Grace
Theological Jouma1 12.1 (1992) 69-97
Copyright © 1992 by Grace Theological
Seminary.
Cited with permission.
THE SOTERIOLOGY OF JAMES 2:14
GALE
Z. HEIDE
In the contemporary debate concerning salvific
essentials, James
the endeavor is made to
allow the context of James to provide the key
indicators on how saving
faith should here be understood. The eternal
ramifications of James
is discussed as it
relates to the audience he has in mind. James is not
merely concerned with
some type of temporal blessing in
stead, he is burdened
over the very eternal existence of some people
who are in his pastoral
care.
* * *
In
times past, the book of James has become the subject of signifi-
cant
debate (such as in the time of Martin Luther), but by and large,
it
has been passed 'over in favor of "more theological" or "more impor-
tant" books with respect to the Christian
faith. This is an unfortunate
thing
to say of any book, and especially of one so close to the pulse of
the
early church. There has, however, been an awakening of sorts
lately
as to the vitality of the book of James. Unfortunately, this awak-
ening is largely due to a theological debate in
contemporary evangeli-
cal
circles that centers in part around the interpretation of one
particular
passage in James, namely James 2:14. This debate is often
called,
among other things, the "Lordship salvation" controversy. It
relates
directly to the understanding of the relationship between salva-
tion and sanctification. Within this debate, there
are often appeals
made
to a given understanding of how James views the relationship, or
defines
the substance, of salvation and sanctification. Underlying many
of
these appeals are varying assumptions as to the interpretation of cer-
tain passages.
Amidst the many references made to
the book of James in the
debate,
specific exegetical explanation is seldom given for the under-
standing
espoused. Instead, the reader is presumed upon to accept the
assumptions
that underlie the interpretation being set forth. In light of
this,
the question must be raised whether the assumptions being made
in
relation to James
70
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
paper
to expose such assumptions and critique them in an endeavor to
come
to a clearer understanding of just what is the author's intended
meaning
in this text.
I. IDENTIFICATION OF THE
PROBLEM
The specific issue to be addressed here centers
around the
intended
meaning of the verb sw<zw--"to
save"--in
of
this study will endeavor to develop a clear understanding of James
2:14.
We will first discuss the various options of meaning for the verb
sw<zw
by itself, and next discuss the context that surrounds
lowing
this, we shall undertake to relate the meaning of the word
within
the surrounding context. Much of this process has clearly been
done
for us and is available in various commentaries and journal
articles.l However, the
theological dynamic in James' use of sw<zw
is
regularly
given little more attention than a brief definition, if men-
tioned at all, in most contemporary studies.2
The intention of this sec-
tion in the study is to build upon and draw together
what has been
written,
and at the same time develop a logically coherent understand-
ing of
1 There is a long-standing tradition, which this
study delineates in further detail in
the
paragraphs below, concerning the interpretation of this passage as is best
represented
by
the following authors: James B. Adamson, James:
The Man and His Message (Grand
Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1989), John Calvin, Commentaries on the Catholic Epistles: James
(trans.
and ed. John Owen;
tary on James (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1982), John P. Lange, Commentary on
the Holy Scriptures:
James-Revelation
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1960), R. C. H. Len-
ski,
Interpretation of Hebrews and James
(Columbus: Wartburg, 1946), Thomas Manton,
An Exposition of the
Epistle of James
(Evansville: Sovereign Grace, 1962), Ralph P.
Martin,
James (WBC; Waco: Word Books, 1988),
James B. Mayor, The Epistle of St.
James (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1954), Douglas J. Moo, Tyndale New Testament Com-
mentaries: The Letter of James (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1985), and James H. Ropes,
Epistle of St. James (ICC; New York: Charles
Scribner's Sons, 1916).
