James 2:14-26
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?
17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
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.
20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
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?
23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
25 Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?
26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.
The Grace New Testament Commentary - James 2:14-26
2:14 James opens this section of admonition by confronting the fundamental issue. Suppose someone lays claim to faith but cannot point to acts of obedience of the kind James has been discussing (James 1:26-2:13). What then? Can he expect his faith in God's Word to "save his life" (James 1:21) if he is not a work-doer (v 25)? In other words, Can faith save him?
Actually, the question (in Greek) implies its own answer and might better be translated, "Faith can't save him, can it?" The expected response is, "No, it can't!" But, of course, faith can and does save when one is speaking of eternal salvation (e.g., Eph 2:8-9). But here - as James makes plain - faith cannot save under the conditions he has in mind (see discussion at Jas 1:21).
Thus in James 2, the writer plainly makes works a condition for salvation. The failure to admit this is the chief source of the problems supposedly arising from this passage for most evangelicals. Readers need to recognize that James cannot be discussing salvation by grace. But instead of admitting these points, many interpreters dodge them.
This is frequently done by trying to translate the question, "Can faith save him?" (James 2:14), by "Can that [or, such] faith save him?" But the introduction of words like "that" or "such" as qualifiers for "faith" is really an evasion of the text. The Greek does not support this sort of translation. Nevertheless, support for the renderings "such faith" or "that faith" is usually said to be found in the presence of the Greek definite article with the word "faith." But in this very passage, the definite article also occurs with "faith" in vv 17, 18, 20, 22, and 26. (In v 22, the reference is to Abraham's faith!) In none of these places are the words "such" or "that" proposed as natural translations. As is well known, the Greek language often employed the definite article with abstract nouns (like faith, love, hope, etc.) where English cannot do so. In such cases, the Greek article is left untranslated. The attempt to single out James 2:14 for specialized treatment carries its own refutation on its face. It must be classed as a truly desperate effort to support an insupportable interpretation.
These statements by James cannot be willed away. As clearly as language can express it, faith by itself does not "save," according to James. But "save" in what sense? Or better, "save" from what? From eternal hell? Or from something else? The only appropriate answer, in the light of the whole epistle, is to say that James is picking up the theme of James 1:21 (expressed again in James 5:19-20). This theme is the truth that obedience to God's Word can "save" the life from the deadly outcome of sin (see James 1:15 and discussion). Faith alone cannot do this. Works of obedience are completely indispensable.
2:15-17 If one keeps in mind the concept of "saving the life by obedience," then the words of James 2:15-17 can be heard in a fresh light. Can the fact that a person holds correct beliefs and is orthodox "save" him from the deadly consequences of sin? Of course not! The very thought is absurd. That is like giving one's best wishes to a destitute brother or sister when what they really need is food and clothing (James 2:15-16). It is utterly fruitless. As a matter of fact, this kind of callous conduct on the part of one Christian toward another is precisely what James has been warning against (see James 1:27; 2:2-6). It superbly illustrates his point.
Such idle words are as "dead" (ineffectual) as a nonworking faith. So James says, Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. It needs to be carefully considered why James chose the term dead to describe a faith that is not working. Yet the moment this term is related to the plainly expressed concept of "saving the life" (James 1:21), everything becomes clear. The issue that concerns James is an issue of life or death. Can a faith that is dead save the Christian from death? The question answers itself. The choice of the adjective dead is perfectly suited to James's argument. Just as the idle words of some ungenerous believer cannot save his brother from death in the absence of life's necessities, a nonworking faith cannot save a believer's life from the death-dealing consequences of sin. For that purpose, faith is sterile and ineffective by itself because it cannot accomplish the needed result.
