Gospel Guidebook: Getting and Keeping It Right 
한국어 日本語
The Relationship between Faith and Works in Key Passages
by Robert P. TerryUpdated May 11, 2026
Introduction
Although I have dealt with the relationship between faith and works in my articles New Perspective on James, Works are NOT Evidence of Faith, Positive Correlation between Faith and Works, Faith Does NOT Produce Works, 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, and in this article, I intend to apply them to Luke 7:36-50, 2 Corinthians 4:13, Hebrews 11:7, Matthew 25:31-46, and 1 John 3:14-15.
Luke 7:36-50
In Luke 7:36-50, Jesus was invited to a Pharisee's house. While He was there, a woman (who had a reputation for being a 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 says it was her works that resulted in forgiveness of sins. Even still, theologians who define faith to include a works-producing element might be tempted to see an inherent causal relationship between her faith and her works of gratitude. However, this cannot be logically deduced, and the description of faith in James 2 leaves no room for any works-producing element, since faith by itself exists apart from works (James 2:17). 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" and often being used in the exact same context or sentence with the word "believe." In every realm of life, "belief" simply refers to being persuaded by the evidence for a proposition. As such, it makes more sense to say that there is a positive correlation between faith and works of gratitude due to the influence of other variables acting upon them, such as the intentional state of desire. In addition, there are also confounding variables (such as the circumstances of life and irrationality) that can prevent faith from being accompanied by consistent behavior (see the next paragraph for more on this point). Again, James 2 supports a positive correlation between faith and works, but does not describe a causative relationship. James explains that faith can work together with (i.e., be combined with) works and can be perfected by works, but always describes faith and works as separate things. From the viewpoint of James 2, the woman's faith worked with acts of gratitude, and it is unquestionable that her works brought her closer to Jesus and perfected her faith. However, at no point did her works serve as a basis of assurance of forgiveness. She was totally infatuated with her Savior and her works only served to strengthen her faith. Jesus picked up on the positive correlation between faith and works, where her faith, unconfounded by other variables, was accompanied by much love. We know it was correlation because, given the way verses 47 is worded, if it was causation, Jesus would have had to say that her works had saved her. Rather, the woman's experience of adding works to her faith culminated in Jesus' own affirmation of her faith when He told her directly that her faith had saved her.
What more can be said about this positive correlation between faith and works? Because of the positive correlation, the presence of works in a person's life can be suggestive of the presence of faith, but works cannot serve as evidence of faith because (1) works are often counterfeited and (2) works could only serve as evidence of the attitude of faith itself, whereas the faith of justification by faith represents its propositional object. (In other words, it is impossible to be conscious of the attitude of faith and the propositional object of faith at the same exact moment, meaning that any supposed evidence of faith from works would essentially be false evidence.) Consider the case of Judas. He had good works and was empowered by Jesus to do many things, and yet, Jesus said that he didn't believe in John 6:64. And the same was true for many other of His disciples (John 6:66). In the case of the woman in Luke 7:36-50, unlike us, Jesus (being God incarnated and a prophet) was able to see her heart, so when he saw her works, he was also able to see through to the propositional object of her faith. Alternatively, I think it is also 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. A lack of works is not evidence of a lack of faith, but because of the positive correlation between the two, it can be suggestive. However, we should not be quick to jump to conclusions because 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. 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. This suggests that he also believed, but his belief was not accompanied by good works.
As we can expect from a correlative relationship in which there are many confounding variables, and as was pointed out by the interlocutor in James 2:18-19, faith definitely does not guarantee consistent behavior. The interlocutor explains that men and demons can believe the same thing about God, but act in different ways. A man who believes in one God "does well," while a demon with the same belief "trembles." James never rebuts the interlocutor's argument. The interlocutor's words are true, both theoretically (when faith and works are isolated from other variables) and practically (when they are confounded by other variables). However, for James, the interlocutor's argument is really a moot point because James never intended to convey an inherent relationship between faith and works in 2:14-17 (nor can such a relationship be deduced from those verses). However, whereas the interlocutor would have been happy to conclude that there can be no relationship at all between faith and works, James responds 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.) and that this potential for benefits becomes an extra variable that can incentivize works to be added to faith and create a relationship between them. More to the point, 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" (thus introducing an extra variable that creates the positively correlated relationship between faith and works). James spends the rest of the chapter in verses 21-26 giving examples of the good things that can happen when faith and works get together. But getting back to the case of the Pharisee and the woman, based on Jesus' parable, I think we can assume (with some confidence) that they both believed in Jesus and both had forgiveness of sins, but their faith was not accompanied by the same works. Faith and the other variables (such as desire) that are needed to create the conditions necessary to perform works do not exist in a vacuum. There are confounding variables that can overpower them and result in very different types of behavior.
