Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of James 2:18

Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: show me thy faith without thy works, and I will show thee my faith by my works.

18. Yea, a man may say ] The objector thus introduced, after the same manner as by St Paul in 1Co 15:35, is here the representative neither of an opponent to be refuted, nor yet of the writer’s own thoughts, but rather, as we should say, of an outsider, the man of common sense and practical piety, in this instance, of the Gentile convert whom the orthodox Jew or Jewish Christian despised, who might be less expert in formulating the Truth, but lived by the Truth which he believed.

shew me thy faith without thy works ] The reading followed by the English version is at once more intelligible and supported by better MS. authority, than the alternative “ by thy works,” which, in fact, destroys the whole point of the antithesis. The man who relied on faith is challenged to exhibit it, if he can, apart from works, as a distinct entity by itself. It is assumed that no such exhibition is possible. If he is to give any evidence that he has the faith that saves, it must be by having recourse to the works which he neglects, and, it may be, disparages. On the other hand, the challenger, starting with works, can point to them as proofs of something beyond themselves. Deeds of love, implying a victory over self, could not have been wrought without, not a dead faith in the dogma of the Divine Unity, but a living trust in God.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Yea, a man may say … – The word which is rendered yea ( alla) would be better rendered by but. The apostle designs to introduce an objection, not to make an affirmation. The sense is, some one might say, or, to this it might be urged in reply. That is, it might perhaps be said that religion is not always manifested in the same way, or we should not suppose that, because it is not always exhibited in the same form, it does not exist. One man may manifest it in one way, and another in another, and still both have true piety. One may be distinguished for his faith, and another for his works, and both may have real religion. This objection would certainly have some plausibility, and it was important to meet it. It would seem that all religion was not to be manifested in the same way, as all virtue is not; and that it might occur that one man might be particularly eminent for one form of religion, and another for another; as one man may be distinguished for zeal, and another for meekness, and another for integrity, and another for truth, and another for his gifts in prayer, and another for his large-hearted benevolence. To this the apostle replies, that the two things referred to, faith and works, were not independent things, which could exist separately, without the one materially influencing another – as, for example, charity and chastity, zeal and meekness; but that the one was the germ or source of the other, and that the existence of the one was to be known only by its developing itself in the form of the other. A man could not show that he possessed the one unless it developed itself in the form of the other. In proof of this, he could boldly appeal to anyone to show a case where faith existed without works. He was himself willing to submit to this just trial in regard to this point, and to demonstrate the existence of his own faith by his works.

Thou hast faith, and I have works – You have one form or manifestation of religion in an eminent or prominent degree, and I have another. You are characterized particularly for one of the virtues of religion, and I am for another; as one man may be particularly eminent for meekness, and another for zeal, and another for benevolence, and each be a virtuous man. The expression here is equivalent to saying, One may have faith, and another works.

Show me thy faith without thy works – That is, you who maintain that faith is enough to prove the existence of religion; that a man may be justified and saved by that alone, or where it does not develop itself in holy living; or that all that is necessary in order to be saved is merely to believe. Let the reality of any such faith as that be shown, if it can be; let any real faith be shown to exist without a life of good works, and the point will be settled. I, says the apostle, will undertake to exhibit the evidence of my faith in a different way – in a way about which there can be no doubt, and which is the appropriate method. It is clear, if the common reading here is correct, that the apostle meant to deny that true faith could be evinced without appropriate works. It should be said, however, that there is a difference of reading here of considerable importance. Many manuscripts and printed editions of the New Testament, instead of without (works – choris), read from or by ( ek), as in the other part of the verse, show me thy faith by thy works, and I will show thee my faith by my works.

This reading is found in Walton, Wetstein, Mill, and in the received text generally; the other (without) is found in many manuscripts, and in the Vulgate, Syriac, Coptic, English, and Armenian versions; and is adopted by Beza, Castalio, Grotius, Bengel, Hammond, Whitby, Drusius, Griesbach, Tittman, and Hahn, and is now commonly received as the correct reading. It may be added that this reading seems to be demanded by the similar reading in Jam 2:20, But wilt thou know that faith without works ( choris ton ergon) is dead, evidently implying that something had been said before about faith without works. This reading also is so natural, and makes so good sense in the connection, that it would seem to be demanded. Doddridge felt the difficulty in the other reading, and has given a version of the passage which showed his great perplexity, and which is one of the most unhappy that he ever made.

And I will show thee my faith by my works – I will furnish in this way the best and most certain proof of the existence of faith. It is implied here that true faith is adapted to lead to a holy life, and that such a life would be the appropriate evidence of the existence of faith. By their fruits the principles held by men are known. See the notes at Mat 7:16.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Verse 18. Show me thy faith without thy works] Your pretending to have faith, while you have no works of charity or mercy, is utterly vain: for as faith, which is a principle in the mind, cannot be discerned but by the effects, that is, good works; he who has no good works has, presumptively, no faith.

I will show thee my faith by my works.] My works of charity and mercy will show that I have faith; and that it is the living tree, whose root is love to God and man, and whose fruit is the good works here contended for.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

A man; any true believer.

May say; to any such boasting hypocrite.

Thou hast faith; thou pretendest to have faith, or admit thou hast faith; and an historical faith he might have, as Jam 2:19.

And I have works: I do not boast of my faith; or, to say nothing of my faith, yet works I do profess to have.

Show me thy faith without thy works: there are two readings of these words, but in both the sense agrees with the rest of the apostles discourse. If we take the marginal reading, show me thy faith by thy works, the sense is, evidence the faith thou pretendest to by thy works, as the fruits of it; let thy actions vouch for thy profession. But if we take the reading in the text, without thy works, it is a kind of ironical expression; q.d. Make it appear by convincing arguments that thou hast true faith, when yet thou wantest works, the only argument of the truth of it. Understand here, but this thou canst not.

And I will show thee my faith by my works; I will easily prove my faith to be true and genuine, by those good works it brings forth in me. Demonstrate the cause to me without the effect, if thou canst; but I will easily demonstrate the cause by the effect, and prove the root of faith to be in me, by my bringing forth that fruit which is proper to it. It cannot hence be inferred, that wherever such works are, as men count and call good, there must needs be faith: the apostles meaning only is, that wherever true faith is, there good works will certainly be.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

18. “But some onewill say”: so the Greek. This verse continues theargument from Jas 2:14; Jas 2:16.One may say he has faith though he have not works. Suppose onewere to say to a naked brother, “Be warmed,” withoutgiving him needful clothing. “But someone (entertainingviews of the need of faith having works joined to it) will say (inopposition to the ‘say’ of the professor).”

show me thy faith without thyworksif thou canst; but thou canst not SHOW,that is, manifest or evidence thy alleged (Jas2:14, “say”) faith without works. “Show” doesnot mean here to prove to me, but exhibit to me. Faithis unseen save by God. To show faith to man, works in someform or other are needed: we are justified judicially by God (Ro8:33); meritoriously, by Christ (Isa53:11); mediately, by faith (Ro5:1); evidentially, by works. The question here is not as to theground on which believers are justified, but about thedemonstration of their faith: so in the case of Abraham. In Ge22:1 it is written, God did tempt Abraham, that is, put tothe test of demonstration the reality of his faith, not forthe satisfaction of God, who already knew it well, but to demonstrateit before men. The offering of Isaac at that time, quoted here, Jas2:21, formed no part of the ground of his justification,for he was justified previously on his simply believing in thepromise of spiritual heirs, that is, believers, numerous as thestars. He was then justified: that justification was showed ormanifested by his offering Isaac forty years after. That work offaith demonstrated, but did not contribute to hisjustification. The tree shows its life by its fruits, but itwas alive before either fruits or even leaves appeared.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

Yea, a man may say, thou hast faith, and I have works,…. That is, a true believer in Christ may very justly call upon a vain boaster of his faith, who has no works, to give proof and evidence of it, and address him after this manner; you say you have faith, be it so that you have; I have works, you see I have, I say nothing about my faith at present; now,

shew me thy faith without thy works, if thou canst; see what ways, means, and methods thou canst make use of, to make it appear to me, or any other, that you have the faith you talk of: the words are a sort of sarcasm and jeer upon the man, and yet very just, calling upon him to do that which is impossible to be done, and thereby exposing his vain boast; for faith is an inward principle in the heart; an hidden thing, and cannot be seen and known but by external acts; and where it is right, it is operative, and shows itself by works, which is not practicable in those who have none:

and I will show thee my faith by my works; there may be indeed an appearance of good works, where there is no faith, as in the Heathens, in the Scribes and Pharisees, and in the Papists, and others; and on the other hand, there may be the principle of faith implanted, where there is not an opportunity of showing it by a series of good works, or a course of godly living, as in elect infants dying in infancy, and in those who are converted in their last moments, as the thief upon the cross; wherefore works are not infallible proofs and evidences of faith, yet they are the best we are capable of giving of it to men, or they of receiving. In short, works may deceive, and do not infallibly prove truth of faith, yet it is certain, that where they are not, but persons live in a continued course of sinning, there cannot be true faith.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Yea, a man will say (‘ ). Future active of . But ‘ here is almost certainly adversative (But some one will say), not confirmatory. James introduces an imaginary objector who speaks one sentence: “Thou hast faith and I have works” ( ). Then James answers this objector. The objector can be regarded as asking a short question: “Hast thou faith?” In that case James replies: “I have works also.”

