"Alone" in James 2:24

[Bill_Rutland]

OK all you Greek scholars out there, I need your help. A Protestant friend of mine claims that ‘monon’ (alone) in James 2:24 is not an adjective modifying ‘faith’ (since it doesn’t agree in gender) but is rather an adverb modifying ‘justified’ thus rendering the verse to say “You see, then, that a man is justified by works and not only [justified] by faith.”? He claims that James is teaching two different types of justification here. I do not see any real distinction from the traditional translation. I have no problem agreeing that “monon" is an adverb, but, and here’s my question, I see “monon” as modifying the phrase “not by faith” and not the verb “justified.” Any (name removed by moderator)ut?

PAX CHRISTI

Bill

 

[promethius]

ask him how “faith without works is dead” fits in with his false exegisis.

ask him how the rest of that section of the bible agrees with his false exegisis. simply read that whole chapter and you will see a great many examples in James’ writing where James shows you exactly what he meant, and its nothing like the pot of stew this guy is trying to sell you

 

[MGEISING]

promethius:

ask him how “faith without works is dead” fits in with his false exegisis.

ask him how the rest of that section of the bible agrees with his false exegisis. simply read that whole chapter and you will see a great many examples in James’ writing where James shows you exactly what he meant, and its nothing like the pot of stew this guy is trying to sell you

My personal experience with Protestants is that they are too busy quoting scripture from Paul, Romans, James, Galatians … and they don’t spend enough time quoting what Jesus, our Personal Lord and Savior, said! Like, John 6 … unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood …, Like Mathew’s Beatitudes, etc. etc. etc.

There are tooooooo many scripture references that prove that Faith Alone is unscriptual!

 

[bengal_fan]

actually don’t respond to his question with another question as that seems like you are attacking (even if that is what he is doing you’ll go much farther by taking his question seriously as it seems you are doing). i guess i am not seeing the problem. it seems that either way, james is saying that works are necessary for salvation (because to have a “saving faith” means works will be produced). it seems he is close to the catholic position. i am not seeing any contradiction unless he means the contradiction is that he thinks james is teaching something different than luther and calvin (who say they got their position from paul but i don’t think that is entirely the case). if you could explain the man’s question a little further that would help me understand. thanks

 

[Fidelis]

“You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.”

“You see, then, that a man is justified by works and not only [justified] by faith.”?

Maybe I’m singularly dense , but to me both proposed translations say the same thing–We aren’t only judged by possessing an intellectual faith, but we will also be held accountable for what we do or fail to do.

 

[MGEISING]

Fidelis:

Maybe I’m singularly dense , but to me both proposed translations say the same thing–We aren’t only judged by possessing an intellectual faith, but we will also be held accountable for what we do or fail to do.

You are not dense!!! Believe me!

 

[germys9]

I think I understand what your friend is trying to say. He is saying this passage is saying we can not only be justified by faith alone, but some men are also justified by works. In other words, James is trying to distinguish between two different ways one can be justified. However, in light of the teachings of the early church which includes the constant teaching of the Catholic church, his interpretation can not be correct. The way to correctly read the passage would to allow the word “alone” modify the word faith and the word justified. Tell your friend that christians have never believed that way from the beginning and if you take his interpretation it just doesn’t make sense when you compare it to Jesus words on justification.

 

[Malachi4U]

Somehow this sounds like the same thing they do to mislead people on Kephas/Cephas/Peter/Petros and little ‘pebble/stone’ or huge massive ‘rock’. (Note: my wife’s diamond ring is made up of itty bitty “ROCKS” much smaller in size then the walking ‘stones’ we stand on outside on the patio that are 18” x 18” each.:whacky: ) They will use any argument as long as it is anti-Catholic or they can find one to support an ‘opinion’ that is not in Scripture.

This sounds like your friend is grasping for stars when he should be enjoying the forest and the trees.

It is an interesting point though and a new one to me. I’ll look into it further too.

A prisoner of Christ

 

[Chesster]

“You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.”

“You see, then, that a man is justified by works and not only [justified] by faith.”?

Maybe I’m singularly dense , but to me both proposed translations say the same thing–We aren’t only judged by possessing an intellectual faith, but we will also be held accountable for what we do or fail to do.

What Bill’s friend is saying is this:
St. James is not talking about 1 “type” of justification but 2 “types” of justification and he is using this translation of the verse to support his argument.

The first translation, “You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.” implies only 1 “type” of justification that’s by both faith & works.

The second translation, “You see, then, that a man is justified by works and not only [justified] by faith.” implies two “types” of justification, one by works alone and another by faith alone.

He is subtly altering the text according to his understanding of the Greek. This is why Bill wants a Greek scholar to help him out.

 

[Bill_Rutland]

Thank you for all of your help and comments. Here is my friend’s argument:

In his accretion that “alone” the Greek monon modifies “justified” and not “faith.” Thus he translates the verse, “You see, then, that a man is justified by works and not only [justified] by faith.” In this he sees two kinds of justification, one by faith which produces salvation and one by works which produces rewards, but is not salvific.

He is correct that in the word form the Greek monon is an adverb, therefore making it impossible that it should modify the noun “faith.” There are however instances in N.T. Greek where the adverbial form is used as an adjective, but I do not think that is the case here. Rather I hold that monon is this case is a special particle which modified the phrase “not by faith.” Keep in mind I know enough Greek to get me into trouble, so that is why I was seeking someone out there who could shed some light on the matter.

This aside the whole idea that James is teaching some sort of “rewards justification” is troublesome. But, because my fiend bases his argument on the Greek I would like to know if his view is correct or is mine?

PAX CHRISTI

Bill

 

[Dandelion_Wine]

Howdy Bill,

I’m not a Greek scholar (and I don’t play one on t.v.), but it seems like he’s still reading something into the verse if he’s saying that we’re justified by works means that we’re not saved but are rewarded. What does justification mean to him then?

And maybe I’ll get flamed by this, but chiming in and saying something like ‘those kooky protestants blah blah blah’ isn’t adding anything to the conversation or helping out Bill - it’s just ripping on protestants.