“In fine, Saint John’s Gospel and his first epistle, Saint Paul’s epistles, especially those to the Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, and Saint Peter’s first epistle,—these are the books which show thee Christ, and teach thee everything that is needful and blessed for thee to know even though thou never see or hear any other book or doctrine. Therefore is Saint James’s epistle a right strawy epistle in comparison with them, for it has no gospel character to it.”
—Martin Luther
Contrary to how some have misconstrued this, Luther did not deny the inspiration and value of James, but he did disparage it as secondary in relation to other books. So zealous was Luther for the truth of the gospel and justification by faith, that he had little use for a book of the Bible that he could not utilize for the great cause of the Reformation. Herein was his strength and herein was his weakness.
But when the good Shepherd puts straw in the manger without the Babe, you can trust him that you need the fiber. And you can trust He who sent the Spirit to give us this book, knowing that the straw is surely not far from the bread and the wine.
In the same way that Proverbs assumes redemption, so too does James. And when you realize this, you can perceive that in a way, Jesus is more present in this letter than he is in any other. Douglas Moo states, “James depends more than any other NT author on the teaching Jesus.” And again, “while Jesus’ person and work might be generally absent, his teaching is not. No NT document is more influenced by the teaching of Jesus than James.” James draws heavily on what would become the synoptic tradition, especially as we see it presented in Matthew.
More narrowly, referring to the Sermon on the Mount, John MacArthur writes, James “may be viewed as a practical commentary on our Lord’s sermon.” If you doubt that Jesus pervades the book of James, read it alongside the Sermon on the Mount a few times and see if the doubt persists.
When you understand this, I believe it radically impacts how you understand James when He refers to the “royal law” (2:8). Yes, James is full of law, but it is as considered the royal law, the law of the Lord Jesus Christ. The royal law then is on par with what Paul speaks of in Galatians 6:2 as “the law of Christ.” The significance of this expression can be seen in that though James can be said to make much of the law, he makes nothing of the ceremonial or civil aspects of the law. James considers the law in light of the one who declared, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them” (Matthew 5:17).
So whenever the commands of James pierce with conviction and lie heavy on your conscience, do not forget the gospel that he assumes of his reader. Paul makes plain what James assumes in Romans 8:1–4.
“There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.”
Luther is reputed to have said, “Oh, how sweet are the commandments of God to us when we receive them not as they are in the book, but as they are in the wounds of Christ.” Oh that Luther had eyes to clearly see all the commands of James as coming to us in the wounds of Christ! This is not an epistle of straw. It is a sweet epistle.
“Our pleasure and our duty, Though opposite before,
Since we have seen his beauty, Are join’d to part no more :
It is our highest pleasure, No less than duty’s call,
To love him beyond measure, And serve him with our all.”
—John Newton
No Other Boast 