Show me thy faith apart from thy works ( ). This is the reply of James to the objector. First aorist active imperative of , tense of urgency. The point lies in , which means not “without,” but “apart from,” as in Heb 11:6 (with the ablative case), “the works that properly belong to it and should characterise it” (Hort). James challenges the objector to do this.

And I by my works will shew thee my faith ( ). It is not faith or works, but proof of real faith (live faith vs. dead faith). The mere profession of faith with no works or profession of faith shown to be alive by works. This is the alternative clearly stated. Note (faith) in both cases. James is not here discussing “works” (ceremonial works) as a means of salvation as Paul in Jas 2:3; Jas 2:4, but works as proof of faith.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

Without [] . Rev., more literally, apart from.

And I will shew thee, etc. The Rev. brings out the antithesis more sharply by keeping more closely to the Greek order : I by my works will shew, etc.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

1) James discusses not faith “or” works but faith “and” works. He asks that one not be confused by being challenged by someone to say, “I have faith but you have works – which of us is saved?” One should not embrace the “either/or”, but the “both/and” position. One should have faith which brings salvation Eph 2:8-10; Joh 1:12, and works which declare salvation, in order to be recognized as a Christian.

2) Works are “visual aids” in Christian witnessing, in teaching, convincing, or impressing the principles of Christ upon the lost, Mat 5:13-16. Good works, as fruits of faith, are influential in witnessing for the Lord. Works are the only means by which the world may “see” one’s faith. Faith itself is invisible, as a gift from God. One should never be confused with the “faith or works,” but confirmed in his embracing “faith and works” as inward and outward demonstrations of proof of salvation to one’s fellow man.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

18 Yea, a man may say. Erasmus introduces here two persons as speakers; one of whom boasts of faith without works, and the other of works without faith; and he thinks that both are at length confuted by the Apostle. But this view seems to me too forced. He thinks it strange, that this should be said by James, Thou hast faith, who acknowledges no faith without works. But in this he is much mistaken, that he does not acknowledge an irony in these words. Then ἀλλὰ I take for “nay rather;” and τὶς for “any one;” for the design of James was to expose the foolish boasting of those who imagined that they had faith when by their life they shewed that they were unbelievers; for he intimates that it would be easy for all the godly who led a holy life to strip hypocrites of that boasting with which they were inflated. (115)

Shew me. Though the more received reading is, “by works,” yet the old Latin is more suitable, and the reading is also found in some Greek copies. I therefore hesitated not to adopt it. Then he bids to shew faith without works, and thus reasons from what is impossible, to prove what does not exist. So he speaks ironically. But if any one prefers the other reading, it comes to the same thing, “Shew me by works thy faith;” for since it is not an idle thing, it must necessarily be proved by works. The meaning then is, “Unless thy faith brings forth fruits, I deny that thou hast any faith.” (116)

But it may be asked, whether the outward uprightness of life is a sure evidence of faith? For James says, “ I will shew thee my faith by my works. ” To this I reply, that the unbelieving sometimes excel in specious virtues, and lead an honorable life free from every crime; and hence works apparently excellent may exist apart from faith. Nor indeed does James maintain that every one who seems good possesses faith. This only he means, that faith, without the evidence of good works, is vainly pretended, because fruit ever comes from the living root of a good tree.

(115) I would render the verse thus:

“

But one may say, Thou hast faith, I also have works; shew me thy faith that is without works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.”

It is the same as though he had said, “Thou hast faith only, I have also works in addition to my faith; now, prove to me that you have true faith without having works connected with it, (which was impossible, hence he is called a ‘vain man,’ or empty-headed, in Jas 2:20,) and I will prove my faith by its fruits, even good works.

(116) Griesbach and others regard χωρὶς as the true reading, countenanced by most MSS., and found in the Syr. and Vulg.

This verse is a key to the meaning of James: faith is to be proved by works; then faith properly justifies and saves, and works prove its genuineness. When he says that a man is justified by works, the meaning according to this verse is, that a man is proved by his works to be justified, his faith thereby being shewn to be a living and not a dead faith. We may well be surprised, as Doddridge was, that any, taking a view of this whole passage, should ever think that there is any contrariety in what is here said to be the teaching of Paul. The doctrine of Paul, that man is justified by faith and not by works, that is, by a living faith, which works by love, is perfectly consistent with what James says, that is, that a man is not justified by a dead faith but by that faith which proves its living power by producing good works, or by rendering obedience to God. The sum of what James says is, that a dead faith cannot save, but a living faith, and that a living faith is a working faith — a doctrine taught by Paul as well as by James.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

GODLY FAITH VS. THE DEVILS FAITH

Text 2:1820

Jas. 2:18

Yea, a man will say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: show me thy faith apart from thy works, and I by my works will show thee my faith.

19.

Thou believest that God is one; thou doest well: the demons also believe and shudder.

20.

But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith apart from works is barren?

Queries

144.

What did the man of Jas. 2:18 really say? (Could you put it in your own words?)

145.

Just who is the speaker in Jas. 2:18? Is it the man who has faith without works? (Look carefully at what he said!)

146.

Who said, show me thy faith apart from thy works, etc?

147.

To whom did he say it?

148.

Is it possible to show faith apart from thy works, as Jas. 2:18 states?

149.

Can faith exist apart from works?

150.

Can works exist apart from faith?

151.

How is this faith apart from works defined in Jas. 2:19?

152.

What do the demons have to do with the argument?

153. Jas. 2:19 a appears to obviously be faith without works, then why does James say, Thou doest well?

154.

Why do the demons shudder?

155.

Do we have any proof from the gospel narratives that the demons believe?

156.

Why refer to the man of Jas. 2:20 as a vain man?

157.

What is the meaning of barren?

Paraphrases

A. Jas. 2:18

Yes, some man might possibly say, You have the faith, and I have the works. Let someone show to me his faith without works, if he can. As for me, I will show my faith by the works I do.

19.

You have faith that Jehovah is the only God, and this is good; but just remember the demons also believe this and they tremble with fear of their fate!

20.

Do you really desire proof, O man with the futile reasoning, that faith without works does not work?

B.* 18.

But someone may say, You think the way to God is by faith alone, plus nothing; well, I say that good deeds are important too, for without good deeds you cannot show me whether you have faith or not; but anyone can see that I believe by the way I act.

19.

You think believing is enough, do you? Believing in one God? Well, remember that the devils believe this too, and believe it so strongly that they tremble in terror!

20.

Dear foolish man! When will you ever learn that believing is useless without doing what God wants you to? Faith that does not result in good deeds is not real faith.

