#8. By works was faith perfected,
and Gen. xv. “fulfilled” (James ii. 22, 23).


We have now seen enough to enable us to set aside the aspersions that have been cast on the teaching of the epistle of James, and can next consider what the epistle actually teaches.

As we have already seen, a comparative study of James, Philippians and the Sermon on the Mount brings the word “perfect” into prominence. The Greek word is teleios, cognate with telos, “the end”, and expresses the idea of finishing one’s course. We will begin, therefore, by considering the passages in James that contain the words teleios, teleioo, teleo, and telos. Let us first see them together:

Teleios. “Let patience have here perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing” (James i. 4).
“Every perfect gift is from above” (James i. 17).
“But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty” (James i. 25).
“The same is a perfect man” (James iii. 2).
Teleioo. “By works was faith made perfect” (James ii. 22).
Teleo. “If ye fulfil the royal law” (James ii. 8).
Telos. “And have seen the end of the Lord” (James v. 11).

Let us now examine these references, and discover if possible the Scriptural meaning of the Greek words used and their bearing on the purpose of James’ epistle in general, and James ii. 22 in particular. The root of all the words is tel, and however far the various derivations may depart from this root meaning, there will always be in the background the idea of an “end” or “finish”. The words “finish” and “end”, have a double meaning in English—signifying either the termination or end of space or time, or the goal, or completion or issue of anything. It is obvious, however, that when James speaks of the “end of the Lord” he can only mean the end or goal that the Lord has before Him. This reference comes in the last chapter of James, and is in structural correspondence with the first chapter:

A | i. 1-4. Patience, and its perfect work. Teleios.
* * * * *
A | v. 7-12. Patience, and the end of the Lord. Telos.

In the second of these sections we read:

“Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord. Behold the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, and hath long patience for it, until he receive the early and the latter rain. Be ye also patient, stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh . . . . . Behold we count them happy which endure. Ye have heard of the patience of Job, and have seen the end of the Lord; that the Lord is very pitiful, and of tender mercy” (James v. 7-11).

The reference to Job in connection with the “end of the Lord” is enlightening, for in the experiences of the patriarch we see worked out the blessedness of temptation when, through it, patience has its perfecting work. Turning now to chapter i., we see there the lesson summed up in verse 12:

“Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love Him” (James i. 12).

The teaching of this verse is comparable with that of II Tim. iv. 7 and 8, where the apostle speaks of a “crown of righteousness”.

As a good example of the confusing of things that differ, we quote the following comment on James i. 12:

“Life, in James, is the result of endurance to the consummation. Hence it is figured by the victor’s wreath. We cannot boast of our life in Christ, but in the kingdom life comes to those that overcome.”

If this comment be true, we might just as well say of II Tim. iv. 7, 8:

“Righteousness, in Paul, is the result of endurance to the consummation. Hence it is figured by the victor’s wreath.”

Such a comment would be a monstrous perversion of the truth. Anyone who confuses “hope” with “prize”, or “gift” with “reward” cannot help but lose his way and mislead his followers. James deals with “perfecting”, as does Paul in some places, but Paul also gives basic teaching which James, in his one epistle, does not give.

Those to whom James wrote had been “begotten” (James i. 18) and to speak of their “life” as the “result of endurance” is unscriptural. “The crown of life” is the award granted to those who endure the test, and to those “who loved Him”, just as in II Tim. iv. 8 “the crown of righteousness” is for those “that love His appearing”. Life is a necessity before it is possible to exhibit love.

The law that James has in view is not “Mount Sinai which gendereth to bondage” but “the perfect law of liberty”—“the royal law” (James i. 25, ii. 8). “The perfect law of liberty” means “the perfect law which is (the law) of our (Christian) liberty”. It is not the Gospel as contrasted with the Law, but the rule of life which obtains under the gospel dispensation, and which Paul and James declare to be the law of love (Gal. v. 13, 14; James ii. 8) or the state of being “under the law to Christ” (I Cor. ix. 21). If James actually teaches that those believers to whom he addressed his epistles were justified, while still sinners, by works, then we must believe that we have in view here a company that differs fundamentally from the rest of the redeemed, whether they be Jew or Gentile. Under Paul’s ministry the Jew, equally with the Gentile, was justified by faith without works. Those to whom Peter ministered were not justified by works, for he speaks of Christ as having died “the just for the unjust” to bring them to God (I Pet. iii. 18); and certainly no one can think of intruding justification by works into the epistles of John.

