Luther’s View of James
While not comprehensive, these are the relevant quotes I'll focus on.
"this epistle of St. James was rejected by the ancients" Martin Luther and "I do not regard it as the writing of an apostle, and my reasons follow.
In the first place it is flatly against St. Paul and all the rest of Scripture in ascribing justification to works (Jam 2:24). It says that Abraham was justified by his works when he offered his son Isaac (Jam 2:20); Though in Romans 4 St. Paul teaches to the contrary that Abraham was justified apart from works, by his faith alone, before he had offered his son, and proves it by Moses in Genesis 15:6. Although it would be possible to "save" the epistle by a gloss giving a correct explanation of justification here ascribed to works, it is impossible to deny that it does refer to Moses' words in Genesis 15 (which speaks not of Abraham's works but of his faith, just as Paul makes plain in Romans 4) to Abraham's works. This fault proves that this epistle is not the work of any apostle." Martin Luther
"In a word, he (James) wanted to guard against those who relied on faith without works, but was unequal to the task in spirit, thought, and words. He mangles the Scriptures and thereby opposes Paul and all Scripture. He tries to accomplish by harping on the law what the apostles accomplish by stimulating people to love. Therefore I cannot include him among the chief books, though I would not thereby prevent anyone from including or extolling him as he pleases, for there are otherwise many good sayings in him. Therefore I will not have him in my Bible to be numbered among the true chief books, though I would not thereby prevent anyone from including or extolling him as he pleases, for there are otherwise many good sayings in him. One man is no man in worldly things; how then, should this single man alone avail against Paul and all Scripture." Martin Luther
Luther later removed those comments in green, though not modifying his fundamental analysis of James.
Luther did not regard the epistle of James as the writing of an apostle. Why? Basically because James contradicts Paul and the rest of scripture. and Paul and the rest of scripture trump James. “it is flatly against St. Paul and all the rest of Scripture in ascribing justification to works” While he did give additional reasons I didn’t include here, this is his first and main reason.
His proof was based upon an apparent contradiction between James 2:20-26 in contrast to Romans 4:1-8
James 2:20-26 You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless? Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. And the scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness," (Gen 15:6) and he was called God’s friend. You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone. In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction? As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.
In contrast with
Rom 4:1-6 What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter? If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about— but not before God. What does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness." (Gen 15:6) Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness. David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works: "Blessed are they whose transgressions are forgiven, whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will never count against him."
Luther notices two contradictions here. First is encapsulated in James 2:24 "You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone." in contrast to the Romans 4 passage. Secondly is the contradiction between how James and Paul interpret Gen 15:6. In both cases they apply Gen 15:6 to their argument which says, "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." In Romans 4 Paul uses this verse as proof that justification is by faith alone apart from works, interpreting the Gen 15:6 as being fulfilled right then in Gen 15:6 prior to Abraham doing any works. Whereas James views Gen 15:6 as a prediction, a prophecy not being fulfilled until Gen 22, when Abraham did a work of faith. For to James, justification is not attained until one has both faith and works.
Note how James phrases James 2:23 And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." Every time in the Bible when this kind of phrase is used it's always referring to the scripture as being a prophecy, a prediction of a future event.
Thus James views Abraham as either not believing God in Gen 15, or believing God, but not being reckoned righteous until Gen 22, prior to which Abraham had faith but no works, of which James refers to as dead faith and not able to save. James 2:17 "faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead." Thus James views Abraham as not saved until Gen 22 when he offered Isaac as a work.
If James interpretation is correct concerning Gen 15:6, then Paul can't use it to prove his point in Romans 4. Conversely if Paul's interpretation of Gen 15:6 is correct and thus Abraham was justified by faith alone apart from works, then James is wrong. And thus Luther said, "it is flatly against St. Paul and all the rest of Scripture in ascribing justification to works"
Gloss Readings of James
Luther does mention Although it would be possible to "save" the epistle by a gloss giving a correct explanation of justification here ascribed to works, it is impossible to deny that it does refer to Moses' words in Genesis 15 (which speaks not of Abraham's works but of his faith, just as Paul makes plain in Romans 4) to Abraham's works.
The gloss he's talking about is the standard Protestant view of resolving the contradiction, reading Paul into James and largely only dealing with James 2:14-20 by saying that James is talking about works as evidence of saving faith rather than a condition for salvation. And claiming that what James means by "justification" is not justification in the eyes of God, but rather in the eyes of men. That is, merely appearing to be justified. The problem is it doesn't interpret James in light of James. It doesn't deal honestly with the whole passage. Luther's view is that if you were to interpret James in light of what James actually wrote, the gloss doesn't work.
Both Paul and James refer to justification reference Gen 15:6, so both were talking about the same justification, namely justification in the eyes of God. The last part of James 2 does indeed contradict Paul, if one interprets James in light of James. And as such it also sheds light on James' meaning of the James 2:14-20. If faith without works is dead, then a person must have both faith and works to be saved. Yet James' example of Abraham's work of faith that saved him didn't occur till many years after Gen 15:6. In contrast Paul indicates that Abraham was saved right after believing the promise, long before the sacrifice of Gen 22. And so the contradiction.
Protestants interpret James in light of Paul, reading Paul into James
Catholics interpret Paul in light of James. reading James into Paul
Luther interprets Paul in light of Paul, and James in light of James.
And it's from that perspective he came to his conclusion.
