James 2:24: "not by faith alone"

"You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone" (James 2:24).

Few verses have been argued over more in this debate. Trent read it as teaching the increase of justification. The justified, says the decree,

"increase in that justice which they have received ... and are still further justified, as it is written; He that is just, let him be justified still; and again, Be not afraid to be justified even to death; and also, Do you see that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only" (Session VI, ch. 10).

Canon 24 condemns anyone who says good works "are merely the fruits and signs of Justification obtained, but not a cause of the increase thereof". This chapter weighs that reading, the three texts the decree cites for it, and the Reformed reply.

Two ways of taking Trent's reading

Trent's claim about James 2:24 can be taken two ways, and each meets different evidence.

  • As a claim about James's word. "Justified" (δικαιόω) in James means the increase of the justice already received: being made more just. Then it meets the evidence about the word. Outside Paul, the word declares, acquits or vindicates: "wisdom is justified by her deeds" (Matthew 11:19, ESV), where "deeds" translates ἔργα, the word James uses for "works". James uses it of Abraham offering Isaac (Genesis 22), long after "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness" (James 2:23, quoting Genesis 15:6), and of Rahab. And a word contributes the least meaning its context requires.
  • As a claim about what works do. James's "justified" is a verdict, and the works it is "by" are a cause of that verdict's increase, not only its fruit (canon 24). Nothing about the word bears on this. It meets the Reformed reading, on which the works are evidence of a living faith, and at that point each side rests on its own confession.

The other two texts Trent cites

Two of Trent's three texts read differently in the Latin Trent quotes and in the Greek.

"He that is just, let him be justified still" is the Latin Vulgate's wording (iustificetur adhuc) at Revelation 22:11. The Greek, as modern critical editions print it, says "let the righteous still do righteousness", and the Catholic Church's own English translation gives "The righteous must still do right". The printed Textus Receptus of the sixteenth century reads "let him be justified still" (δικαιωθήτω), as the Latin does; the critical editions and the Byzantine Majority Text do not.

"Be not afraid to be justified even to death" is the Vulgate's Sirach 18:22. The Greek does have the verb "to be justified" (δικαιωθῆναι), but in a sentence about vows: "let nothing hinder you from paying a vow in due time, and do not wait until death to be justified". The Catholic Church's own translation renders the clause "do not wait until death to fulfill them". So the Latin and the Greek share "until death ... to be justified". They differ in the rest: the Latin has "pray always" and "be not afraid", where the Greek has "pay a vow" and "do not wait".

Pius XII teaches that the original text, "written by the inspired author himself, has more authority and greater weight than any even the very best translation" (Divino Afflante Spiritu §16). Westminster says the same (I.8). So taken as claims about what the inspired authors wrote, the two Latin readings cannot be defended.

Pius XII does not say that a Latin reading absent from the original is an error. Of the Vulgate as a whole he says the opposite. As the Church understands it, it is "free from any error whatsoever in matters of faith and morals", and its authority is "juridical", that is, a matter of the Church's approval, and not a claim about the original wording (§21). Taken that way, Trent's "as it is written" at these two verses quotes the Church's approved Latin and not the inspired author's words, and is consistent with everything Pius XII says (the chapter Trent's two Latin texts). What it then rests on is the Church's authority. Pius XII himself asks that a doctrine taught in this way be confirmed from the original texts (§22), and at these two verses the originals do not confirm it.

The phrase "faith alone"

James 2:24 is the one place in the New Testament where the phrase occurs, and it is often cited as denying sola fide in so many words. The faith James says does not justify is the faith he calls dead (2:17, 2:26). Trent reads it so: faith "unless hope and charity be added thereto ... For which reason it is most truly said, that Faith without works is dead" (Session VI, ch. 7). The Westminster Confession, a Reformed confession of 1647, says the faith that alone justifies "is no dead faith, but worketh by love" (Westminster XI.2). So the phrase James denies is not the formula the Reformers affirm (jamesFaithLine). This answers an argument from the phrase. It does not answer James's "by works", which is the question above.

The words used here

These are the words of the first chapter, which Weighing the positions uses too. One position defeats another when it contradicts something the other rests on, concludes or derives, and is not the weaker. A position is forced when it must be accepted however every tie is settled. It can be defended when some consistent set of positions includes it and answers every attack. It cannot be defended when none does.

What the debate decides

  • Forced (james_words_prevail). James's "justified" does not mean the increase of justice. The faith James 2:24 denies is not the Reformers' faith. Revelation 22:11, in the critical Greek text, does not say "be justified still". Sirach 18:22 in Greek does not say "be not afraid to be justified even to death".
  • Cannot be defended. Trent's reading of James's word (trent_on_james_word_indefensible), and its use of Revelation 22:11 (trent_on_revelation_indefensible) and Sirach 18:22 (trent_on_sirach_indefensible) as texts for the increase of justification.
  • Can be defended, and not forced. Trent's reading of what works do (trent_on_works_defensible, trent_on_works_not_forced), and, against it, the Reformed reconciliation of James with Paul. Whether works are only the fruit of justification is contested at the ratings the sources were given, before they are recomputed under the three standards (worksContested). Trent's reading of the texts that promise a reward (chapter 16, trentRewardLine) meets the Reformed reconciliation in the same way. It also meets Westminster's reading of the same texts (westminsterRewardLine), which denies that the reward is given to merits. When only evidence anyone can check is counted, neither of Trent's readings of what works do stands as an objection, and the Reformed reconciliation is forced (the chapter Why each step is rated as it is).
  • Cannot be defended, at the ratings the sources were given. The reading on which James's word means renewal because Paul's does (renewalWordLine). The argument from James's word defeats it. When a tradition's own teaching is allowed to count as an objection, it does stand as one, and then the question is contested (the chapter Why each step is rated as it is). It also meets the Reformed reconciliation, and the two defeat each other: the reconciliation says James's word does not have Paul's sense, and this reading says it does.

So of the three texts chapter 10 cites, one is left: James 2:24, taken as a claim about what works do before God. Each reading of the three that rests on what a word or a verse says cannot be defended. Trent's reading of the reward texts (chapter 16) can also be defended. No other text was weighed here. What remains is a claim about God's verdict, and there these pages cannot choose.

A rating that was lowered, against the Reformed side

The premise that works are the fruit of faith and not its ground (worksAreFruitNotGround) was rated wellSupported while no position here denied it. In this debate Trent's reading of what works do denies it, and the rating decides who prevails. So the rating was re-examined. Canon 24 condemns exactly that claim. As a premise it is now disputed. Left at wellSupported, it would have made Trent's reading impossible to defend, and that verdict would have come from the rating and not from the evidence.