There are also various journal articles worth
mentioning that have developed the
salvation
theme of James 2: 14 in some fashion. They are best represented by the follow-
ing authors: Christoph Burchard, "Zu Jakobus
mentliche Wissenschaft 71/1/2 (1980) 27-45,
William Dyrness, "Mercy triumphs over
justice:
James
11-16,
Simon J. Kistemaker, "The Theological Message of
James," JETS 29/1 (March,
1986)
55-61, John F. MacArthur, Jr., "Faith According
to the Apostle James," JETS 33/
1
(March, 1990) 13-34, John Polhill, "Prejudice,
Partiality, and Faith: James 2," RevExp
83/3
(Summer, 1986) 395-404, Robert V. Rakestraw,
"James 2:14-26: Does James con-
tradict Pauline Soteriology?"
Criswell Theological Review 1/1
(Fall, 1986) 31-50, and
Michael
J. Townsend, "Christ, Community, and Salvation in the Epistle of
James," EvQ
53/2
(April-June, 1981) 115-23.
2 While not true of every study, many
relied on generally accepted definitions and
rarely
made any attempt to support the definitions in detail. There were a number of
ref-
erences given in support, but unfortunately, the
studies often simply referred to each other.
THE SOTERIOLOGY OF JAMES
context
of the book. This seems to be an especially urgent task in light
of
the recent debate concerning the understanding of this passage.3
The
latter half of the study will deal directly with those who are
opposed
to the traditional interpretation of James 2:14, which under-
stands
James to be speaking of eternal salvation, by answering some of
the
objections they have made to this author's understanding of the
text.
Such a response has not been given any legitimate consideration
in
previous studies dealing with the theological development of James
2:14.
In the past, the articles attempting to deal with this issue have
given,
at best, brief mention of the variant view, which understands
James
to be speaking of a very temporal salvation. That is, there seems
to
have been little effort given to deal with the variant interpretation in
full4
This author's study is intended to fill the ever widening gap. The
discussion
set forth in this latter section will provide the reader with
the
much needed construction of a response to the variant view causing
such
great contention regarding the book of James.
Some of the questions that ultimately need to be
answered in such
a
study are these: What is the meaning of sw<zw?
From what is the per-
son
in question to be saved? How are works related to this salvation?
How
is faith related to this salvation? What type of faith is in view?
All
these and more will be answered or given reasonable consideration
in
the following discussion, while focusing attention primarily on the
meaning
of sw<zw
within its context in James
3 It may be worthwhile to note that there
is relatively small representation of those
who
have objected in written form to the view of James as it is understood in this
study,
The
only major interpretive statements available are sections in Zane Hodges' The Gos-
pel Under Siege (Dallas: Redencion
Viva, 1981) and Absolutely Free (
Viva,
1989), and the brief booklet 'Dead Faith' What is It? A Study on James 2:14-26
(Dallas:
Redencion Viva, 1987) by the same author, Earl D. Radmacher seems to be ad-
vocating the same position in his brief article
"First Response to 'Faith According to the
Apostle
James' by John F, MacArthur, Jr.," JETS 33/1 (March, 1990) 35-41. There is
also
a brief outline of a view similar to Hodges' in R. T. Kendall's Once Saved, Always
Saved (Chicago: Moody, 1985)
207-17. However, there are many who would agree with
the
objections at, a, more popular level., For these reasons it is crucial that we
answer all
the
objections arising to the view of this study, but it is nonetheless unfortunate
that they
are
not represented by more substantial documentation,
4 Most major works on
James have not attempted a response. This is somewhat un-
derstandable since the few articles
that do attend to the issue are mainly book reviews
which
mention the view only in passing. The most complete of these is William G.
Bjork,
"A Critique of Zane Hodges' The Gospel Under Siege, A review
Article," JETS
30/4
(December, 1987),457-60. Others that also mention the issue are Johnny V.
Miller,
"Book
Reviews," Trinity Joumal 4 NS/1 (Spring, 1983)
94, and R, F. White, Book Re-
views,"
WTJ 46/2 (Fall, 1984) 428. The one
possible exception is the response of Mac-
Arthur,
who does give a brief rebuttal of Hodges (MacArthur,
"Faith" 28-32), However,
he
does not deal with Hodges' viewpoint in the depth that is necessary for a
definitive
response.
