At the conclusion of his discussion of the relationship between faith and works, James uses Abraham as an example of a person who obeyed God and was declared righteous. He alludes to Genesis 22 and quotes Genesis 15:16 and concludes that a person is considered righteous because of what they do, not on the basis of faith alone (James 2:24). Usually scholars focus on the glaring clash between this verse and Paul’s argument in Romans 4 that Abraham was justified by believing in God (Gen 15) before he was given the rite of circumcision (Gen 17). For Paul, one is justified “by grace through faith not of works.”
I have written on this aspect of James before, but in preparing for a lecture on the ethics of James I wondered why James uses Rahab as an example in 2:25. Scholars often pass over this verse as if it was an appendix to the argument and not of any real importance. But Rahab is mentioned twice in the Jewish-Christian literature, Hebrews 11:31 and James 2:25-26. 1 Clement 12 refers Rahab as well, observing that her “faith and hospitality” saved her. Clement is not interested in Rahab as a Gentile convert. Rather, Clement connects the “scarlet thread” to the blood of Jesus so that “not only faith but prophecy is found in this woman.” In all three cases Rahab is a paradigm of faith because she acted on behalf of the spies.
In Joshua 2 Rahab is presented as an example of a “righteous Canaanite.” This is remarkable since she is introduced as a זֹנָה, a prostitute and she betrays her own city to the enemy by lying to the authorities. After she has protected the spies, she says she has heard of God’s victory in Egypt and understood that Israel’s God is “the LORD your God, he is God in the heavens above and on the earth beneath” (Josh 2:11). Since she has protected Joshua’s two spies and is therefore exempt from the destruction of all the people of Jericho (Josh 6:17).
When scholars examine Paul’s argument in Galatians 3 or Romans 4, they often ask why Paul used Abraham as an example of justification by faith. Sometimes they suggest Abraham was used by Paul’s opponents to argue Gentiles (like Abraham) should submit to circumcision as did Abraham. After all, Abraham was also a Gentile who expressed his faith in some concrete action (offering Isaac as a sacrifice). The use of Abraham in James 2:20-24 supports this, since Paul seems to be in conflict with “men from James” in Galatians.
My question in James 2:25 is similar: why does James use Rahab as an example of someone who was “considered righteous”? He uses the same aorist passive of δικαιόω as James 2:21 and Romans 4:2, both referring to Abraham being declared righteous. Perhaps Rahab fits the pattern of a Gentile who has heard the word of God (the Exodus and Israel’s victories in the wilderness), has expressed faith in the God who did these things, and confirmed her faith by some concrete action.
For James, Rahab may be a better example for his point since she demonstrated her faith by hiding the spies before she expressed her faith in the God of Israel. Out of all of the residents of Jericho, only Rahab and her family were saved from destruction and only because she expressed her faith through an action. As the climax of the faith vs. works discussion, James says faith without works is dead (v. 26), just like the people of Jericho! The warning to the reader is that even for the Gentiles, some real expression of faith is necessary in order to faith to be “saving faith.”
This discussion is always difficult because we have a tendency to read our theological presuppositions into the text (I know I do!). But if we only had James to construct Christian theology, how different from Pauline Theology would our view of salvation be? Or, are Paul and James really not that far apart after all?
Reblogged this on Talmidimblogging.
In all honestly I don’t understand how people think James contradicts Paul and vice versa. In my opinion they are complimentary of each other. While James 2:14-25 has many elements of faith without works being useless, I would argue that James’ intention was not to contradict Paul (if he was aware of Paul’s teachings), but instead James’ theology acts as another side to Paul’s theology. One also had to look at the audience that is being addressed in each letter. Paul writes to primarily Gentile churches in his epistles who were struggling with whether they needed to follow Jewish purity laws, circumcision etc. While James is writing to a Jewish Christian population. James may have been trying to combat the hypocrisy founded in specific sects of Judaism, specifically the Pharisees who Jesus called hypocrites several times (Matthew 23). As a reaction to Jesus’ teaching perhaps some Jews believed they could simply accept Christ as their savior and continue to live in their old lives, simply doing works for the glory of themselves or simply not doing works at all. James it seems is trying to say the well known “actions speak louder than words”, telling people about Jesus is nice and all, but if you can’t back it up it was useless, and may have the opposite fact of what was intended. While Paul it appears interpreted works as fallowing the Jewish Law, one simply needs to believe in Christ and repent to be saved. Paul’s intention was to reassure Gentiles that they do not need to follow Jewish customs. I think that James 2:8 really showcases James intention for his book, he was not trying to cause division or arguments, James simply wants us to love one another and love our God.