Comment

The man speaking in this verse seems to be some observer outside . . . neither James, nor the ones to whom James is speaking. The speaking man is obviously not the one who has faith only, for he says: You have faith, and I have works. It appears here that this third party is introducing a new thought. You have the faith with no works . . . I have the works with no faith. You claim the belief in Jesus, but your life is no different. Your submission to the Lord goes no further than your lips. The life you live does not agree with what you say. You have compassion without expression. Now as for me, I have the works. I show my compassion by helping my fellow man. When I see a brother in need, I go to his service. No, I dont need your faith, for I do the good deeds without your faith. I am a doer, not a believer. You might call my gospel a social gospel for we are not so concerned with what a man thinks in his heart as what he does in his life.
Our missionaries show the helpless people around the world how to raise better crops. Our ministers visit the jails and offer psychological help to those who are in need of such help. We offer food to the hungry, and clothing to the naked.
If this is the argument of the third party, James dismisses it with a very brief statement, implying that we all know this man is wrong. It is as if this third party is quoted in defense of the man who has faith without works. This faith-only party may be saying: Well, its better to have faith without works than to have works without faith. Works only will get you nowhere!
All right, says James, show me your faith only. But as for me, I will show you my faith by my works!
There seems to be a bit of sarcasm in James reply. Lets see you demonstrate without doing, if you can! It would be difficult indeed to do without doing, to demonstrate without demonstrating, to show without showing! The faith-only man may tell of his faith, but his fellowman would have to take his word for it. He could not show it.
Fallacious is the conviction that religion is only for the inside manthat Gods grace could not possibly have conditions attached that required man to act; that man is saved without deeds; that the teaching of God is salvation by faith only.
Proof for such a faith-only doctrine is usually taken from Pauls Roman epistle. Yet Paul is most emphatic in stating that a man must work out his salvation; that a man must obey, that a man must present his body as a living sacrifice; holy, acceptable unto God. Not only must a man do this, but it is a reasonable servicethat which is no more that what is right and properthat which everyone should understand is Gods right to expect. (See Rom. 1:5; Rom. 12:1 ff; Rom. 16:26).

As for me, I will show you my faith by my works. What other way is there to show a faith? And how many times has the apostle John taught that by expressing our love for our fellow man we express our love for the Father? Did not Jesus Himself show us that As ye have done it unto the least of these, my brethren, you have done it unto me? And if James is unable to convince a man that God requires a man show his faith in God by deeds to his fellow-man, then he should read carefully the epistles of John, the words of Jesus, the teaching of Paul; in fact the entire new Testament!

When James turns aside to an imaginary person, and argues, Show me your faith without your works (if you can), he is using the Greek Diatribe style of argument. He turns to the imaginary opponent and addresses him directly as if he were there in person. This is a very effective debating style, used often by the Old Testament prophets, as well as the Greek debaters. It is very unlikely that James had ever talked with a person who believed that God would justify by faith without any works required. The tendency of the Jews was to say that God required works, but they often lacked faith.
Then, you might ask, Why does James make such a strong point of the argument? James was trying to convince people to do that which they already knew was right and reasonable. He is not just trying to change the conviction of his readers . . . but their action. They already have faith, and this James recognizes. What they lack is the works to go with the faith. Not only do they need to trust Jesus (as they already do) but they need to obey Him. Trust, and obey, for theres no other way to be happy in Jesus but to trust and obey. This they knew, but this they were not doing.

How tragic today to realize that there are many sincere people who have been taught that a man is saved by faith without works. They believe that for God to expect a man to do as well as to believe is neither reasonable nor consistent with the logic of salvation by grace. (This is not meant to say that a man is saved by earning his salvation. Paul refutes this very effectively in more than one of his epistles. Earning salvation by works is impossible for any sinner. Obedience however, can be required as a condition of salvation without that obedience earning one ounce of the salvation gift. James and Paul are in perfect harmony here. (See the chart later in this chapter).

Jas. 2:19 shows that James does not despise faith. He honors the Jewish confession that God is one (the Shema). This conviction that Jehovah is one God, and the only God, is the essential starting point in all revelation. In the beginning God . . . is the fundamental faith upon which further faith and action is built. This James recognizes. A man who believes this doest well, but has not done that which is required. He has the basis upon which a saving commitment to Christ can be made. But without this surrender of both life and deed to Jesus, he has only made a start that accomplishes nothing by itself. He is on his way, but if he goes no further, he is no better off than the demons.

Some may feel that James thou doest well is a touch of the ironical. They may feel that such a man is only doing well if the demons are doing well, and that James is saying: Fine, you are on about the same basis as the demons if you go no further. There could be a touch of irony here, but James is not belittling belief. The intellectual conviction of the truth is important, and basic. James is saying: Good, as far as it goesbut you havent gone anywhere yet!
The demons believe and shudder. If there is anything odd about this, it is not that the demons believe. It is that man sometimes refuses to believe that which even the demons believe! The demons have the conviction that God is real and that His eternity of heaven and hell is real. Their conviction is so strong that they shudder at their destiny. This shuddering they do is similar to the bristling of an animals hair when he is cornered and frightened because his life is in danger. When the demons contemplate Jesus, they bristle at the prospect of hell that looms before them. Men would do well to have such a conviction of the existence of Gods heaven and hell!

What the devil (and demons) believe that makes them tremble is clearly outlined in Johns vision. And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where are also the beast and false prophet; and they shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever. (Rev. 20:10) The false prophet should open his heart to the Word of God and know his destiny. The demons know!

The facts are so fundamental and basic in this God-created world that it takes many years of brain washing to convince young men and women that there is no God. Pupils often are exposed to these subtle suggestions (of there being no God) in their early school years, then during their teens in high school they often see scornful rejection of God on the face of many of their teachers. At the college level, the professor who believes in God is such a rarity that the pupil often is convinced that education and a belief in God are opposed to one another. In a world created by God, with the evidence of God in every leaf, every star, every thing that has been made (see Rom. 1:20-21), the student is brainwashed to blind himself to the evidence, is shamed into a denial of that which is obvious, is ridiculed openly, laughed at and scorned, until he himself turns to join the professors in open scorn of those few students who yet dare to believe. Now walking with the scoffers, he takes his stand with them that he may one day sit in their seat. (See Psa. 1:1) Yes, 2% of the worlds population, the educated elite, need to come up to the faith of the demons before they can go further. They need to become convinced of the reality of Jehovah and His eternity of heaven and hell. To believe this, they would do well; but still they would be no better than the demons if they should go no further than an intellectual acknowledgment of the facts.

It is not just some action that God requires as evidence of our faith. It is obedience He requires. To do without eating kidneys on Fridays (which one may not like to eat, anyway) is no evidence of a Godly faith. Fasting from kidneys is action and this action may be that by which we would choose to demonstrate our faith. This is just the point! It is our selfish choice of action that makes our faith void. It is our refusal to submit our will to Gods that limits our faith to a dull intellectual conviction that prompts no action. Likewise the person who stubbornly refuses to obey God in any commandment is by this refusal making his faith dead. The perfection which God requires of us is supplied by Jesus Christ. But the submission He requires, we must do ourselves.

The demons who believe actually do something about their belief, but what they do does not come from a will surrendered to Christ. An example of demons acting on their faith is found in Luk. 8:26-33. Here the demons who occupy a man cause the man to fall down before Jesus in a position of worship, and through the mans lips confess, so that all may hear, their conviction that this is Jesus, the son of God. (See also Mark 3). The demons faith, even when coupled with confession of that faith, is pointless without the surrendered life. The person who by his deeds shows he wills to obey Jesus Christ, with faith in God and His promises, can expect the grace of salvation through the blood of Jesus.

Wilt thou know? Do you not see the point yet, says James? Do you desire proof? Do you yet wish to know? Faith without works is barren. Is the believer in faith only for justification yet willing to recognize and acknowledge the truth? There appears to be here a point of vexation against the man who still does not see that faith only does not offer salvation. Yet, James with a tenacious spirit is ready to offer other arguments from the Scripture of the Old Testament to convince the most stubborn.

Faith without works is barren offers a subtle play upon words in the Greek. Barren (aggos) denotes idleness, or a lack of results because of lack of work. James is saying, Faith without works doesnt work! The absurdity of holding that a workless faith works explains further the note of exasperation in the question.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(18) Yea, a man may say . . .The bearing of this verse is commonly misunderstood; its words are those of scorn, uttered probably by some enemy of the faithJewish or Paganand are another instance, like that of the unruly tongue, by which those outside the pale of Christianity may and will judge us within. Jas. 2:18-22 are all the speech of this practical opponent of first century solifidianism. The English version, Show me thy faith without thy works is correct, though according to some editors (see marginal variation) it should be by or from.

The sense is obvious; and whether the speaker be Christian or no, he lays claim to faith in God, the Father of all, as the efficient cause of his good deeds.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

18. May (wisely) say That is, the advocate of works evidencing his faith, may say to the mere holder of faith without works, thus.

Show without works And prove thyself an antinomian.

And I faith by works And prove myself a duty-doing believer. I hold faith and duty in correspondence and symmetry with each other. My faith inspires my works, and my works evidence my faith.