As a step (fruitLine), its rating is now worked out and not simply assigned (the chapter Why each step is rated as it is). Its support is wellSupported: the Joint Declaration confesses works to be fruits (§37) and not the basis of justification (§25). On whether works contribute anything further, it records the sides apart: Catholics hold that good works "contribute to growth in grace" (§38). Each of Trent's two objections to it rests, at one claim, on the council's own word. So the step stands when only checkable evidence counts, and is disputed when a tradition's teaching counts. This debate weighs the Reformed reconciliation at its weakest link in any case: that James is attacking a barren faith is rated disputed (jamesHarmonySource).

What each position rests on

james_warrants lists, for each position, the claims it makes on someone's word alone. Each of Trent's five readings rests on Trent's word: four at the reading itself, and the reading of the reward texts at the claim that the reward is given to merits. The reading through Paul rests on Trent's word at one claim, that James uses the word as Paul does. The two readings of the Greek rest, at "the original text outweighs any translation", on the word of Pius XII and of Westminster. Both sides accept it, so it decides the matter between them. It is still a claim taken on authority. The argument from James's word, the argument about James's faith, and the Reformed reconciliation rest on nothing but Scripture and evidence. This is reported beside the verdicts and does not affect them.

Westminster's texts for "fruit, not ground"

The Reformed reconciliation does not assume that works are the fruit of faith and not its ground. It derives it (fruitLine) from the texts the Westminster Assembly gave as proofs. Good works "are the fruits and evidences of a true and lively faith" (XVI.2: James 2:18, 22; Ephesians 2:10; Romans 6:22). And "we cannot by our best works merit" (XVI.5: Ephesians 2:8–9; Luke 17:10).

Trent accepts the texts, and the word "fruit": its chapter 16 is headed "On the fruit of Justification, that is, on the merit of good works", and canon 24 condemns only those who call works "merely the fruits and signs". The disagreement is whether the fruit is also merit. Trent's own answer, that the reward the texts promise is given to merits, is a claim it makes on its own word ("we must believe", chapter 16).

So the Reformed reconciliation now rests on Scripture and not on the Confession's word. In this debate, at the ratings the sources were given, whether works are only fruit is still contested (worksContested). When only checkable evidence counts, it is not (the chapter Why each step is rated as it is).

What has been re-examined, and what has not

The steps in the argument from James's word and the argument about James's faith are cited at wellSupported.

The rating of the step about the word is now worked out as well (the chapter Why each step is rated as it is). The strongest known objection to it is the reading that takes James's word as Paul's and Paul's as renewal (renewalWordLine). That reading accepts the step's starting points and argues for the opposite conclusion. But one of its own starting points, that James uses the word as Paul does, rests on Trent's word alone. So the step stands at wellSupported when only checkable evidence counts, and is disputed when a tradition's teaching counts. This debate weighs it at its cited rating, the first of these. A scholar, verified, who holds that James's word is Paul's would make that objection stand either way, and the step disputed either way.

The step about James's faith has no objection written down here beyond Howell's, which states the opposite without arguing it (TestimonyArguments.Articles.Howell2003). A fuller search across the Catholic commentaries on James is still to be done.

How this is checked

The positions, steps and results behind this chapter, each with the formula or the Lean that checks it

How each step is rated

jamesLexicalSource

The step from three things to "James's 'justified' does not mean the increase of justice": how the word (δικαιόω) is used outside Paul, how James himself uses it, and the rule of least meaning. Its rating has yet to be re-examined.

def jamesLexicalSource : Source :=
  {
    primary :=
      Reference.work mooJames
        (Bib.Locus.adLoc { book := Book.james, chapter := 2, verse := 21 }),
    supporting :=
      [Reference.work silvaBiblicalWords, Reference.work barrSemantics],
    tradition := Tradition.christianHistoricalGrammatical,
    confidence := Confidence.wellSupported }

jamesFaithSource

The step from James 2:14–26, the dead faith it names, and what the Reformers' formula means, to "the faith James 2:24 denies is not the Reformers' faith". Its rating has yet to be re-examined.

def jamesFaithSource : Source :=
  {
    primary :=
      Reference.work mooJames
        (Bib.Locus.adLoc { book := Book.james, chapter := 2, verse := 24 }),
    supporting :=
      [Reference.work westminsterConfession (Bib.Locus.sectionRef "XI.2")],
    tradition := Tradition.christianHistoricalGrammatical,
    confidence := Confidence.wellSupported }

trentIncreaseSource

Trent's reading of its three texts as teaching the increase of justification (Session VI, ch. 10). Rated disputed: the Reformed accept the texts and deny that they teach it.

def trentIncreaseSource : Source :=
  {
    primary :=
      Reference.work tannerDecrees
        (Bib.Locus.sectionRef "Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10"),
    tradition := Tradition.romanCatholic, confidence := Confidence.disputed }

trentWorksSource

Trent's reading of what works do (Session VI, canon 24), applied to "by works" in James 2:24. Rated disputed: the Reformed accept James's words and read the works as evidence, not cause.

def trentWorksSource : Source :=
  {
    primary :=
      Reference.work tannerDecrees
        (Bib.Locus.sectionRef "Trent, Session VI (1547), canon 24"),
    tradition := Tradition.romanCatholic, confidence := Confidence.disputed }

textualSource

The step from what the original text says, and the principle that it outweighs any translation, to "the inspired text does not say what the Latin says". Rated wellSupported: Pius XII (Divino Afflante Spiritu §16) and Westminster (I.8) both make the original the measure of a translation, and no reader was found who accepts both and holds that the inspired author wrote what only the Latin has.

def textualSource : Source :=
  {
    primary :=
      Reference.work divinoAfflanteSpiritu (Bib.Locus.sectionRef "§16"),
    supporting := [Reference.work sblgnt, Reference.work nabre],
    tradition := Tradition.christianHistoricalGrammatical,
    confidence := Confidence.wellSupported }

jamesHarmonySource

The step in the Reformed reconciliation: from "James attacks a barren faith" and "works are the fruit of saving faith" to "James 2:24 does not contradict Paul". Rated disputed: Trent accepts James's words and reads the works as a cause of the increase of justification (Session VI, ch. 10, canon 24).

def jamesHarmonySource : Source :=
  {
    primary :=
      Reference.work mooJames
        (Bib.Locus.adLoc { book := Book.james, chapter := 2, verse := 24 }),
    supporting :=
      [Reference.work Bib.calvinInstitutes
          (Bib.Locus.sectionRef "III.xvii.11")],
    tradition := Tradition.reformedProtestant,
    confidence := Confidence.disputed }

trentRewardSource

Trent's step from the texts that promise a reward, and the reward as given to merits, to "works are not merely fruit". Eternal life is "a reward to be faithfully rendered to their good works and merits" (Session VI, ch. 16), and the good works of the justified truly merit it (canon 32). Rated disputed: Westminster accepts that God rewards the good works of believers, and holds the reward to be of grace, given to works accepted in Christ and not earned by them (XVI.5, XVI.6).

