by HelpWanted 22 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Hi all. I'm new here and I had a question I was hoping you could help me with. Why does James 2:21 say that Abraham was justified by works and yet Romans 4:2 says that he was justified by faith? Also Genesis 15:6 says he was justified by faith? I'm confused?
Thanks for your help.
Hi HelpWanted,
Welcome!
Faith without works is dead, Abraham's faith was demonstrated by his works. Similar to a parent who says they love their child, that love is demonstrated by their actions. So too faith and works are coupled. Abraham had both faith and works.
IW
Rather than guess what you have already researched, Helpwanted, tell us what you have already looked at, commentaries, writings of others on the internet on this dilemma, your reasonings to date. What do you think?
Blondie
(Matthew 17:25) . . ."What do you think, Simon? From whom do the kings of the earth receive duties or head tax? From their sons or from the strangers?. . .
(Matthew 18:12) . . .What do YOU think? If a certain man comes to have a hundred sheep and one of them gets strayed, will he not leave the ninety-nine upon the mountains and set out on a search for the one that is straying?. . .
The honest answer you may not like. The James and Romans verses represent two opposing views within the early Christain sects. Pauline Christainity drew away from more Jewish Christian groups in fact they regarded them as 'Judaizers' who denied Christ. The Jewish sects as represented in texts like James and later Matthew specifically condemned Pauline 'faith without works of Law ' Christology calling them "lawless".
The Genesis 15 text read without the Pauline interpreation in mind reflects the traditional Jewish view. Modern translations have added connecting words (as all translating requires at times) that follow the Pauline lead. The text itself is very brief in fact 4 words: 'aman YHWH; chasab ts@dqah
Simply translated it says: Trusted Yahweh. Counted righteous
The two statements are not corollaries. That is Abraham trusting Yahweh and Yahweh's finding Abraham pious are separate statements. The word ts@dqah meant piety, virtue, rightly acting and this alone precludes the way the Paulinists intepreted it. The Paulinists were also ignoring the greater context of the two phrases where Abraham was tested and demonstrated piety in the story, he was not simply regarded as pious because he believed Yahweh at his word..
Even some translations separate the two clauses with a semicolon.
btw Welcome.
and yet Romans 4:2 says that he was justified by faith Also Genesis 15:6 says he was justified by faith
no it doesn't - it was reckoned to him as righteousness
--------------------------------------
Don't take this personally but if there's one thing not associated with jwism, it's being astute in language
Thought I would type them out for us..
James 2:21 NAV 'Was not Abraham our father jusified by works when he offered his son Isaac upon the alter. You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was was completed by the works.'
Rom. 4:2 NAV 'Indeed, if Abraham was justified on the basis of his works, he has reason to boast; but this was not so in the sight of God. For what does the scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness."
Gen. 15:6 NAV 'Abram put his faith in the Lord, who credited it to him as an act of righteousness.'
Doesn't sound like a contradiction by reading the scriptures..it's just works completed the act of faith.
This is an interesting point the balance of works and faith, the early Christian Jews as pointed out further up did not want to do away with the Mosaic Law, to them this was unthinkable, whereas the Gentile Christians under Paul had a more flexible view though they clearly didn't rely just on faith regardless of works.
Paul said: I am free to do anything but not everything is profitable. He was probably thinking along the lines that those believing in Christ are (provisionally) a new more powerful creation or nature, therefore not bound by the laws of the old creation, however that new creation had yet to take full effect so as to really put Christians above the old laws.
Literary analysis of the Epistle of James shows that it reacts to the wording of Romans, probably in a later setting where the Pauline "faith" was increasingly understood in the objective sense of "belief" or "doctrine" (as in Ephesians or the Pastorals). While it builds on earlier Jewish anti-paulinism (especially by its reference to "James" as the foremost anti-pauline character), it is different in that the "works of the Law" it recommends have lost any ethnical or ritualistic reference, to become entirely moral. Still, EpJames' exegesis of Genesis 15:6 reverts from the odd Pauline one (Romans 4:2) to an older and more classical view, e.g. 1 Maccabees 2:51f: "Remember the deeds (ta erga, "the works") of the ancestors, which they did in their generations; and you will receive great honor and an everlasting name. Was not Abraham found faithful (pistos) when tested, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness?" Or Sirach 44:19f: "Abraham was the great father of a multitude of nations, and no one has been found like him in glory. He kept the law of the Most High, and entered into a covenant with him; he certified the covenant in his flesh, and when he was tested he proved faithful (pistos)."
Hi, Help wanted, and welcome to the forum.
You have put your finger on a theological conundrum that has perplexed the Christian Faith since the birth of Protestantism. Even so herculean a figure as Martin Luther experienced this perplexity, terming the Letter of James "A letter of straw" implying perhaps that those reading too much into it were asses.
However, over the years, many have gradually begun to see that there IS a continuance of thought between the writings of Paul and James, rather than a tension. Or rather, if there is a tension, then it is one of continuity, rather than contradiction.
There is no doubt that the fundamental precept of the NT is that faith is what operates in the believer, both saving, and justifying. But to quote a modern vernacular: Define faith.
Thats where both Paul and James work in tandem. Lets see if we can divine what both say:
1 Paul: The SOURCE of Justification is the unique quality of God called Grace. [Tit 3 :7] This grace provides the faith by which justification comes [Ro 3:30] - Example: Abraham [4:2,3]
2 James: But what KIND of faith justifies? One that is empty? No, but one that is evidenced by works. Yet it is not the works, but the faith, [which comes through God's grace] that justifies.[Ja 2:17,18] Example:Abraham
This is what Paul is saying: Abraham was justified by faith
James is saying that Abraham was justified by [faith that was evidenced by] works
Paul is talking of the PRIORITY of faith in justification, while James is extending this to show the PROOF of this justification. If I were to confess that I have been justified by faith, how would YOU [not God] know that I have been justified? By my works. You [not God] cannot see my heart, but the barometer to enable you to conclude the veracity of my statement is my works. God knew that Abraham had faith. But how could WE [not God] know that Abraham had this justifying faith? By his works.
We can be thankful that both, the letters of Paul and the letter of James were written, because it is only through the steroscopic sight from both points of view that the faith that justifies can be understood
Cheers
