<Li> The New Testament does not use the word "justified" in the sense of "vindicated" in contexts which are soteriological, i.e., contexts which discuss salvation or damnation . Moreover, such passages as Mt 11: 19 where one could plausibly interpret the Greek word dikaioo as referring to a vindication do so only in a metaphorical sense; therefore they do not use dikaioo in the same way that James, and even Paul, use the term, which is historical and literal . </Li> <Li> James's discussion of the events surrounding the justification of Rahab preclude assigning the meaning of "vindicated" to the word justified . Rahab's justification, as described in Jm 2: 25, is a salvific justification, not a vindication, yet James specifies that Rahab was justified "in the same way" that Abraham was justified . Therefore, one cannot understand Abraham's justification as a vindication . </Li> <Li> Since James and Paul use the same Greek noun dikaiosune ("righteous") in reference to Abraham, and interpret the word in the same way (cf . Gn 15: 6, Rm 4: 3, Jm 2: 23), it would be totally incongruous for one of them to use a different meaning of its verbal cognate dikaioo in reference to Abraham . </Li> <Li> The Lutherans and Reformed Christian position assumes that Abraham's justification is a once - for - all event . James's all important question "Can faith save him?" (Jm 2: 14), however, includes Abraham within its purview . Hence we must conclude that if Abraham's works were not of the quality that James prescribes in the context (Jm 2: 15), then Abraham would not be justified . Abraham could not be justified in a "once - for - all" event in Gn 15: 6 and at the same time have that justification put in jeopardy by disobedience to James's requirement of works for justification . If this could happen, the question in Jm 2: 14 would have no meaning . </Li>

Why does god save us by faith alone