def trentRewardSource : Source :=
  {
    primary :=
      Reference.work tannerDecrees
        (Bib.Locus.sectionRef "Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 16, canon 32"),
    supporting :=
      [Reference.work westminsterConfession
          (Bib.Locus.sectionRef "XVI.5, XVI.6")],
    tradition := Tradition.romanCatholic, confidence := Confidence.disputed }

renewalWordSource

The step in the reading that takes James's word through Paul's: from Paul's "justify" as renewal, James's word as Paul's, and James's "justified by works" coming after Genesis 15:6, to "James's 'justified' means the increase of justice" (Trent, Session VI, ch. 10). Rated disputed: the argument from James's word accepts James's words and denies the conclusion.

def renewalWordSource : Source :=
  {
    primary :=
      Reference.work tannerDecrees
        (Bib.Locus.sectionRef "Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10"),
    supporting := [Reference.work vanLandinghamJudgment],
    tradition := Tradition.romanCatholic, confidence := Confidence.disputed }

westminsterRewardSource

Westminster's step from the texts it gives as proofs to "the reward is not given to merits". God does not forget the work of believers (Hebrews 6:10, a proof of XVI.6, and one of Trent's own four texts). When they have done all, they are unworthy servants who have done only their duty (Luke 17:10, XVI.5). To one who works, wages are counted as due, and to one who believes, as a gift (Romans 4:4–5, XVI.5). And their sacrifices are acceptable to God through Jesus Christ (1 Peter 2:5, XVI.6). So God "is pleased to accept and reward" works accepted in his Son, and the reward is of grace, not merit (XVI.5, XVI.6). Rated disputed: Trent accepts these texts and holds the reward to be given to merits (Session VI, ch. 16, canon 32).

def westminsterRewardSource : Source :=
  {
    primary :=
      Reference.work westminsterConfession
        (Bib.Locus.sectionRef "XVI.5, XVI.6"),
    tradition := Tradition.reformedProtestant,
    confidence := Confidence.disputed }

The lines of argument

jamesLexicalLine — James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning)

James's word, read by the rule of least meaning. Outside Paul, "justify" (δικαιόω) declares, acquits or vindicates. James uses it of Abraham at Genesis 22, after Genesis 15:6 had been spoken, and of Rahab. And a word contributes the least meaning its context requires. So James's "justified" does not mean the increase of justice.

  • (1) \(\href{claims.html#claim-85}{P_{85}}\) — Outside Paul, ‘justify’ (δικαιόω) declares or vindicates; it does not mean making righteous
  • (2) \(\href{claims.html#claim-84}{P_{84}}\) — James 2:21–25: Abraham justified by works at Genesis 22, fulfilling Genesis 15:6; Rahab justified by works
  • (3) \(\href{claims.html#claim-51}{P_{51}}\) — A word contributes the least meaning its context requires; one occurrence does not carry the whole concept
  • (4) \((\href{claims.html#claim-85}{P_{85}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-84}{P_{84}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-51}{P_{51}}) \rightarrow \lnot \href{claims.html#claim-86}{P_{86}}\)
  • \(\vdash\) \(\lnot \href{claims.html#claim-86}{P_{86}}\) — at issue, the denial of: James's ‘justified’ (δικαιόω) means the increase of the justice received

jamesFaithLine — James's faith (the faith James calls dead)

James's faith. The faith that James 2:24 says does not justify is the faith apart from works that he calls dead. The faith the Reformers say alone justifies is no dead faith. So the phrase James denies is not the formula they affirm.

  • (1) \(\href{claims.html#claim-83}{P_{83}}\) — James 2:14–26: faith without works cannot save, and is dead (2:17, 2:26)
  • (2) \(\href{claims.html#claim-87}{P_{87}}\) — The faith alone that James 2:24 denies justifies is the dead faith of 2:14–26
  • (3) \(\href{claims.html#claim-88}{P_{88}}\) — The faith the Reformers say alone justifies is no dead faith, but works by love
  • (4) \((\href{claims.html#claim-83}{P_{83}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-87}{P_{87}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-88}{P_{88}}) \rightarrow \href{claims.html#claim-89}{P_{89}}\)
  • \(\vdash\) \(\href{claims.html#claim-89}{P_{89}}\) — at issue: The faith James 2:24 denies justifies is not the faith of the Reformers' formula

catholicJamesWordLine — James 2:24, read for the increase of justification

Trent's reading of James's word: "justified by works" is the increase of the justice received, so James 2:24 teaches the increase of justification.

  • (1) \(\href{claims.html#claim-23}{P_{23}}\) — James 2:24 says a person is justified by works and not by faith alone
  • (2) \(\href{claims.html#claim-84}{P_{84}}\) — James 2:21–25: Abraham justified by works at Genesis 22, fulfilling Genesis 15:6; Rahab justified by works
  • (3) \(\href{claims.html#claim-86}{P_{86}}\) — James's ‘justified’ (δικαιόω) means the increase of the justice received
  • (4) \((\href{claims.html#claim-23}{P_{23}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-84}{P_{84}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-86}{P_{86}}) \rightarrow \href{claims.html#claim-90}{P_{90}}\)
  • \(\vdash\) \(\href{claims.html#claim-90}{P_{90}}\) — at issue: Scripture teaches an increase of justification by good works

catholicJamesWorksLine — James 2:24, read by canon 24

Trent's reading of what works do, applied to James 2:24: the works by which a person is justified are a cause of the increase, so they are not merely fruit and evidence.

  • (1) \(\href{claims.html#claim-23}{P_{23}}\) — James 2:24 says a person is justified by works and not by faith alone
  • (2) \(\href{claims.html#claim-84}{P_{84}}\) — James 2:21–25: Abraham justified by works at Genesis 22, fulfilling Genesis 15:6; Rahab justified by works
  • (3) \(\href{claims.html#claim-91}{P_{91}}\) — Good works are a cause of the increase of justification, not merely its fruits
  • (4) \((\href{claims.html#claim-23}{P_{23}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-84}{P_{84}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-91}{P_{91}}) \rightarrow \lnot \href{claims.html#claim-21}{P_{21}}\)
  • \(\vdash\) \(\lnot \href{claims.html#claim-21}{P_{21}}\) — at issue, the denial of: Good works are the fruit and evidence of saving faith, not its ground

trentRevelationLine — Revelation 22:11, as Trent quotes it

Trent's Revelation 22:11: "He that is just, let him be justified still".