72
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
II. ASSUMPTIONS
In a study of this nature and scope, there are
necessarily some
assumptions
that will be made. Let us briefly describe these assump-
tions before we address the task at hand. James was
written by the
half-brother
of Jesus who was also an authoritative leader in the Jeru-
probably
around 45-47 A.D. This is best supported by the lack of ref-
erences to the council and the early death of
the author. It is also
assumed
that the letter is written to Christian Jews that are scattered
abroad.
This is argued by the use of the word "brother" when address-
ing the audience and by the reference to the
"twelve tribes of the
diaspora." With these assumptions in mind,
we shall begin our study.
III. LEXICAL ANALYSIS
The first portion of our discussion will entail
outlining the pos-
sible options of meaning that the verb sw<zw may take in any given ,
context.
The various lexica representing the relevant periods of history
surrounding
the time in which the letter of James was written provide
us
with a veritable gamut of possibilities for meaning. We shall begin
with
an analysis of them and their respective definitions, then mention
briefly
other possible influences.
The Classical period gives some insight into the
original Greek
usage
of the word crro~ro as authors such as Plato, Homer,
Plutarch, and
others
used it in varying contexts. The range of meaning derived from
a
study of this period depicts references centered mainly around physi-
cal
deliverance from a present reality with occasional reference to an
eternal
salvation.5
The New Testament period is of course the most
relevant to our
study
at hand. The meanings represented by authors of this time,
prevalently
the New Testament authors themselves, seem to divide
amongst
three emphases. The first being mainly an eternal or eschato-
logical
salvation, the second referring to a preservation from physical
5 The Classical period, as represented by
Liddell and Scott, presents four options
that
the verb sw<zw
may mean in a given context (H. G. Liddell and R. Scott, The Greek .
English
Lexicon [
being
saved from death, kept alive, and escaping destruction. The second definition
re-
lates to things being kept safe or preserved. The
third relates to keeping, observing, or
maintaining
something, such as a law. The fourth deals with keeping something in mind
or
remembering. All these definitions appear to have present realities in mind and
do not
refer
specifically to an eternal perspective of salvation. This is not to say that
such a con-
notation
could not be inferred from the use of this verb, but it appears not to be a
common
usage
in Classical literature. Cf. also Colin Brown, The New International Dictionary of
New Testament Theology, Volume 3 (Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1978) 205-6, and
Werner
Foerster, TDNT:
Volume VII (Grand Rapids; Eerdmans, 1971) 965-69.
THE SOTERIOLOGY OF JAMES
harm
or destruction, and the third referring to a combination of the
two.6
The Patristics seemed
to be narrowed to only two options. They
are
the eternal and the physical used exclusive of each other.7
It may be helpful to this study to understand
the Septuagintal
(LXX)
usage of sw<zw
as it represents various Hebrew texts. In the
LXX,
sw<zw
was used to translate many verbs, but two in particular
seem
to stand out as most relevant. They are fwy, and Flm.8 Each verb
takes
physical deliverance as its main referent, but can have a spiritual
sense
included over and above physical deliverance. There are no
usages
of these verbs referring exclusively to a spiritual state of salva-
tion, but they can at times express this as their
main emphasis. Such an
emphasis
is often found in prophetic passages.9
This can help us in establishing the
etymological development of
sw<zw
down through the time of the LXX and into the New Testament
usage
where the LXX was still referenced extensively. There had been
adequate
representation of the spiritual and eternal deliverance prior to
the
New Testament, but much of the emphasis was on present physical
preservation
as stated above. This understanding of LXX usage does
not
dictate the meaning in James, but it does provide us with a context
of
the development of the term during the writing of the New Testa-
ment, especially an early book-like James.
6 The New Testament period is best
represented by
and
F. W. Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon
of the New Testament and Other Early
Christian Literature (Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1952) 798-99. This particu-
lar lexicon gives us three distinct definitional
possibilities for sw<zw.
These are the pres-
ervation from natural dangers, the preservation
from eternal death, and a combination of
both
categories. Preservation from natural dangers includes being saved from death,
brought
out safely, freed from disease, preserved in good: condition, and a form of
greet-
ing that wishes prosperity to the recipient.
