We might entitle this chapter (2), If any man appears to be religious, let that man have something to show for his faith.
Verse 1 has two possible renderings, the one taking it as a statement as My brethren, don’t hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons. The other can be rendered as a question as in the R.V. Do you, in accepting persons, hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory? The faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, what is that? The faith that believes and trusts in Christ, or the faith that is the same as Jesus’? (cf. Rom. 4:15 – the faith of Abraham is not faith in Abraham but the same kind as Abraham. Well, in the end it really comes out the same anyway – to follow the example of Jesus is the same as following the commands of Jesus because there is perfect harmony between Jesus’ teaching and His life – the only teacher ever to accomplish such.
Jesus was no respecter of persons (word meaning ‘face-receiving’ – hence partiality based on appearance). Jesus was accused of being a friend of tax gatherers and sinners, something He probably didn’t mind. As a former Vice-President, Dan Quale, said of those who lampooned his conservative values, I wear their criticisms as a badge of honour. I do likewise when someone calls me conservative or a Bible-Basher. It’s part of bearing the reproach of Christ in the modern age.
What sort is my faith? Faith is spoken of in many ways through the Bible: no faith; little faith; great faith; as a grain of mustard seed; increasing faith; full of faith; unfeigned faith; precious faith; most holy faith; not weak; strong; weak; bold; rich; and vain. What sort of faith do I have? What does my faith mean in relation to persons? My faith must affect how I treat my fellow man. In 2:1-7 the partiality toward people is condemned. There is a parable of the hand:- the fingers of the hand were arguing over who was the most important. The thumb thought he was because he was the strongest and even had power of life and death. The forefinger thought he was because he did all the pointing. The middle finger thought he was because he was the longest, but the next finger thought he was because he was the ring finger. Well, they all waited for the little finger to put in his two bits worth but he was silent. Then they all looked at him and agreed among themselves that he was the weakest, shortest and sorriest excuse for a finger and a waste of space. They asked him, “Just what can you do anyway?”, and without saying a word he inserted himself in his master’s ear and dragged out some wax!
We were introduced to the variations in life in 1:9-11, but the fluctuations and varying fortunes of life do not deny equality in the brotherhood. The over-importance attached to externals by people of the world is not to be attached to Christians. Many of the richest people in the world are the poorest spiritually, and as he points out in v.5, many of the world’s poorest are rich in faith. Why do we attach such importance to worldly wealth and so little to faith? Does character mean nothing or is it papered over with material things? Are we Christians still impressed by gold rings and bright rags? (2 Cor. 5:16). How, then, would we regard Elijah or John the Immerser? As he points out in vs. 6,7, being rich does not guarantee righteousness. In fact, it often creates a form of snobbery and self-sufficiency that results in the oppression of the less-fortunate which is anything but God-like (Matt.22:16b).
Part of the great mystery hidden for ages in Christ was the creation of a universal brotherhood in which there was neither Jew nor Greek, bond nor free. So it starts with “brethren”, the foundation of the admonition with which the chapter begins. It is the way of the world to measure people by their worldly wealth or status. If we use the same measuring stick then what good is our faith to us? V.4 says that to do so is to be guilty of ‘partiality’. This is diakrino, the same word used in 1:6 where it is translated as ‘waver’ or ‘doubts’. This latter rendition is the most common in the New testament and thus if translated so here would indicate that there was doubt in the mind – doubt that God had promised the kingdom to the poor (cf. Luke 12:32; 14:13,21). The faith of Christ is a faith that should reflect itself in acceptance of one’s fellow man since Christ’s coming was not in the abstract but to mix with mankind. That’s why he starts off in v.1 with describing the Lord as the Lord of Glory. If anyone had the right to think he was too high to rub shoulders with the rest of stinking humanity it was Jesus – but He didn’t. We are not to follow the sinful habits of the world but we are to be in the world as yeast, an influence for good, as light, showing a better way, and as salt, preserving.
And as we live in this world we are to follow the ‘royal law’: love your neighbour as yourself. Why is it called the royal law? It is second only to the command to love God. Why is it mentioned here? Because respect of persons violates this law (cf. Lev. 19:15,18). And who is my neighbour? Jesus answered that: even a wounded Samaritan! To violate this law is to be convicted as a lawbreaker as per vs. 9-13.