2 Corinthians 4:13
Using our discussion on Luke 7:36-50 as a segue, it is sometimes hard to see the exact relationship between faith and works. For example, when the Apostle Paul said, "I believed, therefore I spoke" (2 Corinthians 4:13), at first glance, we might be tempted to say that faith caused him to speak, but we can't deduce this despite the word "therefore," because, even if we knew nothing about the nature of faith and its existence by itself apart from works (James 2:17), as mentioned above, there are other variables that came between Paul's believing and speaking that ultimately served as the cause. Given what we know about faith, it would be more accurate to say that Paul's faith served (as one variable) in creating the conditions that caused him to speak. As mentioned above, the potential for benefits (such as people getting saved and increased intimacy with God), owing to faith combining with desire (or other intentional states), can create an incentive that becomes the cause of adding works to faith. In this case, there would not be an inherent relationship between faith and works, yet because faith played a role as an essential variable, we would still be able to say, "I believed, therefore I spoke."
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). This description is consistent with faith being mental assent. Furthermore, the only other passages that potentially describe faith (and if, indeed, they do describe it, are still much less explicit than 11:1) are 11:6 (where it is described as "believing"), 11:10 (where it is described as "looking"), 11:11 (where it is described as "regarding faithful the promiser"), 11:13 (where it is described as "seeing," "being persuaded," and "embracing" promises; but not as "confessing" themselves to be strangers and pilgrims because 11:14-16 explains that this action involved the intentional state of desire), 11:19 (where it is described as "reckoning"), 11:23 (where it is described as "seeing" in the sense of judging something to be the case, and then as "not fearing" in the sense of overcoming the evidence contrary to belief in the king's edict and the fear it elicited), and 11:27 (where it is described as "seeing the unseen"). These are the only verses in Hebrews 11 by which we can deduce anything about the nature of faith, and none of them describe faith as producing works or including 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 by itself cannot produce works. As explained by above, faith can help create the conditions necessary to perform works and can be perfected by such works. Works need to be added to faith for anything meaningful to happen, just like a spirit needs to be added to the body for it to move (James 2:26). With this description of faith, we can see immediately that the great feats 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 a works element. 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 works are added to faith, great things happen, such as those described in Hebrews 11.
Having laid the above groundwork, we can interpret Hebrews 11:7 as Noah's faith working together (i.e., playing an vital role in combination) 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 works are added to faith, so the potential benefits can act as motivation (a causative incentive) to perform the works. In this case, the motivation was condemning the world, saving his family's life, and becoming an heir of the righteousness which is according to faith. In the book of Hebrews, righteousness always refers to ethical righteousness, not forensic righteousness. (See Heb 1:9, 5:13, 7:2, 11:33, and 12:11 for the other instances of the word righteousness). This means that this "righteousness which is according to faith" is not the same as the justification by faith described in the book of Romans and Galatians. To understand this, please consider that it was said of Abraham, "Then he believed in the Lord; and He reckoned it to him as righteousness" (Genesis 15:6), but that it was also said of Phinehas, "Then Phinehas stood up and interposed [by killing Zimri and Cozbi]; and so the plague was stayed. And it was reckoned to him for righteousness, to all generations forever" (Numbers 25:7-8, Psalm 106:30-31). Abraham believed and it was reckoned to him as forensic righteousness. Phinehas took action and it was reckoned to him as ethical righteousness. What Abraham experienced was justification by faith and what Phinehas experienced was justification by works (see James 2:21, 24, 25). Now, in consideration of what was said of Noah, the author of the book of Hebrews very well could have said that Noah "became an heir of the righteousness which is according to works," which is the perspective that James took in James 2. But the emphasis of Hebrews 11 is on faith and how it can work together with works to accomplish great things. We were just told in the previous verse that "without faith it is impossible to please God" (Heb. 11:6). This means that faith was present with Noah's works, not as some synthesis of faith and works called "religious faith," "authentic faith," or "true faith," but as a cooperation between faith and works. Because faith is always be present where there is justification by works (i.e., works that are pleasing to God), it is entirely consistent with the nature of faith to say that Noah "became heir of the [ethical] righteousness which is by faith."
To make this easier to understand, it might helpful to use an analogy. Faith is (in someways) like money. We can say, "By money, a rich man built a yacht to join a yacht club." From this we can see that the motivation (i.e., causative incentive) was to join a yacht club. Money is incapable of doing anything by itself, but when combined with other variables (such as products, services, and labor), it can play an important role in building a yacht. Of Noah, it was said, "By faith ... he prepared an ark ... and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith," and of the rich man, it could be said, "By money ... he built a yacht ... and became a member of a yacht club exclusive to those who have money." Now, consider how that same sentence could be reworded as "By money ... he built a yacht ... and became a member of a yacht club exclusive to those who build yachts." Having money and building yachts are not the same thing (just like having faith and doing works are not the same thing), and money by itself as paper in a vault or digits on a screen cannot build a yacht (just like faith by itself as a propositional attitude cannot perform works), but if you want to build a yacht to join a yacht club, you better have money (just like if you want to perform works to become an heir of ethical righteousness, you better have faith).
The other verses in Hebrews 11 can be interpreted similarly. For more explanation on Hebrews 11, please see my article What is Justification by Works in James 2.
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 no one can put any charge against them (compare 8:31-34 and 8:36). And God calls His sheep and causes them to recognize their Shepherd by giving them faith. 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.
Based on the above, 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. 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 motivation (i.e., 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 entirely an 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 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.