  • (1) \(\href{claims.html#claim-92}{P_{92}}\) — Revelation 22:11 says: he that is just, let him be justified still
  • (2) \(\href{claims.html#claim-92}{P_{92}} \rightarrow \href{claims.html#claim-90}{P_{90}}\)
  • \(\vdash\) \(\href{claims.html#claim-90}{P_{90}}\) — at issue: Scripture teaches an increase of justification by good works

trentSirachLine — Sirach 18:22, as Trent quotes it

Trent's Sirach 18:22: "Be not afraid to be justified even to death".

  • (1) \(\href{claims.html#claim-94}{P_{94}}\) — Sirach 18:22 says: be not afraid to be justified even to death
  • (2) \(\href{claims.html#claim-94}{P_{94}} \rightarrow \href{claims.html#claim-90}{P_{90}}\)
  • \(\vdash\) \(\href{claims.html#claim-90}{P_{90}}\) — at issue: Scripture teaches an increase of justification by good works

revelationTextLine — Revelation 22:11, in the Greek

Revelation 22:11 in Greek. The verse says "let the righteous still do righteousness". The original outweighs any translation. So its inspired text does not say "be justified still".

  • (1) \(\href{claims.html#claim-93}{P_{93}}\) — The Greek of Revelation 22:11 says: let the righteous still do righteousness
  • (2) \(\href{claims.html#claim-96}{P_{96}}\) — The original text, written by the inspired author, outweighs any translation: a reading it lacks is not his word
  • (3) \((\href{claims.html#claim-93}{P_{93}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-96}{P_{96}}) \rightarrow \lnot \href{claims.html#claim-92}{P_{92}}\)
  • \(\vdash\) \(\lnot \href{claims.html#claim-92}{P_{92}}\) — at issue, the denial of: Revelation 22:11 says: he that is just, let him be justified still

sirachTextLine — Sirach 18:22, in the Greek

Sirach 18:22 in Greek. The verse is about paying a vow promptly, and says "do not wait until death to be justified". The original outweighs any translation. So its inspired text does not say what the Latin says, "be not afraid to be justified even to death".

  • (1) \(\href{claims.html#claim-95}{P_{95}}\) — The Greek of Sirach 18:22 is about paying a vow: do not wait until death to be justified
  • (2) \(\href{claims.html#claim-96}{P_{96}}\) — The original text, written by the inspired author, outweighs any translation: a reading it lacks is not his word
  • (3) \((\href{claims.html#claim-95}{P_{95}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-96}{P_{96}}) \rightarrow \lnot \href{claims.html#claim-94}{P_{94}}\)
  • \(\vdash\) \(\lnot \href{claims.html#claim-94}{P_{94}}\) — at issue, the denial of: Sirach 18:22 says: be not afraid to be justified even to death

trentRewardLine — The reward of works (Trent, Session VI, ch. 16)

The reward of works, as Trent reads it. God rewards the labour of believers (1 Corinthians 15:58, Hebrews 6:10, Hebrews 10:35, 2 Timothy 4:8). The reward is given to those works as merits (chapter 16, canon 32). So works are not merely the fruit of justification. The second premise is stated as Trent states it. The texts say "reward"; that the reward is given to merits is the council's own claim, introduced with "we must believe".

  • (1) \(\href{claims.html#claim-105}{P_{105}}\) — 1 Cor 15:58; Heb 6:10; 10:35; 2 Tim 4:8: God rewards the labor of believers
  • (2) \(\href{claims.html#claim-107}{P_{107}}\) — The reward God renders to the works of the justified is rendered to them as merits
  • (3) \((\href{claims.html#claim-105}{P_{105}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-107}{P_{107}}) \rightarrow \lnot \href{claims.html#claim-21}{P_{21}}\)
  • \(\vdash\) \(\lnot \href{claims.html#claim-21}{P_{21}}\) — at issue, the denial of: Good works are the fruit and evidence of saving faith, not its ground

renewalWordLine — James's word, read through Paul's (the renewal reading)

James's word, read through Paul's. Paul's "justify" (δικαιόω) means the renewal of the inward person, as Augustine explained it and as VanLandingham argues from the lexicon. James uses the word as Paul does. And James says Abraham was justified by works at Genesis 22, after Genesis 15:6 had been spoken. So James's "justified" means the increase of the justice received.

This is the strongest reading of the word against the argument from James's usage that has been found: it argues for the increase from Paul's word, and does not merely state it.

  • (1) \(\href{claims.html#claim-52}{P_{52}}\) — Paul's word ‘justify’ means the renewal of the inward man, not only a verdict
  • (2) \(\href{claims.html#claim-106}{P_{106}}\) — James's ‘justify’ (δικαιόω) has the sense Paul's has: the justification of Romans and Galatians
  • (3) \(\href{claims.html#claim-84}{P_{84}}\) — James 2:21–25: Abraham justified by works at Genesis 22, fulfilling Genesis 15:6; Rahab justified by works
  • (4) \((\href{claims.html#claim-52}{P_{52}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-106}{P_{106}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-84}{P_{84}}) \rightarrow \href{claims.html#claim-86}{P_{86}}\)
  • \(\vdash\) \(\href{claims.html#claim-86}{P_{86}}\) — at issue: James's ‘justified’ (δικαιόω) means the increase of the justice received

westminsterRewardLine — The reward of works, of grace (Westminster XVI.5, XVI.6)

The reward of works, as Westminster reads it (XVI.5, XVI.6). God rewards the labour of believers, Hebrews 6:10 among the texts. Having done all, they are unworthy servants who have done only their duty (Luke 17:10). Wages are counted as due to one who works, and as a gift to one who believes (Romans 4:4–5). And their sacrifices are acceptable to God through Jesus Christ (1 Peter 2:5). So the reward is not given to their works as merits. Every premise is a text, and Westminster gives each as a proof of these sections. What is Westminster's own is the step, a reading of the texts, rated disputed.

  • (1) \(\href{claims.html#claim-105}{P_{105}}\) — 1 Cor 15:58; Heb 6:10; 10:35; 2 Tim 4:8: God rewards the labor of believers
  • (2) \(\href{claims.html#claim-104}{P_{104}}\) — Luke 17:10: having done all that was commanded, we are unworthy servants
  • (3) \(\href{claims.html#claim-4}{P_{4}}\) — Romans 4:4–5 contrasts wages owed with a gift reckoned to the one who believes
  • (4) \(\href{claims.html#claim-108}{P_{108}}\) — 1 Peter 2:5: spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ
  • (5) \((\href{claims.html#claim-105}{P_{105}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-104}{P_{104}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-4}{P_{4}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-108}{P_{108}}) \rightarrow \lnot \href{claims.html#claim-107}{P_{107}}\)
  • \(\vdash\) \(\lnot \href{claims.html#claim-107}{P_{107}}\) — at issue, the denial of: The reward God renders to the works of the justified is rendered to them as merits

The positions

jamesLexicalCase — James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning)

James's word: "justified" in James does not mean the increase of justice.