Commentators often deal with the word dead simplistically. As a metaphor, dead is often treated as though it could refer to nothing other than the death/life terminology employed to describe salvation from hell. But every linguist knows that "death" and "deadness" are concepts that have given rise to numerous and diverse metaphors in nearly every language. English itself has many ("this law's a dead letter," "you're dead wrong," "he's dead drunk," "he's a dead duck," "that idea is dead," "they navigated by dead reckoning," etc.). So also the Greek language (and the NT itself) abounds in such metaphors. In Romans alone, Paul says Abraham's body was "dead" while it was still alive and attributes "deadness" to Sarah's barren womb (Rom 4:19). Paul says that "apart from the law sin was [or is] dead" (Rom 7:8) (although sin can be quite active apart from the Law [Rom 5:13]), and then declares that "sin revived and I died" (Rom 7:9). So too the Christian's body, in which the Spirit dwells, can be described as "dead" (Rom 8:10), although the Christian himself is regenerated. The complexity in Paul's use of the term "dead" is clearly evident from these texts. A concordance study yields examples in other parts of the NT as well (e.g., Luke 15:24, 32; Heb 6:1; 9:14; Rev 3:1). It is simply wrong to think that James's metaphor about "dead faith" can have only one meaning, namely, a soteriological one. To claim this is to beg the question.
So when faith is described as "dead" in James 2, this can easily be understood in context as meaning that (for the purpose being considered) faith is sterile, ineffectual, or unproductive.
2:18-19 James does not expect such words to go unchallenged. Even in Christians, the impulse to excuse or cover our failures is strong. So James anticipates his readers' excuse by introducing the words of an imaginary objector. Such alleged objectors were a common stock-in-trade for writers on morals in James's day, and here he employs this well-known literary foil. The entirety of vv 18-19 belongs to this hypothetical speaker.
The exact extent and meaning of the objector's words have long been a problem to commentators. The NKJV follows a common understanding in its punctuation of vv 18-19. The words, "You have faith and I have works," are enclosed in quotation marks by the NKJV, and this signals that these words alone are taken as the words of an objector. (What they are an objection to has puzzled many commentators.) The remaining words of v 18 and those of v 19 are taken by the NKJV as the reply of James, though it is by no means clear how they answer the words attributed to the objector. But all punctuation in our English Bibles is the work of editors, since the original manuscript of James would probably have had little or none. But the text is only correctly understood when the entirety of vv 18-19 (starting with, You have faith...) is assigned to the objector and none of it assigned to James.
In vv 18-19 the specific literary format James uses was familiar from the Greek diatribe, which was a learned and argumentative form of discourse. The form employed in vv 18-20 might be called the "objection/reply format." Words such as James's "but someone will say" (v 18) are used to introduce the objection and, when the objection has been stated, a sharp rejoinder is begun with words like James's "but do you want to know, O foolish man" (v 20). This same format used by James also occurs in Rom 9:19-20 and 1 Cor 15:35-36. The view of many writers that James's reply has to begin at v 18b ignores the manifest structural signals of James's text. These writers have failed to produce any comparable text in the relevant literature. This writer regards it as certain that the objector's words extend to the end of v 19.
But what does the objection mean? Since most Greek manuscripts read the word "by" (ek) in place of the familiar word "without" (chōris) in v 18, the reading "by" is preferred here. The objector's statement may then be given as follows, retaining the Greek word order more exactly than does the NKJV: But someone will say: "You have faith and I have works. Show me your faith from [ek] your works, and I will show you, from [ek] my works, my faith. You believe that there is one God; you do well. The demons also believe, and tremble" (vv 18-19, author's translation).
The argument which these words express appears to be a reductio ad absurdum (reducing someone's claims to absurdity). It is heavy with irony. "It is absurd," says the objector, "to see a close connection between faith and works. For the sake of argument, let's say you have faith and I have works. Let's start there. You can no more start with what you believe and show it to me in your works than I can start with my works and demonstrate what it is that I believe." The objector is confident that both tasks are impossible. The impossibility of showing one's faith from one's works is now demonstrated (so the objector thinks) by this illustration: "Men and demons both believe the same truth (that there is one God), but their faith does not produce the same response. Although this article of faith may move a human being to 'do well,' it never moves the demons to 'do well.' All they can do is tremble. Faith and works, therefore, have no built-in connection at all. The same creed may produce entirely different kinds of conduct. Faith cannot be made visible in works!" With this supposedly unanswerable claim, the objector rests his case.
No doubt James and his readers had heard this argument before. It was precisely the kind of defensive approach people might take when their orthodoxy was not supported by good deeds. They might say, "Faith and works are not really related to each other in the way you say they are, James. So don't criticize the vitality of my faith because I don't do such and such a thing."
