Gospel Guidebook: Getting and Keeping It Right 
한국어 日本語
The Relationship between Faith and Works in Key Passages
by Robert P. TerryUpdated January 7, 2025
Introduction
Although I have dealt with the relationship between faith and works in my articles New Perspective on James, Positive Correlation between Faith and Works, Faith Does NOT Produce Works, Works are NOT Evidence of Saving Faith, and Faith is NOT Like a Fruit Tree, there is more to say on this topic. I believe James 2 gives us the principles for understanding the nature of faith, namely that (1) faith by itself is idle (literally "dead"), just like a body without a spirit is idle; (2) faith is empowered by works just like a body is enlivened by a spirit; (3) faith can work together with works and create beneficial synergy; and (4) faith is perfected by works similar to how fire is perfected by wind. In this article, I will look at Luke 7:36-50, Hebrews 11:7, Matthew 25:31-46, and 1 John 3:14-15 and see how these principles apply. If we can understand these passages of Scripture through these principles, not only will be able to confirm the principles themselves, but also be able to equip ourselves with a rule for interpreting similar passages.
Luke 7:36-50
In Luke 7:36-50, Jesus was invited to a Pharisee's house. While He was there, a woman (who was known to be a notorious sinner) came and prostrated herself at His feet and wiped His feet with her tears. When the Pharisee doubted Jesus' legitimacy as a prophet, Jesus answered him with a parable, concluding that 47 "For this reason I say to you, her sins, which are many, have been forgiven, for she loved much; but he who is forgiven little, loves little." 48 And He said to her, "Your sins have been forgiven." 49 And those who were reclining at the table with Him began to say to themselves, "Who is this man who even forgives sins?" 50 And He said to the woman, "Your faith has saved you; go in peace."
If all we had was verse 47, we wouldn't be able to make any firm conclusions. However, in verse 50, Jesus tells us that it was her faith that saved her, so this dispels any theory that it was her works of gratitude that procured forgiveness of sins. Despite this, theologians who define faith to include a works-producing element (such as fiducia) might be tempted to see an inherent causal relationship between her knowledge of forgiveness and her works of gratitude. However, this cannot be logically deduced and it requires defining faith in an unnatural and unbiblical way. The description of faith in James 2 leaves no room for fiducia or any other works-producing element, since faith is likened to a body without a spirit, idle in itself and incapable of doing anything. Also, as noted elsewhere on this website, the word translated "faith" in English Bibles corresponds to a Greek noun that could more literally be translated as "belief," being a cognate of the verb "believe." In every realm of life, "belief" simply means "to accept something as true," being merely a state of the mind. As such, it makes more sense to interpret the relationship between her knowledge of forgiveness and her works of gratitude from the viewpoint of positive correlation. Certainly, faith can (but not necessarily) influence works, and influence implies some degree of causation, but because there are many confounding variables (such as motivation, circumstances, irrationality, etc.), it cannot be said that faith consistently causes certain types of behaviors (see the next paragraph for more on this point). Again, James 2 supports a positive correlation between faith and works, but (perhaps surprisingly) does not describe a causative relationship. James explains that faith can work together with works and can be perfected by works, but always describes faith and works as separate concepts. From the viewpoint of James 2, the woman's recognition of forgiveness worked with acts of gratitude, and it is unquestionable that her works brought her closer to Jesus and perfected her faith. Like Abraham, her works displayed to other people that she was the "friend of Jesus." However, at no point did her works serve as assurance or evidence of forgiveness. She was totally infatuated with her Savior and her works only served to increase this infatuation and strengthen her faith, culminating in Jesus' own affirmation of her faith when He told her directly that her sins were forgiven.