Works are rightly said to justify a man by evidencing his faith. Yet this is not all. Works are a direct justification of faith before God. According to Paul it is by the act of submitting and self-consecrating faith alone that a man comes into reconciliation and justification with God. But the condition of the continuance of that state of justification is not faith alone, but faith with works correspondent to that faith. And those works justify, not only indirectly, as evidence of the trueness of the faith, but directly, being graciously accepted by God as works of righteousness and true holiness.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘Yes, a man will say, “You have faith, and I have works. Show me your faith apart from your works, and I by my works will show you my faith.” ’

He then contrasts two men. One says he has faith. ‘OK,’ says the other. ‘Show me your faith. Let me see it, handle it, touch it, experience it.’ But the man is stumped. He has nothing to show for his faith. Then the other says, ‘Now I have faith, and I can show it to you in practise, for it is my faith that makes me act in obedience to Jesus Christ in letting my light so shine before men that they see my good works and glorify our Father Who is in Heaven. Look then at what I have done and give glory to God that He has worked true faith in me, by begetting me with the word of truth, so that I do His will.’ In other words he was known by his fruits (compare Mat 7:20).

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Jam 2:18. Shew me thy faith, &c. “You talk mightily of your faith, without giving any proof of its sincerity; and I, on the contrary, instead of taking up with high swelling words and professions of faith, have evangelical works of love and obedience to bear witness that my faith has its proper influence upon me.” The reading which our version follows, is not only the reading of Jam 2:20 but is supported by sufficient authority, and is more agreeable to the context: therefore I prefer it to the marginal reading.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Jas 2:18 . The words , with which this verse begins, apparently introduces an objection, as in 1Co 15:35 ; by which under a certain one is to be considered as an opponent of the thought above expressed, who with addresses James, and by denotes himself. But against this explanation the sentiment itself is opposed; for as James reproaches those, against whom he argues, that they have indeed faith but not works, he could not possibly put into the mouth of his opponent, that the same had works, but he (James) had faith. The opinion of Pott, that = , cannot be justified (so also Bouman: hic ille). By that explanation it would require to be said: , , namely, in the sense: If thou place all stress on works, I am not the less entitled to place all stress on faith. Kern attempts to remove the difficulty by taking the first sentence: , as a hypothetical protasis, and the second, on the other hand, , as the apodosis, and explains it: “If thou hast faith, so have I also works, because, as thou sayest, faith and works cannot be separated.” But to this explanation is opposed not only the fact that James has not in what has gone before properly expressed the inseparableness of faith and works, but has only presupposed it; but also that the opponent should appeal to works , whilst James considers him as a person who has no works. [135] With these difficulties it is not to be wondered at that almost all expositors have decided for the view that is not here to be taken as the form of an objection, and that by not an opponent of James is meant, but a “ vir sapiens et intelligens ,” to whom James assigns the part of carrying on the argument in his stead against his opponent. Wiesinger: “ cannot here be possibly taken, as in 1Co 15:35 , Rom 9:19 , as an objection, for, as already shows, the person introduced as speaking is on the side of James, and like him combats faith without works.” Accordingly, with the same opponent is addressed whom James had hitherto in view, and with the person called designates himself as agreeing with James. But against this explanation there are many objections. 1. It cannot be denied that the words have most decidedly the character of an objection. 2. If they are not so understood, then is not only an interruption, but inexplicable; Hottinger, indeed, maintains: hic non adversativum esse per se patet; but who will agree with him in this? De Wette assumes that by here is expressed not primarily the contrast with what immediately precedes, but with the error already combated. Wiesinger has, however, correctly rejected this opinion, which is the less to be justified “as the error has not yet been per se expressed.” must at all events be referred to what directly precedes. According to Schneckenburger, it refers ad negationem, quam notitio involvit, quasi dictum foret: ista fides non est fides, sed dicat aliquis; but that , if it has not works, is not at all, is so little the opinion of James that he ascribes a to the devils (Jas 2:19 ); is here arbitrarily explained as = nulla, and not less arbitrarily is it observed on : “interlocutor ad hominis errorcm descendens fidem, quam profitetur, eum habere sumit ,” since James does not the least indicate that the words are to be understood in the sense: “I will even assume that thou hast faith.” The opinion of several critics, that is here (= quin etiam) “a correction of the preceding judgment, heightening it” (Wiesinger), and indicates “that the opinion that a faith without works is dead is here surpassed” (Gunkel), is of no avail, as the opinion contained in this verse on faith without works is evidently not, as Brckner falsely thinks, stronger than that which is expressed in Jas 2:17 with . [136] Accordingly, all attempts at the explanation of do not attain their object. [137] 3. With this explanation it is entirely uncertain how far the speech of extends, and where James again resumes; and accordingly the greatest uncertainty here occurs among expositors. 4. Lastly, it cannot be perceived why James should express his own opinion in the person of another who is designated by the entirely indefinite term . Wiesinger and most expositors do not touch on this point at all. Baumgarten thinks that James speaks here in the words of a stranger, in order the better and the more freely to convey the notion of erroneousness in severer terms. But this is a pure fiction; that James did not shun from expressing himself freely and strongly the whole Epistle is a proof. [138] These objections are too important to permit us in spite of them to rest on the above explanation. But, on the other hand, the difficulties which arise if is taken as a form of objection appear to be invincible. They are only so, however, when it is assumed that the person introduced with as speaking means James, and with himself. But this assumption is by no means necessary. Since James introduces as speaking, so both words and can be understood as well from the standpoint of James as from that of the speaker; that is to say, that with the opponent with whom James argues, and against whom he asserts that without works is dead, is meant, and with James himself. The meaning, then, is as follows: But some might say in answer to what I have just stated, defending thee, [139] thou (who hast not the works) hast faith, and I , on the other hand (who affirm that faith without works is dead), have works; [140] my one-sided insisting on works is no more right than thy one-sided insisting on faith. By this explanation, which has nothing linguistically against it, not only is the nature of preserved, but it expresses a thought entirely suited to the context, whilst the following words give the answer by which this objection is decidedly repelled. This answer is in form not directed to the person introduced as speaking, but to the opponent with whom only James has properly to do, and whom he in his lively style can now the more directly address, as the objection made was the expression of his soul. The meaning of this answer is as follows: Hast thou actually, as that person says, faith, and if this is to be of use it must manifest itself, but this without works is impossible; thou canst not even show thy faith without works; as for myself, who have works, these are a proof that faith is not wanting, for without faith I could do no works. On , Schneckenburger correctly remarks: vide ne verbo tribuas significationem exhibendi et manifestandi ( per vitam ), sed retine primam et simplicem comprobari quasi ante judicem.

is said because the opponent ascribed faith to himself (Jas 2:14 ); thus “the faith which thou sayest thou hast” (Wiesinger).

With the reading of the Rec. . (instead of ) the words are to be taken as ironical (so also Lange), as the supposition is that works are wanting to him.

With these words not faith generally, but living faith which saves is denied to the opponent; if the same is not proved by works, it is dead.

In what James says of himself, are the works which proceed from faith, as these could not otherwise authenticate it. It is to be observed that in the first clause , and in the second , stand first, because these ideas are the points on which the whole turns.

[135] The explanation of Knapp, that the first words are interrogative: tune quia ipse fide cares, propterea eam contemnis? and to which the answer is then given: immo vero plus habeo, quam quantum tu et habes et postulas, fidem videlicet cum factis conjunctam, is correctly relinquished by himself, as it is too artificial to be considered as correct.

[136] Wiesinger observes: The person introduced as speaking not only confirms what was said before, but goes beyond it; not only that such a faith is dead, but that it cannot even prove its existence without works: it is nothing. But with these last words Wiesinger inserts a thought into the words which they by no means contain, the same thought which, according to Schneckenburger, is contained in .

[137] The pointing , , . . . (Schulthess, Gebser, Rauch) does in no way remove the difficulty, and has also this against it, that the closely-united formula is thus disunited.

[138] Lange thinks to remove the difficulty by ascribing to the words “a grand prophetical character,” whilst by is meant “the Gentile-Christian world,” which has proved “by its works of faith that it has had the true faith, whereas Ebionism, with its want of consistency in Christian works of love, has proved that its orthodoxy was not a living faith.” But, apart from the arbitrariness of this interpretation, is by it referred not to the preceding declaration, but falsely to the erroneous opinion of (ver. 14).

[139] The view of Stier, that by the speaker a Pharisaical Jew is to be understood, who takes occasion from the inoperative faith of Christians to mock the Christian faith in general, has been rightly rejected by Wiesinger. If James had meant by a Jew, he would have called him such.