2:20 James's reply to the objector's words may be paraphrased this way: "What a senseless argument! How foolish you are to make it! I still say that without works your faith is dead. Would you like to know why?" Verses 21-23 are James's direct rebuttal of the objection. This is made clear in the Greek text by the singular form of "do you see" (blepeis) in v 22. This shows he is addressing the objector. Only with the "you see" (horate) of v 24 does James return to the plural and to his readers as a whole.
2:21. In refuting the objection he has cited, James selects the most prestigious name in Jewish history, the patriarch Abraham. He selects also his most honored act of obedience to God, the offering of his own son Isaac. Since in Christian circles it was well known that Abraham was justified by faith, James now adds a highly original touch. He was also justified by works! If James's subject matter is kept clearly in mind, one will not fall into the trap of pitting James against the Apostle Paul. In no way does James wish to deny that Abraham, or anyone else, could be justified by faith alone. He merely wishes to insist that there is also another justification, and it is by works.
Of course, there is no such thing as a single justification by faith plus works. Nothing James says here suggests that idea. Rather, there are two kinds of justification (see v 24). Somewhat surprisingly to most people, the Apostle Paul agrees with this. Writing at what was no doubt a later time than James, Paul states in Rom 4:2, "For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something of which to boast, but not before God." The form of this statement in Greek does not deny the truth of the point under consideration. The phrase, "but not before God," strongly suggests that Paul can conceive of a sense in which people are justified by works. But, he insists, that is not the way people are justified before God. That is, it does not establish their legal standing before Him.
Therefore, in responding to the kind of person who tried to divorce faith from works in Christian experience, James takes a skillful approach. His thought paraphrased this way: "Wait a minute, you foolish man! You make much of justification by faith, but can't you see how Abraham was also justified by works when he offered his son Isaac to God? [v 21]. Isn't it obvious how his faith was cooperating with his works and, in fact, by works his faith was made mature? [v 22]. In this way, too, the full significance of the Scripture about his justification by faith was brought to light, for now he could be "called the friend of God" (v 23).
It should be carefully noted that in referring to Abraham's offering of his son Isaac, James has returned to the theme of trials which is the basic concern of his epistle (see James 1:2-18). In Jewish tradition, this story about Abraham represented the supreme trial of the patriarch, over which he had triumphed gloriously. But equally, when James turns to Rahab in v 25, he is likewise dealing with a woman who had triumphed under severe trial. The two stories, standing at the end of a major unit (James 1:21-2:26), form an implicit inclusio (a reference back) carrying the reader's mind back to the point at which the unit on true hearing had begun. The exhortation of James 1:21 had sprung from the preceding discussion on Christian trials.
2:22-23 The content of these verses is rich indeed. It is a pity that they have been so widely misunderstood. The faith that justifies - James never denies that it does justify! - can have an active and vital role in the life of the obedient believer. As with Abraham, it can be the dynamic for great acts of obedience. In the process, faith itself can be made perfect, that is, "perfected" (eteleiōthē). The Greek word suggests development and maturation. Faith is thus nourished and strengthened by works.
It would hardly be possible to find a better illustration of James's point anywhere in the Bible. The faith by which Abraham was justified was directed toward God's promise about his seed (Gen 15:6), a promise that reaffirmed the initial promise of Gen 12:1-3, which carried soteriological significance (see Gal 3:6-9). But Abraham's faith was also implicitly faith in the God of resurrection (cf. Gen 15:6 with Rom 4:19-21 and Heb 11:17-19).
Abraham had confidence that the God in whom he believed could overcome the deadness of his own body and of Sarah's womb. But it was only through the testing with Isaac that this implicit faith in God's resurrection power becomes a specific conviction that God could literally raise a person physically from the dead to fulfill His oath.
The faith of Abraham was strengthened and matured by works. From a conviction that God could overcome a "deadness" in his own body (inability to beget children), he moved to the assurance that God could actually resurrect his son's body from literal, physical death. In the process of carrying out the divine command to sacrifice his beloved boy, his faith grew and reached new heights of confidence in God.
In this way, too, the Scripture that spoke of his original justification was fulfilled. Abraham's works filled this ancient text full of meaning, so to speak, by showing the extent to which his faith, mentioned in Gen 15:6, could develop and undergird a life of obedience. Simple and uncomplicated though it was at first, Abraham's justifying faith had potential ramifications which only his works, built on it, could disclose.
