Gospel Guidebook: Getting and Keeping It Right 
New Perspective on James
I wrote this commentary on James 2:14-26 to give a new perspective on James. For too long, both Catholics and Protestants have been using James 2:14-26 to deny salvation by faith alone, either by saying that works must accompany faith like the Catholics, or by saying that works must serve as evidence of faith like the Protestants. James' main intention was to exhort believers to add works to their faith, and he did this well, but thankfully, this is not all he did, for he also told us something important about the nature of faith.
Context
When we consider James 1:1-2:13, we can see that James is concerned about how of the recipients of his letter are living. It is beyond question that he regards them as genuinely saved people and is writing to them with such an assumption. For example, he calls them "beloved brothers" three times (1:16, 1:19, 2:5), "brothers" an additional two times (1:2, 2:1), believers in Jesus Christ (2:1), and refers to himself and them collectively as being born again (1:18) and having the same glorious Lord Jesus Christ (2:1). Verse 1:18 is instructive because it really sets the theme of the letter. He writes, "Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures." This verse explains one of the purposes of God saving them. God wants them to be the firstfruits of His creatures, meaning that He wants them to be the "light of the world" (Matthew 5:14-16) and "the cream of the crop" of all people. This reminds us of Ephesians 2:8-10 where Paul similarly says that one of the reasons why God saved the Ephesians was that they might live a life of good works (see my article here for a discussion on Ephesians 2:10). Likewise, this reminds us of Titus 2:14 where Paul explains that God saved His people so that they might be zealous for good works. In light of this, good works definitely have an important role in the life of a believer. James' intention is to remind, exhort, and rebuke them, as born-again people, so that they might fulfill God's intention for them in being the firstfruits of His creatures. We must always keep this in mind as we read James 2:14-26.
Another part of the context that is vital to understanding James 2:14-26 is James' consistent emphasis on helping the poor. He calls the poor blessed (1:9), says that pure and undefiled religion is to help the fatherless and widows in their affliction (1:27), says that the recipients of his letter should not neglect the poor in showing partiality to the rich (2:1-4), again calls the poor blessed (2:5), rebukes them for despising the poor (2:6), exhorts them to fulfill the royal law to love one's neighbor (2:7), continues to rebuke them for showing partiality (2:9), and finally says that they will be judged by the law of liberty according to how they had mercy presumably on the poor (2:12-13). In these verses, James' is telling the recipients of his letter how they can fulfill their role as the firstfruits of God's creatures by caring for the poor.
James 2:14
14 What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, 16 And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?
The first thing we need to notice is that the words "What doth it profit?" form an inclusio (i.e., brackets or bookends) for verses 14-16. Whatever "What doth it profit?" means at the beginning of verse 14 is what it means at the end of verse 16. So, the first thing we need to ask is "Who is supposed to be the recipient of this profit?" Is James referring to personal profit or the profit of others? Based on everything James has written so far in verses 1:1-2:13, the most natural answer is that he has the profit of others in mind. This assumption is really solidified in verses 15-16 where we see that James is still thinking of the poor. James seems to have had a special place in his heart for needy people, for in Galatians 2:10, he also encouraged the Apostle Paul to remember the poor. It is interesting that Paul, writing in the same spirit as James, said, "This is a faithful saying, and these things I will that thou affirm constantly, that they which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable unto men." So, here again, we see that believers should do good works, not for themselves, but for the profit of others. With this context and background, when James says, "What doth it profit?" in verse 14, it is apparent that he means "What doth it profit the poor?" and then in verse 16, "What doth it profit them?" In fact, there is nothing in James 2:1-13 at all that even suggests that James had personal profit in mind.
