The first character taken as an example from the Old Testament is Abraham our father. Abraham, one of the most respected personalities in Jewish history, is considered the standard example of faith by the New Testament writers (Acts 7.2-8; Rom 4.11, 12, 16; Gal 3.7-14; Heb 11.8). Here our father is to be understood as “our ancestor” (Good News Translation; so also Contemporary English Version, New International Version, and New Revised Standard Version) or “our forefather” (Goodspeed). Father or “ancestor” may be variously translated as “our [inclusive] great father,” “our great father of long ago,” “our grandfather in ancient times,” “our big grandfather,” and so on. The pronoun our includes all believers.
Was not Abraham our father justified by works…?: the whole verse is interrogative, expecting an affirmative answer “Yes.” It is possible, in fact preferable in many languages, to conclude the question at the end of the first clause, making the rest of the sentence an affirmative answer, as Good News Translation has done: “How was our ancestor Abraham put right with God? It was through his actions….”
In Greek the verb justified may be used in the law-court sense of “be forgiven” or “be declared innocent.” In this context, however, it should be observed that Abraham is not considered as a “justified sinner” in the Pauline sense, but as a righteous person approved and rewarded by God. Since Abraham offered his son Isaac upon the altar, God found him to be faithful and approved him as a righteous person in the light of his deeds. The focus is not on its legal sense but its moral sense. The word justified may have a different meaning in modern English usage and is therefore not the best rendering. The verb is best translated in the passive as “was considered righteous” (New International Version), “was declared acceptable,” or “was approved”; or, making God the agent of the action, “was accepted by God” (Barclay), “was recognized as being righteous by God” (Bible en français courant); or, in the active, it can be translated “God has accepted him as just” (so Biblia Dios Habla Hoy).
It seems awkward to use the plural by works when only one work of offering Isaac is mentioned. Two explanations have been suggested. First, it may have been used simply as a formula meaning “by his conduct.” If this explanation is adopted we may render the expression as “by his action” (New English Bible, Revised English Bible; similarly Barclay), “by what he did” (Moffatt), or “for what he did” (New International Version). Secondly, it has been suggested that by using the plural by works James is recollecting the customary Jewish list of ten tests of Abraham, with the offering of Isaac as the final one. If this interpretation is adopted we will need to keep the plural, such as by works, “through his actions” (Good News Translation), or “for his good deeds” (Goodspeed). However, the idea of “conduct” still applies, and we may express justified by works as “God approved of [or, was pleased with] his conduct.”
When he offered his son Isaac upon the altar: there are two problems in this clause; both relate to the aorist participle rendered when he offered. First, the participle can be understood in two ways. It can mean “having offered,” indicating that the act of offering Isaac on the part of Abraham took place before God’s declaration of his approval. In other words, the two are successive events: the offering first, and then the approval. This apparently is the meaning intended by King James Version when it renders the clause as “when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar.” The majority of translators, however, understand the participle to mean a simultaneous act, thus when he offered …, or as the extension of the same act, thus “in that he offered up…” (American Standard Version), “for offering his son…” (Goodspeed), or “in offering his son…” (New English Bible, Revised English Bible).
The second problem is minor, as it does not affect the translation. The verb offered is a technical term for offering sacrifices. Here the “offering” ends only in “binding.” According to the Genesis account (22.1-14), Isaac was not killed as a sacrifice on the altar; but Abraham showed that he was ready to do so by binding him. What is meant here without being stated is the faith of Abraham; he believed in the promises and faithfulness of God. This is made clear in the next verse. In order to bring this point out, as well as to smooth out the fact that Isaac was not actually killed, some translators have resorted to expanded renderings; for example, “when his faith led him to offer…” (Phillips), “when he was willing to obey God, even if it meant offering his son Isaac to die on the altar” (Living Bible), or “by putting his son Isaac on the altar to sacrifice him” (Contemporary English Version).
The Hebrew altar was a stone structure on which animals were sacrificed or food was offered to God. Many modern cultures have similar elevated structures for sacrificing animals or for offering gifts to a deity. Sometimes this is a stone or wood platform or table. Such terms may be used here if it is clear that this altar is dedicated to God.
An alternative translation model for this verse may be:
• God accepted Abraham our [inclusive] ancestor as a good person, didn’t he? He accepted his conduct when he put his son Isaac on the altar to sacrifice him.
Quoted with permission from Loh, I-Jin and Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on The Letter from James. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .