James 2:14-26, A verse by verse study

Exactly. It's simply a cunning way in an effort to "get around" the truth found in such verses as (Romans 4:2-6; Ephesians 2:8,9; Titus 3:5; 2 Timothy 1:9 etc..). The end result is saved by "these" works and just not "those" works which still culminates in salvation by faith and works/works-righteousness and boasting in self.

That salvation is by grace through faith and is not by works is not hard to understand. It's just hard for those who cling to works for salvation to ACCEPT. It's a shame that human pride will not allow works-salvationists to place their faith in Jesus Christ ALONE for salvation. Their hands are full of their works, and they will not let go in order to receive Christ through faith. It's a PRIDE issue.

My dear brother in Christ, "As many as were BAPTIZED into Christ Jesus were baptized into His DEATH.”

What baptism are you interpreting this to be brother? water or spirit? Paul is pretty clear that there is only one baptism...(Ephesians 4:5) and... God Himself last I read required no water to put His Spirit in you.(Ezekiel 36:26) Furthermore, what did you understand was the significance of the baptism John was doing in the Jordon? Baptism saves brother but not water baptism. Water baptism is a sign and or declaration of ones trust and belief in Christ Jesus.

Happy to always help brother.

Any works that may add to faith to receive salvation are boastful. God works for those who believe in him. It is not man works but God works.

John 6:39
King James Bible
Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

yes
it is God doing the work in us who are in The Way -- both to will, and also to do
therefore there can be no boasting, not of our will, nor of our works -- because it by His grace and by His work in us, "not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy"

@Beckworth

It is not really possible is it to add works?
People may think they can but it God's terms which matter and we come to Him on His terms.

The baptism in Acts 2:38 commanded by Peter was water baptism; I know this because the Holy Spirit was promised as a “gift” AFTER they were baptised; so it could NOT have been Holy Spirit baptism.

The baptism of the Samaritans in Acts 8 was water baptism; I know this because AFTER they were baptized they received the Holy Spirit. Read verses 12-15.

Cornelius and his house were still commanded to be baptized after they received the baptism if the Spirit in Acts 10:48. The baptism that was COMMANDED was water baptism. If it was not necessary then why did Peter COMMAND them to do it?

The baptism of the Ethiopian eunuch was water baptism. I know because the eunuch said, “ Here is water. What does hinder me from being baptized?”

Ananias told Paul to “Arise and be baptized and wash away your sins”. Men could not just go out and command the Holy Spirit to baptize them. Holy Spirit baptism was given by God, at His discretion, and “unexpectantly”. It fell “suddenly” on the Jews in Acts 2 and on Cornelius in Acts 10. It was not administered by MEN. But Jesus tells His disciples to go out and “baptize” in all the world. People did not get Holy Spirit baptism in that way.

Besides, Holy Spirit baptism was never given to “save” people. It was always given as a “sign” of God’s approval. In Acts 2, it was a sign that the apostles had God’s approval and that their message was truly from God. In Acts 10, it was a “sign” to the Jews that proved God had accepted the gentiles as recipients of the gospel message. That’s what God had been showing Peter with the vision of the Sheet full of animals.

The Holy Spirit baptism was only given twice in the New Testament. Acts 2 and Acts 10. The apostles could give the “gift” of the Spirit by laying their hands on people and this was one of the miraculous gifts talked about in 1 Cor. 14 &15. If you had the miraculous “gift” of the Spirit, you could do miracles or speak in tongues, or heal people, or prophesy. But you got these gifts by the apostles laying their hands on you—not by Holy Spirit baptism. Both times Holy Spirit baptism happened, the persons were NOT seeking it; they were NOT asking for it; they were NOT praying for it, they were not even aware that it was about to happen. That is not the baptism that men are told to “do”. Men are told to go be baptised (Acts 3:38, Acts 22:16. Matthew 28:18-19, etc) which implies that they decide to “do” it or not. It’s something that men can do in obedience to a command. That is NOT Holy Spirit baptism in the Bible.

The baptism taught in Ephesians 4 is water baptism. Jesus taught that miraculous gifts would “cease” when the “perfect” will of God, the Bible, had come. 1Cor. 13. The first century Christian’s NEEDED guidance from those with spiritual gifts because they did not have the complete word of God written down. But once the word was complete and written so all could read it, there was no longer any need for miraculous guidance. He is very specific about this in 1 Cor. 13.