I agree with emilycrosssite with this James and Paul contradiction. I do not see so much of a contradiction, but as emilycrossite mentions “they are complementary of each other.” I cannot see how you can have one without the other. Works is the extension of one’s faith. Through their works one demonstrates their faith. In Matthew 7:15-20, the passage talks about how a good tree only produces good fruits, and the trees that do not produce such fruit will be “cut down”. The passage is talking about false prophets and mentions twice that one will know them by their fruit (vs 16, 20). The same would go for anyone else. People should know your faith by what fruit one produces. Unless you do the will of God then He does not know you (Matthew 7:23). If one has faith they show it through their works. At the same time one needs faith in order to truly do the work. They need each other, and not one aspect greater than the other.
I think James could of used Rahab due to the fact she put her faith into works. She could of just said she had faith and done nothing allowing the two spies to be captured. If this happened would she really have faith? Her actions demonstrated her faith. Instead out of faith, she helped the two spies and kept them from being caught. The actions she did showed her faith. If she was caught hiding them, she would have serious consequences for her actions, but because she had faith she was able to accomplish what she did. Without her faith there was no reason for her to do what she did. Her showing her faith through what she did and not just saying she believes is what I think is one of the reason James uses her.
I think that is easy to see the apparent contraction. James specifically talks about righteousness through works, whereas Paul is concerned with righteousness through faith. This is eerily similar in my opinion to the more recent discussions people have been having about doubt and faith. The relationship between Paul and James’ writings can be viewed as contradictory, or complimentary. In a similar way, doubt and faith can be either complimentary or contradictory. One motivates the other. To answer the question, I think that James would have made for an interesting “center” of our theology as far as soteriology and justification is concerned. Obviously we would have probably heard more from James if this was the case, but since we only have this letter to read I would suggest starting in chapter 2. It seems interesting that James mentions “favoritism” right before engaging the subject of righteousness. (v. 2-4) Why would James talk about this and jump right into the subjects of righteousness and justification immediately afterwords? I think that it stands in line with the rest of his book. When you read the book of James it is pretty difficult to not get a very clear picture of social justice and right treatment of the poor, widowed, and lost. James is concerned with the legs of faith rather than its head alone. I think that if we were to only read James we would get a picture of a very outward focused Christianity which exists almost solely to help the poor. I think it would be unfortunate as it would miss out on the other aspects of faith like belief and acceptance of Jesus’ free gist on the cross. I think it is obvious that the two are nearly inseparable if one is to live a holistic faith out daily.
This passage is one that I have also simply breezed over without truly thinking about why, of all people, the author chose Rahab. I think that the argument made that Rahab chose God over her own country, and that the author of James is simply showing that actions are required to have real faith makes a lot of sense. The author of James makes it abundantly clear that he feels action is necessary to have genuine faith (James 2). When I was thinking about this, I was wondering if the fact that Rahab believed even though she had only heard about what happened has anything to do with this. Rahab had greater faith than even those who had seen the miracles God provided, and acted, even at great personal risk. In this way, Rahab could have been considered to have greater faith than even many Israelites. And as far as the question of how different our theology would be if based on the book of James rather than Pauline literature: It is difficult to know. The easy answer would be that our faith could be more action oriented. James makes it clear that we are not saved through works, but that they are a fundamental component of faith. Perhaps, if we were more focused on James, we as Christians would focus more on living out our faith, not to earn salvation, but to further complete our faith.
Rahab shows up multiple times in the Jewish Christian Literature, both in James 2 and also previously in the faith chapter of Hebrews, chapter 11 verse 31. Both point to Rahab’s actions in saving the spies, James saying it made her righteous and the author of Hebrews saying it was by faith she was spared. I look at those passages and see similar meanings: That Rahab had faith, and through that faith she acted in accordance to God’s will, and because of her faith AND actions she is made righteous in the eyes of the Lord. It appears quite obvious to me that she, being a “harlot”, she was saved through grace, which is very Pauline.
