Sola fide and james 2:24

  • Thread starter Thread starter BlueKnight1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

BlueKnight1

Guest
Not trying to start a fight, but I did notice something that I think is worth pointing out and wanting someone to clarify.
A common rebuttal to sola fide is James 2:24. If that is the case, then shouldn’t it say sola fide in the verse? The verse in James uses “fide tantum.” I am not claiming to be a latin scholar, but the “fide tantum” in context appears to be describing faith that bears no fruit, for lack of a better term. Sola Fide on the other hand requires bearing fruit (at least among most confessional and academic protestants). So unless I am missing something, I think that there should be a different apologetic response, otherwise it’s either dishonest or misplaced.

If I am wrong in my observation, please show me, but that just been bugging me and I felt I should say something.
 
The thing with James 2:24 is that Reformer John Calvin added the word “alone” to this verse where it didn’t exist. That’s because the Greek word that James used, ‘monon’, is actually an adverb and thus it modifies a verb (“justified”) rather than a noun (“faith”). Calvin added the word “alone” to “faith” to make it sound as if James was attacking a ‘dead faith’, but this is not what the grammar says, nor would James have had to point out something so obvious as “Did you know dead faith cannot save you?”

Rather, James is actually saying “a person is justified by works and not only [justified] by faith”. In this case, James is clearly saying works justify and faith justify, completely putting the Protestant in a bind. By reassigning ‘only’ to attach it to ‘faith’ rather than ‘justify’, Calvin altered the meaning St James was trying to convey. Luther didn’t do this, which is why Luther did have to admit that James contradicted his theology.
 
Last edited:
BlueKnight1 said:
A common rebuttal to sola fide is James 2:24. If that is the case, then shouldn’t it say sola fide in the verse?
Click to expand...
I’m not following you here?

Are you saying there is a difference in the meaning between someone saying “Faith Alone” versus saying “Faith Only”?

Because the words Alone and Only are technically synonyms.
BlueKnight1 said:
So unless I am missing something, I think that there should be a different apologetic response, otherwise it’s either dishonest or misplaced.
Click to expand...
I think what you are missing here is if you are going to apply this strict rule of interpretation to James 2:24 as being either dishonest or misplaced, wouldn’t you also have to admit that the Sola Fide advocates are also being either dishonest or misplaced every time they make the claim that St. Paul is speaking about “Sola Fide in context” when the word SOLA never shows up in any of his verses?

That being said, I think the problem with James 2:24 is people tend to use it as a rebuttal against Romans 3. Trying to use St. James to define St. Paul. When they should be showing the two authors actually agree. They could easily do this by comparing James 2:24 with Romans 2 not 3.
3 Do you suppose, O man, that when you judge those who do such things and yet do them yourself, you will escape the judgment of God? 4 Or do you presume upon the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience? Do you not know that God’s kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? …

6 For he will render to every man according to his works: 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life;
Click to expand...
In verses 3-4 St. Paul is speaking about the sin of presumption here. This was a temptation for many Jews, who believed that their membership in the Old Covenant would exempt them from the judgement of God. This is the same mindset of many Christians today, they presume just because they believe (their faith alone) they have Christian faith that they will not be judged by God.

St. Paul hits this thought home in verse 6 telling us that God will render to us according to our works. If we keep reading to verse 7 it defines what is rendered…Eternal Life (Salvation).

Which is the same thing James is telling us we are justified by works and not by faith alone.

I think the big problem is people tend to push the either/or when Catholics believe it is both/and.

Like @(name removed by moderator) said …

Then we are on the same page.

Just my thoughts,

God Bless
 
MT1926 said:
6 For he will render to every man according to his works: 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life;
Click to expand...
On the face of it, these two verses, Romans 2:6-7, look as though they ought to be a much better source than anything in James for refuting “sola fide,” simply because it is surely more effective to argue “No, that isn’t what Paul is saying” than the alternative, “Yes, Paul says that, but we also have to take into account what James says.”

What is the “sola fide” side’s stock reply to counter the argument from Romans 2:6-7?
 
Sorry about the delay,

A couple things I am observing (I hope my observations are correct),
  1. alone and only are synonymous, so no real distinction
  2. Catholic doctrine tries to emphasize a both/and nature, not either/or nature
A few points,
1, Catholic_Dude, that would be something to look up and study. I can’t recall any work on Calvin and the book of James.
2, In regards to the book of Romans (in particular Romans 2:6-7), the layout of Romans, ch 1 and 2 would be talking about how everything is supposed to be, then from ch 3 onward it tells how we have fallen and how we need faith in Jesus and his saving work. (that is a very abbreviated overview of the first third of Romans, but there are better summations)
3, I will be honest, the both/and position is interesting. The way I understand sola fide is that faith alone saves, but faith that saves in turn inspires action, actions of trust, love, fidelity, etc… (ex. when Abraham believed God, he started his journey to the promised land, he didn’t stay put). So the both/and sounds like same thing with different emphasis. Unfortunately, that is not something I regularly hear or read. If there is anything you would recommend reading to that effect…
 
To understand the Protestant position on Faith and Works I suggest you listen to this sermon (if you have an hour or so to spare).

Faith and Works

You may have to scroll down to hit the play button.
 
Last edited:
That was a fair article. Faith to the vast majority of evangelical groups is what Jimmy Akin calls “Formed Faith”. It is a faith that includes intellectual understanding but goes beyond to include love and trust and hope. It is having our heart turned from stone to flesh that results in our love, surrender and trust of Christ and what He has done for us.

I like to use the term “living faith” as it is consistent with James.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top