Please do a thorough study of the Spirit and how He worked in the New Testament—without a preconceived prejudice. You have been deceived by Satan.

The Bible does not teach—nor imply—that once an apostle gave you the “gift” of the Spirit, you then could “pass” that gift on to other people. No. It could not be “passed on.” That means once the last apostle died and the last person to receive the Holy Spirit from an apostle died, that was the end of miraculous spiritual gifts. They have “ceased”, just like 1 Corinthians 13 predicted. We now have the inspired word of God to guide us and direct us. And Paul says it was once and for all delivered; it is complete— not ongoing revelation, and it is ALL we need to be saved. 2 Tim 3:16.

The way we get the “gift” of the Holy Spirit today is by being baptized in water just as Peter told those in Acts 2:38. It is all we need.

Have you read James 2:14-26? That whole passage contradicts what you just said. Faith and works go together verse 22. Abraham was saved by works when he offered Isaac. Rahab was saved by works when she hid the spies. They had faith, yes, but their faith without works is dead! Verses 17 and 26. That is the whole point of those verses. We are not saved by faith alone to the exclusion of everything else see verse 24. Neither are we saved by works alone but as verse 22 says, faith and works together.

John 6 does not teach faith ONLY or faith ALONE. It just says faith is a WORK of God. If you exclude ALL works, you exclude faith. 1 Thess. 1:3 and 2Thess. 1:11 both call faith a work. You still think we are not saved by works?

And is the work of believing (faith) a BOASTFUL work? The Holy Spirit calls it a work. What do you call it?

Be sure to go back and read posts #68 #69 #70 and #76 from the link below:

https://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/james-2-14-26-a-verse-by-verse-study.217314/page-4

Adding works to faith for salvation means boasting

• Is to add to what Christ did. The cross finished our salvation. Christ is offered and the gift of salvation is wrapped and offered free.
• It is to aid Christ's redemption. This is boasting 101. We are not Saviour, it’s Christ alone.

The context is not about obtaining salvation but proving or providing a valid explanation of one's faith. James is saying this of showing of faith as in v.18 “Shew me…” The justification here means that in the eyes of men and not in the eyes of God. The focus here is the vain man v.20, or the unprofitable man v.16 and Abraham was justified by works, meaning he validated his faith by his works and so with Rahab the harlot.
1 Thes 1;3 speaks of the believers or the saved. People like them needed to work their faith. Paul says to them that he not only imparted the gospel of God to them to believe but also to work to prove their faith. Paul says exactly what James is saying in v.9 “For they themselves shew of us…ie to validate, justify, give evidence of one's faith.

Umm, I would think Mailmandan and Post(hu)man and others offer very good explanations in harmony with the scriptures.

WOW, even spoken in Your own words> "Besides, Holy Spirit baptism was never given to “save” people. It was always given as a “sign” of God’s approval". YOU HAVE IT BACKWARDS!! Don't panick, i got you my brother..

Below you will see very clearly that water baptism was never required in order to receive Gods Spirit. It is God alone who puts HIS Spirit in you( baptism of the Holy Spirit) first before anything, God never said I will give you a new heart, then you will get water baptized then you will receive my Spirit.. (NOT BIBLICAL)

*Water baptism is only a sign of His work in you (past tense)that declares your love and commitment to Christ*.

Tell me when was the criminal on the cross saved my dear brother and how did that happen??

Luke 23:39-43
New King James Version
Then one of the criminals who were hanged blasphemed Him, saying, “If You are the Christ, save Yourself and us.”
But the other, answering, rebuked him, saying, “Do you not even fear God, seeing you are under the same condemnation? And we indeed justly, for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this Man has done nothing wrong.” Then he said to Jesus, “Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom.”
And Jesus said to him, “Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise.”

If you need anymore help let me know, I know who to ask
God bless.