What more can be said about this positive correlation between faith and works? I think it is important to note that there is not a one-to-one correspondence between faith and works. Faith is capable of existing without works, so even if works go to zero, this doesn't necessarily mean that faith is absent or non-existent. The whole point of justification by faith apart from works is that faith is literally alone, meaning that there is no necessary relationship between the two. As I have shown in the articles linked above, there are many examples in the New Testament where faith isn't accompanied by works and other examples where works are performed without faith. And even in Luke 7:36-50, there is a hint of this. The Pharisee who invited Jesus was not hospitable, and displayed a hard heart toward the woman. However, in the parable that Jesus told him in verses 41-42, Jesus seemed to imply that he also had been forgiven his sins. Jesus then blamed his lack of gratitude on his lack of recognition of forgiveness (again indicating the same positive correlation between faith and works). As noted above, faith can influence works, but as pointed out by the interlocutor in James 2:18-19, faith is not associated with consistent behavior. In other words, while we might expect to see the same faith and the same works together (correlated and causative), we often see the exact opposite. The interlocutor explains that men and demons can believe the same thing about God, but not have the same response. A man who believes in one God "does well," while a demon with the same belief "trembles." The interlocutor shows that there is no inherent connection between faith and works. James never rebuts his interlocutor. The interlocutor's words are true and reflect reality, but for James, they are really a moot point because James never intended to convey such a connection between faith and works in verses 14-17 (although he obviously understood that some people would misunderstand him, and thus he needed to insert the interlocutor's words). Rather, James calls his interlocutor a foolish person because the interlocutor fails to see benefits of adding works to faith (see also 2 Peter 1:5ff.). Therefore, James spends the rest of the chapter in verses 20-26 giving examples of the good things that can happen when faith and works get together. Getting back to the case of the Pharisee and the woman, based on Jesus' parable, I think we can presume (with some confidence) that they both believed in Jesus and both had forgiveness of sins, but their faith did not elicit the same response. Faith does not exist in a vacuum, and as mentioned above, even when it influences works, there are other confounding variables that can overpower faith and result in very different types of behavior.
People may be wondering how James can say that faith by itself is idle (literally "dead"), yet there still can exist a causal relationship between faith and works due to the potential influence of faith. This may seem contradictory at first, but it is important to emphasize that there is no inherent causal relationship between faith and works, and any causal relationship that can exist due to influence is not by necessity. Also, James said that there are benefits that occur when faith works together with works, so the benefits can act as a causative incentive, creating a correlative rather than a causative relationship between faith and works. It is often hard to distinguish between the relationship. For example, when Paul said, "I believed, therefore I spoke" (2 Corinthians 4:13), this seems to indicate that faith caused his works, but we can't say that with certainty because it might be that his faith created the potential for benefits (such as people getting saved and intimacy in his relationship with God), and that these benefits created an incentive that became the dominant cause of the works. In this case, there would be a correlative relationship between faith and works, not a causative relationship, yet we would still be able to say, "I believed, therefore I spoke." Without the incentive, faith and works would have never gotten together. But getting back to the main question, how can faith be described as idle and still be able to exert an influencing force? I think this can be understood by way of analogy. Faith is like money. Money by itself can do nothing. But it can (but not necessarily) influence people's behavior. However, there is no inherent causal relationship between money and behavior. Also, there are other confounding variables, such as the circumstances of life, that can cause people with money to behave in ways that seem contrary to what we would expect of people with money. Moreover, when money is combined with labor, products, and services, there is potential for many benefits. And these potential benefits can act as an incentive and dominant cause behind the relationship between money and behavior. In such a case, we can say, "I had money, therefore I bought," and not be speaking of a causal relationship between money and works, but a correlative relationship.
Hebrews 11:7
Next, let's take a look at Hebrews 11:7. By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.
Before diving into the verse, it will be helpful to look at the context. In Hebrews 11:1, we are given a description of faith that we can use to interpret the examples given in the rest of the chapter. We read, "Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen" (NASB). From this description, we can see that faith is a state of mind, and this coincides well with the supplemental descriptions of faith in 11:6 (where it is described as "believing"), 11:11 (where it is described as "regarding faithful the promiser"), 11:19 (where it is described as "reckoning"), and 11:27 (where it is described as "seeing the unseen"). These are the only verses in Hebrews 11 by which we can deduce any description of faith, and in all of them, it is clear that faith does not include a works element. This means that faith, as described by the author of the Hebrews, is in accordance with the faith described in James 2:14-26 where we learn that faith is incapable of doing anything on its own. As explained by James, the only way that faith can work is when it is empowered by works, similar to how a body can move when it is enlivened by a spirit (James 2:26). With this description of faith, we can see immediately that the wonderful achievements of Hebrews 11 were the result of "faith working together with works" (James 2:22). It is important to keep this in mind because there is no equivocation as to the meaning of faith in Hebrews 11. Faith is never regarded as producing works or consisting of works. Hebrews 11:6 tells us that without faith it is impossible to please God, and this is why it is always "faith working together with works." Faith has the primacy, and when it is combined with works, great things are able to happen, such as those illustrated in Hebrews 11.