[140] This is a form of expression which frequently occurs. Thus, if one speaks with Charles, and says to him: Henry says thou hast found the book which I have lost. Brckner, indeed, thinks that this example is not appropriate, but he does not give his reasons for saying so. Lange calls the explanation here given artificial, but he does not say in what its artificial character consists. The objections which Lange brings against it are founded on his having read erroneously defending himself instead of defending thee.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.

Ver. 18. My faith by my works ] It appeared by the fruits it was a good land, Num 13:23 . It appeared that Dorcas was a true believer by the coats she had made: so here.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

18 .] But (in any case of faith without works, analogous to that supposed above, of one of you having dismissed the naked and hungry with mere words) some one will say (he will be liable to this reproach from any one who takes the more effectual and sensible method, of uniting faith with works), Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me (not, ‘prove to me,’ but ‘exhibit to me,’ ‘ostenta mihi’) thy faith without the works (which ought to accompany it), and I will shew thee my faith by (from the evidence of, out of, as the ground of the manifestation) my works . The whole difficulty found in this verse by Commentators has arisen from overlooking the fact that it continues the argument from the previous verses, and does not begin a new portion of the subject. And the reason why this has been overlooked, is, the occurrence between the two of the general clause in Jas 2:17 . The same mistaken person is in the Apostle’s view throughout, down to Jas 2:22 ; and it is as addressed to him, on the part of a chance objector to his inconsistency, that the is introduced: the conveying the opposition of an objection not to the Apostle himself, but to him whom the Apostle is opposing. For the various and curious difficulties and confusions which have been raised on the verse, see Huther’s note.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Jas 2:18 . : these words, together with the argumentative form of the verses that follow, imply that a well-known subject of controversy is being dealt with. is a regular argumentative phrase, used of an objection. “Instead of the future the optative with would be more common in classical Greek, but the latter form is rather avoided by the Hellenistic writers, occurring only eight times in the N.T., thrice in Luke, five times in Acts” (Mayor). : the interrogative here suggested by WH does not commend itself, as the essence of the argument is the setting-up of two opposing and definite standpoints. : In the N.T. “often coalesces with (and its oblique cases), , , , and ; but there are many exceptions, and especially where there is distinct coordination of with another pronoun or a substantive. There is much division of evidence” (WH, Ths N.T. in Greek , II. App., p. 145). : is not used quite consistently by the writer; faith which requires works to prove its existence is not the same thing which is spoken of in the next verse as the possession of demons; the difference is graphically illustrated in the account of the Gadarene demoniac; in Luk 8:28 the words, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of the Most High God , express a purely intellectual form of faith, which is a very different thing from the attitude of mind implied in the words which describe the whilom demoniac, as, sitting, clothed and in his tight mind, at the feet of Jesus (Luk 8:35 ). With the whole verse cf. Rom 3:28 ; Rom 4:6 .

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Jas 2:18-26

18But someone may well say, “You have faith and I have works; show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works.” 19You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder. 20But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless? 21Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar? 22You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected; 23and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness,” and he was called the friend of God. 24You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. 25In the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way? 26For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.

Jas 2:18-20 Grammatically this is a very ambiguous passage as to punctuation and pronoun antecedents. It is uncertain whether there is (1) one supporter of James’ position; (2) one objector to James’ position; (3) one of each; or (4) two opposing hypothetical persons alluded to by James. It is uncertain whether the quotation stops at Jas 2:18 a (NKJV, NRSV, NIV) or 18b (NASB, TEV) or if it goes through Jas 2:19.

It is possible that James’ supposed objector is claiming that Christians have different spiritual gifts, some faith and some works. James responds that faith is not a gift, but a bedrock relationship of trust in Christ. To know Christ is to emulate Him; to live as He lived; to love as He loved; to give oneself to others as He gave Himself to others (cf. 1Jn 3:16).

Spiritual giftedness is not a reduction of Christian responsibility, but an empowerment for effective ministry (in conjunction with other believers).

“show me your faith without works” This is an aorist active imperative. This would be a similar truth to the parable of the sower in Matthew 13. Fruit-bearing, not initial response, proves genuineness (cf. Tit 1:16; 1Jn 2:4). No fruit, no root!

Jas 2:19 “You believe that God is one” This truth (monotheism) was the first test of orthodoxy for Judaism (cf. Deu 4:35; Deu 4:39; Deu 6:4-5; Mar 12:29). Yet the demons believe this also (cf. Mat 4:3; Mar 5:7). Christianity is not only correct doctrine, but a relationship of obedience and love. Orthodoxy alone, without orthopraxy, is empty (cf. 1 Corinthians 13). A theological, intellectual commitment to monotheism (cf. Rom 3:30; 1Co 8:4; 1Co 8:6; Eph 4:6; 1Ti 2:5) does not make one right with God. Proper belief cannot save, for who among fallen humanity has perfectly accurate theology? Salvation through Christ affects the head (doctrine), the heart (volitional trust in Christ), and the hand (lifestyle Christlikeness).

“the demons also believe” Demons know who Jesus is! Demons believe in monotheism!

SPECIAL TOPIC: THE DEMONIC (UNCLEAN SPIRITS)

“and shudder” This is possibly related to the practice of exorcism in YHWH’s name. This term was often used in this sense in the magical papyri found in Egypt.

Jas 2:20

NASB”that faith without works is useless”

NKJV”that faith without words is dead”

NRSV”that faith apart from works is barren”

NJB”that faith without deeds is useless”

Three possible translations come from the most ancient Greek manuscripts:

1. , A, C2 have “dead,” (cf. Jas 2:26)

2. B and C have “barren”

3. P74, the Bodmer Papyri, has “vain” (used earlier in Jas 2:20)

USB4 rates #2 as “B” (almost certain”).

Jas 2:21 This question expects a “yes” answer.

“Abraham” He is used by both Paul (cf. Genesis 15 quoted in Romans 4) and James (quotes Genesis 22) to prove their theological points, but each uses different events in his life. Paul speaks of his initial call and promises (i.e., the birth of Isaac), but James speaks of the consummation of his faith years later (i.e., the offering of Isaac).

“our father” This term seems to reflect Jewish Christian recipients (cf. Mat 3:9; Joh 8:39). However, Paul uses this same concept for Gentiles (cf. Rom 2:28-29; Rom 4:11-12; Rom 4:16; Gal 3:7; Gal 6:16).

“justified by works” This is the Greek verb dikaio. The semantic field (possible meanings and connotations) this term has is interesting:

I. From Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, and Danker, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (p. 196-197)

A. “Show justice” or “do justice to someone”

B. “Justify, vindicate, treat as just”

C. Paul uses the term for God’s judgment

1. of men

a. “be acquitted”

b. “be pronounced and treated as righteous”

2. of God’s activity – “make upright”

3. “to make free or pure” (ACTIVE)

or “to be made free or pure” (PASSIVE)

4. “God is proved to be right”

II. From Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament based on Semantic Domains, 2nd edition (vol. 2 p. 64).

A. “to put right with” (vol. 1, 34:46, p. 452)

B. “show to be right” (vol. 1, 86:16, p. 744)

C. “acquit” (vol. 1, 56:34, p. 557)

D. “set free” (vol. 1, 37:138, p. 489)

E. “obey righteous commands” (vol. 1, 36:22, p. 468)

When one compares these lexical usages it becomes clear how Paul could use this term in one way (specialized forensic sense of “made righteous”) and James in another (shown to be righteous by one’s godly living). The term is fluid enough to allow both. But please remember it is a “both/and” situation, not an “either/or.” Also be careful of a set theological definition of this term (or any term) which is then read into every usage of the word in Scripture. Words only have meaning in specific contexts! See SPECIAL TOPIC: RIGHTEOUSNESS at Jas 1:20.

“offered up Isaac” The offering of Isaac (cf. Genesis 22) was not the grounds of Abraham’s faith (cf. Genesis 12, 15), but the result and expression. James is using the term “works” in a different way than Paul. James is speaking of the Christian’s lifestyle faith (cf. 1 John), while Paul is speaking of a works-righteousness of the Jews (or Judaizers of Galatians) as a basis for being accepted by God (cf. Rom 10:2-3).

Jas 2:22 “faith was working with his works” This is an Imperfect active indicative which denotes continual action in past time. There is a word play between “working with” (syn + ergon) and “works” (ergn). The word “work” is used eleven times in Jas 2:14-26 and only three times in the rest of the book of James.