Preservation from eternal death was used in
both
the active and passive voice. It was used in the active to denote the saving
activity
of
persons, especially God or Christ, and of qualities that lead to salvation. The
use of
aro~co in the passive voice denoted being saved or the
attainment of salvation. The com-
bination of these two areas had both the eternal
and present perspective in mind. Much
evidence
is given for the emphasis of the eternal nature of salvation, particularly in
James'
use of the verb, by Colin Brown and J. Schneider, New International Dictionary
211-16,
and Werner Foerster, TDNT 989-98.
7 The Patristic period, as represented by
Lampe, seems to have been characterized
by
only two definitional variants for sw<zw
(G. W. H. Lampe, A Patristic Greek Lexicon
[
from
sickness or physical constraints. The second definition addressed the salvation
that
is
given by God, the objects of God's salvation, and the means of salvation.
sFor a brief lexical description of each, see
Francis Brown, S. R. Driver, and
Charles
A. Briggs, A Hebrew-English Lexicon with
an Appendix Containing the Biblical
Aramaic (Peabody: Hendrickson,
1979) 446-47 (fwy), and 572 (Flm).
9 Fora full
development of the meanings found in the LXX, see Brown, New Inter-
.national Dictionary, 206-11, and Georg Fohrer, TDNT 970-80.
74
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
We have viewed the various options in meaning
for sw<zw
and it
seems
possible to narrow them down to just three fairly general
usages,
namely, 1) with reference to salvation from some type of natu-
ral danger, 2) eternal salvation or some facet
thereof, and 3) a combi-
nation
of these two. Certainly all the usages would have been known
by
James' readers. We must remember that this is not a grocery list
from
which to choose; it only helps us to better understand our
options.
The emphasis in determining meaning must be upon the usage
of
the word in its context. With this in mind, we must now turn our
attention
to the context in which
IV. CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS
Verse 14 of chapter 2 may be translated as
follows: "What is the
use,
my brothers, if a certain one should say he has faith, but does not
have
works? Is that faith able to save him?" (the expected answer
being
no).10 Our task is to relate what meaning the word save, (sw<zw)
might
take on in such a context. Is this salvation from some present
hazard
or misfortune, or is it salvation from eternal damnation, or is it
possibly
a combination of the two? The pattern that will be followed in
this
section is to look first at the centerpoint of the
passage and expand
to
every point of reference that encircles the passage. The study begins
with
an examination of
the
surrounding context of the book of James, and culminates with a
brief
section related to the historical setting encompassing the situation
of
James and the early church.
James
2: 14
What is James saying when he pens 2:l4?
Obviously, he does not
see
much use to faith that does not have accompanying works. But
what
exactly does this faith entail? Does James see this faith being so
weak
as to result in forfeiting one's salvation and losing the confidence
of
eternal life with Christ? If we look at the form of argumentation that
James
is using, loss of salvation does not seem to be the point that he
is
making. What then is the point? As we examine James
closely,
he seems to speak of this faith unto salvation as something
which
one enters into initially. The emphasis he seems to make is an
appeal
for the reader to begin to exercise faith that will be able to save,
not
to continue to maintain a faith that could possibly be lost. Let us
observe
how this is expressed in the verse.
10 The grammatical construction of this question
includes the negative particle
mh, thereby expressing
James' expectance of a negative answer to the question. Cf. H. E.
Dana
and Julius R. Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament (New
THE SOTERIOLOGY OF JAMES
James
begins his argument by asking a pragmatic question, "What
is
the use. . ." or "What is the advantage. . . ." We must first
deter-
mine
for whom the advantage is intended. Interestingly, there seems to
be
both a primary and a secondary advantage evidenced in the passage.