Thinking back on my long tenure in the church and having heard what must be thousands of sermons, I have never heard one preached on Rehab. I think, like what Taylor said, that this is a verse that tends to get glossed over. I believe that the reason Rehab is honored is because she had faith in God because of the spies, even though she may not have known who God was. Her faith in the unknown was rewarded. The unknown became known to her, and because of her faith she was spared. She hid the spies, who were seeking the method of the destruction of her city, which would have put her in great personal danger if she was discovered. I think that this took a lot of faith on her part. If we had either Paul or James only, I do not think that our faith would look all that different. Paul and James both preach the same things from different angles, there is harmony between them for those who have eyes to see.
Rahab is among a few women who are named in the genealogy of Jesus in the first chapter of Matthew; women were not often specifically mentioned in Bible times. Those who are named–Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, Bathsheba, and Mary–might be considered sexually promiscuous because of lifestyle, nationality, or unexplained pregnancy. And yet, Matthew lists them among the generations from Abraham to the Messiah. Perhaps for no other reason than to assure each of us that we can be used by God.
Why does James use Rahab as an example of someone who is considered righteous? The same reason God uses any of us to carry out His work.
Rahab showed that her faith was strong by hiding the spies. She had not yet asked to be rescued from the destruction of Jericho, but she did what she knew was right. She put her faith into action by caring for the immediate physical need of safety for the spies. James explains that faith must be accompanied by action (2:17).
Rahab and her family were safe when Jericho fell because Rahab had taken action when confronted with her faith. She then verbally confirmed her belief in the God of Israel. Rahab became the mother of Boaz, great grand-mother to King David, part of the lineage of Jesus. She allowed God to use her in Jericho, and He continued to use her and her offspring for His work.
I think if we had James and not Paul to be Christians with, we would have vastly different lives. How much crazy stuff do we take from all that Paul wrote to judge how we live our lives and stuff like that? James is full of great ethical teachings, but the theology of salvation looks vastly different between the two. I think that Paul’s teachings on salvation are more focused on the freedom God gave us in Jesus while James’ view is also on the freedom through Jesus, but also through doing what good Jews do too. And that is take care of the orphan, widow, and the other poor people, just like it says in the Old Testament and in James (2:8-13).
The fact that Rahab is mentioned in this book is quite unique. However, considering that she did something for the Jewish people that no one else would is worthy of mention. After all, that is really why she is even in the Bible in the first place. I really have to ask the question, what would make someone question the righteousness of Rahab? She did the right thing and did it in reverential fear of the one true God which she knew existed. This isn’t much a question of her righteous character at all. Still, I must ask why her in particular? Are there not many more characters to choose from? Why did Rahab in particular strike the interest of James?
The fact that James and the author of Hebrews both make claims that faith is important, yet it seems that James takes a very different approach than the author of Hebrews. James brings out the use of Rahab because she was someone that showed faith regarding a god that she was familiar with, although unfamiliar at the same time. She saw that the conquering of the nation of Israel was great during this part of their conquest, and believed that this God was greater than all others due to their winnings. This was the point James was trying to make. Rahab believed that Yahweh was stronger, and demonstrated that by hiding the spies from Israel. This points to works based on her faith that shows Rahab believes in Yahweh and therefore wants to gain in the favor of Yahweh by helping out his people. Faith is demonstrated by your works and it is often debated if you can have faith without works. Well James clearly portrays faith as being seen through Rahab’s actions. To me, when we observe the text for when it was written, if we just observe the text through James we would assume that nobody is getting to heaven based on faith alone, but only through works as James describes.
In James, it is interesting to see Rahab used as an example. In the Old Testament, Rahab is introduced as prostitute yet she is considered to be one of the most righteous in the Bible. The reason being is that she hid the Jewish spies even before she believed in their God. After she helped them escape, she believed that God would rescue her and her family. After the fall of Jericho, Rahab joined the Israelites and followed God. Rahab is the best example because she came from a background who first did not know about God. She believed in God after hearing about how God helped the Israelites on their way to the Promised Land. Rahab is also the best example as she demonstrated her faith through her actions and not just by faith.
