Paul and James: Compare or Contrast?
The controversy between the messages of Paul and James begins long
before Biblical scholars look at the Letter of James. The first
conflict is described in the book of Acts. But are they really in
conflict? James’ message is certainly different than that
of Paul, and we should not try to make them one and the same. Martin
Luther seemed to think that James contradicted Paul; modern scholars
question that view. Even in Acts we can see that James and Paul
are reaching to different people, and like good preachers everywhere,
are adapting what they say so it can be heard by their respective
congregations.
Acts 15 is the story of the Council at Jerusalem,
where the leadership decided that Gentiles were not required to
be circumcised in order to become Christians. Circumcision was closely
linked to following Jewish law. The strict view is that it is
necessary for them to be circumcised and ordered to keep the Law
of Moses –Acts 15:5. Paul responds with the evidence
of the wonders done among Gentiles, people who are not circumcised,
and are not keeping the law. It is James who proposes the compromise—that
Gentiles should abstain from food offered idols, strangled foods,
and from blood, and from fornication. When Paul visits James in
Acts 21:17-26, we discover that the Jews of Palestine are following
the law, while the Jews of the diaspora are not.
Painter suggests that early Christians varied widely on the view
of the law. The most conservative, who are identified as Pharisees—and
believers—in Acts 15, suggest that Christianity is a part
of Judaism, and thus is bound by the law (Painter 74). The other
extreme is described in 1 Corinthians: Christians who felt bound
by NO laws (Painter 77). Neither James nor Paul supported either
of these positions. Yet this does not mean they agreed. James seems
to have believed that Jews were bound to the law; Paul apparently
did not follow the law himself, and argues that it is not necessary
to salvation (Painter 76).
Paul’s point is that only faith in Jesus Christ that is necessary
for salvation. Fifteen centuries later the church seems to have
missed this, and Martin Luther turns to Paul to remedy the situation.
It is Luther’s focus on grace that makes him decide that James
was contradicting Paul, and thus a lesser scripture (Johnson 197).
But Paul’s commitment to grace and James’ support of
law are both the convictions of first century Jewish-Christians
with roots in Palestinian Judaism (Johnson 180).
What, then, is Paul’s understanding of Law? How does James
understand faith? Because of the conflict described in Acts, we
look for conflict in their letters (Painter 265). Yet James style
and outlook is quite similar to that of Paul (Johnson 180). What
will we find when we look for similarities rather than contradictions?
It is a mistake to presume that James is not concerned with faith.
Despite our general understanding that the letter is about works,
James writes about faith from beginning to end. “Deeds do
not replace faith, they complete it” (Johnson 198). The letter
uses the word faith 16 times, although not so much to develop
a theology, as to consider the practical implications of a life
of faith (Hartin 95). Yet it is clear that James wants us to know
that the implication of faith IS works.
In this sense Painter is correct in arguing that James is not denying
Paul’s contention that we are justified by faith,
but he is opposed to the idea that we are justified by faith alone
(Painter 265). So faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead
–James 2:17. It is not that faith is unimportant, but rather
that faith without works is not faith at all. James' concern is
that faith and works must be unified (Tamez 53), his goal is completeness
and integrity. And for James, complete faith is obedience to the
Law (Hartin 91). It is our actions at living out the law that reveals
our faith (Johnson 197). Interestingly, this is the same message
as Galatians 5:6. The only thing that counts is faith working
through love.
While James talks about the works of faith (James 2:22), rather
than the works of the law (Johnson 197), there is no question that
James has a focus on law that could unsettle the Pauline Christian
(Wall 93). James is clearly describing Christianity as an ethical
religion, that we are called to observe the whole law (Wall 126).
Paul makes similar arguments, but in the end concludes that we cannot
succeed at following the law. Paul proclaims that the good news
of Jesus Christ is that it is our faith, not our works that justify
us before God.
And it is the idea of justification that is important to Paul.
He certainly agrees that active faith is demonstrated by our good
works (Painter 269). His argument is that those works cannot save
us. For we hold that a person is justified by faith apart from
works prescribed by the law (Romans 3:28). Paul uses Abraham
as an example of how even a person of good works is justified by
his faith rather than actions. In Romans 4 Paul quotes Genesis 15:6
to argue that Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him
as righteousness. The point for Paul is related to the circumcision
debate—Abraham is reckoned as righteous before he is circumcised.
James is not interested in circumcision, but uses Genesis 15:6
as well. James’ argument, however, is that it is Abraham’s
works that reckoned him as righteous.
Was not our ancestor Abraham justified by works when he
offered his son Isaac on the altar? You see that faith was active
along with his works, and faith was brought to completion by the
works. –James 2:21-22
Some have argued that this shows that James is written in response
to Paul’s letters; that James is refuting Paul’s theology.
Painter argues instead that this is evidence that the letter of
James is a later document, written in response to believers who
interpreted Paul’s theology as acceptance of faith apart from
works (Painter 268). What is certain is that both Paul and James
accept Abraham as a model for modern Christians, and as a righteous
man who had faith and good works.
For James, faith without works is dead. For Paul, we
are justified by faith alone. James believes we demonstrate
our faith by living out the law. Paul believes that the grace of
Jesus Christ frees us from living out the law. We do not know whether
James is calling believers to follow the ritual law that developed
with Pharisaic Judaism, but from Acts we see that he was willing
to require a lesser law for Gentile believers. We do not know whether
Paul ever saw the letter of James, but from 1 Corinthians and elsewhere
we see that he is not calling for Christians to give up ethical
living.
Certainly Paul and James would agree that we cannot say to a person
without food “Go in peace; keep warm and eat your fill,”
unless we are willing to supply their bodily needs. For indeed,
what is the good of that? -James 2:16
Patrick J. Hartin, A Spirituality of Perfection:
Faith in Action in the Letter of James, (Collegeville, MN:
The Liturgical Press, 1999).
Luke Timothy Johnson, “The Letter of James” in Leander
Keck et al, eds., The New Interpreter’s Bible, Volume
XII, (Nashville: Abingdon, 2000).
John Painter, Just James: the Brother of Jesus in History and
Tradition, (Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press,
1997).
Elsa Tamez, The Scandalous Message of James: Faith Without
Works is Dead, (New York: The Crossroad Publishing Company,
1990).
Robert W. Wall, Community of the Wise: The Letter of James,
(Valley Forge, PA: Trinity Press International, 1997).
|