The
secondary advantage appears to be the benefit of others. This is
especially
true if we look at the next two verses where the same phrase
is
used to describe the profit that comes to the brother or sister who is
sent
away without clothing and in need of food. This is a very immedi-
ate
reflection of the benefits of faith, or the lack thereof. But also evi-
dent
is the primary advantage that is to be gained by the "one saying
he
has faith." This seems to agree best with the statement that directly
follows
the qualification of "no works," "Is that faith able to save
him?"11
Ultimately, the primary usefulness that is in view is the advan-
tage to the man who says he has faith. The advantage
that James points
out
as the most prevalent is this man's salvation. The primary grounds
of
benefit to be found in this faith must be in whether or not it can pre-
serve
him in a future judgment.12
James now focuses his attention on the man in
question. It is
important
to remember that James is using a form of argumentation
that
does not directly point toward the people to whom he wants to
convey
this message. It is a form of rhetorical argument known as dia-
tribe
that gets its point across without necessarily naming the ones in
question.13 This is best evidenced
here when he uses the supposed
"man who says he has faith" and
distinguishes him from the brothers,
asking,
"What use is it, my brothers, if a certain man. . . ?" This
method
of argumentation also uses short questions that make a point
indirectly,
as demonstrated in the question of usefulness, and in the
phrase
"Is that faith able to save him?" However, it must be remem-
bered that James is intending this argument to be
pointed toward cer-
tain ones amongst the brothers who are guilty of the
problem. He
shows
this later in verse 16 where he uses the words "one from among
11 Sophie Laws, Harper's New Testament Commentaries: The Epistle of James
(San
Francisco: Harper & Row, 1980) 119.
12 It is argued by
ptwxo<n who was mentioned in
2:6 (
much
of accepted Greek syntax when there is a much more likely referent found in the
immediate
context of
an
unwarranted presupposition, especially since James feels it necessary to refer
to the
poor
again in 2:15-16. It is also interesting to note that ai]to<n is masculine,
accusative,
singular
(movable v is unlikely). James illustrates his concept of the poor in
cluding both male and female. It seems awkward
to say that James has changed his un-
derstandingof referents for au'tov between
illustration
of
13 For a further discussion of 'diatribe'
see Adamson, James 103-4, or Martin
Dibelius, A
Commentary on the Epistle of James (rev. H. Greeven
and ed. H. Koester;
76
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
you"
and returns to addressing them directly as the guilty parties. The
argumentation
of James does not make its point of reference someone
outside
the group to which he is speaking, but rather finds its audience
within
the group. The man that James states "says he has faith" must
be
found within the intended audience of the letter. Could it be said
that
James is simply drawing an analogy similar to what the believers
might
be experiencing with someone outside of their fellowship? This
would
allow for the possible translation of tij to be any man. If we
take
the statement exclusive of the context, this is a plausible argu-
ment. However, James is not leaving the identity of
the intended man
so
obscure. He identifies the workless faith of "those from among you"
as
equally useless and insufficient for salvation. This means that James
is
associating the man with the group of believers. He is one who pro-
fesses
faith in Christ, and in fact this is what James states, "If a man
says
he has faith," ultimately referencing the same faith that is men-
tioned in 2:1, "faith in our glorious Lord Jesus
Christ." This associa-
tion with the audience of believers makes tij seem more specific and is
better
understood to refer to a certain man.
James is not stating that the
man
is a true believer; in fact the distinction between a believer and
this
man is the intent of James' singling him out. But James does
understand
him to be within the group of professing believers.
The syntactical construction of the phrase
"If a certain man says
he
has faith" is somewhat helpful in understanding the meaning here as
well.
The third class conditional clause used with the subjunctive
mood
would indicate that there is a probable future condition in the
mind
of the author. James views this individual as one who will claim
to
have faith. James uses the probable future condition to establish
what
he believes to be the position of the "certain man," but he is not
willing
to accept this claim at face value. He rejects the presence of
true
faith by measuring it according to its lack of works. James' use of
the
probable future condition sets up the position of a hypothetical
man
whom he expects to be found within the intended audience of the
letter.
James can then take issue with what he understands to be a fal-
lacious claim. James uses the third class
conditional protasis and the
subjunctive
mood to establish a position on which he then casts much
doubt.14
It may be quite appropriate to comment here on
the doubt that
James
is implying. He is not necessarily making a dogmatic claim as to
the
profession of faith not being true, but he is also not taking this pro-
fession at face value. It would be quite proper
for James to make some
allowance
and even use hypothetical argumentation since he is evi-
14 A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament: Volume VI (
Harper
& Brothers, 1933) 33-34.
