This is the fourth installment in my series of posts on James 12:14-26. If you would like to look at the previous three posts please follow these links:
- James 2:14-26: Introduction
- James 2:14-26: The Devils Tremble
- James 2:14-26: Abraham Offered Isaac Part 1
I am going to focus on verses 21 through 23 which state:
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
Whether or not James is speaking about works salvation in this passage depends on how we interpret “justified” and “imputed unto him for righteousness.”
Is Justified Used Exclusively in a Legal Sense?
I ran a query using Blue Letter Bible that returned all variations on the word “justify” (click here to see the results) and while” justify” can be used in a legal sense that is not always the case. In fact Luke 7:29 says that the people justified God being baptized by John. In a legal sense, that statement is just plain silly.
Why is this important? The answer is because all Protestants have had it drilled into their brains that “imputed righteousness” is another way of saying eternal salvation! When most church goers read verse 21 it is case closed, we are talking about salvation here. However is that really true?
Brad Jersak discusses Paul’s use of justification which I think applies to James’ use of the word as well:
Justification: In the juridical model, justification is usually reduced to a verdict of “not guilty” declared by God after Jesus has been punished for your guilt in your stead. You were guilty, God punished Jesus for your guilt, now you are not guilty. Is that how Paul sees it?
No, in his apostolic mind, justification is about restoration or rebalancing–if we want a modern metaphor, why not think about how we justify margins of a document. For Paul, justification is far more than an abstract legal declaration in some heavenly courtroom. It is about establishing God’s kingdom on earth and restoring a shalomic community in which the Gentiles are now included in God’s blessings. To justify is literally “to make right.” How? By punishment? No, by the mercy and forgiveness of God revealed on the Cross when we crucified his Son, when God raised him to life and when he enthroned him as Prince of Peace.
Could it be that Abraham did the right thing (was justified) when he offered Isaac up? Maybe justification isn’t just some “legal fiction” used to get us into heaven on a technicality? The article “Justification and Vindication” defends this concept of “legal fiction” and I’m linking to it so you can see I’m not making this up.
Does Imputed Righteousness = Eternal salvation?
Some people will say that I can quibble with justification not always being used in a judicial sense but when Abraham’s faith “was imputed unto him for righteousness” that has to be speaking of eternal salvation. Does it really?
Once again if we stop interpreting these words in a judicial sense it opens other interpretations to us. Here is Brad Jersak:
Righteousness: In the juridical model, righteousness is this imputed status where God considers you not guilty because he sees Christ’s righteous life instead of your sin, regardless of one’s actual life. Because God already punished your sins in Christ, you can be declared holy without ever needing to participate in the empowering grace that transforms us.
In Paul’s apostolic mind, righteousness (also translated just or justice) is who God is and what the grace of the Holy Spirit is doing in us through faith. It’s the righteousness not just imputed but imparted to disciples growing in love through the indwelling grace of Christ-in-us that is transforming us into Christlike people from the inside out. A faith orientation of trust in and surrender to the loving care of God opens our hands and hearts to his righteousness IN us (not OUT there somewhere in a gnostic legal transaction).
Jesse Morrell has a similar take:
The word imputed means to reckon or account. It never means that something alien to you is transferred to your account. When the Bible says that faith is imputed as righteousness, instead of works of the law, that means that God considers faith to be righteousness as opposed to obedience to the Torah.
Paul did not deny that a person must be righteous in order to go to heaven, he simply disagreed with the Judiazers as to what righteousness consisted of. Instead of teaching that the Gentiles needed to obey the Torah and be righteous that way, Paul said they needed to be righteous by putting their faith in Christ. His argument went back to Abraham who existed before the Torah yet was righteous by His faith, thus disproving the Judiazers that a person must obey the Torah to be righteous and saved.
Your Atonement Model Determines How You Interpret This Passage!
Until a coup[le of years ago I thought that the atonement model of Penal Substitutionary Atonement (PSA) was the only way the church had ever interpreted Christ’s salvation work on the cross. To my surprise it turns out that for the first 1,000 years of Christianity PSA was not how the church interpreted Christ’s work on the cross. If a Christian decides that another “atonement model” is more faithful to scripture then they are not necessarily committing heresy.
So, what does that have to do with James 2:21-23? It turns out it has everything to do with it. It is PSA that has brought the judicial interpretation of “righteousness” and “justice” into our theology. If PSA goes away then so does the need for injecting imputations into Christ’s work on the cross. If PSA goes away then there is no need to interpret “justify” and “imputed righteousness” in a way that forces works salvation into this passage.
I’m not going to try and summarize the case against PSA but I would like to recommend some resources for further study. Warren McGrew has done two good video series on the topic that I highly recommend:
There are 17 claims made by proponents of PSA. Some of them I find reasonable and others I do not. If some of those 17 claims are wrong I think it seriously compromises the case for PSA. I recommend everyone watch these series and come to their own conclusions.
When Was Abraham Justified?
James 2:212 says that Abraham was justified by works when he offered Isaac upon the altar. This is strange to me. If you look at my Blue Letter Bible search again (link here) you will see that nowhere in Genesis 22, where Abraham offered Isaac, does it say Abraham was justified. In fact the words “justify” and “justified” do not appear in the Book of Genesis.
Genesis 15:6, which is when Abraham believes that God will give him an heir, does say when Abraham believed God it was counted to him as righteousness. Abraham’s belief was counted to him as righteousness. Works are not in scope in Genesis 15:6.
Did Abraham Receive and Temporal Blessings for Offering Up Isaac?
Yes, as a matter of fact Abraham was blessed because he offered Isaac up:
15 And the angel of the Lord called unto Abraham out of heaven the second time,
16 And said, By myself have I sworn, saith the Lord, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son:
17 That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;
Just like in the previous verses that reference the Shema these are temporal blessings. Tell me once again why I have to interpret James 2:14-26 as works salvation?