  • (1) \(\href{claims.html#claim-85}{P_{85}}\) — Outside Paul, ‘justify’ (δικαιόω) declares or vindicates; it does not mean making righteous
  • (2) \(\href{claims.html#claim-84}{P_{84}}\) — James 2:21–25: Abraham justified by works at Genesis 22, fulfilling Genesis 15:6; Rahab justified by works
  • (3) \(\href{claims.html#claim-51}{P_{51}}\) — A word contributes the least meaning its context requires; one occurrence does not carry the whole concept
  • (4) \((\href{claims.html#claim-85}{P_{85}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-84}{P_{84}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-51}{P_{51}}) \rightarrow \lnot \href{claims.html#claim-86}{P_{86}}\)
  • \(\vdash\) \(\lnot \href{claims.html#claim-86}{P_{86}}\) — at issue, the denial of: James's ‘justified’ (δικαιόω) means the increase of the justice received

Grounded in scripture alone: James 2:21–25: Abraham justified by works at Genesis 22, fulfilling Genesis 15:6; Rahab justified by works.

jamesFaithCase — James's faith (the faith James calls dead)

James's faith: the phrase James denies is not the Reformers' formula.

  • (1) \(\href{claims.html#claim-83}{P_{83}}\) — James 2:14–26: faith without works cannot save, and is dead (2:17, 2:26)
  • (2) \(\href{claims.html#claim-87}{P_{87}}\) — The faith alone that James 2:24 denies justifies is the dead faith of 2:14–26
  • (3) \(\href{claims.html#claim-88}{P_{88}}\) — The faith the Reformers say alone justifies is no dead faith, but works by love
  • (4) \((\href{claims.html#claim-83}{P_{83}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-87}{P_{87}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-88}{P_{88}}) \rightarrow \href{claims.html#claim-89}{P_{89}}\)
  • \(\vdash\) \(\href{claims.html#claim-89}{P_{89}}\) — at issue: The faith James 2:24 denies justifies is not the faith of the Reformers' formula

No premise here rests on scripture alone.

fruitSource

Westminster's reading of its proof texts: from Ephesians 2:8–10, James 2:18–22, Romans 6:22 and Luke 17:10 to "works are the fruit and evidence of saving faith, not its ground" (XVI.2, XVI.5).

This rates how well the step is supported, and it is wellSupported. The Reformed confess it. The Lutheran World Federation and the Catholic Church confess two parts of it together: good works "follow justification and are its fruits" (§37), and "whatever in the justified precedes or follows the free gift of faith is neither the basis of justification nor merits it" (§25, Joint Declaration).

They do not confess that works are only fruit. The Declaration records the Catholic understanding that good works "contribute to growth in grace, so that the righteousness that comes from God is preserved and communion with Christ is deepened" (§38). That is the point canon 24 makes, and it is weighed as Trent's objection, not as part of this step's support.

Whether an objection brings the step down is worked out separately (the chapter Why each step is rated as it is). Trent objects twice: in canon 24, and in chapter 16's reading of the reward texts. When a tradition's teaching counts, both stand, and the step is disputed. When only checkable evidence counts, neither does, because each rests at one claim on the council's word.

def fruitSource : Source :=
  {
    primary :=
      Reference.work westminsterConfession
        (Bib.Locus.sectionRef "XVI.2, XVI.5"),
    supporting :=
      [Reference.work jointDeclarationJustification
          (Bib.Locus.sectionRef "§§25, 37; see §38")],
    tradition := Tradition.reformedProtestant,
    confidence := Confidence.wellSupported }

fruitLine — Works as fruit (Westminster XVI.2, XVI.5, and its proofs)

Works as fruit, from Westminster's proof texts. "Not a result of works", and "created in Christ Jesus for good works" (Ephesians 2:8–10). Faith shown by works (James 2:18, 22). "The fruit you get leads to sanctification" (Romans 6:22). "We are unworthy servants; we have only done what was our duty" (Luke 17:10). So works are the fruit and evidence of saving faith, not its ground.

  • (1) \(\href{claims.html#claim-1}{P_{1}}\) — Ephesians 2:8–9 teaches salvation by grace through faith, not of works
  • (2) \(\href{claims.html#claim-101}{P_{101}}\) — Ephesians 2:10: created in Christ Jesus for good works, after 'not a result of works'
  • (3) \(\href{claims.html#claim-102}{P_{102}}\) — James 2:18, 22: I will show you my faith by my works; faith completed by works
  • (4) \(\href{claims.html#claim-103}{P_{103}}\) — Romans 6:22: the fruit you get leads to sanctification, and its end is eternal life
  • (5) \(\href{claims.html#claim-104}{P_{104}}\) — Luke 17:10: having done all that was commanded, we are unworthy servants
  • (6) \((\href{claims.html#claim-1}{P_{1}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-101}{P_{101}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-102}{P_{102}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-103}{P_{103}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-104}{P_{104}}) \rightarrow \href{claims.html#claim-21}{P_{21}}\)
  • \(\vdash\) \(\href{claims.html#claim-21}{P_{21}}\) — at issue: Good works are the fruit and evidence of saving faith, not its ground

jamesHarmonyCase — Harmonisation of James 2:24

The Reformed reconciliation of James with Paul: James is attacking a barren faith, and works are the fruit of saving faith and not its ground. The second point is derived from Westminster's proof texts, not assumed. The line here is jamesLine with "fruit, not ground" taken from fruitLine.

  • (1) \(\href{claims.html#claim-1}{P_{1}}\) — Ephesians 2:8–9 teaches salvation by grace through faith, not of works
  • (2) \(\href{claims.html#claim-101}{P_{101}}\) — Ephesians 2:10: created in Christ Jesus for good works, after 'not a result of works'
  • (3) \(\href{claims.html#claim-102}{P_{102}}\) — James 2:18, 22: I will show you my faith by my works; faith completed by works
  • (4) \(\href{claims.html#claim-103}{P_{103}}\) — Romans 6:22: the fruit you get leads to sanctification, and its end is eternal life
  • (5) \(\href{claims.html#claim-104}{P_{104}}\) — Luke 17:10: having done all that was commanded, we are unworthy servants
  • (6) \(\href{claims.html#claim-20}{P_{20}}\) — James 2:14–26 targets a barren faith — mere assent — not Paul's doctrine
  • (7) \((\href{claims.html#claim-1}{P_{1}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-101}{P_{101}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-102}{P_{102}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-103}{P_{103}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-104}{P_{104}}) \rightarrow \href{claims.html#claim-21}{P_{21}}\) — would give: Good works are the fruit and evidence of saving faith, not its ground
  • (8) \((\href{claims.html#claim-20}{P_{20}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-21}{P_{21}}) \rightarrow \href{claims.html#claim-22}{P_{22}}\)
  • \(\vdash\) \(\href{claims.html#claim-22}{P_{22}}\) — at issue: James 2:24 is compatible with Paul, using ‘justify’ in a different sense

No premise here rests on scripture alone.

catholicJamesOnTheWord — James 2:24, read for the increase of justification

Trent on James's word: James 2:24 teaches the increase of justification, because that is what James's "justified" means.