When Jesus was on earth, He could save people any way, anytime, He chose. He not only saved the thief on the cross, He also saved the man let down through a hole in the roof. That does not mean that people today can be saved that way. You do not understand the difference between the old Jewish law of Judaism and the new law of Jesus Christ for Christian’s. The thief lived under the laws of the Jews; the laws of Judaism. It did not require baptism. He very likely was baptized with John’s baptism but no one knows. You and I can’t be saved like the thief Or the man let down from the roof. Read Hebrews 9;16-17. Jesus had a will, the New Testament is called the last will and testament of Jesus Christ. It contains the GOspel message of salvation. It was never required of the thief or anyone else before Jesus’s death on the cross. Just like any “will” today, it did not come into effect until Jesus’s death. That’s exactly what Hebrews 9:16-17 tells us. Luke 24:47 tells us that “repentance and remission of sins was first preached to all nations beginning at Jerusalem.” That was fulfilled in Acts 2 when Jews from every nation was gathered for Pentecost in Jerusalem. Peter preached a powerful sermon about how Jesus was the Son of God and when those Jews asked “What shall we do” in verse 37, Perter said, “ REPENT…AND BE BAPTISED… FOR THE REMISSION IF SINS.” VERSE 38. That was 50 days after the crucifixion. The thief and Jesus had been dead for over a month before the first gospel sermon was preached! You do err, not knowing the scriptures. How or in what way the thief may have been saved has nothing to do with you or me. Christ is not here to personally save us , and we are not Jews living under a different law (Judaism).

Please give me the Bible scripture that tells me that baptism is only a “sign.” That is a doctrine of man. Do you know what Jesus said about practicing the “doctrines of men?” Matthew 15:9- your worship to Him is vain, useless. You are wasting your time.

This is what the BIBLE says about Baptism:
It SAVES US . 1 Peter 3:21
It removes our sins. Acts 2:38
It is required BEFORE salvation. Mark 16:16
It puts us into Christ. Galations 3:27
It places us in His death where we come into contact with His BLOOD that cleanses us from all sin. Romans 6
It is required in order for you to call yourselves after Him ( Christian) 1 Cor. 1
That doesn’t sound like a “sign” to me. And that isn’t anything like what you are teaching. 2 John 9 gives a warning: If you don’t abide in the doctrine of Christ, you DONT HAVE GOD!

I have told you what the Bible says and given scripture to prove it. Now you give me the scripture that proves baptism is only a “sign.”

My dear brother in Christ, Baptism is just a sign and nothing more. If water baptism was a requirement for salvation then that would mean it falls into the category of works and dismisses Grace. The Holy Spirit is in you way before you decide to get wet my brother..

Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again" John 3:3

God bless,

Just to add and help you, I guess by the way you believe and not by what the Word of God says people all over the world in prisons and jails and institutions that hear the Gospel will never be saved because they have no water to get into

Romans 10:9 "If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved"

You make it sound like there are multiple ways to be saved, yet the thief on the cross and the man let down through a hole in the roof were both saved by faith.

Luke 23:39 - Then one of the criminals who were hanged blasphemed Him, saying, "If You are the Christ, save Yourself and us."
40 But the other, answering, rebuked him, saying, “Do you not even fear God, seeing you are under the same condemnation? 41 And we indeed justly, for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this Man has done nothing wrong.” 42 Then he said to Jesus, “Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom.” 43 And Jesus said to him, “Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise.”

Luke 5:18 - Some men came carrying a paralyzed man on a mat and tried to take him into the house to lay him before Jesus. 19 When they could not find a way to do this because of the crowd, they went up on the roof and lowered him on his mat through the tiles into the middle of the crowd, right in front of Jesus. 20 - When Jesus saw their faith, he said, “Friend, your sins are forgiven.”

Certain people may try to argue that the thief on the cross may have been converted, was water baptized, yet the fruit of that is being crucified as a thief? - (highly unlikely) In Matthew 27:39-44, we see that those who passed by, along with the chief priests' scribes and elders blasphemed, mocked and shook their heads at Jesus and EVEN THE ROBBERS WHO WERE CRUCIFIED WITH HIM REVILED HIM WITH THE SAME THING. More fruit? I certainly don't see being crucified as a thief, blaspheming, mocking and shaking your head at Jesus as being the fruit of repentance/faith. Yet, moments later, we see that one of the thieves had a "change of mind" (repentance) placed his faith in Christ for salvation and was saved (Luke 23:40-43). Of course, he died while still hanging on the cross before having the opportunity to be water baptized.