Having established that James is concerned with the profit of other people, we can re-read James 2:14-16 as follows: What doth it profit [the poor man], my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, 16 And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit [them]? This immediately reminds me of 1 John 3:17-18. "17 But whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him? 18 My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth." John is dealing with a similar issue where where believers are loving in word only, but not in deed. It is important to notice that both James and John refer to loving other brothers and sisters. If James and John were writing to people they suspected were unsaved, it would be inappropriate to tell them to love their brothers and sisters. Unsaved people don't have brothers and sisters to love. Getting back to James 2:14, he says, "though a man say he hath faith," while John similarly says, "let us not love in word, neither in tongue." Notice how John goes so far as to use the collective "us," including himself. John had just told them to imitate God in laying down their lives for the brothers. So, it is really useless for people to speak about their faith or love, yet not follow in the footsteps of God and sacrifice one's own wealth for the needy. With this background, we can continue to understand James 2:14 as follows: "What doth it profit [the poor man], my brethren, though a man say [to the poor man] he hath faith, and have not works [to help the poor man]? can faith save him?
At this point, I think it is important to say something about the word "faith." According to the traditional interpretation, commentators assume that James is equivocating as to the meaning of the word "faith," sometimes meaning inauthentic faith (when speaking hypothetically about the person who has faith without works in verses 14-20 and 26) and sometimes meaning authentic faith (when speaking of Abraham in verses 21-24). As a result, commentators conclude that James taught that "works are inherent in authentic faith" or that "authentic faith produces works" (which are really just two ways of saying the same thing). However, James gives no hint that he is equivocating. James knows of only one type of faith, which he said that the recipients of his letter had in 2:1. If James meant to distinguish between two types of faith, an inauthentic type and an authentic type, it seems reasonable that he would have said something similar to what he said in 1:26-27 where he explicitly distinguishes between "religion that is vain" and "pure and undefiled religion." As we will see, James make no such distinction when it comes to faith. James only knows of one type of faith and this faith is dead when not empowered by works, regardless of whether it is the hypothetical person in 2:14 or Abraham in 2:22.
Let's move on to the last part of 2:14 where it says, "Can faith save him?" Some translations such as the NASB and ESV render it as "Can that faith save him?" However, the word "that" is not explicitly in the Greek, and the decision to render the verse this way was probably based on the translators' assumption that James is referring to inauthentic faith. "That faith" is supposed to be a spurious faith that doesn't produce works. Greek has a word for "that" and if James wanted to be explicit, he could have been. In the Greek, instead of the explicit word "that," the word "faith" is preceded by the definite article. It is true that the definite article can sometimes function in place of a demonstrative, such as "this" or "that," and it can also function in place of a possessive pronoun, such as "his" or "her," but in most cases, it is simply best to translate it as the English definite article "the" or just ignore it all together, depending on the context. In the case of 2:14, I think the KJV made the correct decision not to translate the definite article. The reason is because in Greek abstract nouns used in the nominative case are often used with the definite article without any special meaning attached to them. For example, in James 2:14-26, the same Greek definite article and abstract noun "faith" also occur in 2:17, 2:20, 2:22 (x2), and 2:26, but neither the NASB nor ESV rendered any of these instances by anything other than the plain word "faith." So, to make an exception in 2:14 seems more contrived to fit the theology of the translators, rather than accurately reflect the Greek.