  • (1) \(\href{claims.html#claim-23}{P_{23}}\) — James 2:24 says a person is justified by works and not by faith alone
  • (2) \(\href{claims.html#claim-84}{P_{84}}\) — James 2:21–25: Abraham justified by works at Genesis 22, fulfilling Genesis 15:6; Rahab justified by works
  • (3) \(\href{claims.html#claim-86}{P_{86}}\) — James's ‘justified’ (δικαιόω) means the increase of the justice received
  • (4) \((\href{claims.html#claim-23}{P_{23}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-84}{P_{84}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-86}{P_{86}}) \rightarrow \href{claims.html#claim-90}{P_{90}}\)
  • \(\vdash\) \(\href{claims.html#claim-90}{P_{90}}\) — at issue: Scripture teaches an increase of justification by good works

Grounded in scripture alone: James 2:21–25: Abraham justified by works at Genesis 22, fulfilling Genesis 15:6; Rahab justified by works.

catholicJamesOnWorks — James 2:24, read by canon 24

Trent on what works do: the works of James 2:24 are a cause of the increase of justification, not merely its fruit.

  • (1) \(\href{claims.html#claim-23}{P_{23}}\) — James 2:24 says a person is justified by works and not by faith alone
  • (2) \(\href{claims.html#claim-84}{P_{84}}\) — James 2:21–25: Abraham justified by works at Genesis 22, fulfilling Genesis 15:6; Rahab justified by works
  • (3) \(\href{claims.html#claim-91}{P_{91}}\) — Good works are a cause of the increase of justification, not merely its fruits
  • (4) \((\href{claims.html#claim-23}{P_{23}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-84}{P_{84}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-91}{P_{91}}) \rightarrow \lnot \href{claims.html#claim-21}{P_{21}}\)
  • \(\vdash\) \(\lnot \href{claims.html#claim-21}{P_{21}}\) — at issue, the denial of: Good works are the fruit and evidence of saving faith, not its ground

Grounded in scripture alone: James 2:21–25: Abraham justified by works at Genesis 22, fulfilling Genesis 15:6; Rahab justified by works.

trentOnRevelation — Revelation 22:11, as Trent quotes it

Trent on Revelation 22:11.

  • (1) \(\href{claims.html#claim-92}{P_{92}}\) — Revelation 22:11 says: he that is just, let him be justified still
  • (2) \(\href{claims.html#claim-92}{P_{92}} \rightarrow \href{claims.html#claim-90}{P_{90}}\)
  • \(\vdash\) \(\href{claims.html#claim-90}{P_{90}}\) — at issue: Scripture teaches an increase of justification by good works

No premise here rests on scripture alone.

trentOnSirach — Sirach 18:22, as Trent quotes it

Trent on Sirach 18:22.

  • (1) \(\href{claims.html#claim-94}{P_{94}}\) — Sirach 18:22 says: be not afraid to be justified even to death
  • (2) \(\href{claims.html#claim-94}{P_{94}} \rightarrow \href{claims.html#claim-90}{P_{90}}\)
  • \(\vdash\) \(\href{claims.html#claim-90}{P_{90}}\) — at issue: Scripture teaches an increase of justification by good works

No premise here rests on scripture alone.

revelationTextCase — Revelation 22:11, in the Greek

What Revelation 22:11 says, in the Greek.

  • (1) \(\href{claims.html#claim-93}{P_{93}}\) — The Greek of Revelation 22:11 says: let the righteous still do righteousness
  • (2) \(\href{claims.html#claim-96}{P_{96}}\) — The original text, written by the inspired author, outweighs any translation: a reading it lacks is not his word
  • (3) \((\href{claims.html#claim-93}{P_{93}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-96}{P_{96}}) \rightarrow \lnot \href{claims.html#claim-92}{P_{92}}\)
  • \(\vdash\) \(\lnot \href{claims.html#claim-92}{P_{92}}\) — at issue, the denial of: Revelation 22:11 says: he that is just, let him be justified still

No premise here rests on scripture alone.

sirachTextCase — Sirach 18:22, in the Greek

What Sirach 18:22 says, in the Greek.

  • (1) \(\href{claims.html#claim-95}{P_{95}}\) — The Greek of Sirach 18:22 is about paying a vow: do not wait until death to be justified
  • (2) \(\href{claims.html#claim-96}{P_{96}}\) — The original text, written by the inspired author, outweighs any translation: a reading it lacks is not his word
  • (3) \((\href{claims.html#claim-95}{P_{95}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-96}{P_{96}}) \rightarrow \lnot \href{claims.html#claim-94}{P_{94}}\)
  • \(\vdash\) \(\lnot \href{claims.html#claim-94}{P_{94}}\) — at issue, the denial of: Sirach 18:22 says: be not afraid to be justified even to death

No premise here rests on scripture alone.

trentOnReward — The reward of works (Trent, Session VI, ch. 16)

Trent on the reward of works: what God rewards is not merely fruit.

  • (1) \(\href{claims.html#claim-105}{P_{105}}\) — 1 Cor 15:58; Heb 6:10; 10:35; 2 Tim 4:8: God rewards the labor of believers
  • (2) \(\href{claims.html#claim-107}{P_{107}}\) — The reward God renders to the works of the justified is rendered to them as merits
  • (3) \((\href{claims.html#claim-105}{P_{105}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-107}{P_{107}}) \rightarrow \lnot \href{claims.html#claim-21}{P_{21}}\)
  • \(\vdash\) \(\lnot \href{claims.html#claim-21}{P_{21}}\) — at issue, the denial of: Good works are the fruit and evidence of saving faith, not its ground

No premise here rests on scripture alone.

westminsterOnReward — The reward of works, of grace (Westminster XVI.5, XVI.6)

Westminster on the reward of works: the reward is of grace, and is not given to merits.

