jew devoted to the ministry of the law from his younger days still carried weight among some of the unbelieving Jews ... because Paul gained an audience with them ... sharing and persuading them of Jesus from morning until evening by using the writings from the law and the prophets. Some believed, others did not.
Paul warned those Jews who refused to believe, using words from the prophet Isaiah and then this follow-up regarding their rejection of the Messiah:
Therefore let it be known to you that the salvation of God has been sent to the Gentiles, and they will hear it! And when he had said these words, the Jews departed and had a great dispute among themselves. Then Paul dwelt two whole years in his own rented house, and received all who came to him, preaching the kingdom of God and teaching the things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ with all confidence, no one forbidding him (Acts 28: 28-31).