Before moving on to the word "save" in the question "Can faith save him?", it is important to point out that the letter of James is often classified as Jewish wisdom literature, similar to the book of Proverbs. Also, there are many instances in James that seem to allude to the Jewish wisdom book of Sirach found in the Old Testament Apocrypha. For example, see the articles here and here for some of the striking similarities between James and Sirach. In the book of Sirach, the theme of helping the poor is an important topic that is covered in Sirach 3:30-31, 4:1-10, 7:32, and 29:9. What is especially interesting is that Sirach 4:1-10 speaks of helping the poor, the fatherless, and widows in a way that closely resembles James. Against this backdrop, we need to understand that in the Bible, the word "save" often means being delivered from some adverse temporal circumstance, such as the sick person being healed in James 5:15 or Paul being saved from the shipwreck in Acts 27:44. This is especially true in wisdom literature like Proverbs, Sirach, and James where the word "save" rarely refers to eschatological salvation from hell. As just mentioned, in 5:15, the word clearly refers to being healed from illness. The other four instances of the word in James are at 1:21, 2:14 (the verse in question), 4:12, and 5:20. None of these instances seems (at least clearly) to refer to eschatological salvation, especially when read as wisdom literature. For example, 1:21 and 5:20 both speak of "saving a soul," but 1:21 is in the context of people who are already eschatologically saved (according to 1:18) and 5:20 seems to be referring to saving a life from death. In fact, the expression "save a soul" often just means "to save a life" from temporal calamity or physical death, such as when Jesus spoke of "saving a soul" on a sabbath in Luke 6:9. In the Psalms, Proverbs, and Sirach, the word "soul" is often just translated as "life." With this understanding, the word "save" in the question "Can faith save him?" does not need to be referring to eschatological salvation from hell. Based on James' other usages of the word, it most likely refers to being saved from adverse temporal circumstances or physical death. It is also important to realize that James does not use the word "save" reflexively in 1:21, 4:12, 5:15, and 5:20. In other words, "save" is used as a transitive verb with a direct object that is someone other than oneself. If 2:14 means to "save oneself," this would be the exception in James because he usually uses the word in the context of "saving others."
Finally, we get to the word "him" in the question "Can faith save him?" Who is the "him" in this question? We might be tempted to say that it refers to its closest antecedent, being the person who possesses the faith. If this is the case, then the question would mean "Can the faith of such a person save himself?" However, Greek is much more flexible than English and pronouns sometimes refer to far-removed antecedents. This is especially true with the pronoun being used for "him" in 2:14. For example, the Greek scholar Joseph Henry Thayer said, "Very often αὐτός [translated "him" in 2:14] is used rather laxly, where the subject or the object to which it must be referred is not expressly indicated, but must be gathered especially from some preceding name of a province or city [commenting on its usage in Matthew 4:23], or from the context." As some examples where the pronoun "him" is used to indicate a person other than its closest antecedent, please refer to Matthew 12:10-14 where the last "him" refers to Jesus, not the man who was healed; Matthew 22:15 where the "him" refers to Jesus all the way back in Matthew 22:1; 2 Thessalonians 2:9 where the pronoun "who" refers not to the Lord, but the man of perdition; and 1 John 3:5 where the demonstrative pronoun "that one" refers not to God the Father, but to the Son of God. In the case of James 2:14, while the closest antecedent is the person who possesses the faith, the poor man has been at the center of James' thought the whole time. As mentioned above, the poor man was introduced in 2:2, but was alluded to either directly or indirectly all the way up to 2:13 and then immediately again in 2:15-16. Also, grammatically speaking, the pronoun "him" can also refer to the "poor man" since both of them singular masculine nouns. So, based on the surrounding context, the inclusio "what does it profit?", the genre of James, James' use of the verb "save," and the grammar, there is strong evidence that the word "him" in the question "Can faith save him?" refers to the poor man. Therefore, I suggest that the correct interpretation of 2:14 is "What doth it profit [the poor man], my brethren, though a man say [to the poor man] he hath faith, and have not works [to help the poor]? can faith save him [i.e., the poor man]?
Before moving on, we'll need to make a few more observation. (1) In James 2:14, we again see that James regards the recipients of his letter as brothers in the sense of fellow believers and children of God. If by "my brethren," he simply meant to address people of the same ethnicity as himself, he has surely been belaboring the point beyond usefulness. As mentioned above, he had already previously called them "beloved brethren" three times and "brethren" another two times, and 2:14 gives us the sixth instance of this address. This is important because if he regarded them with suspicion, thinking that they had inauthentic faith, not only would he be tediously belaboring the use of the word "brethren," but he'd also be misleading them into thinking the very thing that he himself doubted. (2) James speaks of faith and works as two separate things. Never once does James speak of works as if they were inherent in faith or as if faith produced them. (3) The expected answer to the question "Can faith save him?" is No. This is instructive because it tells us that faith, by its very nature, is incapable of performing works. This is a point that James will make more explicit in the following verses.