And now he could be called the friend of God, not only by God Himself, but also by men (cf. 2 Chr 20:7; Isa 41:8). This is in fact the name by which Abraham has been known down through the centuries in many lands and by at least three religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam). Had Abraham not obeyed God in the greatest test of his life, he would still have been justified by the faith he exercised in Gen 15:6. But by allowing that faith to be alive in his works, he attained an enviable title among countless millions of people. In this way he was also justified by works (before men; cf. Rom 4:2).
When a person is justified by faith, he or she finds an unqualified acceptance before God. As Paul puts it, such an individual is one "to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works" (Rom 4:6). But only God can see this spiritual transaction. When, however, one is justified by works, he or she achieves an intimacy with God that is manifest to others. He or she can then be called a "friend of God," even as Jesus said, "you are My friends if you do whatever I command you" (John 15:14; see also the discussion of Jas 4:4).
2:24 Leaving the imagined objector behind, James returns in vv 24-26 to address his readers directly. (See comment on v 20.) His statement here confirms what is noted above (v 21), that there are two kinds of justification, not one kind conditioned on faith plus works. James's words should be read like this: You see then that a man is justified by works, and not [only justified] by faith. The key to this understanding is the Greek adverb "only" (monon), which does not qualify (i.e., modify) the word faith, since the form would then have been monōs. As an adverb, however, it modifies the verb justified implied in the second clause. James is saying that a by-faith justification is not the only kind of justification there is. There is also a by-works justification. The former type is before God, the latter type is before men.
2:25 This is precisely what is now illustrated in the additional case of Rahab. James does not say, "Was not Rahab the harlot justified by faith and works?" James knows of no such justification. Rather, Rahab, like Abraham before her, was justified by works in front of other people, that is, before the nation of Israel among whom she came to live.
Rahab, however, is superbly suited to tie James's thoughts together. The passage had begun with a reference to his theme of "saving the life" (James 2:14; 1:21). Not surprisingly, Rahab is selected as a striking example of a person whose physical life was "saved" precisely because she had works. The author of Hebrews (Hebrews 11:31) points to her faith and lays the stress on the fact that she received the spies. James, by contrast, points to the fact that she... sent them out another way. Why does James do this? The answer has considerable significance for James's argument.
Although Rahab's faith began to operate the moment she received the messengers, she could not really be justified by works until she had sent them out another way. This is obvious when the story in Joshua 2 is carefully considered. Up until the last minute, she could still have betrayed the spies. Had she so desired, she could have sent their pursuers after them. That the spies had lingering doubts about her loyalty is suggested by their words in Josh 2:20, "And if you tell this business of ours, then we will be free from your oath." But the successful escape of the spies demonstrated that Rahab was truly a friend of God because she was also their friend. In this way, Rahab was justified by works.
And in the process, she saved her own life and her family's! Her faith, therefore, was very much alive because it was an active, working faith. Though she was a prostitute - and both inspired writers remind us that she was - her living faith triumphed over the natural consequences of her sin. While all the rest of the inhabitants of Jericho perished under the divine judgment which Israel executed, she lived because her faith lived!
2:26 James therefore wishes his readers to know that works are in fact the vitalizing spirit which keeps one's faith alive, in the same way that the human spirit keeps the human body alive. Whenever a Christian ceases to act on his faith, that faith atrophies and becomes little more than a creedal corpse. "Dead orthodoxy" is a danger that has always confronted Christian people and we do well to take heed to this danger. But the antidote is a simple one: Faith remains vital and alive as long as it is being translated into real works of living obedience.
Charles Bing - Grace, Salvation, and Discipleship - Faith Without Works is Dead, James 2:14-26
(Salvation) Interpretation: If someone says he is a Christian but has no works, he was never saved.
(Discipleship) Interpretation: If someone says he has faith but has no works, he will not be saved from a negative judgment at the Judgment Seat of Christ.