We don’t live in a country that exhibits the wide range of poverty and riches that the ancient world did. We have various welfare programs and safety nets that means everyone gets to eat and be clothed and be sheltered if they want to. Those who came to assembly in that day in vile rags did so out of necessity, those who do it today do it out of choice. So who are the poor today? Single mothers? Refugees? Foreigners? The weak? Jim McGuiggan quotes Mike Jaconelli who said, I believe evangelicals have sold their birthright for a mess of porridge. We have been seduced by the glitter and temporariness of power and have gone a whoring. We have sold out and traded our worship of God for a worship of power. We have changed the ministry of sacrifice for the ministry of domination. He adds, I see that as I travel to a lot of places in the world. I hear movements bragging on their buildings, their programs, their dreams, their successes, their thriving ministries. And the weak? WHERE ARE THE WEAK?
In verse 14, beginning the second half of the chapter, he asks another question that is appropriate to our theme, If a man seems to be religious let him have something to show for his faith. “What does it profit, my brethren, though a man says he has faith and has no works? Can faith save him?” We use this to combat denominational error and there is nothing wrong in doing that, but this is written to members of the Lord’s church. The whole faith/works controversy has been the source of much confusion. Luther called James a right strawy epistle – in fact he went on to say, this James does no more than drive to the law and its works, and in a disorderly way throws one thing into another, and suggested that the letter came from a third or perhaps a fourth hand, removed in time from that of the apostles and the time of the apostles’ disciples. It is sad to see a man disparage a book of the accepted canon because he didn’t understand it and thus conflicted with his false translation of Rom. 3:28.
Paul says, faith without works is unprofitable (v.14). This rhetorical verse teaches that there is no profit in faith absent of works, just as there is no profit in works absent of faith. To talk about faith is easier than putting it into action. He also says that faith without works is not a saving faith. Faith does save (Eph. 2:8), not according to human works of merit (Titus 3:5), or according to the works of the law of Moses (Rom. 3:27,28), but according to works of righteousness which God has appointed man to do (Eph. 2:10).
Verse 17 refers to faith without works as a dead faith, and v.18 adds that it is incapable of demonstration. It’s true that faith cannot be seen, but a tree is known by its fruits. One who boasts that his faith is but pure faith, untainted by any admixture of works, and thus superior to others who work, cannot do other than boast of one’s professed faith. Anthony Flew, the late atheist, had a little fable about the supposed gardener who tends a jungle clearing, and who cannot be detected by scent, electric shock, or sight. He ends his fable with the question, How does this gardener differ from an imaginary gardener or even from any gardener at all? We may well ask what is the difference between one who has no faith and one who has an invisible kind of faith? (cf. Matt. 5:47). James says, Someone might say I believe in salvation by works, and God forbid that I should boast, but I’ll let my works do the talking and let others make their judgement.
James goes on to say that this action-less faith is like the faith of demons (cf. Mark 5:7; Luke 4:34). You believe God is one (cf. Deut.6:24 – the Jewish shema prayed regularly by Jews it was their equivalent to the Moslem’s “Allah is Great”)? Well done! (a touch of irony). It is a faith of mental acceptance and even profession, which are essential components of faith, but will it save the demons? Faith involves theological propositions, but if these do not motivate then what is the point? I guess a car without an engine is still a car, but of what value? So James says in v.22, that it is an imperfect faith. It is the working faith that is the mature or complete faith (cf. Heb.11).
He then gives three examples of saving faith, one negative and two positive. In verses 15,16 we see how words are not appropriate in the circumstance, but rather actions are necessary. In verses 21-24 the offering of up Isaac is called a work here but in Heb. 11:17 the same offering is said to be “by faith”. If faith and works are incongruous, then how can the same act be both of works and faith? The fact is, faith and works are not incongruous – they are inseparable. In Gen. 15:6 it is said that Abraham was counted righteous, but James does not refer to that incident – rather to the one in Ch. 22 when he offered up Isaac. As Gen. 22 illustrated the ongoing working of faith in Abraham’s life, so James is showing that the working faith involved in initial gospel obedience was to be a continuing thing in the Christian’s life. Abraham was called “The friend of God”, and what was this friendship established upon? – his actions.
Finally in verse 25,26, note that, like Abraham the Jew, Rahab the gentile harlot’s work in protecting the spies was also by faith (Heb. 11:31). Whilst some may have thought the heroic acts of Abraham’s faith were beyond emulation, James her shows that even the primitive faith of an immoral Canaanite expressed itself in action.
Faith without action is dead even as a body without the spirit is dead. Is the body of man the spirit of man? Not at all, they are two different things closely related. Neither are faith and works. To be viable they must be enjoined. Works are necessary as (a) the fruits of faith and (b) evidence that the faith is genuine. So Rom. 14:12 and 2 Cor. 5:10 rightly give the place of works in the judgement.
If anyone appear to be religious, let that man have something to show for his faith.