James 2:15-16
15 If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, 16 And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?
These verses are pretty self explanatory, but I'll make a few observations. (1) Unsaved people (i.e., people with supposedly inauthentic faith) do not have brothers or sisters. This same observation applies to 1 John where John often speaks of loving one's brother or hating one's brother. If James or John thought these people had inauthentic faith, it would be pointless to speak of them having a brother. (2) There is a similarity between 2:16 and 2:14, which gives us a further hint that James was thinking of poor and needy people the whole time. In 2:16, James' hypothetical person "says unto them, Depart in peace...", whereas similarly in 2:14, he "says [unto the poor man,] I have faith [like you]..." In both verses, we have the hypothetical person speaking. (3) As mentioned above, the question "What doth it profit?" clearly refers to the needy people in 2:15. It is highly unlikely that James was using the same question to refer to two different people. This question is used as a bookend to emphasize James' concern for helping the poor (again see Galatians 2:10), not as a way of doubting the faith of his letter's recipients.
James 2:17
Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
This verse requires a careful analysis starting from the beginning. However, first and foremost, it is necessary to dispel the idea that "dead" means inauthentic. The word "dead" is simply being used figuratively here to mean "useless" or "idle," which is clear from the context. Faith apart from works is useless in helping the poor. That has been James' main point so far. In fact, there are some Greek manuscripts that actually use the word "idle" instead of word "dead" in 2:20, proving that there were some scribes who interpreted the word "dead" to mean "idle." There are plenty of examples in the New Testament where the word "dead" is used figuratively of things that are clearly not inauthentic. A notable example of this is in Hebrews 6:1 and 9:14 where the author speaks of "dead works." In this verse, the works were not inauthentic. Rather, they were useless. When "dead" is used figuratively to mean "useless," the uselessness needs to be ascertained from the context. In Hebrews 6:1 and 9:14, the author is pointing out that the cultic works of the Old Covenant were useless in that they were only types and shadows of the fulfillment in Christ. Another important example is in Romans 7:8 where Paul says, "For without the law sin was dead." A.T. Robertson in his Word Pictures in the New Testament insightfully says, "Dead (νεκρα [nekra]). Inactive, not non-existent. Sin in reality was there in a dormant state." Sin was real and existent, but without the law it was dormant (like a body without a spirit in James 2:26). When James says, "faith without works is dead" in 2:20, he doesn't mean that faith without works is inauthentic, but inactive, idle, and useless in helping people.
Having dispelled the idea that "dead" means inauthentic, let's look at the actual content of the verse. The Greek word translated "even so" can also be translated as "in this way" or "thus." James is saying that faith, in the manner just described in the preceding verses about the poor and needy, is idle or useless. This is instructive. James is not saying that faith without works is useless in every context. Faith without works is definitely useful in the context of justification by faith. But in 2:17, he is merely saying that faith without works is useless in the context of helping the poor.