“faith was perfected” This is an aorist passive indicative. Faith is initiated and perfected by God, but believers’ volition and actions are also part of the equation. The term “perfected” means “mature,” “equipped for the assigned task,” “complete.” The biblical covenant concept unites the sovereignty of God and the free will of humanity to form a contract or agreement which has both benefits and obligations, a gift and a requirement.

SPECIAL TOPIC: COVENANT

Jas 2:23 “the Scripture” This refers to Gen 15:6, as do Rom 4:3 and Gal 3:6. James is saying that this verse was “fulfilled” by Abraham’s later actions in his willingness to obey God and offer Isaac, the son of promise, as a sacrifice on Mt. Moriah (cf. Genesis 22).

“the friend of God” Abraham is called by this title two times in the OT (cf. 2Ch 20:7; Isa 41:8).

Jas 2:24 “You” This is plural. James is now addressing his readers/hearers!

“justified by works” See note at Jas 2:21.

Jas 2:25 “Rahab the harlot” She was Judaism’s ultimate proof of God’s forgiveness and the power of repentance (i.e., a Canaanite prostitute, cf. Joshua 2). She also is an ancestor of Jesus (cf. Mat 1:4). James uses two extremes, Abraham and Rahab, to prove his point.

Jas 2:26 Active love is to faith what the breath is to the human body. We could summarize James’ description of lifeless faith as (1) demonic, Jas 2:19; (2) vain, Jas 2:20; and (3) dead, Jas 2:26.

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

without = apart from. Greek. choris.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

18.] But (in any case of faith without works, analogous to that supposed above, of one of you having dismissed the naked and hungry with mere words) some one will say (he will be liable to this reproach from any one who takes the more effectual and sensible method, of uniting faith with works), Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me (not, prove to me, but exhibit to me, ostenta mihi) thy faith without the works (which ought to accompany it), and I will shew thee my faith by (from the evidence of, out of, as the ground of the manifestation) my works. The whole difficulty found in this verse by Commentators has arisen from overlooking the fact that it continues the argument from the previous verses, and does not begin a new portion of the subject. And the reason why this has been overlooked, is, the occurrence between the two of the general clause in Jam 2:17. The same mistaken person is in the Apostles view throughout, down to Jam 2:22; and it is as addressed to him, on the part of a chance objector to his inconsistency, that the is introduced: the conveying the opposition of an objection not to the Apostle himself, but to him whom the Apostle is opposing. For the various and curious difficulties and confusions which have been raised on the verse, see Huthers note.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Jam 2:18. , but some one will say) entertaining more correct sentiments than the other person, mentioned in Jam 2:14, and asserting the true nature of faith and works.- ) show me thy faith without thy works (show, if thou canst; that is, thou canst not); and I will show thee by my works, of which I know that I cannot be destitute, my faith. There are two sayings, the former of which[24] speaks of faith before works, the latter of works before faith, and this for the sake of emphasis; the former has reference to the clause, Thou hast faith; the latter to the clause, and I have works. See Apparat. Crit., Ed. ii., on this passage.[25] [The gives point to the challenge, , …-Not. Crit.]

[24] Thus also verse 22. See the note on Luk 11:36.

[25] ABC Vulg. have . But Stephens Rec. Text (not Engl. Vers.) has , with later authorities.-E.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Jas 2:18-20

WORKS PROVE FAITH

Jas 2:18-20

18 Yea, a man will say,—James, in order further to emphasize his thesis that faith, apart works is dead, and to prove that works demonstrate faith, imagines an objector to appear with an argument the design of which is to try to prove the inspired writer’s reasoning wrong. James is quite willing to listen to the objection because his position is secure. It will indeed enable him more fully to establish his contention that there is no value whatsoever in faith which does not demonstrate itself in works. What does the objector have to say?

Thou hast faith, and I have works:— Were the New Testament to follow modem methods of punctuation, these words would be in quotation marks, thus indicating that they are the words of the objector to James’ position. It is idle to speculate whether “Thou” means James specifically; and “I” the objector: more likely the meaning is, “One person has faith, and another works ; one emphasizes the faith which he has; the other, the works which he possesses; each is good and effective; and neither should be minimized,” the objector argues. It is as if James should say, “Suppose some one comes forth with the objection that one’s piety and devotion to God are not always exhibited in the same fashion; one may show his loyalty to God by faith, another by works; yet, both be equally pious and devout in God’s sight.” Inasmuch as this challenge of the objector to James’ reasoning is on the ground that faith can exist apart from works, the inspired writer answers with a challenge of his own!

show me thy faith apart from thy works, and I by my works will show thee my faith.—Faith, actually and literally, cannot be seen; its existence is evidenced only through the works which it produces. Hence, James demands of his objector that he show his faith (if he thinks it can exist in this fashion) apart from works. This, of course, was impossible; and thus constituted additional evidence of the truth of the thesis, that faith, without works, is dead. Faith and works, in the religious realm, are so related, that one cannot long exist without the other. One springs from the other, and each depends, for its effectiveness, on the other. Faith, without works, is dead; works, without faith, cannot bless, either. So the objection is invalid, in that it is based on the erroneous assumption that faith can exist apart from works,-an untrue premise. Works may be seen; these may be offered in evidence of faith which cannot be seen. Faith, however, cannot be seen; one without works cannot offer proof of the faith which he alleges to have. It follows therefore, that one who disparages works must resort to them to prove that he has any faith at all!

It seems not possible to over-emphasize these matters in our day. We should learn them well for our own good; and, that we may be able also to teach them effectively to others. In view of the fact that the denominational system alleges that salvation is by faith without works and to it multitudes about us subscribe, it is important that every member of the body of Christ should be able to explain clearly the kind of works included in the plan of salvation (the commandments of the Lord), and the kind of works excluded (those involving merit, the law of Moses, and the like). It is idle for one to expect salvation short of complete submission to God’s will. (Mat 7:21; 1Jn 2:4; Heb 5:9.) It is also vitally important to remember that these words are not limited to the alien sinner; faith, apart from works, whether possessed by an alien or a member of the church is powerless to bless. As Christians, we are to “work out” our own salvation with fear and trembling (Php 2:12), and those ultimately to be privileged to enjoy the bliss of the eternal city are those who have kept his commandments (Rev 22:13-14).

19 Thou believest that God is one;—The address here is to the objector to whom James, in verse 18, said: “Thou hast faith, and I have works: show me thy faith apart from thy works, and I by my works will show thee my faith.” This is to say, in effect, “You contend that faith, apart from works-the mere intellectual assent of the mind-is sufficient to save. Let us test your thesis. Basic among the things one must believe to be saved is that ‘God is one … .’ This, you believe. It is good that you so do. But, is this enough? Remember that the demons believe and shudder. You do not argue that demons are saved. It follows, therefore, that one may believe, and yet not be saved. Belief, unattended by good works, is no more effectual in saving the sinner (or the Christian) than the demons who exercise it.”

It is clear that the verb “believest,” here signifies no more than intellectual assent to the truthfulness of a proposition-in this case, that God is one. It is, in this instance, contemplated apart from love, obedience, trust, and submission- being an action of the mind alone. And, while the acceptance of the doctrine of the One True God is the fundamental premise of all genuine religion, mere lip service thereto will not suffice. Jam es selects this as an illustration of what mere belief-if it could of itself produce a blessing-might do, in saving the soul. If the simple exercise of belief is sufficient, surely those who subscribe to the basic premise of all religion worthy of the name should be saved by it. “No,” the writer hastens to add; “It is not enough ; even the demons believe, and shudder at the destiny which awaits them.”

That “God is one,” is taught repeatedly in the Scriptures, Old and New. The Shema of Israel (Deu 6:4), uttered morning and evening by every devout Jew, and endlessly recited in the synagogues, kept this fundamental fact of all true religion constantly in the minds of the worshippers. So important was it regarded in the religion of Israel that the rabbis taught that those who prolonged the word “one” in the recitation thereof would have their days and years prolonged upon the earth!