This passage is probably one of the most misused passages in the New Testament. It has a long history of interpretation attempting to resolve the tension it seems to create with the apostle Paul's teaching about justification through faith alone. The conflict is simply this: Paul said in many places, especially in Romans and Galatians, that justification is through faith alone in Jesus Christ. Paul is unequivocal in his teaching that salvation is by grace, "not by works" (Eph. 2:8-9). He also contrasts believing with working, and grace with works (Rom. 4:4-5; 11:6). But James says that "faith by itself, if it does not have works is, dead" (James 2:17) and "a man is justified by works, and not by faith only" (v. 24). In short, they say, if there are not demonstrable works, a person should be judged unsaved. This traditional interpretation fits in the category of (Salvation truth).
Of course, one of the problems with this view is that rarely, if ever, is good "works" defined. So there is a great assumption that we know what a good work is, can identify it, and can measure it to a standard of approval. As we all know, even those who are not Christians and those who contradict Christianity can do works that look good. Works can also be relative to a person's background and personality. We all progress in our growth and godliness at different rates. Another problem usually ignored is that no one ever seems to declare how many good works are necessary to prove salvation. The works that James specifically addresses in James 2:14-26 involve showing mercy to those who are poor or disadvantaged, which was his previous discussion (vv. 1-13).
As much trouble as this passage has caused commentators and interpreters through the centuries, can I be so bold as to suggest the problem is resolved rather simply by observing the author's purpose and the context of his statements about faith and works? The choice between (Salvation) and (Discipleship) interpretations quickly becomes apparent.
As we often should, we begin by observing who the readers of the epistle are. In the previous discussions of James 1:15 and James 2:12-13 above, we established that the readers are definitely Christians. This carries into our passage when James again addresses his readers as "my brethren" in James 2:1 and James 2:14. In James 2:1, James reminds the readers that they "hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of Glory."
Another key is from the larger context. As James addresses his "beloved brethren" in James 1:19-20, he intends to help his readers produce God's practical righteousness in their lives by addressing their hearing (obedience), their speaking, and their control over anger. Most have observed that these key verses give us an outline of the book. James is writing to help his Christian readers live righteous lives, and that involves obeying God's Word.
We might insert a side note here about the different approaches taken by the apostle Paul and James. Paul also writes to help his readers live righteous lives, but he argues differently from James. Paul argues from the gospel of grace and its results. With him, justification is through faith without works, but it results in a new position and power with God that allows the Christian to overcome sin. Works and righteous living for Paul are the way we can live to show our gratitude for God's grace (Rom. 12:1-2). James, however, argues from practical and eschatological motivations - who is helped, and what are the ramifications for the future judgment of the readers?
Future judgment is often overlooked in this passage, but James 2:14-26 is bracketed by two bookends that speak of this judgment. We have already considered one in 2:13 and conclude that it speaks of the Judgment Seat of Christ. The other, in James 3:1, warns of a "stricter judgment" for those who teach God's Word. Can this be anything other than a judgment for Christians who teach God's Word carelessly? Paul even classifies himself among these teachers with the familiar "we." What judgment does Paul speak of that could include him and others from the readers who teach God's Word? It can only be the Judgment Seat of Christ.
These observations tilt the passage strongly toward a (Discipleship) interpretation and away from the traditional (Salvation) interpretation. Rather than offer a lengthy explanation of the entire passage, it will serve us well to simply make some pertinent points that reinforce the (Discipleship) perspective.
First, the Judgment Seat of Christ looming in the background of this section helps understand the nature of the salvation James speaks of in verse 14, "Can faith save him?" Save from what? To import hell here is unnatural and fits nowhere in the argument. Some might point to the unsaved status of demons who believe (v. 19) and Abraham and Rahab's justification (vv. 21, 24-25). These will be discussed later. We know that the word save means to be delivered from some undesirable fate and is often used apart from the idea of eternal salvation from hell. James uses the word in James 1:21, 5:15, and 5:20 for deliverance from an undesirable fate for Christians (spiritual deadness or physical death; see the discussion of Jas. 1:15). Based on the context of James 2:14-26, salvation must be deliverance from an undesirable fate at the Judgment Seat of Christ. If the readers do not show mercy to those in need, there is no "profit" (v. 16) - the needy are not helped and the readers would be judged without mercy at the bema (James 2:13).