Moving on, James says, "if it has not works, is dead, being alone." As pointed out in 2:14, for James faith and works are always separate things. James knows of no type of faith that includes works. He proves this beyond a shadow of doubt in verse 2:17. In this verse, he clearly says that faith can exist alone. This means that works are not inherent in faith. There is not the slightest thought here that faith is capable of producing works. Rather, faith by itself is dead (i.e., idle or useless), meaning that it is incapable of doing anything. It is only when works come along to accompany faith that faith can be empowered and enlivened to do anything useful. Without the enlivening power of works, faith, by definition, exists apart from works and can do nothing, which is an implication of its inability to help the poor, and which is proven decisively later in 2:26. At this point, however, we might be wondering what this works-empowered faith looks like. James will give an example of this in 2:21-23. For now, however, it is vitally important to understand that James is telling us that faith is absent of works. This means that faith does not contain a works element or works principle. This means that works are not inherent in faith and that faith is incapable of producing works. This is highly instructive because later when James quotes Genesis 15:6 and says that Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness, which is a favorite passage of the Apostle Paul's in proving that a person is justified by faith apart from works, he means that it was this "dead faith" (i.e., faith not empowered by works and containing no works principle, namely the bare persuasion of the mind when impressed with external evidence apart from any qualifying or accompanying deed or thought) that justified Abraham. In other words, the faith that justifies does not work (see also Romans 4:5). It exists totally absent of works and is not (and cannot be) evidenced by works. Although James' main purpose so far is to exhort believers to perform good works, which is one of the purposes of God in saving them, he has in the process completely vindicated Paul's teaching that faith exists apart from works.
James 2:18-19
18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. 19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
In these verses, James introduces an interlocutor who presents what James supposes to be an objection to his foregoing conclusion that faith apart from works is dead. The interlocutor's objection basically boils down to this: "Faith is faith and works are works. It is impossible to show one's faith apart from works, but it is also impossible to show one's faith by one's works because a man and a demon can believe the exact same thing but behave in very different ways. Therefore, you, James, should not be trying to create a connection between faith and works where none exists, nor is it even logical to speak of faith being useless without works because you know very well that faith by its very essence is incapable of doing anything."
James 2:20
But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
James never rebuts his interlocutor's argument. The interlocutor's words are true and reflect reality, but for James, they are really a moot point because James never intended to convey an inherent connection between faith and works in 2:14-17, which if read carefully, leaves no room for deducing any inherent relationship between faith and works. James responds to his interlocutor by calling him a "vain man" because even though there is no inherent relationship between faith and works, the interlocutor has failed to understand James' contention, namely that there are benefits of adding works to faith (see also 2 Peter 1:5ff.) When James says, "faith without works is dead," he is by implication (although not a strictly logical one) saying that faith with works is beneficial. Remember that the word "dead" here doesn't mean non-existent or inauthentic. It merely means idle or useless. In fact, as mentioned above, there are some Greek manuscripts of 2:20 that replace the word "dead" with "idle," indicating that some ancient scribes interpreted his words this way. According to James "faith with works is useful." And by saying "wilt thou know?", he intends to now give a couple examples of the benefits of adding works to faith.
James 2:21-22
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? 22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
The first thing that we need to recognize is that James never says that Abraham was justified by faith and works. He says that Abraham was justified by works. The Apostle Paul also hints at this in Romans 4:2 when he says, "For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God." Paul seems to be implying that Abraham was justified by works, and while these works might have given him reason to boast before men, they ultimately had no sway with God. This is why Paul goes on to say that Abraham's was justified by faith before God. So, what we see are two types of justification, one by works and one by faith, which James also describes in 2:24 below. Justification by faith is what gives a person right standing with God, but justification by works also has several benefits.
