The Bible as the infallible word of God does not change, however; our understanding of it will transform us over time no matter how much we already grasp. Also, our preunderstandings evolve over time and, as a result may allow us to see the text with new eyes. We should note that Luther’s comment that “St. James’s epistle is a right strawy epistle,”  was made in 1522, which was, in fact, early in his career. We must also consider that it appeared in the preface of his German translation of the New Testament which did not exclude the book of James. We must also take note that he did remove this statement from all subsequent editions.  
The Church and theologians alike do not have amnesia concerning what Luther said about James. In fact, almost every commentary or exegete who studies the subject of James's justification reverberates those similar, nearly 500-year old words: "St. James' epistle is an epistle of straw."  It is possible to explore the questions that Luther had without doubting the infallibility of the Bible. Surely the Bible has stood over millennia of analytical testing, and certainly, this paper will not be the first attempting this. This question speaks to the heart of the issue: does James agree with Paul on justification?  
		When two verses are pulled from their context and compared the result is a perception of disharmony where there is none. This is the error of proof-texting, and it is not localized to just the Scriptures. We can easily misrepresent anyone’s intentions, whether verbally, or in print this way. Please consider and compare the following two verses:

One can see that, on the surface, these two verses seem to contradict as "faith apart from works" cannot be reconciled in any way with "by works and not by faith alone." Both verses contain the word justified so we might be tempted to contrast them both only in a word study. A survey of both Romans and James reveals Paul and James using the word δικαιόω, which is defined as “to justify, vindicate, declare righteous, to put someone in a proper relationship with another...implying a proper legal or moral relationship.”  And so by definition the two uses of δικαιόω taken out of context take on the same meaning which leads them into conflict with each other within the comparable texts in James and Romans.  However, interpreting the word δικαιόω within their own contexts permits for both James and Paul to be in agreement. To see how we must return the verses back to their respective contexts and then compare the contexts. 
William Vine states that “the two writers use the words ‘faith’ and ‘works’ in somewhat different senses.”  Paul in Romans 3:28 is different faith against works to communicate the salvific doctrine of justification by faith. However, James is revealing an entirely different view by “not pitting works and faith against each other, but rather discussing the merits of faith with and without works, as he supposes faith is present already in his audience. Popke puts it this way, “James’ concern is not ‘how to get in’ but ‘how to stay in.’ Saving faith is for him something lasting, not just initial. He addresses people who are already Christians, not potential converts. The aspect of the justification simply is not his scope here.”   Popke then encapsulates the soteriology of James as “not proceed[ing] from the human’s liberation out of misery by divine grace (in contrast to Paul); rather, it is a teleological soteriology along the way, looking towards the goal of the journey, arriving at Immaculate completion,”  Consequently Paul in Romans is arguing the necessity of faith, as opposed to works, for salvation, this was not James’ concern in his Epistle. Dr. Marilyn Adams writes “when James declares, 'faith without works is dead!' he is only emphasizing the obvious. Lip-service, head-assent are superficial. To become Kingdom-people, we have to start exercising so that Kingdom-convictions can reshape our core.”  