  • (1) \(\href{claims.html#claim-105}{P_{105}}\) — 1 Cor 15:58; Heb 6:10; 10:35; 2 Tim 4:8: God rewards the labor of believers
  • (2) \(\href{claims.html#claim-104}{P_{104}}\) — Luke 17:10: having done all that was commanded, we are unworthy servants
  • (3) \(\href{claims.html#claim-4}{P_{4}}\) — Romans 4:4–5 contrasts wages owed with a gift reckoned to the one who believes
  • (4) \(\href{claims.html#claim-108}{P_{108}}\) — 1 Peter 2:5: spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ
  • (5) \((\href{claims.html#claim-105}{P_{105}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-104}{P_{104}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-4}{P_{4}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-108}{P_{108}}) \rightarrow \lnot \href{claims.html#claim-107}{P_{107}}\)
  • \(\vdash\) \(\lnot \href{claims.html#claim-107}{P_{107}}\) — at issue, the denial of: The reward God renders to the works of the justified is rendered to them as merits

No premise here rests on scripture alone.

renewalOnTheWord — James's word, read through Paul's (the renewal reading)

The reading through Paul: James's "justified" means the increase of justice, because Paul's word means renewal and James's is Paul's.

  • (1) \(\href{claims.html#claim-52}{P_{52}}\) — Paul's word ‘justify’ means the renewal of the inward man, not only a verdict
  • (2) \(\href{claims.html#claim-106}{P_{106}}\) — James's ‘justify’ (δικαιόω) has the sense Paul's has: the justification of Romans and Galatians
  • (3) \(\href{claims.html#claim-84}{P_{84}}\) — James 2:21–25: Abraham justified by works at Genesis 22, fulfilling Genesis 15:6; Rahab justified by works
  • (4) \((\href{claims.html#claim-52}{P_{52}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-106}{P_{106}} \land \href{claims.html#claim-84}{P_{84}}) \rightarrow \href{claims.html#claim-86}{P_{86}}\)
  • \(\vdash\) \(\href{claims.html#claim-86}{P_{86}}\) — at issue: James's ‘justified’ (δικαιόω) means the increase of the justice received

Grounded in scripture alone: James 2:21–25: Abraham justified by works at Genesis 22, fulfilling Genesis 15:6; Rahab justified by works.

Each position holds together and reaches its conclusion

reformedJamesReading

The Reformed reading of James. Every text as it stands. James's "justified" a declaration and not an increase. The faith James denies not the Reformers' faith. Trent's Latin readings of Revelation 22:11 and Sirach 18:22 not what the verses say. And the reward of works not given to them as merits.

def reformedJamesReading : Valuation Claim :=
  fun a =>
    match a with
    | Claim.jamesJustifyDenotesIncrease => False
    | Claim.worksCauseIncreaseOfJustification => False
    | Claim.rev22_11BeJustifiedStill => False
    | Claim.sir18_22BeJustifiedToDeath => False
    | Claim.scriptureTeachesIncreaseOfJustification => False
    | Claim.rewardRenderedToMerits => False
    | x => True

tridentineJamesReading

Trent's reading of James. Every text as Trent reads it: James's "justified" the increase of justice, its works a cause of that increase and not merely fruit, and Revelation 22:11 and Sirach 18:22 as the Latin has them.

def tridentineJamesReading : Valuation Claim :=
  fun a =>
    match a with
    | Claim.worksAreFruitNotGround => False
    | x => True

jamesLexicalCase_establishes

The argument from James's word reaches its conclusion.

theorem jamesLexicalCase_establishes : Establishes jamesLexicalCase
-- axioms: propext, Quot.sound

jamesLexicalCase_is_satisfiable

The argument from James's word can be held without contradiction.

theorem jamesLexicalCase_is_satisfiable : Satisfiable
    jamesLexicalCase.premises
-- axioms: propext, Quot.sound

jamesFaithCase_establishes

The argument about James's faith reaches its conclusion.

theorem jamesFaithCase_establishes : Establishes jamesFaithCase
-- axioms: propext, Quot.sound

jamesFaithCase_is_satisfiable

The argument about James's faith can be held without contradiction.

theorem jamesFaithCase_is_satisfiable : Satisfiable jamesFaithCase.premises
-- axioms: propext, Quot.sound

jamesHarmonyCase_establishes

The Reformed reconciliation reaches its conclusion.

theorem jamesHarmonyCase_establishes : Establishes jamesHarmonyCase
-- axioms: propext, Quot.sound

jamesHarmonyCase_is_satisfiable

The Reformed reconciliation can be held without contradiction.

theorem jamesHarmonyCase_is_satisfiable : Satisfiable
    jamesHarmonyCase.premises
-- axioms: propext, Quot.sound

catholicJamesOnTheWord_establishes

Trent on James's word reaches its conclusion.

theorem catholicJamesOnTheWord_establishes : Establishes
    catholicJamesOnTheWord
-- axioms: propext, Quot.sound

catholicJamesOnTheWord_is_satisfiable

Trent on James's word can be held without contradiction.

theorem catholicJamesOnTheWord_is_satisfiable : Satisfiable
    catholicJamesOnTheWord.premises
-- axioms: propext, Quot.sound

catholicJamesOnWorks_establishes

Trent on what works do reaches its conclusion.

theorem catholicJamesOnWorks_establishes : Establishes catholicJamesOnWorks
-- axioms: propext, Quot.sound

catholicJamesOnWorks_is_satisfiable

Trent on what works do can be held without contradiction.

theorem catholicJamesOnWorks_is_satisfiable : Satisfiable
    catholicJamesOnWorks.premises
-- axioms: propext, Quot.sound

trentOnRevelation_establishes

Trent on Revelation 22:11 reaches its conclusion.

theorem trentOnRevelation_establishes : Establishes trentOnRevelation
-- axioms: propext, Quot.sound

trentOnRevelation_is_satisfiable

Trent on Revelation 22:11 can be held without contradiction.

theorem trentOnRevelation_is_satisfiable : Satisfiable
    trentOnRevelation.premises
-- axioms: propext, Quot.sound

trentOnSirach_establishes

Trent on Sirach 18:22 reaches its conclusion.

theorem trentOnSirach_establishes : Establishes trentOnSirach
-- axioms: propext, Quot.sound

trentOnSirach_is_satisfiable

Trent on Sirach 18:22 can be held without contradiction.

theorem trentOnSirach_is_satisfiable : Satisfiable trentOnSirach.premises
-- axioms: propext, Quot.sound

revelationTextCase_establishes

The Greek of Revelation 22:11 reaches its conclusion.

theorem revelationTextCase_establishes : Establishes revelationTextCase
-- axioms: propext, Quot.sound

revelationTextCase_is_satisfiable

The Greek of Revelation 22:11 can be held without contradiction.

theorem revelationTextCase_is_satisfiable : Satisfiable
    revelationTextCase.premises
-- axioms: propext, Quot.sound

sirachTextCase_establishes

The Greek of Sirach 18:22 reaches its conclusion.

theorem sirachTextCase_establishes : Establishes sirachTextCase
-- axioms: propext, Quot.sound

sirachTextCase_is_satisfiable

The Greek of Sirach 18:22 can be held without contradiction.

theorem sirachTextCase_is_satisfiable : Satisfiable sirachTextCase.premises
-- axioms: propext, Quot.sound

trentOnReward_establishes

Trent on the reward of works reaches its conclusion.

