Are We Justified by Works? | Mark Jones on James 2:14–26

Does James contradict Paul? In this episode of What in the Word?, host Kirk E. Miller sits down with pastor and theologian Mark Jones to tackle James 2:14–26. They explore the apparent tension between Paul’s doctrine of justification by faith alone and James’s claim that “a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.” Tune in to consider how genuine saving faith operates in the life of a believer.

Follow the show on YouTube, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and more.

Connect with us

Ready to increase biblical literacy? Like and share. To go the extra mile, leave us a review on your preferred platform. 

See all of our episodes.

Episode guest: Mark Jones

Mark Jones is the pastor at Faith Reformed Presbyterian Church in Vancouver (PCA). He is married to Barb and they have four children. He has authored and edited many books and is involved in theological education all over the world, particularly in Cape Town, South Africa, at Trinity Reformed College.

Episode synopsis

Framing the key interpretive issue

According to Mark Jones, James’s letter reads, in many ways, like a retelling of Jesus’s Sermon on the Mount in pastoral prose. It is an incredibly practical book, which opens up the question: What does it actually mean to have genuine saving faith? That question, in turn, opens up one of the most contested areas of Christian theology: the role of works both in salvation in general and justification in particular.

James 2:24 contains the only explicit use of the phrase “faith alone” in the entire New Testament. Yet instead of affirming justification by faith alone, it states that “a person is justified by works and not by faith alone” (emphasis added). For those who believe in the Protestant doctrine of sola fide, this is a striking verse to reckon with! Many see James as standing in tension—if not outright contradiction—with Paul, who teaches justification by faith and not works (e.g., Rom 3:20–4:8; 9:32; Gal 2:16, 21; 3:11; Gal 5:4; Phil 3:9; cf. Rom 11:6; Eph 2:8–10; Titus 3:5; 2 Tim 1:9; etc.).

Major interpretations of James 2:14–26

Mark Jones and Kirk E. Miller sketch some of the major interpretations of James 2:14–26 and the Bible’s overall teaching on justification and works.¹

1. Initial and final justification: Typically in Roman Catholic tradition, Paul and James are understood as describing two different justifications. Paul’s justification excludes all works and initiates salvation; James’s “second justification” is the perfecting or forming of that justification through works of love. In this scheme, what Protestants would call sanctification effectively becomes folded into justification itself.
2. A vindication of faith: The historic Reformed Protestant reading understands James as describing, not a second justification, but God’s vindication of the church and the believer’s faith, confirming God’s prior act of justifying them.
3. Justification before men: As Kirk mentions, some maintain that, whereas Paul is concerned with justification before God (salvation), James is concerned with “justification” before men, that is, a public proof that one is a believer.
4. Rewards for good works: Free grace theology is especially cautious about assigning works any role in salvation. This view interprets any judgment according to or justification by works as pertaining to degree of rewards, not salvation.

Within Protestantism, disagreement exists as to how strong a role works play in salvation. Some treat works as mere evidence of faith. Others understand works, not as an optional confirmation of faith, but a necessary feature of genuine possession of salvation. Mark holds to the latter. He maintains that there is only one justification, received by faith, complete and irrevocable. Yet God’s judgment will also affirm the righteousness of this verdict. Good works performed in the Spirit, by faith, will publicly exhibit evidence that the believer’s profession of faith is real.

In what sense is one justified “by works”?

James’s most pointed claim comes in James 2:24: “A person is justified by works and not by faith alone.” How should we understand this, the role of works in justification?

Following Reformed theologians of the post-Reformation era, Mark distinguishes between the right to eternal life and the possession of it. The right to life, Mark explains, is what faith alone secures: an irrevocable legal standing grounded entirely in the work of Christ, with no admixture of works. But the possession of that eternal life happens only along the path of good works. As is often said, faith alone saves, but the faith that saves is never alone. Works don’t provide the right to eternal life, but their presence proves that the faith which justified was genuine, rather than an empty assent.

Faith alone saves, but the faith that saves is never alone. Works don’t provide the right to eternal life, but their presence proves that the faith which justified was genuine.

Thus, the proposition “faith justifies without works,” where “without works” modifies “justifies,” is true. Faith justifies without the assistance of works, because works form no part of the ground of justification. At the same time, the proposition “faith without works justifies,” where “without works” modifies “faith,” describing a kind of faith that has no works accompanying it, is false. Such faith, according to James, is “dead” (Jas 2:17, 26), “useless” (Jas 2:20), i.e., it does not save (Jas 2:14). This so-called faith is a mere fiction, incapable of justifying anyone.

Reconciling James, Paul, and the rest of Scripture

Mark pushes back against the idea that Paul and James stand in tension. If we ask how James reconciles with Paul, we must equally ask how Paul reconciles with Paul, since Paul also speaks of justification and judgment according to works (e.g., Rom 2:6–11, 13; 2 Cor 5:10).