While not comprehensive, these are the relevant quotes I'll focus on.
"this epistle of St. James was rejected by the ancients" Martin Luther and "I do not regard it as the writing of an apostle, and my reasons follow.
In the first place it is flatly against St. Paul and all the rest of Scripture in ascribing justification to works (Jam 2:24). It says that Abraham was justified by his works when he offered his son Isaac (Jam 2:20); Though in Romans 4 St. Paul teaches to the contrary that Abraham was justified apart from works, by his faith alone, before he had offered his son, and proves it by Moses in Genesis 15:6. Although it would be possible to "save" the epistle by a gloss giving a correct explanation of justification here ascribed to works, it is impossible to deny that it does refer to Moses' words in Genesis 15 (which speaks not of Abraham's works but of his faith, just as Paul makes plain in Romans 4) to Abraham's works. This fault proves that this epistle is not the work of any apostle." Martin Luther
"In a word, he (James) wanted to guard against those who relied on faith without works, but was unequal to the task in spirit, thought, and words. He mangles the Scriptures and thereby opposes Paul and all Scripture. He tries to accomplish by harping on the law what the apostles accomplish by stimulating people to love. Therefore I cannot include him among the chief books, though I would not thereby prevent anyone from including or extolling him as he pleases, for there are otherwise many good sayings in him. Therefore I will not have him in my Bible to be numbered among the true chief books, though I would not thereby prevent anyone from including or extolling him as he pleases, for there are otherwise many good sayings in him. One man is no man in worldly things; how then, should this single man alone avail against Paul and all Scripture." Martin Luther
Luther later removed those comments in green, though not modifying his fundamental analysis of James.
Luther did not regard the epistle of James as the writing of an apostle. Why? Basically because James contradicts Paul and the rest of scripture. and Paul and the rest of scripture trump James. “it is flatly against St. Paul and all the rest of Scripture in ascribing justification to works” While he did give additional reasons I didn’t include here, this is his first and main reason.
His proof was based upon an apparent contradiction between James 2:20-26 in contrast to Romans 4:1-8
James 2:20-26 You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless? Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. And the scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness," (Gen 15:6) and he was called God’s friend. You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone. In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction? As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.
In contrast with
Rom 4:1-6 What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter? If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about— but not before God. What does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness." (Gen 15:6) Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness. David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works: "Blessed are they whose transgressions are forgiven, whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will never count against him."
Luther notices two contradictions here. First is encapsulated in James 2:24 "You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone." in contrast to the Romans 4 passage. Secondly is the contradiction between how James and Paul interpret Gen 15:6. In both cases they apply Gen 15:6 to their argument which says, "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." In Romans 4 Paul uses this verse as proof that justification is by faith alone apart from works, interpreting the Gen 15:6 as being fulfilled right then in Gen 15:6 prior to Abraham doing any works. Whereas James views Gen 15:6 as a prediction, a prophecy not being fulfilled until Gen 22, when Abraham did a work of faith. For to James, justification is not attained until one has both faith and works.
Note how James phrases James 2:23 And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." Every time in the Bible when this kind of phrase is used it's always referring to the scripture as being a prophecy, a prediction of a future event.
Thus James views Abraham as either not believing God in Gen 15, or believing God, but not being reckoned righteous until Gen 22, prior to which Abraham had faith but no works, of which James refers to as dead faith and not able to save. James 2:17 "faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead." Thus James views Abraham as not saved until Gen 22 when he offered Isaac as a work.
If James interpretation is correct concerning Gen 15:6, then Paul can't use it to prove his point in Romans 4. Conversely if Paul's interpretation of Gen 15:6 is correct and thus Abraham was justified by faith alone apart from works, then James is wrong. And thus Luther said, "it is flatly against St. Paul and all the rest of Scripture in ascribing justification to works"
Gloss Readings of James
Luther does mention Although it would be possible to "save" the epistle by a gloss giving a correct explanation of justification here ascribed to works, it is impossible to deny that it does refer to Moses' words in Genesis 15 (which speaks not of Abraham's works but of his faith, just as Paul makes plain in Romans 4) to Abraham's works.
The gloss he's talking about is the standard Protestant view of resolving the contradiction, reading Paul into James and largely only dealing with James 2:14-20 by saying that James is talking about works as evidence of saving faith rather than a condition for salvation. And claiming that what James means by "justification" is not justification in the eyes of God, but rather in the eyes of men. That is, merely appearing to be justified. The problem is it doesn't interpret James in light of James. It doesn't deal honestly with the whole passage. Luther's view is that if you were to interpret James in light of what James actually wrote, the gloss doesn't work.
Both Paul and James refer to justification reference Gen 15:6, so both were talking about the same justification, namely justification in the eyes of God. The last part of James 2 does indeed contradict Paul, if one interprets James in light of James. And as such it also sheds light on James' meaning of the James 2:14-20. If faith without works is dead, then a person must have both faith and works to be saved. Yet James' example of Abraham's work of faith that saved him didn't occur till many years after Gen 15:6. In contrast Paul indicates that Abraham was saved right after believing the promise, long before the sacrifice of Gen 22. And so the contradiction.
Protestants interpret James in light of Paul, reading Paul into James
Catholics interpret Paul in light of James. reading James into Paul
Luther interprets Paul in light of Paul, and James in light of James.
And it's from that perspective he came to his conclusion.