THE SOTERIOLOGY OF JAMES
dently separated from most of the Christian Jews who
will read this
letter.
But it is also quite appropriate for him to convey a certain
amount
of convictional.and even judgmental authority due to
his posi-
tion in the church and the responsibilities that
position would entail.
James
is making every effort to define for his readers the type of faith
by
which he expects them to be saved.
It may well be asked whether the faith in view
is a faith in the
saving
work of Christ or simply a faith that the man in question has in
his
mind as a possible mere intellectual assent expressed in a lifeless
proclamation
or creed. James has used the word faith four times in the
previous
context: first, in relation to testing it through the endurance of
trials
(1:2-4); second, he uses it in the context of asking in faith and
not
having any doubt (1:6); third, he uses it in relation to how it is
viewed
with respect to others (2: 1); and fourth, he uses it to describe
the
poor whom God had chosen to be rich in faith and heirs of the
kingdom
(2:5). All four of these usages seem to have the true faith that
is
unto eternal salvation in mind, even though they may be used in a
very
pragmatic sense.lS This is especially true of the
second usage
which
is qualified by the phrase "in our Lord Jesus Christ," and the
fourth
usage which relates to those chosen by God to be the heirs of
the
kingdom. James has assumed all of these usages to contain true
faith
and he does not change his view of the essence of faith in
26.
True faith is that which is expressed by Abraham and Rahab.
These
are
set in contrast with the man who "says" he has faith. The under-
standing
that James has of saving faith does not change in this passage.
However,
the man in question evidently has a different view of faith
than
what James understands faith to be.16 There is not something
15 James H. Ropes, James 203.
16 This explains why James centers on this man's
proclamation of faith as distinct
from
his own definition of authentic faith. Cf. Calvin, James 309-10, and Polhill, "Prej-
udice" 400-401. James is not necessarily viewing
this statement in
kind
of faith, rather he sees it as true faith being misrepresented. The man in
question
evidently
has a view of faith that is not complete. Davids
describes this use of James
phrasing
as having a different definitional quality (Peter H. Davids,
"Theological Per-
spectives on the Epistle of James" JETS 23/2 [June, 1980] 102-3). Later in
the deve1op-
ment of this thought, he explains that James is
using the definitional qualities to make
the
distinction between true faith that acts and false faith that does not act.
This would
certainly
seem to fit with the way that the man's faith is granted for the sake of
argument,
but
James does not see it going any further than that when he states that it will
not
"save"
and in reality is non-existent, or "dead." Calvin also makes a distinction
between
the
two faiths when he speaks of Jesus not entrusting Himself to those who only
believed
on
His miracles in John
John [
the
distinctives made between various types of faith (MacArthur, "Faith" 22-23). Huther
gives
a good development on the meaning of faith without making definitional distinc-
tions (J. E. Huther, Heinrich A. W. Meyer's Commentary on the New
Testament: The
78
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
lacking
in faith per se, but there is something lacking in this man's
understanding
of it. This accounts for the doubtfulness that James has
in
the man's claim of faith. The difference seems to be directly related
to
the qualification James makes of the man having "no works."
James
has made the statement that the man "says" he has faith,
however
doubtful it may be. He now further explains that this man has
no
works, providing the only possible reason within the immediate
context
to doubt the faith of the man in question. For James, the pro-
fession did not seem to convince him of the
reality of the faith. Now
we
see the reasoning behind the doubt: the man has no works and so
his
profession of faith is called into question.
Next James points to the lack of works in this
man's faith and asks,
"Is
that faith able to save him?" expecting a negative answer. This does
not
mean that James is promoting works as a means to, or a condition
for,
the salvation in question, he does not ask, "Is this lack/abundance
of
works able to save him?" He focuses still on the faith in question and
makes
it the determinant of the salvation he has in mind. The faith is
the
ultimate test of this salvation. However, it must not be ignored that
he
also makes the lack of works the reason for the doubtfulness of the
man's
profession of faith. Works appear to be the test of the faith James
has
in mind as the type of faith that will save. James says plainly that
the
man who is claiming faith, but not doing works, does not have a
faith
that can save.17 To some observers, this might seem to fly in the
face
of free grace if eternal salvation is in view, but the argument does
not
stop with only this evidence.