People have tried to find contradictions in the Bible to disprove its inerrancy and ultimately disprove its authority. The problem is that the things that do seem to contradict themselves are usually taken out of context. One of these topics of possible contradiction is the debate of faith between James and Paul. The argument between whether James and Paul contradict each other is a very old one. I truly believe James and Paul are talking about two different things that relate to one another. Paul is discussing the point of salvation. A moment in time where the Holy Spirit unveils the believer and salvation begins. This seems to make more sense to a Gentile audience who did not already believe in only the one true God of Israel. James is discussing what should happen when you are saved. James is writing to the diaspora. HE IS WRITING TO PEOPLE WHO ALREADY BELIEVED IN THE ONE TRUE GOD. Though the avenue is different because the avenue is in Jesus, these Jews, once they understood who Jesus was, were believing. Both theologies are correct and one is clearly more pointed to the Jewish community who already believe in God and the other is pointed to more of a Gentile community. Both need Jesus. One is talking about the point of salvation and the other is talking about the Christian life.
On the discussion of Rahab, I think she is mentioned by James specifically because James had just written about not showing partiality. On the spectrum of biblical heroes, Abraham is clearly at the top. He is the father of the nation of Israel. Rahab was a prostitute. She probably ranked pretty low on the spectrum of biblical heroes. What James is doing is showing equality and mutuality between two very different people who are both important to Jewish history. These people would have had very different views on these two people. This is why I think James uses both Abraham and Rahab as examples.
Rahab appears to me to be a natural fit for James’ discussion on the relationship between works and faith. James is very concerned about how Christians live out there faith and the need for a visible outworking from their faith. For James, these two ideas are what makes you a Christian, to the point where if one of them is absent, he believes that you are not a Christian. Rahab exemplifies this belief through her actions with the spies, not only believing in YHWH, but then living her life in accordance with that belief.
James argues that faith and works are essential aspects to Christian living, being inseparable for true belief in who Jesus Christ is. James believes that just because believers are free from the law because of Jesus, they still have to live under God’s moral order, or as James calls the “royal law” (Jobes, 221). Rahab showed this action when the Israelites took over Jericho. She protected the foreigners in her land, providing for them and saving their lives at the risk of her own. She lived out the faith that she believed, and she and her family were saved because of it. The outworking of faith is needed for any Christian, and shows your faith in who God is.
This blog post can be a bit challenging to navigate and progress through because of our tendency to include our entire theology, rather than just James’ Christian theology. The blog post mentions this tendency of ours as Christians and Bible Students, and I completely agree. First and foremost, I would like to share some thoughts in regards to the concluding questions of the blog post. I believe that James and Paul have extremely different views and theologies on salvation of human beings. I took the course “Pauline Literature and Theology” last semester, so I feel like that intensive study of the letters of Paul have prepared me for a discussion like this. This course has left me with a much deeper understanding on the book of James over the past couple weeks as well.
From my perspective and understanding, I feel that Paul views salvation as a result of one’s faith. I feel as if Paul does not consider the works or deeds of a Christian. In contrast, James obviously understands and acknowledges that faith is critical and important to salvation, but he also believes that works and deeds are important as well. James 2:14-26 represents an entire passage of the Bible where James speaks on how faith without works, or deeds, is dead. In my opinion, Paul sharply contrasts from this thinking because Paul does not favor works or deeds in any manner.
This passage is the passage in which James includes the reference to Rahab. Because I understand the theology of James and his view on how Christians can receive salvation, I feel as if I can easily understand why James chose to incorporate this Rahab reference into his letter. He chose to incorporate Rahab into the letter because Rahab was willing to live out her faith, or display her faith in God, through her interaction and situation with the spies. This represented Rahab’s way of professing her faith in the eyes of James. James seems to rather witness someone live out their faith than to simply profess their faith.
Rahab was a very interesting inclusion into James message for this example because of her history of prostitution. According to Moore (2016), Rahab is introduced in the Bible as a prostitute. This means that her prostitution was a major aspect of her life. Therefore, this seems to go against living out one’s faith that James stresses. That being said, Moore claims that James exemplifies Rahab because of her combination of faith and action. This is very important to consider and should not be ignored.
Though James and Paul seem to have different theologies, it is important to consider the fact that they may not have been at war with each other in terms of their theological perspectives. Jobes (2011) lists multiple reasons as to why these two may have different views on salvation and faith and works (pg. 217-220). They could have very easily been writing from different perspectives of references (Jobes, 2011, pg. 219). Jobes (2011) claims that there is a combination of reasons that causes these different viewpoints between apostles (pg. 220).