A common argument used by water-salvationists in an attempt to "get around" the thief on the cross being saved by faith "apart from water baptism" is, "the thief was not subject to baptism because he died under the Old Testament mandate. (Others may argue how do we know he was not already water baptized just to cover all the bases). So let's see, after the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus, in Acts 2:38, we read - "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.." and before the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus, in Mark 1:4 and Luke 3:3, we read - John came baptizing in the wilderness and preaching a "baptism of repentance for the remission of sins."

So, in Mark 1:4 and Luke 3:3, was this baptism of repentance for (eis) "in order to obtain" the remission of sins or was it or for (eis) "in regard to/on the basis of" remission of sins received upon repentance? It would have to be the latter in order to agree with the Old Testament mandate argument from water-salvationists. In Matthew 3:11, we read: I baptize you with water for (eis) repentance.. If interpreted "in order to obtain" the verse does not make sense. I baptize you with water for (eis) "in order to obtain" repentance? or I baptize you with water for (eis) "in regard to/on the basis of" repentance? Obviously, the latter. In Luke 24:47, we read - and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. *No mention of baptism.

Whatever baptism is "for" in Acts 2:38, it's "for" in Mark 1:4 and Luke 3:3. In Acts 2:38, "for the remission of sins" does not refer back to both clauses, "you all repent" and "each one of you be baptized," but refers only to the first. Peter is saying "repent unto the remission of your sins," the same as in Acts 3:19. The clause "each one of you be baptized" is parenthetical. This is exactly what Acts 3:19 teaches except that Peter omits the parenthesis. *No mention of baptism in Acts 3:19.

*Also compare the fact that these Gentiles in Acts 10:45 received the gift of the Holy Spirit (compare with Acts 2:38 - the gift of the Holy Spirit) and this was BEFORE water baptism. (Acts 10:47)

In Acts 5:31, we read - Him God has exalted to His right hand to be Prince and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins. *No mention of baptism.

In Acts 11:17-18, we read - If therefore God gave them the same gift (Holy Spirit) as He gave us when we believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, (compare with Acts 16:31 - believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved with no mention of baptism) who was I that I could withstand God?” When they heard these things, they became silent; and they glorified God, saying, “Then God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to life.”

In Acts 15:7-9, we read - And when there had been much dispute, Peter rose up and said to them: “Men and brethren, you know that a good while ago God chose among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. 8 So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us, 9 and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. *What happened to baptism?

In Acts 26:18, we read - to open their eyes, in order to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who are sanctified by faith in Me. *What happened to baptism?

In Acts 10:43 we read ..whoever believes in Him receives remission of sins. Again, these Gentiles received the gift of the Holy Spirit - Acts 10:45 - when they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ - Acts 11:17 - (compare with Acts 16:31 - Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved) BEFORE water baptism - Acts 10:47. This is referred to as repentance unto life - Acts 11:18.

*So, the only logical conclusion when properly harmonizing Scripture with Scripture is that faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:7-9; 16:31; 26:18). *Perfect Harmony*

So, the water baptism is not necessary for salvation under the Old Testament mandate but is necessary for salvation under the New Testament mandate argument is bogus and does not hold water. Before AND after Pentecost, salvation is through belief/faith "apart from water baptism" (Luke 7:50; 8:12; John 1:12; 3:15,16,18,36; 6:40,47; 11:25,26; Acts 10:43-47; 11:17-18; 13:39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:24-28; 4:2-6; 5:1; 1 Corinthians 1:21; Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 2:8,9; Philippians 3:9; 2 Timothy 3:15; 1 John 5:13 etc..).

Before mentioning baptism in chapter 6, Paul had repeatedly emphasized that faith (not baptism) is the instrumental cause of salvation/justification. (Romans 1:16, 3:22-30; 4:4-6, 13; 5:1) That is when the old man was put to death and united in the likeness of His death, which water baptism symbolizes and pictures. Righteousness is "imputed to us who believe in Him who raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead, who was delivered up because of our offenses, and was raised up because of our justification." (Romans 4:24,25)

Baptism is a symbol of salvation in that it pictures Christ's death, burial and resurrection and our identification with Him in these experiences. In reality, believers are literally saved by what baptism symbolizes--Christ's death, burial and resurrection. A symbol is not the reality but is a picture of the reality. Baptism would have no meaning without Christ’s death, burial and resurrection, but Christ’s death, burial and resurrection would still have meaning, even if there were no baptism. In other words, Christ’s death, burial and resurrection is the substance and baptism is the sign/symbol/picture. Without the substance there would be no sign/symbol/picture.

