James has to be interprets with the rest of scripture, So that it does not contradict.
If you read James 2 and Romans 4, you appear to have apposing/contradictory views.
So you have to interpret in context. In a way that makes them both agree.
Paul spoke often saying those who are truly saved WILL have works, In fact he said their new creation and faith will cause those good works. So you can say that if a person says they had faith, but had no works, Then if all true believers have works according to paul. Then those who do not must not have true faith.
Which is exactly what James said,
James is arguing agains tlicentiousness (people who think just because they BELIEVE then they are saved, and can live anyway they want. Hence his argument, If your one of them who believe (even demons believe yet tremble) well that good. But is it enough to save you? Paul said we are saved by living faith, not mere belief, Living faith works, so if you CLAIM to have faith, but have no works, Your faith is dead (it is powerless, it is lifeless, it is not true faith at all) can that faith save you?
No!
James used to get me, I had no argument, Until i finally sat down and actually studied it. Using the guideline I shared above (james and paul MUST be in agreement)
Pauls audience was workers for. People who thought they had to work to maintain salvation.
James audience is licentious people who think because they said a sinners prayer they are saved, no matter what.
when you use these basis of context. The word openes up and you find agreement and harmony between both Paul and James.