And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all the mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. If I give away all my possessions, and if I hand over my body so that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing. (1 Cor 13:2-3 NRSV)
Within the theological debates between Latter-day Saints and most Protestants, an important element of the theological divide concerns the issue of whether one is justified by faith alone (sola fide) and the role of works (done under the power of God’s grace and in a salvific/covenantal relationship with God [a la Covenantal Nomism]). Within Reformed soteriology, there is a distinction between a “so-called” faith that is merely intellectual assent, and a “true” or “saving” faith that appropriates the (alien) righteousness of Jesus Christ, and this is how most Reformed apologists answer the issue of Jas 2—in their view, the “faith alone” position condemned by James in his epistle is against this former type of faith (a non-saving, so-called faith), following the approach of Philip Melanchthon who proposed this interpretation to Martin Luther who had some concerns about James (Luther referred to this epistle in his early Reformation career as “an epistle of straw”). In this view, true saving faith produces good works, though such good works, while playing an important role in sanctification, do not play a role in justification, as in Reformed soteriology, justification is an external, forensic event where a person is legally declared righteous based on the alien imputed righteousness of Christ, while intrinsically remaining sinful (simul iustus et peccator).
There are many exegetical issues with the Reformed Protestant understanding of Jas 2 specifically, and the nature of justification more broadly, and I have dealt with some of them in this post blog on Jas 2:24. For instance, in Jas 2:24, we read:
You see then how by works a man is justified and not by faith only
The Greek phrase "not by faith alone" is οὐκ ἐκ πίστεως μόνον (lit. "not from faith alone/only"). The addition of this phrase introduces a specific element and direction to James' argument, for it clearly shows that his primary concern is to show that faith alone cannot justify a man, not merely to suggest Abraham was vindicated by works. If James' concern were to teach that works are added to faith only as a demonstration of a previous justification, there would be no reason to add "not by faith only," for "faith [alone/only]" is not demonstrating anything in order to be negated, and thus it would be unnecessary to eliminate it from the works that are being demonstrated.
Another problematic area of Reformed soteriology and exegesis is that the Hebrew צדק and Greek δικαι- word groups, while they can and do have a declarative meaning, they also have a transformative meaning, even in soteriological contexts.
That δικαιοω can and does have a transformative, not just a declarative, meaning, can be seen in many passages. For instance, notice Psa 73:13 (LXX 72:13):
Verily I have cleansed (δικαιοω) my heart in vain, and washed my hands in innocency.
Similarly, the Hebrew term “to justify” (צדק), which is the word usually translated with δικαιοω in the LXX, can also mean “purify”:
And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed (צדק).
As Derek Flood, in his book, Healing the Gospel: A Radical Vision for Grace, Justice, and the Cross (Eugene, Oreg.: Cascade Books, 2012), pp. 103-104 notes:
Even where dikaioo appears to mean “declare righteous” linguistically in Romans, I would argue that it nevertheless always includes the restorative sense of God making-righteous the unrighteous in Paul’s thought. We can see this connection explicitly drawn out in Romans 5 where Paul juxtaposes two parallel formulations:
Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification (dikaoisis) and life for all people. (v.18)
For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous. (v. 19)
Here we can see that, whatever Paul understands dikaioo to mean, he directly connotes that meaning with our being “made righteous” in this parallel verse. The NET renders the Greek dikaiosin zoes (literally “the making right of/from life”) as “righteousness leading to life” (v. 18). Justification is an act of God that results in life because it “makes righteous.”
When Paul says that “God justifies the ungodly,” he is not proposing [that] God is a participant in the kind of legal fiction that the Old Testament expressly condemns [Isa 5:23; Exo 23:7]. Indeed, one of Pau’s central points in Romans is to demonstrate that God was not unjust in showing mercy to sinners rather than punishing them. The way that God demonstrates justice is not by acquitting the unrighteous, but by making them good. It is a gospel of God’s act of restorative justice in us. God’s actions are life-giving and transforming.
Speaking of Christ and His glorious resurrection, the apostle Paul wrote:
Without any doubt, the mystery of our religion is great: He was revealed in flesh, vindicated in spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among Gentiles, believed in throughout the world, taken up in glory (1 Tim 3:16 NRSV)
The underlining Greek translated as “vindicated” is ἐδικαιώθη, the indicative aorist passive of the verb δικαιοω. While one can (correctly) argue that δικαιοω has the meaning of "vindicated," it also shows that the verb also have a transformative sense too, by the mere fact that Christ in His resurrection was literally transformed from a state of death to a state of life, as well as being the recipient of a glorified, immortalised body the same promise given to all believers (cf. Phil 3:21; 1 Cor 15:44).
With respect to the passage from 1 Cor 13:2-3 that was quoted at the beginning of this article, this is another stake into the heart of Reformed theology. The “faith” Paul is speaking about is clearly not a “dead” or “so-called” faith, but a true/saving faith evidenced by its inclusion within a number of spiritual gifts in v. 2. Notwithstanding, for Paul, if he had “[saving] faith alone,” he would not οὐθέν εἰμι (v. 2 ["I am nothing"]), and in v. 3, would describe himself as οὐδὲν ὠφελοῦμαι ("not profited"; alt.: “counts for nothing”). As Joseph Fitzmyer noted in his commentary on 1 Cor, “In other words, all such pneumatika amount to zero without the animating force of love” Joseph A. Fitzmyer, First Corinthians [AB 32; Garden City, Doubleday, 2008], 494), or in the words of Anthony C. Thiselton, “These wondrous gifts and triumphant victories all amount to nothing, unless love directs them, with its Christlike concern and regard or ‘the other’” ( The First Epistle to the Corinthians [NIGTC; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2000], 1045 [emphasis in original]).
Indeed, this concept is paralleled by Paul's words to the Galatians:
For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love. (Gal 5:6)
For Paul, one is saved by faith, but not faith alone, but a faith that works by/through love (δι᾽ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη). For the apostle Paul, faith and love are coupled together in what seems to be an inseparable bond. In regard to justification, love is not portrayed as a mere appendage of faith but a necessary element and addition to faith. This is further developed in v. 14:
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
As one writer noted:
Even more important regarding the intimate bond Paul creates between faith and love is that he describes this bond as the only way to obtain salvation. This is more apparent in Galatians 5:2-3 as Paul contrasts “faith working in love” with “law” which cannot save. Paul is not only clarifying the negative by pitting faith against law, he is also bringing forth the positive which is faith working in love. Since Paul is concerned in this context with how one is justified, this places the bond between faith and love as indispensable to salvation. Faith is a superlative virtue, but it is not supreme, or is it alone in the salvation of man. It is no surprise, then, when Paul says in 1 Corinthians 13:2, 13: “. . . and if I have faith that can move mountains, but not love, I am nothing . . . of faith, hope, and love, the greatest of these is love.” (Robert A. Sungenis, Not by Faith Alone: The Biblical Evidence for the Catholic Doctrine of Justification [Goleta, Calif.: Queenship Publishing, 1997], 72 [emphasis in original]).
This is another area where Latter-day Saint soteriology and “biblical Christianity” converge, but the theology of our Evangelical opponents (yet again) faces many exegetical, theological, and linguistic problems.