Since believers receive the benefits of Christ’s death and resurrection (justification) and that through faith, believers must be spiritually united to Him (delivered and raised up with Him). If baptism is taken as the instrumental cause, then Paul contradicts what he had established before, namely that justification is by faith, not baptism. *Hermeneutics. Paul clearly teaches that what is signified in baptism (buried and raised with Christ) actually occurs "through faith." Christians are "buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead" (Colossians 2:12). Justification on account of union in Christ's death, burial and resurrection is brought about "through faith" - and is properly symbolized by dipping the new believer in and out of the water.

A man and a woman become united through their wedding vows and the ring symbolizes this. Just as we become united with Christ through faith and water baptism symbolizes this. Strictly speaking, the husband is united to his wife because of the marriage vows rather than the ring. Yet since the latter is the sign of their union, it is natural to speak of the ring to mean the reality it represents. "With this ring, I thee wed," although the ring is not the actual cause of the change in the marital status, just like water baptism is not the actual cause of our salvation status. Get the picture?

Your teachings are the doctrines of men. Your theology has originated with men, namely THOMAS CAMPBELL, ALEXANDER CAMPBELL, WALTER SCOTT, and BARTON W. STONE. Did these men actually "restore" the gospel, the church, and true New Testament worship, as they claim, or did they simply create another sect bent on a more dogmatic sectarianism than others they renounced? Your false teachings are according to the gospel of Campbellism.

In 1 Peter 3:21, Peter tells us that baptism now saves you, yet when Peter uses this phrase, he continues in the same sentence to explain exactly what he means by it. He said that baptism now saves you-not the removal of dirt from the flesh (that is, not as an outward, physical act which washes dirt from the body--that is not what saves you), "but an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (that is, as an inward, spiritual transaction between God and the individual, a transaction that is symbolized by the outward ceremony of water baptism). By saying, "not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience -through the resurrection of Jesus Christ," Peter guards against saving power to the physical ceremony itself.

Just as the eight people in the ark were "saved THROUGH water" as they were IN THE ARK. They were not literally saved "by" the water. Hebrews 11:7 is clear on this point (..built an ARK for the SAVING of his household). The context reveals that ONLY the righteous (Noah and his family) were DRY and therefore SAFE. In contrast, ONLY the wicked in Noah's day came in contact with the water and they all perished.

As I previously explained, faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:7-9; 16:31; 26:18).

Mark 16:16 - He who believes and is baptized will be saved (general cases without making a qualification for the unusual case of someone who believes but is not baptized) but he who does not believe will be condemned. The omission of baptized with "does not believe" shows that Jesus does not make baptism absolutely necessary for salvation. Condemnation rests on unbelief and not on a lack of baptism. *NOWHERE does the Bible say, "baptized or condemned."

If water baptism is absolutely required for salvation, then we would expect Jesus to mention it in the following verses. (3:15,16,18; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26) Yet what is the 1 requirement that Jesus mentions 9 different times in each of these complete statements *BELIEVES. *What happened to baptism? *Hermeneutics.

John 3:18 - He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who (is not water baptized? - NO) does not believe is condemned already, because he has not (been water baptized? - NO) because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

"Baptized into Christ" does not mean water baptized into the body of Christ, as water-salvationists teach. That is only accomplished through Spirit baptism. (1 Corinthians 12:13) Now in what "sense" would a believer be "water baptized into Christ?" In the same "sense" that the Israelites were "baptized into Moses.." (1 Corinthians 10:2) The Israelites were not literally water baptized into the body of Moses and there is little dispute that being "baptized into Moses" signified the open allegiance and public identification of the Israelites with Moses as their leader. Moses was formally recognized as the leader of the covenant people. Water baptism signifies our allegiance and public identification with Christ as our Savior, so it would only be in that sense.