Having laid the above groundwork, we can interpret Hebrews 11:7 as Noah's faith working together with his "moving with fear" and "preparing an ark." Faith did not produce those things, but as described above, there are benefits that occur when faith works together with works, so the benefits can act as a causative incentive, creating a correlative rather than a causative relationship between faith and works. In this case, the causative incentives were condemning the world (see also 2 Peter 2:5), saving his family's life (see also 1 Peter 3:20), and becoming a joint-heir with Christ in accordance with the righteousness which is by faith (see also Romans 8:17, Hebrews 1:2, as well as the use of the word metochos in 1:9, 3:1, and 3:14 to indicate partnership or sharer in the inheritance of Christ). In order to achieve these benefits, Noah needed to have faith. In this respect, we can say that "by faith, he moved with fear and prepared an ark" based on the rule given us by James whereby "faith works together with works." Again, as described above, let's think of faith as money. We can say, "By money, I purchased material and employed labor in order to build a house." From this we can see that the causative incentive was building a house. Money is incapable of doing anything by itself, but it is empowered by the products, services, and labor in that those things value money. Therefore, when money works together with products, services, and labor, good things happen, such a house being built.
Given the above explanation, it becomes easy to interpret Hebrews 11 through the principles we learned in James 2:14-26.
Matthew 25:31-46
Next, let's look at a few verses from Matthew 25:31-46, "Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in...And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me."
Although these verses say nothing about faith explicitly, I think it is definitely there in the background. One of the important sub-themes in the Gospel of Matthew is the humility and faith of little children, and how the little children are treated. I can't help but see a connection between the little children and the least of Jesus' brothers. For example, in Matthew 10:42, we read, "And whosoever shall give to drink unto one of these little ones a cup of cold water only in the name of a disciple, verily I say unto you, he shall in no wise lose his reward." Similarly, in Matthew 18:6, "But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." Just like in Matthew 25:31-46, Jesus' main concern is how these little ones who believed in Him are treated. In the parable, we see that it was the group of people among the nations who were classified as sheep (i.e., believers as explained below) who treated them well. So, the point of emphasis seems to be believers helping fellow believers, especially those who are young, weak, and fragile, while any mistreatment or neglect of them by the goats (i.e., unbelievers as explained below) is met with condemnation and punishment. Therefore, assuming that I have correctly identified the least of Jesus' brothers with the little ones who believe in Him, then obviously faith does have its place in the parable even though it is not explicitly mentioned.
So, who exactly are the sheep and the goats? As explained in the parable, the kingdom was prepared for the sheep from the foundation of the world. Therefore, the sheep represent the elect, and the goats represent the non-elect. It is important to note that a sheep cannot become a goat by doing bad works or neglecting to do good works, and a goat cannot become a sheep by doing good works. A sheep is what it is, and a goat is what it is. This is all in accordance with the predestination of God and His choice of election. As explained in Romans 8, the sheep are justified by God and none one can put any charge against them (compared 8:31-34 and 8:36). And God calls His sheep and causes them to recognize their Shepherd by giving them faith. It is by believing that their justification is manifest to them and to the world. As for the goats, Jesus said in John 10:26, "But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you." And in this manner the destinies of the sheep and the goats were decided from the foundation of the world.
Having established that faith lies in the background of the parable, we can move onto the judgment of the sheep and goats. First, it is important to notice that there are two judgments, one for the sheep and one for the goats, indicating again that there are two classes of people (which comprise the nations). This is significant because they don't experience the same judgment. In Revelation 20:15, it says that "whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire." In other passages, we learn that their names were written in the book of life before the foundation of the world, again indicating that the God's elect are treated differently. The sheep and the goats are both judged according to their works, but in the case of the sheep, this judgment is not to decide whether they will be justified or condemned. They are justified by God on account of what their Shepherd did for them, but they are judged to determine their status within the kingdom. A kingdom by very definition has hierarchy and not everyone can occupy the same station in life. This is the reason why rewards and inheritance are so often emphasized in the New Testament. As mentioned above, when Noah became an heir according to the righteousness of faith, he had become a partaker of the inheritance of Christ, meaning that he was destined to reign with Him (Romans 8:17, 2 Timothy 2:12).
So, what is the relationship between faith and works? By now, it should be obvious, that "by faith, the sheep did all those good deeds to the least of Jesus' brothers." Again, just as explained above, this means that their faith worked together with their works. What makes these sheep so special is that their causative incentive for doing the good deeds was based on pure compassion and mercy. It is one thing to do a good deed with the expectation of receiving a reward (which according to many passages in the New Testament is a legitimate reason for doing good deeds), but it is an entirely another thing to do good deeds out of a pure heart of compassion, expecting nothing in return. For these types of people, the benefit received by the beneficiary of the good deed is incentive enough. And it is these types of good deeds that are highly favored with God.