“God,” (Greek theos), denotes deity. (Thayer.) It is the Greek name of the divine nature. There is but one divine nature. Hence, there is but one God. There are, however, three Persons who possess this divine nature-the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit-the Godhead. Hence all are God. Since there is but one divine nature, and this nature is named God, there is but one God. Thus, the three Persons of the Godhead constitute the One God. This is demonstrated (a) in the plural pronouns used to designate the activity of God: “And God said, Let us make man in our own image, after our likeness . . .. ” (Gen 1:26.) (b) In the designation of Christ as God: (“In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God …. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us (and we behold his glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth.” (Joh 1:1; Joh 1:14.) (c) In the plural form of the Hebrew word Eloheem (God) appearing in Gen 1:1 : “In the beginning God (Eloheem, plural form of El, God), created the heavens and the earth.” (d) In the reference to the Father as God : “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ …. ” (1Pe 1:3.) (e) In the reference to the Holy Spirit as God: “But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thy heart to lie to the Holy Spirit … thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.” (Act 5:3-4.) To believe that God is one is a basic doctrine of the Bible. (Exo 34:14; Psa 90:1; Jer. 43:3. 10-13; Joh 4:24; 1Jn 4:6.)

thou doest well:— The writer is careful to make it clear that the acceptance of the premise that God is one is not under criticism. It is absolutely necessary for one to believe that God is one in order to be saved. James does not minimize the importance of the doctrine of the One True God. He is simply showing that such is not sufficient in order to salvation. “Thou doest well,” is in the Greek, kalos poieis. It is beautifully good for you to do this. The word for “good,” (kalos), signifies a type or kind of goodness which allures, attracts, and woos; one who believes in the One God is to be commended for this if one does not rest there; it is good to do this and it is fine so far as it goes. But, it does not go far enough.

the demons also believe, and shudder.—To believe that God is one is simply not enough because the demons of the unseen reahn-the imps of Satan-do as much ; they believe so strongly in God that they tremble with fear in their contemplation of the terrible destiny which awaits them. The word “shudder,” (phrissoimn, present active indicative of phrisso, to bristle up,) indicates the kind of terror which makes one’s hair to stand on end (Job 4:14-15), thus emphasizing how strongly the demons subscribed to the doctrine of One God. It should be observed that the kind of faith which the demons have is exactly that which James declares to be profitless-faith which does not express itself in humble obedience to the commands of the Lord. Demons believe, but will not obey; those exercising faith, without works, thus exhibit the same kind of profitless faith which the demons have. They know that they are lost; and they tremble at their inevitable destruction. There is no more hope for those who depend upon faith only as the basis of salvation than there is for the salvation of the demons.

Who were the demons of whom James writes? The question is not an easy one to answer; and the subject of demonology is fraught with many difficulties. The word demon, from the Greek daimon, and its derivative claimonion, is used in a variety of senses in the New Testament: (a) of idols (Act 17:18) ; (b) angels which kept not their first estate (Mat 25:41; Rev 12:7-8); (c) ministers of Satan (Luk 4:35; Joh 10:21); (d) Satan, the prince of demons (Mat 9:34; Mar 3:22; Luk 11:15).

Demons, in the first century, were able to enter individuals and vex them (Luk 8:30; Luk 8:32) ; interfere with their thinking and reasoning (Luk 7:33; Joh 7:20), and cause men to do and to think evil (Mat 8:31; Mar 3:11).

Numerous efforts have been made to explain their existence such as (1) the allegation that demon possession was a popular superstitution without any basis of fact but at which Jesus winked, knowing better himself, thus apparently accepting a common error which, in reality, he did not believe. (a) Such a theory seriously reflects on the integrity of Christ and imputes to him deceit, hypocrisy and falsehood. (b) Moreover, it is in conflict with established facts. Jesus charged, rebuked, commanded, and cast out demons; they recognized his deity and obeyed his commands. (Mar 5:9-12; Mat 8:29-32; Mar 1:25; Luk 4:34; Mat 12:23-37; Luk 11:17-23.) (c) The apostles were given power to cast out demons. (Mar 3:14-15.) Thus, Jesus recognized the reality of demoniac possession and it cannot be questioned without reflection on his credibility. (2) Others have attempted to explain this strange matter as mental sickness resulting from diseased minds and bodies. This is shown to be false in the fact that people were said to be sick and demonpossessed. (Mat 8:16; Mar 1:32, esp. verse 34.) (3) Jesus based an argument on the fact of demoniac possession in his contentions with the Jews, declaring that casting them out by the Spirit of God proved his deity. (Mat 12:23-27; Mar 9:29.) We may be certain that our Lord would not have rested the case of his deity on a popular superstition!

We may, therefore, conclude that (a) the demons of the apostolic age were real and not fanciful; (b) they were wicked spirits (Act 19:13-17); (c) judgment upon them was impending; they recognized the justice of such, but insisted that the time was not yet (Mat 8:29); ( d) they were possessed of consciousness and intelligence (Luk 4:41); (e) they acknowledged the deity of Christ; (f) they deliberately taught false doctrines, and circulated them among the early disciples (perhaps by influencing men whom they possessed, 1Ti 4:1 ; 1Jn 4:1).

Who were they? Where did they come from? Where did they go? are questions which cannot be fully answered today. It is quite obvious, from the New Testament description of them and of their activities, that they are not eqttally active in the world today. Efforts to explain their existence have been many, none of which settles the question satisfactorily. Among the views advanced thereon are, (1) the demons were wicked angels which kept not their first estate and in some manner not known to us were suffered to come out of the place where they were restrained and to vex human beings. (Jud 1:6; 2Pe 2:4.) (2) The demons were disembodied spirits of evil men which, after death and their descent into Hades, escaped the Hadean realm, returned to earth, and seized the minds and bodies of live people. Josephus, the Jewish historian, advanced this view. Compare, also, Thayer, under daimonion. If either view is correct, the second would appear the more probable.

As interesting as these questions are, and however much we might desire to have correct answers thereto, they are not pertinent to our study of the text of James. The meaning of the sacred writer is clear: Demons believe in the doctrine of the One True God, and tremble at the thoitght of their impending destruction. Tlieir jaith does not express itself in obedience; and is, hence, dead. But this is precisely the kind of faith that the objector (who subscribes to the doctrine of faith only) alleges to be sufficient! (Verse 18.) Therefore. the conclusion of verse 20 is obvious.

20 But wilt thou know, 0 vain man, that faith apart from works is barren?—“But wilt thou know…” is theleis de gnonai, ingressive active aorist infinitive of ginosko, to come to know, and here in the sense of to realize, to recognize the truth of that affirmed. The conclusion which the writer is about to draw is so obvious that he calls upon the objector to acknowledge the truth of his proposition which, thus far, he has not; and is consequently, “a vain man,” (literally, an empty-headed fellow) who has not properly considered the matter under consideration. He who would attempt to reason that faith, apart from works, is efficacious, is empty-headed, devoid of those qualities which are essential to proper reasoning. Faith, apart from works, is faith only. Such a faith is “barren,” (arge, unproductive), because it is dead. That which is dead is incapable of producing; and is thus barren. Earlier, and in much detail, James shows that faith, without works, is dead; here, he indicates that it is without the outward evidence of life (productivity) which demonstrates that life exists. (Jas 2:17; Jas 2:20.) The kind of faith described here-faith apart from works,-is the kind which the denominational world urges is that which saves. The Scriptures, on the contrary, establish the fact that in the hands of a person exercising such faith there are no sheaves whatsoever!

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

Thou: Jam 2:14, Jam 2:22, Rom 14:23, 1Co 13:2, Gal 5:6, Heb 11:6, Heb 11:31

without thy works: Some copies read, by thy works.

and I will: Jam 2:22-25, Jam 3:13, Mat 7:17, Rom 8:1, 2Co 5:17, 2Co 7:1, 1Th 1:3-10, 1Ti 1:5, Tit 2:7, Tit 2:11-14

Reciprocal: Gen 22:12 – now Lev 11:9 – General Eze 18:9 – is just Mat 9:2 – seeing Mat 25:20 – behold Mar 2:5 – saw Luk 5:20 – he saw Luk 19:16 – Lord Rom 14:18 – and Eph 4:5 – one faith Jam 2:21 – justified Jam 2:25 – justified 1Jo 1:6 – If