In fact, New Testament writers regularly testify to the necessity of good works for salvation and the final judgment (Matt 7:21–23; 16:27; 25:31–46; John 5:28–29; Rom 6:22; 1 Cor 6:9–10; Gal 5:19–21; 6:7–8; Phil 2:12–13; Heb 12:14; 1 Pet 1:17; 1 John 2:3–6; 3:7–10; Rev 20:12–13; 21:27; 22:12). Thus, as Mark points out, it’s a bit peculiar that we tend to isolate James 2:14–26 as especially problematic, since James’s teaching here seems quite in line with what is taught in many other places. If James is to be explained away, a great deal of the New Testament will have to be explained away with him.

Have Bible questions? Find answers from trusted resources.
Try Logos for free!

Many argue that some of the above texts (e.g., Rom 2:6–11) teach a mere hypothetical path of justification, God’s standard of righteousness that we all fail to meet. However, Mark argues that Scripture’s teaching on the necessity of works recurs in too many texts to be explained this way. One would seemingly have to treat them all as hypothetical, doing violence to these texts.

Kirk notes the striking detail that both James and Paul appeal to Abraham in their respective writings on justification (Rom 4:1–25; Gal 3:6–9; Jas 2:21–23). This shared reference suggests the two are not adversaries but complementary witnesses to the same faith that both trusts Christ alone and inevitably bears its fruit.

Puritan commentator Thomas Manton helpfully clarifies that Paul’s doctrine of justification is opposed to the condemnation of a sinner in general, while James’s teaching on justification is opposed to the condemnation of a hypocrite in particular. These are not competing theologies, but complementary teachings on the same doctrine.

What counts as “good works”—and how many are enough?

If works are a necessary part of salvation, it raises the questions: What exactly are these “works”? And: How many works need to accompany faith in order for that faith to be justifying?

Mark defines good works as those done by faith, empowered by the Spirit, in obedience to God’s moral law, and aimed at God’s glory. If we want to understand what James specifically means by works, Kirk suggests looking at those concrete acts James mentions throughout his letter, e.g., controlling the tongue (Jas 1:26; 3:1–12), caring for widows and orphans (Jas 1:27), not hoarding wealth (Jas 5:1–6), etc.

Mark reframes the question of quantity: The issue is not whether one tallies enough good works but whether good works, however few or many, are genuinely present. In fact, religious systems that clearly define what good works are necessary—and how many—can result in adherents partitioning their religious devotion instead of offering their life to God. Instead, every aspect of our life is meant to consist of faith and good works.

Can we have assurance if works are necessary?

Does the necessity of works eliminate the possibility of genuine assurance and our ability to rest solely in the work of Christ?

Mark flips the question: Should not the total absence of good works rob someone of assurance? In other words, as we’ve seen, Scripture recognizes that works necessarily accompany true, saving faith.

Christ is the ultimate ground of our assurance, received through faith alone. But Scripture also identifies our good works as subsidiary grounds or corroborating evidence. Together, these function like an ecosystem of evidence for assurance of salvation.

Preaching and teaching James 2:14–26

It’s fine and good to answer people’s questions about how James’s teaching harmonizes with the rest of Scripture. But do not spend your sermon apologizing for James, qualifying every statement with what James “doesn’t actually mean.” James would not want us to apologize on his behalf. Allow the burden of the text to be the burden of your sermon, landing with the same force James intended. Trust that the broader teaching of Scripture will hold together without needing to mute this particular text.

---

Logos values thoughtful and engaging discussions on important biblical topics. However, the views and interpretations presented in this episode are those of the individuals speaking and do not necessarily reflect the official position of Logos. We recognize that Christians may hold different perspectives on this passage, and we welcome diverse engagement and respectful dialogue.

Let us know what you think

How do you interpret James 2:14–26? Join us in the Word by Word group to share your thoughts.

Mark Jones’s recommended resources

• John Davenant, A Treatise on Justification (2 vols.)

Additional related resources

Related content

• What Is Justification? | Stephen Westerholm
• Justification by Faith: Debates Old and New
• Who Are Paul’s Law-Abiding Gentiles? | Jarvis Williams on Romans 2:14–15
• What Does It Mean to Work Out Our Salvation? | Lynn Cohick on Philippians 2:12–13
• Is Your Definition of Salvation Too Small? The Bible’s Full Teaching

1. Although not mentioned in the interview, other interpretations might include: (5) James contradicts—and maybe even intends to correct—Paul’s teaching on justification by faith. (6) When James rejects justification by “faith alone,” he means something different by “faith” than Paul, i.e., mere intellectual assent. (7) Whereas “works” in Paul refer to ceremonial rites (“works of the law”), in James they refer to acts of charity. Some interpretations are not necessarily mutually exclusive.