Now I understand you needing to accommodate your Campbellism theories, but this is ridiculous. "Through His blood" (as in Colossians 1:14) is a reference not limited to the fluid as if the blood has saving properties in it's chemistry and we literally contact it in the waters of baptism but is an expression pointing to the totality of Christ's atoning work as a sacrifice for sin. The word "cross" is used similarly to refer to the whole atoning work of Christ on the cross. (1 Corinthians 1:18; Galatians 6:12,14; Ephesians 2:16) So, we do not literally contact the blood of Christ in the water and Roman Catholics do not literally contact the blood of Christ in the wine either.

If one is trusting in water baptism for salvation instead of trusting in Jesus Christ alone for salvation, then one has become an imposter, and is declaring, in baptism, to be what they are not. 1 Corinthians 1:18 - For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. 20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

I can see that your CoC indoctrination runs deep and that you are one tough nut to crack. Until we get to the end of the creature we will not get to the beginning of the Creator.

Abiding in the doctrine of Campbellism is not abiding in the doctrine of Christ.

You have given us your eisegesis but you have not properly interpreted Scripture. You need to learn how to properly harmonize Scripture with Scripture before reaching your conclusion on doctrine. It will take the Holy Spirit to show you the truth. (1 Corinthians 2:11-14)

You guys need to explore GL 5 along with EPH 2, because GL 5:6&22-23 teach that we are saved by grace through faith first that is manifestly genuine when it is followed by loving fruit of the HS.

Greek word for justified "dikaioo" Strongs #1344 is:

1. to render righteous or such he ought to be
2. to show, exhibit, evince, one to be righteous, such as he is and wishes himself to be considered
3. to declare, pronounce, one to be just, righteous, or such as he ought to be

You error by giving the word "justified" a broad brushed meaning of "made righteous."

Beckworth said - Abraham was JUSTIFIED, declared or made righteous shown to be righteous in the sight of God, by works verse 21.
(I fixed it for you)

Beckworth said - A man is JUSTIFIED, declared or made righteous shown to be righteous in the sight of God, by works and not by faith only. Verse 24. (I fixed it for you)

Greek word for justified "dikaioo" Strongs #1344 is:

1. to render righteous or such he ought to be
2. to show, exhibit, evince, one to be righteous, such as he is and wishes himself to be considered
3. to declare, pronounce, one to be just, righteous, or such as he ought to be

You see that a man is justified (shown to be righteous) by works and not by an empty profession of faith/dead faith that remains alone "barren of works." (James 2:14)

*Fits the context.

Beckworth said - Rahab was JUSTIFIED, declared or made righteous shown to be righteous in the sight of God, by works… verse 25.
(I fixed it for you)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Romans 4:2 - For if Abraham was justified (accounted as righteous) by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it (faith, not works) was accounted to him for righteousness.

Greek word for justified "dikaioo" Strongs #1344 is:

1. to render righteous or such he ought to be
2. to show, exhibit, evince, one to be righteous, such as he is and wishes himself to be considered
3. to declare, pronounce, one to be just, righteous, or such as he ought to be

*Fits the context.

You fail to understand that James is not using the word "justified" to mean "accounted as righteous" but is shown to be righteous. James is discussing the evidence of faith (says-claims to have faith but has no works/I will show you my faith by my works - James 2:14-18) and not the initial act of being accounted as righteous with God. (Romans 4:2-3)

The harmony of Romans 4:2-3 and James 2:24 is seen in the differing ways that Paul and James use the term "justified." Paul, when he uses the term, refers to the legal (judicial) act of God by which He accounts the believer as righteous. James, however, is using the term to describe those who would show the genuineness of their faith by the works that they do. *Perfect Harmony*

Instead of audience recognition and application, let’s switch meanings of words to make it fit.

In James, Abraham was justified by works in the sight of God not man. He was declared righteous when he believed Genesis 15, but that righteousness was not justified until he offered his son (Genesis 22). James is using Abraham as an example after circumcision (Genesis 17), as faith and works to the Jew in the last days. Paul uses Abraham before circumcision as an example of faith alone to the Gentile. Abraham being used as a dual type, uncircumcision and circumcision.