To correctly interpret the content of 1 John, it is first necessary to understand John's purpose for writing the letter. In 1 John 1:3-4, we read, "What we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also, that you also may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ. And these things we write, so that our joy may be made complete." This means that 1 John was not written to test the authenticity of its readers' profession of faith (as is so often said), but as an encouragement to promote their fellowship and joy. In this letter, John repeatedly speaks of "knowing" something, using expressions with the word "know" over 30 times. In some of these cases, including the first instance of the word in verses 1 John 3:14-15, it is probably better to understand the word "know" as "know by experience," rather than "know cognitively." This seems evident from comparing 1 John 1:6 where it says, "If we say that we have fellowship with Him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth" with 1 John 2:3-5 (the first instances of John's use of word "know" in this letter) where it says, "And by this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments. The one who says, 'I have come to know Him,' and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him; but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him:" By comparing these two passages, we can see that "having fellowship" corresponds to "knowing," meaning that "knowing" must be interpreted as "knowing by experience." Also, the last instance of "knowing" in 1 John 2:3-5 where it says, "By this we know that we are in Him," should also be interpreted as "By this we know [by experience] that we are in Him," since this knowledge depends directly on their actions, not their understanding. Therefore, when we get to 1 John 3:14-15, we should probably be interpreting these verses accordingly, so that "We know that" means "We know [by experience] that," since this knowledge also depends on their action of loving their brothers. Based on this understanding, these verses do not refer to the cognitive knowledge of possessing eternal life that comes after believing that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God (John 20:31, 1 John 5:13), but to the experiential knowledge and enjoyment of having eternal life "abiding" (another word John uses to refer to one's experience) in the believer.
In contrast to this, there are many preachers and theologians who regard 1 John 3:14-15 as a "test of true conversion" where this "knowing" refers to a cognitive knowledge of possessing eternal life. Although I disagree with this interpretation, even if it were true, it would still be consistent with the principles of faith described in James 2, since acts of love done in combination with faith strengthen faith, which in turn strengthens assurance. This was the case of the woman in Luke 7:36-50 where her works strengthened her faith, culminating in Jesus' approval of it.
The big danger of the "test of true conversion" interpretation is that its advocates misunderstand the nature of faith, and often speak of faith producing works and being evidenced by works. As a result, these preachers and theologians often encourage people to look directly at their works for assurance of salvation. This is a form of works salvation, plain and simple. Besides this, however, the "test of true conversion" interpretation just doesn't hold up to scrutiny too well. For starters "false converts" don't have brothers whom they can be admonished to love. Rather, John is writing to people who he genuinely regards as believers, pleading with them again and again in his letter to love one another (2:10, 3:11, 3:14, 3:16, 3:18, 3:23, 4:7, 4:11, 4:12, 4:21, 5:1, and 5:2). If loving one's brother was such a common experience that it could be used as a touchstone of "true conversion," then it is hard to imagine why John would need to plead so hard and so often with his letter's recipients. The "test of true conversion" advocates will say that John was doubtful of them, but this doesn't even make sense considering how many times John called them brothers, beloved, children of God, and so on. If he were simply greeting them as brothers because they shared the same Jewish ethnicity, then he was definitely belaboring it beyond usefulness and was, in fact, misleading them into thinking the very thing he supposedly doubted himself. Again, all of this pleading only make sense when it is regarded as an admonishment to deepen their fellowship with God and His Son, just as he explained in the purpose statement of the letter (1 John 1:3-4).
Next, 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 a person can know cognitively that he has 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 who does not love his brother "abides" in death, but again, in John's writings the word "abide" refers to experience, not to positional truth. Basically, John is saying that hatred for one's brother is not characteristic of the eternal life his readers were called to enjoy. To hate one's brother is to experience death. As mentioned above, "false converts" don't have brothers. It is only redeemed people who can love or hate a brother. Redeemed people possess eternal life because of what Christ did for them, but they experience eternal life when they are following in His footsteps and loving their brothers (see the very next verse, 1 John 3:16). When John says that "Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer; and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him," this should be interpreted in the same way as 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Galatians 5:21, and Ephesians 5:5, as a general truth statement that such people will not be in God's kingdom, and because of this, God's redeemed people should avoid doing the things that these people do. In other words, by saying this, John is admonishing believers not to act like these people, which would would be entirely unacceptable for the redeemed people of God.
Lastly, we must also be careful not to confuse eternal life with justification by faith. These are both benefits that the elect enjoy because of Christ's sufficient and efficacious work on the cross, but they are not the same thing. Justification by faith is entirely forensic in nature (being the opposite of condemnation), whereas eternal life is ethical and transformative in nature. Justification by faith logically (and probably chronologically) precedes eternal life, just like the justifying death of Christ preceded His regenerating resurrection. In this regard, it is quite possible for a person who has experienced justification by faith to fail to experience eternal life in a practical manner.
In this article, we looked at five key passages and saw that the principles of James 2 can be applied to them all 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 our findings in James 2 give us a good hermeneutic for understanding similar passages in Hebrews, 1 John and the rest of the New Testament.