Jobes, K. H. (2011). The Letters to the Church. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
Moore, S. R. (2016). “Rahab the Prostitute.” John D. Barry, et al. The Lexham Bible Dictionary.
I think that James and Paul are not as opposite as we like to make them. My first thought is to consider the difference in audience and their circumstance. James writes to Jews who have accepted Jesus as Messiah, fulfilling something they have been anticipating for generations, who have likely lived their whole lives in action-based worship/obedience to YHWH. Therefore, teaching them to no longer exercise physical representations or sacraments as worship to God because of Jesus could be a negative influence on their faith. And Paul’s presentation to the Gentiles is driven not by fulfillment of anticipation but by overflowing grace through Jesus Christ. I do not think these two things contradict each other. I think the differences arise because of a unique emphasis from the authors due to their awareness of the audience.
Abraham used as an example of someone righteous based on what they do (Gen 15:16; 22). Rahab is placed on a similar level as Abraham when she is also deemed righteous based on what she did (James 2:25-26). It is interesting that Rahab is used as an example by James. However, James is not the only one to reference Rahab. She is referred to as a “righteous Canaanite” (Josh. 2), and it is stated that her “faith and hospitality has saved her” (1 Clem. 12).
The action of Rahab hanging a scarlet cord in her window, can be seen as a messianic message, as it directly relates to the color of Christ’ blood, and how it covers the sins of men and women. The scarlet cord is not an analogy that is well known or well heard of, but it makes great sense, even when looking at Pauline theology and making the comparison to James. Paul was someone committing murder of Christians, who is saved through his faith in God.
“Perhaps Rahab fits the profile as a gentil who has heard the word of God” (Long 2022).
Only Rahab and her family were saved from destruction, due to her expressing her faith in action. This may be why James used her as a reference because this is a perfect example of someone exercising their faith with their actions. Thus, Rahab could be viewed as one of the first silent followers, as she appears to become saved solely through her actions.
An interesting parallel that I found from this James 2 are the stories in Matthew 15. James first says that “faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead” in verse 17, then goes on to give an example of a Canaanite woman who displayed her faith through her actions (ESV). In Matthew, Jesus just finishes saying “what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart” in verse 18, and then the story moves on to a Canaanite woman who speaks to Jesus and is commended by Jesus for having great faith (ESV). Jobes mentions that the “echos of Jesus’ voice [is] in James’ message” (2011, p. 189). This does not mean that James was trying to follow this specific story, but that a similar idea is represented: what a person truly believes, no matter where they are from, is shown in what they do or say. This idea is not isolated to this one story in Matt 15 but shown many times in Jesus’ teachings. Most commonly he refers to this as bearing good fruit. But the opposite is also true. The one who does “not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire” even if they say they are all good because of their Jewish heritage (Matt. 3:9-11, ESV). It’s not by accident that Abraham and Rahab are chosen for this section. Both are Gentiles, and both have tainted histories (remember when Abram let the Pharaoh take Sarai as his wife to save his own skin in Gen 12?). But both proved their faith through their actions. That’s the point of having Rahab as an example in James 2.
There are many things in the Bible which we will never know the answer to. While we can wonder why Rahab was used, we can never know for sure because the Bible and the authors simply do not tell us. I like to believe that the Bible uses characters like Rahab, who was a prostitute, to show the glory of God and His ability to save all different types of people. Maybe because Abraham is talked about a lot in earlier portions of Scripture, the author wanted to use a different example this time. This passage also does bring up the argument of faith vs. works. It does initially seem like the Bible is promoting works with the passage, however, there is a deeper meaning after studying the passage with context. This passage is actually saying that true faith and belief in Christ changes a person. When we are born again, we become a new creation. If we are a new creation, and we have put our old way aside, then we will be acting and living differently. It is not that works save you or that they are necessary for faith, but that true faith will be reflected in our words, actions and lifestyle. Works are just the byproduct of true faith, and it is the indicator of a true Christian. This could also be a reason why Rahab was used as an example. The contrast of her actions from her life before Christ and her life after Christ is evident.
