But someone will say!
The argument from James's objector
I touched on the (in)famous Jas. 2:14-19 in my last post. We’re going to say a lot more about these verses for at least another couple of posts, but today, I want to look at a section that has confused a lot of people—and apparently, a lot of translators! Who is this objector that James brings up? What is his argument? How does it contribute to the point James is making?
Here’s the way the text reads in the NIV:
18 But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.”
Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds. 19 You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.
20 You foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless? (Jas. 2:18-20)
There are three problems I think we need to see. First, where should the quotation marks end? Second, what is the objector’s argument? And third, how does this little section help make James’s broader point in the larger passage?
I’d like a quote, please!
The NIV puts quotation marks around the words, “You have faith; I have deeds.” On this reading, those constitute the words of whoever this “someone” is that James has in mind. But let’s remind ourselves that the Greek manuscripts don’t have quotation marks. Translators have to infer from context where the quote begins and ends. The NASB rendering it like this: “But 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’.” Notice how it includes the second half of the verse in the quotation marks.
So which one is right? Actually, I think they’re both mistaken! I think that all of 18 and 19 should be included in the quote. Keeping the NIV’s wording (for now), I think it should look like this:
But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds. Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds. You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.”
You foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless?
I have a few reasons for preferring this. First, I think it just reads more naturally. I’ll expand on that idea below when I talk about the argument, but just see if you can hear how this flows more naturally. Second, there’s a small grammatical point worth considering. The NIV’s rendering hides a subtle point in the Greek text. Notice how the NASB begins verse 20 with, “But are you willing to acknowledge.” The word “but” is the little Greek word δὲ (de), which doesn’t just mark a contrast. It was used to push the text forward or to make the next point. It’s as if James is quoting his objector and then saying, “Okay, given that . . . do you want to evidence?” But the third reason is the most important and relates to how it changes the argument.
Would you stop arguing?
The problem with the NIV’s stopping the quote at the first line is that it really muddles the logic of the section. The translators of the NLT seemed to recognize this and clarify it by offering rendering it this way: “Someone may argue, ‘Some people have faith; others have good deeds.’ But I say, ‘How can you show me your faith if you don’t have good deeds? I will show you my faith by my good deeds’.” If you compare the NLT and NIV (or any other common translation), you’ll see that the NLT has taken a lot of liberties with the text. But why? Because the NIV’s logic doesn’t make a lot of sense. Let’s try to follow the argument.
James has said in verses 14-17 that we need works because faith, by itself, is dead. But then this objector comes along and says, “No, James. You have faith. I have works!” That’s confusing. James’s whole point is that they don’t have works! And then in response to this objection, James supposedly says, “Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds.” But the objector accused James of having faith and said he himself has works. Someone is seriously confused! (Maybe it’s just me.)
Given that, the NASB seems to make better sense of the argument. Now, the objector has a coherent thought. He’s talking to someone who has faith but no works, and then he challenges that person to show his faith apart from works. Of course, that can’t be done. But we still have a problem. The NASB then has James go on to say that their faith is like that of demons. Where does that fit in?
Actually, if you keep it in the mouth of the objector, the whole argument makes sense. Some people have faith, which is all well and good. But the objector challenges them to demonstrate that without works. He says it can’t be done, and presses the point. These believers are orthodox. They say the Shema (see Deut. 6:4). They are keeping the required commandments. But the objector points out that even the demons know the truth. They’re orthodox. In fact, their orthodoxy terrifies them!
Think back to Isa. 1:10-20, where God blasts the Jewish people for keeping the Law but not loving their neighbor. Jesus made the same charge against the Pharisees. And wasn’t James just talking about that very issue in the first part of James 2 and the in the immediate context of verses 14-16? “Works,” for James, isn’t about keeping the Law. It’s about loving your neighbor. That is what demons can’t do!
Can I get a witness?
But if we follow the logic of the passage carefully, we still have a huge problem. We already noted that James’s whole point in verses 14-17 was that faith needs works. But the objector is arguing that faith needs works. So how is that an objection?
It’s not, and, fact, it turns out that James 2:18 isn’t introducing an objector at all. The problem is with the NIV’s word “But” at the beginning of the verse. We should follow the KJV, which says, “Yea, a man may say.” You could also translate it, “Indeed, someone may say.”
But how can a word that means “but” be translated “Yea” or “indeed”? For starters, the word is ἀλλά (alla), and it’s common translated “indeed.” For example, John 16:2 says, “They will put you out of the synagogue; in fact (ἀλλά), the time is coming when anyone who kills you will think they are offering a service to God.” The same word used in James 2 is translated here “in fact.” (Side note: the KJV renders ἀλλά as “yea” here, also.) The point is that this word doesn’t always mean “but.” Instead, it’s point is to change directions or intensify an idea.
Given this idea, we can translate James 2:18 as, “Indeed, someone may well say.” James, it turns out, isn’t dealing with an objection. He’s calling in a witness! He’s just said that faith without works is dead. If we believe the gospel, we need to live it out by loving others. He intensifies the idea with a witness: someone could well point out that you have an orthodox faith, but that they have works, so they can show their faith but James’s readers can’t. Their faith (or orthodoxy) is about as helpful as what a demon has!
Tying it all together
Between questionable quotation marks and troubles in translations, we can get lost in the very straightforward point James is making. What good is it, he asks, to talk about your faith if you aren’t going to show it (v.14)? If we don’t love our brothers and sisters in need, our faith won’t help them (vv.15-17, cf., v.8). In fact, someone might even put it this way: if you can’t show your faith, it’s of no use. Even demons believe the right thing! (vv.18-19). So do something about it. Put your faith to work.
That’s all James is saying. We try to complicate it by suggesting that if we fail to put our faith to work, then our faith isn’t real (which the text doesn’t say) or that we’ll go to hell (which the text doesn’t say). All James says is exactly what he means: we should put our faith to work. That’s what a wise, mature Christian does, and there’s just no reason for the passage to be any more controversial than that. Forget worrying about whether or not I’m a “true Christian” on these verses. I’ve got my hands full just trying to keep them busy doing God’s work!