Moving on to 2:22, James says that "faith wrought with his works." The Greek word translated "wrought with" means "work together." In fact, it is the Greek word from which we get our English word "synergy." It refers to a combined effect of two more more things that is greater than the sum of effects of the things themselves. We might think of it as "added value." In other words, faith is good and works are good, but when these two things are combined, we get something that is not only good, but also has added value. It might seem anachronistic to read our English word "synergy" into 2:22a, but James describes this combined benefit in 2:22b-23. So, regardless of whether we want to call it "synergy" or not, James does describe a synergistic like benefit from combining faith and works. Before moving on, it is interesting to ponder why James says, "faith worked together with his works" instead of "works worked together with his faith." After all, if works need to be added to faith according to the Apostle Peter (or as James says in 2:22b, "works perfect faith" and in 2:26 "works empower faith"), then why does faith get the primacy? I think the answer to this is simple. James doesn't want to mislead us into thinking that works have the primacy. Works are added to faith, but "without faith it is impossible to please God" (Hebrews 11:6). Faith without works results in justification with God, whereas works without faith results in condemnation with God. Faith without works works peace, whereas works without faith work wrath. So, faith must have the primacy. Works can be added to faith, but faith cannot be added to works because justification with God is by faith without works. Therefore, when James says, "faith worked together with his works," he is reminding us that faith is the only necessary thing. But another question might be "How can faith work together with works if faith by itself is idle and incapable of doing anything?" Actually, James answers this question in the next clause of 2:22, and then more concretely in 2:26. In short, faith can work when it is empowered by works. Paul spoke of a similar thing in Galatians 5:6 when he said that "faith works through love." Love is the empowering force that enables faith to work. In 2 Corinthians 5:14, Paul described this as the love of Christ constraining him.
Continuing on in 2:22, James says that "by works faith was made perfect." It is regrettable that some English translations such as the ESV render this as "faith was completed by his works." This is probably due to the bias of the translators, thinking that faith without works is inauthentic, and that the performance of works somehow "completes" faith to prove that it was authentic. In this view, faith is like a fruit tree where the fruit is inherent in the seed, and it is only a matter of time before faith produces works. This view requires equivocation as to the meaning of faith, sometimes regarding it as inauthentic such as in 2:14, and sometimes regarding it as authentic such as in the case of Abraham. The ESV's rendering is also paradoxical in that it implies that Abraham's faith was somehow 'incomplete' until he sacrificed Isaac, despite Scripture saying that he was justified by faith many years earlier. Instead of getting entangled in such a paradox, it is better to just take James' words at face value and realize that he has been talking about the only type of faith that exists the whole time, whether it be the faith of the hypothetical person in 2:14 or the faith of Abraham in 2:21-23. When James says that "by works faith was made perfect," he is not implying that faith was somehow insufficient or incomplete until works were performed. Rather, he is simply saying that works empowered faith. By way of metaphor, works are to faith what wind is to fire. Wind and fire are two completely different things. Wind is not evidence of fire, and fire is not evidence of wind. However, when wind blows properly on a fire, the wind can perfect the fire. The same thing goes with works and faith. When a person with faith performs works, his faith is strengthened. As a result, works benefit not only the beneficiary of the works, but also the performer of the works. And this is the synergistic benefit of combining faith and works.
James 2:23-24
23 and the Scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness"—and he was called a friend of God. 24 You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.
To understand James 2:23 properly, we need to remember that in 2:21, James said that Abraham was justified by works. James has been laboring to show the benefits of adding works to faith, but he doesn't want to do this to the detriment of justification by faith. As we saw in 2:22, works are very important in James' theology, but faith gets the primacy it deserves. In 2:23, James enumerates these two types of justification, one by faith and one by works. Although it isn't apparent in the English, James describes these two separate events using the Greek correlative conjunctions kai ... kai (both ... and) (i.e, [1] "Both the Scripture was fulfilled ... [2] and he was called the friend of God."). By saying "the Scripture was fulfilled," James is telling us that when Abraham sacrificed Isaac, he had the same exact faith he had many years previously when he first believed God. The only difference now is that works were added to this faith, so in addition to continuing to enjoy his right standing with God, he also got the honor being called God's friend.