I never thought of Paul and James as being in conflict. To me, James never said you do not need faith, or that faith is not the saving factor. And Paul never said that good works were bad, or that Christians should never do good works. I think James and Paul each look at a different side of the same coin. Both Paul and James say that a person is saved by faith and that their faith should be evident through the good works they do. Ephesians 2:8-9 is the most common Pauline passage cited for being saved by faith alone. However, keep reading. Ephesians 2:10 says “For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works…” (emphasis added). Once saved, and though not saved by our works, part of our Christian walk is to do good works. James focuses much more heavily on the works side of the coin, leading some to believe that he says we are saved by works. However, James 2:22 “You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did” (again, emphasis added). James does not say that the works provided salvation, nor does he say they are necessary for salvation, but rather that complete faith is evidenced through the fruit one bears as they live their life, which is, their works. James reiterates this in 2:26 when he says, “faith without deeds is dead.” James is trying to say that unless you are actively sharing your faith through how you live, what good is it? One could even equate good deeds with loving others, which then reflects back to 1 Corinthians 13 where Paul says that without love we are nothing. James chooses some interesting examples to show that faith must be accompanied by action. First he uses Abraham, which makes sense, because Abraham is seen as the father of the Jewish nation. Of course, one who is held is such high regard is an excellent example to use, but then he chooses Rahab. Rahab was a prostitute from another land, yet her faith was so real and so alive that she was willing to align what she did with what she believed. She knew that if she got caught, she would lose her life. She also knew that if she didn’t help the spies she would lose her life when Israel destroyed Jericho. Her faith in the God of Israel would have meant nothing if she hadn’t acted on it. But her deeds made her faith complete and they were evidence to everyone else that she really believed what she said she did.
I had not given much thought on why Rahab was chosen in this passage alongside of the great father Abraham. It seems obvious why James had chosen Abraham because he was a hero of faith and revered in the Jewish culture for his great faith in God. But Rahab was known as a prostitute in Jewish-Christian literature (Hebrews 11:31, James 2:25), yet she was still known as the “righteous Canaanite” who lived in the pagan city of Jericho. In Joshua 2, the account of Rahab does not show her only as an immoral, pagan woman, but as a heroine who helped saved Israel’s spies. But most of all, this passage also shows Rahab as a woman who professed faith and confidence in Yahweh (Joshua 2:11). She boldly saved the Lord’s men and believed that the Lord would “save alive my father and mother, my brothers and sisters, and all who belong to them, and deliver our lives from death” (Joshua 2:13). This remarkable story of an outsider, a pagan woman, doing righteous works for God in spite of her background, lineage, and vocation is a strong reason why James used her as an example of not being righteous by faith alone but “by what they do” (James 2:24). God used Rahab for a story for redemption, using her in spite of her past for great works, including being a part of brining God’s greatest gift into the world through His Son (Matthew 1:5).
I personally do not see James and Paul’s teachings as contradictory, but rather working together to say the same thing to different audiences. The context of the messages of Paul and James is what contrasts; Paul writes in light of the Law of Moses that was practiced in the first century and what the recipients of the letter of Galatians were use to (Jobes, 172). Where James writes to Jewish converts to Christianity. How I have always understood it, is that Paul’s address of justification by faith not works speaks to those who have just converted or are surrounded by converts. Because they were still in the mindset of the old law and making sacrifices for sins, however in the new law, we do not perform works or tasks to gain salvation. Salvation is by faith alone. It is after having gained salvation that James speaks of faith apart of works being dead. As followers of Jesus, we are called to more than just believing. Matthew 25:35-36 “For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me”. We are called to serve and to give to another, to fight for one another, to pray on behalf of one another. These are not works that gain us “kingdom points”, but a way of life we are called to as being children of God.
i would like to think that James and Paul were called to their own ministry and told others about Christianity in ways that their audience would understand. Paul went throughout all of the known world back then spreading the Word of God to them. they do not have the Law like the Jews do, so he had to teach the Gentiles that did not seem like they had to convert to Judaism. with James, he stayed in Jerusalem where the people know the Law. he told the people where he was teaching what now to do. James knew that the Jewish people were people of works because of the Law. he implied that faith without works is meaningless and vice versa. with Paul and his audience, he told them that Faith alone will give them salvation. all in all, i would like to believe that James and Paul complement each other and help out their audience to what they need to do to follow Christ.