Israel also, according to the prophecies of the O.T., are justified without works, for they will acknowledge that all their righteousness are as filthy rags, and that Jehovah Tsidkenu is their “righteousness”. David, also, knew and taught the same blessed doctrine as Paul makes evident in Rom. iv. The believers addressed by James could no more attain to a righteousness by works than we can to-day. Both Paul and James appeal to the record of the justification of Abraham, and both appeal to the same verse. We are fully aware that in the process of his argument James goes to Gen. xxii. but this is not the basis; it is rather the “end” or “perfecting” of the faith already manifested without works. Referring to Gen. xv., Paul writes:

“For what saith the Scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness” (Rom. iv. 2).

In connection with the same passage James writes:

“And the Scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness” (James ii. 23).

Paul carries us forward in Rom. iv. to Abraham’s further exercise of the faith he had already shown in believing God’s promise of a son to a man and woman “as good as dead”:

“He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God: and being fully persuaded that what God had promised, He was able to perform. And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness” (Rom. iv. 20-22).

Paul concentrates on the question of Isaac’s birth, and makes it clear that he has in mind the kind of faith that includes resurrection, and believes in “God Who quickeneth the dead”. James does not speak of the initial act of Abraham’s faith but takes us rather to the “end”, where we stand with the patriarch on Mount Moriah, and see him “tempted” and attaining “the crown”. James exposes the hollow mockery of a “faith” that is in name only. The A.V. reads:

“What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? Can faith save him?” (James ii. 14).

The R.V. is closer to the true meaning here, and reads:

“Can that faith save him?”

The believers to whom James was writing, had been brought up as Jews to believe that the mere fact of being a child of Abraham was sufficient to guarantee their entrance into the kingdom—an evil doctrine that was rebuked both by John the Baptist and the Lord Himself, (“Think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father” Matt. iii. 9, John viii. 33-44). James saw that they were now slipping into the error of regarding “faith” in a similar way. “Though a man say he hath faith”, says James, “Can that kind of faith save him?” The answer is that it cannot, and the answer is illustrated by the two examples that follow. Try saying to a naked and destitute brother, “Be ye warmed” and “be ye fed” without implementing these words with necessary materials, and ask the one who is sent empty away how much this “saying” has profited him (James ii. 15, 16). “Even so”, comments James, “faith, if it hath not works, is dead in itself”. He then goes on to the second illustration: “Thou believest that there is one God: and thou doest well.”

The word hoti (“that”) after pisteuo (“to believe”) expresses the highest form of faith (John vi. 69; xvii. 8, etc.). Yet what follows? “The devil believe [and thus far are ‘believers’] and shudder.”

Now comes the appeal to Abraham:

“Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the Scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God and it was imputed unto him for righteousness, and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only” (James ii. 21-24).

Note carefully what James actually says here. The supreme act of obedience on Mount Moriah “fulfilled” the Scripture which said that “Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness”, and showed to a demonstration that Abraham’s faith was “living” and not “dead”. Faith, says James, wrought with his works, and by these works faith was perfected—or brought to its goal or consummation. Wesley observes: “There is no contradiction between the apostle because: (1) They do not speak of the same faith; St. Paul speaking of a living faith, St. James here of a dead faith. (2) They do not speak of the same works; St. Paul speaking of works antecedent to faith, St. James of works subsequent to it.” Abraham had “gone on unto perfection”, he had reached his goal, he had finished his course, and attained to a crown, for he was called “the Friend of God”. It is all a matter of “right division”, for balanced truth is truth “rightly divided”.

We trust that the application of this thought of “perfecting” will be made by the Spirit of Truth, as the reader ponders the doctrine of “perfecting” in Phil. iii., with its “prize” (Col. i. 28) and its “reward” (Col. ii. 18), together with Heb. xii. with its “race” and “joy”, and James with its “crown of life”. Any teacher who builds an argument upon a false comparison of James, with his “perfecting” and “crown”, and Paul, with his justification of the ungodly, is building something which will not stand the test of “that day”.

------------------------------

(From The Berean Expositor, vol. 34, page 236).

--------------------------