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

Jas 2:18. The first sentence represents a man who seems to think that faith and works are two distinct virtues of equal worth, and that a person is at liberty to make his own choice of them and the reward from the Lord will be the same in either case. James replies with a remark that shows he will not endorse either without the other. Show me thy faith without thy works only states what the pretender claims to show, not that James is admitting that the claim is true. He does not ask anyone to take his word but proposes to prove his faith by actions.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Jas 2:18. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith and I have works. There is a considerable diversity of opinion in the interpretation of these words. They appear to be the language of an objector, being the usual form by which an objection is introduced (Rom 9:19; 1Co 15:35); but when examined, they express the sentiments of James, and not those of an opponent; if an objection, we would have expected the opposite: Thou hast works and I have faith. Some, considering the words as those of an objector, give the following interpretation: One, defending thee, may say: Thou, who hast not works, hast faith, and I, who declare that faith without works is dead, have works; there is no reason to lay more stress upon the one than upon the other. But such a meaning is complicated and awkward; it reverses the language of the apostle. Others suppose that the objector is a Pharisaical Jew who, opposing James, maintains justification to be entirely by works without faith; but such a meaning is not borne out by the context. It is best to suppose that the words are not those of an objector, but of a person who agrees with the apostle, and who is here introduced to impart liveliness to the discussion. Nay, one may interpose, Thou hast faith and I have works. Others connect the words with Jas 2:14, and consider the intervening words as parenthetic, but we do not see how this removes the difficulty.

shew me thy faith without thy works, prove to me the reality of your faith. A faith without works is incapable of being proved. To show faith without works is simply an impossibility. If it exist at all in such a state, it exists in a passive or latent form in a mans mind, and cannot be shown to others. Faith is not entirely denied to the man, but living faith is; if faith does not prove itself by works it is dead, and of no value as regards salvation.

and I will show thee my faith by my works. This is the key to the meaning of James. Justification is denied to a dead faith, and affirmed only of a living faitha faith which manifests itself in works. This is the test by which we are to try the reality of our faith; and this is the test by which we shall be judged at the final judgment. We shall not then be examined as to the pureness of our creed or the extent of our knowledge, but whether we have fed the hungry, clothed the naked, visited the sick, and ministered to the afflicted; whether we have practised that religious worship which consists in visiting the fatherless and the widows in their affliction, and in preserving ourselves unspotted from the world.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

St. James brings in these words by way of dialogue, between a sincere believer that has true faith, and a falsehearted hypocrite that only pretends to it; thus, “Thou sayest thou hast true faith, though thou hast no works to evidence its truth; I say, I have true faith, because I have good works, which are the genuine effects and fruits of it. Come we now to the trial and let it appear who saith truth, thou or I; if thou that hast no works sayest true, prove thy faith to be true some other way. Works thou hast none, shew thy faith then be something else; but that is impossible, therefore thou vainly boastest of that which thou hast not; but, on the other side, says the sincere believer, I can make good what I say, proving the truth of my faith by the fruits of it is my works; this is a real demonstration that my faith is no vain ostentation as your’s is.” This way of arguing is very convincing; it grips the conscience of the hypocrite, and covers him with shame and confusion of face.

Learn hence, that good works are the evidences by which Christ will judge of our faith now, and according to which Christ will judge of us, and our faith at the great day. These two, faith and good works, ought to be as inseparable as light and the sun, as fire and heat. Obedience is the daughter of faith, and faith the parent and principle of obedience.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Jas 2:18-20. Yea, a man Who judges better; may say To such a vain talker, in order to bring matters to a short issue; thou hast faith Thou sayest; and I make it appear by my life and conversation that I have works Which naturally spring from that principle. Show me thy faith without thy works If thou canst. Or, , by thy works, as the most and the best copies read it, and as it is read in the margin. And I will show thee my faith by my works Let us, without contending about different explications of faith, make it manifest to each other that our profession is solid, by its substantial effects upon our tempers and lives. As if he had said, The only way in which thou canst show thy faith is by thy works; but as thou hast no works to produce, thou never canst show thy faith in this way. Thou believest that there is one God I allow that thou dost: but this only proves that thou hast the same faith which the devils have. Nay, they not only believe, but tremble at the dreadful expectation of eternal torments. So far is that faith from either justifying or saving them. But wilt thou Art thou willing; to know Indeed thou art not, thou wouldest fain be ignorant of it: O vain , empty, man Devoid of all true religion; that faith without works A persuasion of the truths of the gospel, if it produces no real fruits of holiness; is dead As to any valuable purpose that can be expected from it. Indeed it cannot justly be said to be faith, as a dead carcass is not a man. By a dead faith, then, St. James means a faith which, because it has no influence on a mans actions, is as incapable to justify him, as a dead carcass is to perform the offices of a living man.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.

Simple straightforward statement of fact. If you say you have faith, then show it to me by your works. Works are the proof of a persons faith. No works and the truth of faith should be suspect.

The idea of works is rather general but seems to dwell on the doing of something. If the person is not in the business of doing, then the faith is suspect. What does, “doing” mean in the Christian life?

I am not sure I can describe it since it is so general. It is the doing of anything that furthers the cause of Christ. Today, we have a lot of doing that I wonder at times if it is really doing for Christ. Weve seen athletes doing their prayers and kneeling on the field – is that doing? I don’t really know what is in their heart, but at times it seems quite ritualistic and a bit of grandstanding. “Okay, here I am Lord, I’m praying in front of these people, now give me another touchdown!”

I don’t wish to detract from some honest expressions of faith, but the verse speaks to the doing of things, rather than the showing of things. Doing good works in the neighborhood would be much more appropriate in my mind. The teaching of Sunday school, the ushering, the cleaning at the church, the witnessing etc. would be more appropriate in my mind.

The proof isn’t in the pudding, but in the doing when it comes to faith.

Fuente: Mr. D’s Notes on Selected New Testament Books by Stanley Derickson

2:18 Yea, {i} a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.

(i) No, by this every man will be eaten up with pride.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

4. An objection 2:18

James next introduced an objection to his thesis that faith is dead (inoperative) without works. He put it in the mouth of a hypothetical objector. This literary device of objection and response was a common one that Paul also used (e.g., Rom 9:19-20; 1Co 15:35-36). It is the diatribe. [Note: See Hiebert, James, p. 131; and Sidebottom, p. 1.] The form of the diatribe helps us identify that what follows is the statement of the objector and what follows that is James’ response to the objector.

The NIV, by its use of quotation marks, has the objector saying only the first part of this verse, "You have faith; I have deeds," and James responding in the last part of the verse. The NASB has the objector saying the whole verse. Which is correct? There were no punctuation marks in the Greek text so we have to determine on the basis of what makes the most sense. The objector seems to be making a point by way of argument rather than making a simple statement. This fact seems clear from the context in which James responds with a rebuttal (Jas 2:19-23). Consequently I prefer the NASB punctuation of this verse.

The objector claims that good works are the necessary sign of saving faith. He says, "You cannot prove you have faith unless you have works, but because I have works you can see that I have faith." [Note: Cf. Adamson, p. 124.] This is the argument that many evangelicals have used: the necessary evidence that a person has been saved (justified) is his good works (sanctification). If he is not doing good works, he is unsaved. Works always evidence faith, they say. But if this view is true, why did Jesus teach his disciples that some who are "in Me" bear no fruit (Joh 15:2; Joh 15:6)?

The idea that evidence of sanctification must be present before the sinner can have full assurance of his justification is one that certain Reformed preachers after the time of John Calvin popularized. This idea is neither scriptural nor did John Calvin hold it. Theodore Beza in Geneva and William Perkins in England were leading figures in the Calvinists’ departure from John Calvin’s own teaching concerning faith and assurance. [Note: See R. T. Kendall, Calvin and English Calvinism to 1649; idem., Once Saved . . ., pp. 207-17; and M. Charles Bell, Calvin and Scottish Theology: The Doctrine of Assurance.]

The basis of our assurance that we are saved is primarily the promise of God in Scripture (Joh 1:12; Joh 3:16; Joh 3:36; Joh 5:24; Joh 6:47; Joh 10:27-29; Joh 20:31; et al.). It is not the presence of good works (fruit) in our lives. Jesus taught that some branches of the vine do not bear fruit (Mat 13:22; Mar 4:7; Luk 8:14; Joh 15:2; Joh 15:6). Nevertheless they still share in the life of the vine. It seems clear that every true believer experiences a radical transformation in his life when he trusts Jesus Christ as his Savior (Gal 2:20; Rom 6:13; Eph 5:8; Col 1:13; et al.). However the Scriptures do not say that every true believer’s lifestyle will inevitably experience external transformation. That depends on the believer’s response to God’s will. Carnal Christians (1Co 3:1-4) are those who choose to indulge the flesh rather than submitting to the Spirit’s control. Fruit is the outward evidence of inner life. Just as some fruit trees bear little or no fruit, it is possible for some genuine Christians to bear little or no external evidence of their eternal life. The Holy Spirit effects inner transformation in every believer. Normally He will produce outer transformation as well unless the believer quenches and grieves Him as He seeks to manifest the life of Christ through us to others.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)