It is very interesting that James uses Rahab as an example of righteousness because she was a known prostitute and was not a believer by any means. She stepped out in faith to help these men that she did not know. The point you brought up about the tense of the word used and how it points to her compassion for the spies over her faith in God and how it shows the same righteousness that Abraham shows. This use of Rahab is also interesting because it would have been a very understandable story to the Jewish Christians that James was writing to. It also shows that James had a deep understanding of the Old Testament and expected his readers to have the same. James uses this example of not just having faith but having faith along with works(Jobes, 174). James uses Rahab as a key example to show that you don’t need a perfect faith to be saved, but that you need to also have works to show for it. James is really big on faith being dead without works and Rahab may not have had any beliefs about God and yet she helped the men who were in dire need, she let her faith speak for her works. It is still a very interesting use of a seemingly small person in the Old Testament and yet would be well known by Jewish Christians and also is a good example of faith and works.
When I read the title of this post I first was up in flames of defense. I initially thought that the post would be questioning the integrity and courageous nature of Rahab’s actions as the woman who helped the Israelites gain victory in Joshua 6. However, it is not uncommon to question her being referenced as a righteous woman because of her being a prostitute, recorded in the same chapter. Something interesting to consider is that in the book of Matthew chapter 1, Rahab is actually mentioned to be in the ancestry of Christ. This seems to me to be a great honor as the others who are mentioned in this genealogy are great men and women known for their righteousness. This chapter mentions Rahab, Mary, David, and other people held in high regard in the Bible. Rahab could have mentioned for a number of reasons. Some of the thoughts I have as to why James may have chose to list Rahab as a righteous figure may be her redemption story from prostitute to savior, a desire to incorporate a male and female example, and also that Rahab could have been a well known figure in the Jewish community because of the weight of her actions on the nation of Israel.
Additionally, when we examine Rahab’s past as well as her identity, James’ stress of faith not by works, but also placing an importance on works that our faith might not be dead is realized. Rahab was a pagan prostitute living in an enemy nation. But even a woman in such a low stature could exhibit true faith. It is not that her actions saved her, but that her faith to act could make it so that she could be counted as righteous and gain the privilege of being in the ancestry of Christ. It is surely a good thing that faith can outweigh a life of failure and of sin.
Just from this story alone if the Lord had James’s construct early Christian foundational theology, I do believe there would be a huge difference. As referenced in the blog post you quote James by saying faith without works is dead; not I don’t believe he is using works as in being a good person but rather just having faith without doing anything for the kingdom is dead and your spirit is not being filled with the Word of God and what He calls us to do. With that being said I feel like if James were to construct our theology, we would have a deeper understanding of the spiritual side of things relying on our spirit man to lead us in the direction that the Lord wants us to go. Also, there might be less room for distractions due to the fact that James pushes the notion of pressing into the Lord through prayer (5:13-16), having mature faith (5:11), resting in God (even when we are doubtful: 1:21-22), or when He talks about fully submitting ourselves to the Lord (4:7-10). Paul on the other hand is pushing the fact that we need to be disciples and go outside the four walls of the church to reach people and show them what a Christ-like life looks like. Both have a lot to offer but one theology would be very spiritual depth and reliant on God rather than church planting and mission work. Neither one is bad, both of them have a lot to offer and can be beneficial to foundational theology among all Christians.
It seems that James and Paul’s writings are not that different, but instead seem to complement and add to each other. Where Paul says that one is justified by grace through faith alone, James adds that works are also important to the Christian life. He is not contradicting Paul but rather stressing the importance of living out that faith. Both writings by Paul and James are very practical teachings for a Christian to live by. They both focus on how a Christian should be active in their faith and act accordingly to the promise and hope found in Christ. Jobes talks about the purpose of James and why it was written. “…the book of James moves from moral exhortation to another with few discourse markers or strong connections to structure its logical flow of thought. Furthermore, the reader is given no clue about what specific situation prompted James to write, which suggests that perhaps James was addressing the broad and general situation of his readers at that moment rather than a particular local crisis or event” (Jobes, 161). Jobes then goes on to talk about how James is meant to encourage and inspire the audience. It does not seem to be in direct contrast to be intended to rebuttal Paul’s writings. “…to read James in engagement with the writings of the apostle Paul assumes that James was written later and knew of Paul’s writings, especially of Galatians and/or Romans, and is, therefore, a somewhat circular argument. This argument would be compelling only if it could be established on other grounds that James must date later than AD 62. But if that dating can be discounted, then there is no reason to believe that what James says about faith and works was necessarily written in direct engagement with Paul’s writings” (Jobes, 155). This topic of faith and works was a relevant topic for Christians which Paul needed to address after the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. He also had to address the Gentiles entering the church as well, which James does not do. “This suggests that James was written before this issue arose or after it had been resolved” (Jobes, 155). There may be areas in which it seems like James and Paul contradict each other, but it seems that both their intentions were to encourage and teach believers of their time how they can practically apply and live out their faith.