Another issue to resolve is the meaning of "dead" in verses 17 and 26. The traditional (Salvation) interpretation insists on the meaning non-existent. In other words, those who do not show mercy are not saved and never were. In their view, dead faith is no faith at all. The greater context, however, leads us to another understanding of dead in relation to faith. James is not concerned with the reality of his readers' faith, but the quality (James 1:3, 6; 2:1; 5:15) and usefulness (James 1:12, 26; 2:14, 16, 20) of their faith. James is not saying faith will manifest itself in works, but that without works, faith is useless or unprofitable in this life and the next. James' main concern is that his readers become "doers of the word" (James 1:22) which is the same as being a "doer of the work" who will "be blessed in what he does" (James 1:25). For example, faith that perseveres in trials earns a reward from God (James 1:3-12), and faith that is merciful to others receives God's mercy at the Judgment Seat of Christ (James 2:8-13). But faith that does not work is useless towards these blessings and useless in helping others (James 1:26; 2:20 use "useless" in NASB and some other versions). The word "dead" should therefore be understood as useless or unprofitable rather than non-existent. It is used this way in everyday speech:
The battery is dead; the body is dead; the project is dead. What we mean is not that these things do not exist, but that they are not vitalized so as to be useful.
In James 2:19, the faith of demons also shows the uselessness of faith without works. This verse is not about eternal salvation, because demons cannot be saved. Their fate and condemnation is sealed (Matt. 8:29; 25:41; Jude 1:6), which is why they tremble when they think of God. Besides, their faith is in monotheism, not Jesus Christ. The point of their mention is that since they only tremble, they do not do any good works to alleviate a fearful judgment. Their faith is useless to them, but still it exists; it is a real faith. This passage is so often misused it deserves a discussion of its own, but that cannot take place apart from the context. The (Salvation) interpretation of this verse is used to argue that people cannot be saved by faith alone; works have to be demonstrated. The problems with that view should now be obvious: Verse 19 speaks of demons not humans, and of faith in one God not faith in Jesus Christ.
Those who hold the (Salvation) view of James 2:14-26 interpret James' use of justification in the same soteriological sense as the apostle Paul. However, closer examination shows that when James speaks of being "justified by works" (vv. 21, 24, 25), he is not speaking of the imputed justification which saves us eternally as Paul uses the term (Rom. 3:24; 4:5). This indeed would be a contradiction in the Bible. James is speaking of a vindication before others. Paul even recognizes such a use of the word justify in Romans 4:2, where he suggests that Abraham could be justified by works before men but not before God. There are two kinds of justification in the Bible. One concerns practical righteousness that vindicates us before people; the other concerns judicial righteousness that vindicates us before God. James obviously uses the practical sense because Abraham was judicially justified in Genesis 15:6 (James 2:23) before he offered Isaac in Genesis 22 (James 2:21).
His vindication by others is seen when they call him "the friend of God" (v. 23). Thus Abraham's faith was "made perfect" or mature by this demonstration of his faith (v. 22), as also was Rahab's (v. 25).
In James 2:26, James is not saying that faith invigorates works, but that works invigorate faith. It is works which make faith useful, just as the spirit makes the body useful. The issue is not whether faith exists in a person, but how faith becomes profitable or useful to a Christian.
This passage in James is written to Christians to encourage them to do good works, which will make their faith mature and profitable to them and to others. There is no contradiction between James and Paul. In Romans 3-5, Paul is discussing how to obtain a new life in Christ. In James, James is discussing how to make that new life profitable. If this passage is taken to mean that one must demonstrate a "real" salvation through works, then works unavoidably becomes necessary for salvation - a contradiction of Ephesians 2:8-9. Also, there are no criteria mentioned for exactly what kind or how much work verifies salvation. This opens the door to subjectivism and undermines the objective basis of assurance - the promise of God's Word that all who believe in Jesus Christ and His work will be saved.
It is interesting how many evangelical Christians go quickly to this passage to judge the salvation of others or to pressure people into righteous behavior when the major cults like Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons do the same. I am not implying guilt by association, but simply showing that demanding works for salvation negates the grace that distinguishes biblical Christianity from all other religions, cults, and "isms."
We cannot produce the kind of good works that honor God by pressuring people with fear or guilt about the legitimacy of their salvation. Good works must come from higher motives which are a response to the amazing undeserved grace that saves us. When we do such works, we make our faith useful to others and to our final evaluation at the Judgment Seat of Christ.
James intended this (Discipleship teaching) to produce genuine righteousness in believers, not prove their salvation.