James 2:24 is extremely important in confirming our interpretation of 2:23 and overall conclusions in 2:14-26. Again, this is a verse where our English translations have a hard time conveying the underlying Greek properly. In particular, the translation "not by faith alone" fails to clearly convey the meaning of the Greek. The word translated "alone" in 2:24 is not the Greek adjective mones. Rather, it is the Greek adverb monon that modifies the omitted verb "justify" in the second clause. The American Standard Version (ASV) is one of the only English translations to render this clearly. It reads, "Ye see that by works a man is justified, and not only by faith." The verb in the second clause is omitted, but if we supplement it, we would have the following translation, "Ye see that by works a man is justified, and not only [justified] by faith." An even more literal translation would be, "You see then that a man is justified by works and not only [justified] by faith." This translation is based on the majority text (Textus Receptus and Byzantine tradition), and in my opinion, the addition of the conjunctive adverb "then" strengthens the force of James' argument. At any rate, what is clear is that James is talking about two types of justification. The justification by works in 2:21 and the justification by faith in 2:23. Justification by faith apart from works gave Abraham a right standing with God, and justification by works [combined with faith] gave him the benefits of deepening his faith in God and his relationship with God, as well as vindication relative to other people who later called him the friend of God. It is this type of justification by works that James is exhorting his letter's recipients to pursue, as is evident in 2:25 where he gives another example of justification by works.
(At the risk of being too technical, I'd like to say a little more about the Greek adverb monon translated "alone" in the KJV. It is sometimes said that Greek adverbs can occasionally function as adjectives, but this is rare and the examples of this usage are usually debated among scholars. I've personally looked at all the examples provided by Henry Alford and Georg Benedikt Winer, but none of them are conclusive, and Winer didn't wholeheartedly commit to this usage, simply saying that "Certain adverbs approach more nearly to adjectives." More importantly, however, from my observation, the most plausible examples of this use adverbs that don't have a corresponding cognate adjective. In other words, the adverb is only used when there is no adjective available. When an adjective is available, but an adverb is used, it is always easy to supply the omitted verb. In the case of James 2:24, if James wanted to use the Greek adjective mones to modify the noun "faith," he certainly could have, but his use of the prepositional phrase "by faith" strongly anticipates a verb in the passive voice. Therefore, it is only natural that the Greek adverb monon would modify the omitted passive verb "justify," giving us "not only [justified] by faith" as mentioned above.)
James 2:25
25 Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?
James is continuing with his theme by giving us a second example of a person who was justified by works. Again, James says nothing about justification by faith and works. For James, faith and works are always two separate things, and therefore, it is only natural that he should speak of two different kinds of justification. In this case, he says nothing about Rahab being justified by faith, but we know that she believed based on what we read in Hebrews 11:31. Abraham's works enabled him to be called the friend of God, but in the case of Rahab, her works enabled her and her family to survive the seige of Jericho.
James 2:26
For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.
In this verse, James returns to the conclusion he made in 2:20. From what we have learned so far, it is obvious that faith by itself is incapable of doing anything. James made this clear, but only incidentally, because his main intention was not to give a discourse on the nature of faith, but to exhort the recipient's of his letter to add works to their faith. Of course, he knew the implications of what he was saying about the nature of faith, and thus he introduced his interlocutor to object to an anticipated misunderstanding of 2:14-17, and then proceeded to reply to his interlocutor by giving examples of Abraham and Rahab to show how beneficial works can be. We learned how faith can work together with works to do great things, and how works perfect faith. In 2:26, James ends his appeal by explaining, in no uncertain terms, the relationship between faith and works by way of analogy. Faith is like a body, and works are like a spirit. There is no room here to smuggle in any ideas about an inauthentic or authentic faith because nobody in their right mind would question the realness or authenticity of a body lying in front of them. The question is not whether the body is real or authentic, but whether or not it is alive and empowered by a spirit. Contrary to what the theologians tell us about faith being like a fruit tree that produces good works, in James' theology, works are the engine and empowering force, not faith. Faith, by definition, can do nothing. It is like a dead body. But when works empower faith, then faith works together with works and good things happen.
To conclude, I'd just like to say one things about justification by faith. Obviously, James didn't liken faith to a body in order to teach us about justification by faith, but if you are offended by the idea that justifying faith is like a dead body, then you still haven't properly understood the Gospel. In such a case, I would recommend reading some of the articles on this website and meditating on the meaning of the cross. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or comments.