Jobes, Karen H. Letters to the Church: A Survey of Hebrews and the General Epistles. Zondervan, 2011.
When it comes to the theology of salvation, it is paramount that one book is not favored over the other. We can wonder what it would be like if Pauline theology was removed from the Bible and the book of James was left behind, but it would have the same fundamental problems associated with the dividing theology of James and Paul. Honestly, it makes me think of the modern issues today between the democrats and republicans, where both sides are pitted against one another based on different beliefs and stances on the world. I am not going to put James on the democrat side and Paul on the republican side or vice versa, because that is not the point. Each book of the Bible has important lessons and applications to share, and Paul and James had different audiences to whom they were writing. Paul was addressing the Gentiles, and James was addressing the Judaist-Christians.
Already, there is a dividing factor, but it is not wide enough to be fully considered as James and Paul sharing differences in their beliefs. In my opinion, the two authors each have an approach they make that is different but not dissimilar from one another. The main issue is when Paul says it is by faith alone a person is saved, and James seems to contradict this statement by implying a person needs not just faith but good deeds as well, but I think they are complementing one another by these elements within. Since Paul was addressing a different audience at a possibly different time, he tells them things they needed to hear at that time, such as faith alone can save them.
James, on the other hand, tells his audience it is through faith and deeds a person should live out their life, which can be because he realized there was more to faith than just faith. “What good is it…to have faith but no deeds? Can such faith save them?” (James 2:14). What James is doing is asking if their faith is real or a part of hypocrisy. You can say you believe in something, but words can be easily said over actually acting on that belief. It can be that the faith they believe they have may not be something they entirely believe in or just believe in it for the wrong reasons. “You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder” (James 2:19). James then goes on to inform the readers of why deeds are just as important as faith. In the Gospel books of the Bible when Jesus drove out the demons, they knew him and called him by name. When the Legion does this, it does not mean they respect Jesus but rather they fear him and despise him. James is cementing the idea home of how faith alone is not enough, but this does not mean he is contradicting Paul. The theology of James is centered on the post-salvation works rather than the focus of Paul on the pre-salvation works, meaning your salvation is not counted on by good works, but your good works are counted within and after salvation because Jesus’ action in saving us was intended to transform us in our heads, our hearts, and our hands. In other words, James 2:14-26 is a continuation of what Paul says about being saved by faith alone, not a disagreement with what Paul is saying. Therefore, if the books of Paul were not in the Bible, we would be left with half the puzzle on salvation just as we have half the puzzle of salvation with the focus on Pauline theology over the book of James.
James in general is a very overlooked book of the bible. Not only is it short, but it also has a message that focuses on bitter things: persecution and poverty. Although some of the verses seem to be contradictory, it is important to take a step back and look at multiple things before drawing conclusions. For Paul to say that people are justified “by grace through faith not of works” is not saying that works have no part to play in salvation. From my understanding, Paul is saying that someone cannot be saved by their works alone. No one can earn the kingdom of heaven. That is where grace comes in. However, faith needs to be confirmed by an outside expression. That is one of the main ideas surrounding baptism.
Rahab expressed her faith in her actions. She went on to proclaim her faith, but she first acted it out. Of course God knows our hearts, but to be a Christian is not to be silent. Even the process of receiving Jesus into your life involves an action. Romans 10:9-10 speaks to this in that one is saved by the confession of their mouth and heartfelt belief of who Jesus is and what he did. There is an outward action that is included in the salvation process. Only God can see our hearts and judge accordingly. If we want the new start that is in Christ Jesus, it involves the initial step of faith in which we accept the Holy Spirit into our hearts and are changed from the inside out.