James 2:20 But would you like evidence, you empty fellow, that faith without works is useless? 2:21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? 2:22 You see that his faith was working together with his works and his faith was perfected by works. 2:23 And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Now Abraham believed God and it was counted to him for righteousness,” and he was called God’s friend. 2:24 You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. 2:25 And similarly, was not Rahab the prostitute also justified by works when she welcomed the messengers and sent them out by another way? 2:26 For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.

Because of James’ assertion here that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only, some (including Martin Luther) have felt that James contradicts the great Pauline teaching of justification by faith. For does not Paul teach that we are saved by faith alone, apart from deeds (cf. Rom 3:28; Eph 2:8)?

A careful reading of James and Paul reveals that the contradiction is only apparent. Paul, no less than James, realized that a genuine, living faith will issue in works of love and obedience. (Gal 5:6)

It is important to recognise the diversity that is to be found within Scripture.  We can gladly accept that Paul is not James, and that James is not Paul.  James would never have written Rom 4, for example, and Paul would never have penned James chapter 2.  So the question is not whether their teaching is identical, but whether is is compatible.  And a little thought will show that it is perfectly compatible.

The difference between Paul and James lies in the fact that Paul attacks the problem of legalism, while James opposes libertines who felt that the quality of a Christians conduct is irrelevant. For Paul, the question is how a genuine faith lays hold of the finished work of Jesus Christ the contrast is between faith and works. For James, the question is how one demonstrates that ones faith is genuine – the contrast between a living and a dead faith.

J.I. Packer explains:

‘It is sometimes thought that Jas 2:21-25 contradicts Paul by teaching that God accepts men on the double ground of faith and works. A study of these verses in their context, however, shows that this is not James’ meaning. It must be remembered that Paul is the only New Testament writer to use “justify” regularly for God’s act of accepting man. When James speaks of “being justified,” he is using the word in the more general sense of being vindicated, or proved right, in regard to claims made on one’s behalf. (There is a rather similar use of it in Mt 11:19) To be justified in this sense means, not to be accepted by God as righteous, but to be shown to be a genuine believer; a man is justified in James’ sense when his life gives evidence that he has the kind of living, working faith which secures acceptance with God. James himself quotes Gen 15:6 for the same purpose as Paul does – to show that it was faith which secured Abraham’s acceptance as righteous. (Jas 2:23) But now, he says, this Scripture statement was “fulfilled” (confirmed and proved true by later events) some thirty years after, when Abraham was “justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac.” (Jas 2:21) Abraham’s act on that occasion proved the reality of his faith, and so of his acceptance with God. James’ point throughout the whole section (Jas 2:14-26) is that a bare profession of faith, unaccompanied by the good works which true faith would produce, provides no sufficient grouns for inferring that a man is saved – a point with which Paul would heartily agree.’

(God’s Words, 145f)

William Barclay, more briefly:

‘At a first reading Jas 2:14-26 reads like a direct attack on Paulinism. “A man is justified by works and not by faith alone” (Jas 2:24) seems a flat contradiction of the Pauline doctrine of justification by faith. But what James is attacking is a so-called faith which has no ethical results and one thing is quite clear-anyone who charges Paul with preaching such a faith cannot possibly have read his letters. They are full of ethical demands, as, for instance, a chapter like Rom 12 illustrates.’ (DSB)

And Harper’s Bible Commentary similarly comments:

‘Some readers find James to be at odds with the Paul of Galatians. But Paul would surely agree that what matters is “faith being worked out by love” (Gal. 5:6). Their focuses, to be sure, are quite different. James is not debating the theological grounds for salvation. He advocates a “true religion,” which he understands as effective action for others in the world.’

The explanation given in ISBE (1st ed.) is as follows:

This passage in James is one of a few ‘where pistis, “faith,” appears in the sense of “creed,” the truth, or body of truth, which is trusted, or which justifies trust. The most important of such places is the paragraph Jas 2:14-26, where an apparent contradiction to some great Pauline dicta perplexes many readers. The riddle is solved by observing that the writer uses “faith” in the sense of creed, orthodox “belief.” This is clear from Jas 2:19, where the “faith.” in question is illustrated: “Thou believest that God is one.” This is the credal confession of the orthodox Jew (the shema’; see Deut 6:4), taken as a passport to salvation. Briefly, James presses the futility of creed without life, Paul the necessity of reliance in order to receive “life and peace.”‘

The essential compatility between Paul and James was recognised long ago by Bede:

”Although the apostle Paul preached that we are justified by faith without works, those who understand by this that it does not matter whether they live evil lives or do wicked and terrible things, as long as they believe in Christ, because salvation is through faith, have made a great mistake. James here expounds how Paul’s words ought to be understood. This is why he uses the example of Abraham, whom Paul also used as an example of faith, to show that the patriarch also performed good works in the light of his faith. It is therefore wrong to interpret Paul in such a way as to suggest that it did not matter whether Abraham put his faith into practice or not. What Paul meant was that no one obtains the gift of justification on the basis of merit derived from works performed beforehand, because the gift of justification comes only from faith.’ (ACCS)’

To summarise: the teaching of James and Paul is in perfect harmony:-

(a) They each have a different purpose, and therefore a different emphasis. As Ross says, Paul (eg in Galatians) is opposing legalism; James is opposing antinomianism. They are not duelling against each other, but standing back to back, facing different foes.

(b) Their use of the word ‘faith’ is different. James, as we have seen, is speaking of a spurious faith which is no more than mere assent; Paul uses the term in its full sense of obedient trust.

(c) In Paul’s teaching, true faith always issues in good works, Eph 2:10; Gal 5:6.

Which emphasis do we stand in greatest need of today – James’ or Paul’s?