James has presented an analogy in the preceding
context of 2:1-
13
concerning people who are exercising their "proclamation" of faith
by
disobeying the law. Naturally the first objection that would come to
the
mind of James' audience would be that obedience to the law does
not
bring one to salvation. James is not claiming that it does, but he is
saying
that the known, willful disobedience they are displaying causes
him
to question their salvation.18
General Epistles of
James, Peter, John, and Jude [
86-88).
These articles capture the essence of the definitional distinctions.' However,
it
should
be noted that the redefinition focuses on the proclamation of faith made by the
man
in question, not the way in which faith itself can take on various meanings.
Those
who wish to find the definition of faith remaining the same throughout the
entire
argument of James have the right idea, but they push it too far when they presup-
pose
a view of temporal salvation and eternal rewards being James' main concern; cf.
Radmacher, "First Response" 37-3S.
17 It is very likely that James is also
condemning those who are not "willing" to do
works.
This is established by the way James addresses the attitude of the "one
who says"
in
recognized.
18 Charles C. Ryrie, So Great Salvation
(Wheaton: Victor, 1989) 132-33.
THE SOTERIOLOGY OF JAMES
He
goes even further to explain in the verses following 14 that
their
blatant and sinful disregard for their brother or sister causes him
to
pronounce their faith dead. What is a dead faith? It may be defined
as
a faith .that is inactive, of which James has already explained will
not
save (
works
from the simple proclamation of creed. James is not willing to
accept
the proclamation alone as sufficient evidence for salvation when
the
one making it is denying the opportunity before him to do works.20
A
dead faith may also be defined as that which the demons in verse 19
possess,
a faith that does have knowledge and even belief in God, but
is
not willing to expend any effort for God, and in fact may work in
opposition
to God. James' view of faith does not change in this argu-
ment. He still has in mind the faith that is in
"our glorious Lord Jesus
Christ,"
and the faith that is held by those who are heirs to the king-
dom.
This is the faith that is somewhat in opposition to the "pro-
claimed"
faith of the supposed man in verse 14 and to the "dead" faith
of
the verses following. When he explains that faith without works is
dead,
he is not saying that it has become weak and died. He is describ-
ing it as a faith that never was, non-existent in
the eyes of James, and
ultimately
in the eyes of God.
The appeal mentioned briefly above to a
"proclamation" of faith
as
the sole requirement for salvation seems to be just what James
expects
his audience to make when presented with the law in 2:1-13,
and
would explain why he introduces his argument in the immediately
following
context of
tion next, the context surrounding
The Meaning of sw<zw in Surrounding Context
We must now focus our study on what the best
understanding of the
word
sw<zw
is in the larger context surrounding
verse 14. We have
already
shown that the faith that James has in mind as efficacious for sal-
vation and the faith the man in question has in mind
are two very differ-
ent. understandings of faith. It is obvious that
James would not affirm the
propagation
of a faith that would not be able to save anyone in the sense
he
has presented in
a
faith that will not save. Our focus in this section will be to understand
the
salvation as it is set in the whole of James intention.
19 Bauer, Arndt, and Gingrich, Greek-English Lexicon 104, and Ropes, James 217.
20 This is a distinctively different
situation from the thief on the cross whom Jesus
said
would be with Him that day. Jesus knew the man's heart, James makes no claim to
know
this objector's heart. Instead, James bases his exhortation on the opportunity
for
works
that he has seen this objector fail to carry out. James is not arguing for a
works
foundation
for salvation, rather he is imploring them toward a grace foundation for
living.
80
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
Let us begin our study with the salvation that
is presented in the
earlier
portions of James' letter. One might see 2:14ff. to be connected
directly
with
thought,
that being the active pursuit of works.21 This presents us with
an
interesting determination of how to define the verb sw<zai
in
and
verb
du<namai--"to be able." There are in fact three occurrences
of this
complementary
construction in the book of James, the third being
found
in