Do all sheep do good works? It is important to remember that a sheep is a sheep because it is was chosen to be a sheep, irrespective of its works, whether they be good or bad. But based on the parable, we can conclude that the sheep are characterized by good works, and this coincides with other passages of Scripture, such as Ephesians 2:10 where we learn that God foreordained that believers walk in good works. However, it is also important to notice that, in the parable, the sheep are judged as a group, not individually. This is why I say that the sheep are characterized by good works. Just like the World Series winning baseball team, when viewed as a team, they are the best of the best with many excellent achievements. But this doesn't preclude the possibility of there being some bench warmers on the team. The same goes for the sheep. They are the light of the world, but at the same time, they are also prone to wandering off and getting into trouble. If it were not so, the Apostles wouldn't have needed to write the imperative sections of the their letters and agonize and plead with the believers to live in a manner worthy of their calling in Jesus Christ. In a kingdom, not everyone can reign. In fact, there needs to be a lot of common people for the rulers, principalities, and authorities to reign over. As mentioned above, what makes the sheep so special is that their good deeds were done out of sheer compassion and mercy, so I believe that the point of the parable is to indicate that when the sheep "inherit the kingdom," they are really entering into their inheritance, which for them is positions of great authority. Another good question would be in regard to the least of Jesus' brothers. Who are they? Obviously, they are among the elect, but it is not clear whether they are the rams and ewes of the sheep, or maybe they represent the common people in the kingdom, or maybe they are the elite in the kingdom based on Jesus' oft repeated saying "the last shall be first and the first shall be last."
Although there are some things that we cannot know for sure about the sheep and the least of Jesus' brothers, what we can be sure about is the relationship between faith and works and how "faith worked together with the good deeds" of the sheep in the parable.
1 John 3:14-15
Let's move on to 1 John 3:14-15. We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brethren. He who does not love abides in death. Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer; and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.
First, I'll give what I think is the most natural interpretation, and in the next paragraph, I'll proceed to analyze the less natural "test of true conversion" approach to interpreting these verses. To start, we have to consider what John means by "we." Is he speaking generally about all Christians or is he speaking specifically about himself and other apostles? While the former seems more natural in the English, the word "we" is emphatic in the Greek, so it might be that John wants to contrast his own experience against the hatred displayed by the world (verse 13) in order to defend and promote the way of brotherly love. Either way, he obviously wants to encourage his letter's recipients to act accordingly. Next, what does he mean by "know"? The context indicates that he uses the word "know" to mean "experience." Christians experience resurrection life when they love other brothers. Of course, if Christians have eternal life, they can experience it in their everyday lives by loving fellow Christians. This is what John means by having eternal life abiding in them. When Christians don't love their brothers (and please note that "fake Christians" or "false converts" don't have a brother to hate), they are not living in a manner in which the eternal life they possess abides in them. This interpretation is entirely consistent with the understanding of faith and works described above.
For the sake of argument, what can we say about these verses if we attempt to interpret the word "know" as a way of deducing whether or not one has passed from death to life (i.e., as a test of true conversion)? I'd say that this view is still consistent with the principles we've learned from James 2. As mentioned above, works of love can empower faith, and when faith is empowered, obviously assurance is also strengthened. This is that positive correlation between faith and works that I have been talking about. Just to repeat, it is not the works that give us assurance/evidence of passing from death to life, but the empowered faith that gives us greater assurance as we become more persuaded by sacrificial love of Christ. In this way, we come to "know" that we have life.
However, it is important to notice that John's statement is a positive one. He says nothing about the reverse situation, namely that a lack of love means that we can know that we have not passed from death to life. This shows the logical weakness in the "test of true conversion" approach. For sure, John says that such a person "abides" in death, but in John's writings (i.e., his Gospel and letters), the word "abide" always refers to experience, not to positional truth. Moreover, the experience of eternal life, and even the possession of eternal life, must not be confused with justification by faith, which is a benefit "in Christ" (according to the Apostle Paul's usage of the phrase) that is entirely forensic (being a legal term that is contrasted with condemnation). In fact, John himself, in similar manner to Paul, says that the only way of inceptively having eternal life is bare belief, namely the reception of the testimony of God as being true in 1 John 5:9-13. In John 1:12, he says that belief in Jesus gives a person the "authority" to be born again as a child of God. I have argued elsewhere (here and here) that justification precedes regeneration and that this "authority" may very well refer to justification. So, in light of this, the "test of true conversion" fails to be a true test because it is possible for a person to fail the test and still be justified by faith. However, as I mentioned above, the interpretation of these verses as a "test of true conversion" is weak to begin with, and I think they should be more naturally interpreted as I did initially. At any rate, the principles we learned in James 2 apply to 1 John 3:14-15, and in fact, to all other verses in 1 John.
In this article, we looked at two key passages and saw that the principles of James 2 can be applied to them quite well. And this is exactly what I expected because Scripture is consistent with itself. Having looked at these passages, as well as the passages in the other articles linked above, I feel confident that James 2 gives us a good hermeneutical rule for understanding similar passages in 1 John and the rest of the New Testament.