theorem trentOnReward_establishes : Establishes trentOnReward
-- axioms: propext, Quot.sound

trentOnReward_is_satisfiable

Trent on the reward of works can be held without contradiction.

theorem trentOnReward_is_satisfiable : Satisfiable trentOnReward.premises
-- axioms: propext, Quot.sound

westminsterOnReward_establishes

Westminster on the reward of works reaches its conclusion.

theorem westminsterOnReward_establishes : Establishes westminsterOnReward
-- axioms: propext, Quot.sound

westminsterOnReward_is_satisfiable

Westminster on the reward of works can be held without contradiction.

theorem westminsterOnReward_is_satisfiable : Satisfiable
    westminsterOnReward.premises
-- axioms: propext, Quot.sound

renewalOnTheWord_establishes

The reading through Paul reaches its conclusion.

theorem renewalOnTheWord_establishes : Establishes renewalOnTheWord
-- axioms: propext, Quot.sound

renewalOnTheWord_is_satisfiable

The reading through Paul can be held without contradiction.

theorem renewalOnTheWord_is_satisfiable : Satisfiable
    renewalOnTheWord.premises
-- axioms: propext, Quot.sound

How strong each position is

jamesLexicalCase_strength

The argument from James's word rests on nothing rated below wellSupported.

theorem jamesLexicalCase_strength : jamesLexicalCase.strength = 2
-- axioms: propext

jamesFaithCase_strength

The argument about James's faith rests on nothing rated below wellSupported.

theorem jamesFaithCase_strength : jamesFaithCase.strength = 2
-- axioms: propext

jamesHarmonyCase_strength

The Reformed reconciliation rests on its reading of what James is attacking, and on works as fruit and not ground. Both are disputed.

theorem jamesHarmonyCase_strength : jamesHarmonyCase.strength = 0
-- axioms: propext

catholicJamesOnTheWord_strength

Trent on James's word rests on its reading of the word, rated disputed.

theorem catholicJamesOnTheWord_strength : catholicJamesOnTheWord.strength = 0
-- axioms: propext

catholicJamesOnWorks_strength

Trent on what works do rests on canon 24, rated disputed.

theorem catholicJamesOnWorks_strength : catholicJamesOnWorks.strength = 0
-- axioms: propext

trentOnRevelation_strength

Trent on Revelation 22:11 rests on the Latin reading, rated disputed.

theorem trentOnRevelation_strength : trentOnRevelation.strength = 0
-- axioms: propext

trentOnSirach_strength

Trent on Sirach 18:22 rests on the Latin reading, rated disputed.

theorem trentOnSirach_strength : trentOnSirach.strength = 0
-- axioms: propext

revelationTextCase_strength

The Greek of Revelation 22:11 rests on nothing below wellSupported.

theorem revelationTextCase_strength : revelationTextCase.strength = 2
-- axioms: propext

sirachTextCase_strength

The Greek of Sirach 18:22 rests on nothing below wellSupported.

theorem sirachTextCase_strength : sirachTextCase.strength = 2
-- axioms: propext

trentOnReward_strength

Trent on the reward of works rests on its reading of the texts, rated disputed.

theorem trentOnReward_strength : trentOnReward.strength = 0
-- axioms: propext

westminsterOnReward_strength

Westminster on the reward rests on its reading of the texts, rated disputed.

theorem westminsterOnReward_strength : westminsterOnReward.strength = 0
-- axioms: propext

renewalOnTheWord_strength

The reading through Paul rests on Paul's word as renewal, rated disputed.

theorem renewalOnTheWord_strength : renewalOnTheWord.strength = 0
-- axioms: propext

The debate

jamesPartyNode

The premises each position argues from.

def jamesPartyNode : JamesParty → ArgumentPackage Claim

jamesDispute

The debate over James 2:24 and the increase of justification. For every position heard: its premises can be held without contradiction, its conclusion follows from them, and every step it uses is rated. Each position's weakest link is wellSupported for the readings of the words and the texts, and the bottom for the rest.

def jamesDispute : Dispute Claim JamesParty :=
  { node := jamesPartyNode,
    consistent := jamesDispute._proof_1,
    sound := jamesDispute._proof_2,
    rated := jamesDispute._proof_15 }

jamesDispute_defeats

Who defeats whom, for all 144 pairs.

The argument from James's word defeats Trent's reading of that word, and the reply fails. It defeats the reading through Paul too, whose reply fails for the same reason: it rests on Paul's word as renewal, rated disputed, against an argument rated wellSupported.

The Greek of Revelation 22:11 and of Sirach 18:22 defeat Trent's Latin readings of them, and the replies fail.

The Reformed reconciliation and each of Trent's readings of what works do defeat each other: canon 24's, and chapter 16's from the reward texts. Westminster's reading of the reward texts and chapter 16's defeat each other: each denies what the other holds about merit, and both rest on a reading rated disputed.

The Reformed reconciliation and the reading through Paul defeat each other through what their claims mean. The reconciliation holds that James 2:24 does not contradict Paul, which says James's word does not have Paul's sense; the other holds that it does (TestimonyArguments.Meanings.SolaFide.joins). Both rest on a reading rated disputed.

Nothing else. In particular, nothing here contradicts the argument about James's faith. And the argument from James's word does not bear on Trent's reading of what works do, which accepts the word and makes a claim about God's verdict.

Every answer is worked out from the positions' premises and checked by machine.

theorem jamesDispute_defeats : ∀ (i j : JamesParty), jamesDispute.defeats i j
    ↔ (i, j) ∈ [(JamesParty.lexical, JamesParty.trentOnTheWord),
    (JamesParty.harmony, JamesParty.trentOnWorks), (JamesParty.trentOnWorks,
    JamesParty.harmony), (JamesParty.revelationText,
    JamesParty.trentOnRevelation), (JamesParty.sirachText,
    JamesParty.trentOnSirach), (JamesParty.harmony, JamesParty.trentOnReward),
    (JamesParty.trentOnReward, JamesParty.harmony), (JamesParty.lexical,
    JamesParty.renewalOnTheWord), (JamesParty.westminsterOnReward,
    JamesParty.trentOnReward), (JamesParty.trentOnReward,
    JamesParty.westminsterOnReward), (JamesParty.harmony,
    JamesParty.renewalOnTheWord), (JamesParty.renewalOnTheWord,
    JamesParty.harmony)]
-- axioms: propext, Classical.choice, Quot.sound

What the debate decides

jamesWordsUnanswered

How far the debate can be settled. Nothing defeats the argument from James's word, the argument about James's faith, or the Greek of the two verses, so those are accepted first, and nothing joins them. Trent's readings of James's word, of Revelation 22:11 and of Sirach 18:22 each have an attacker that remains: the one that defeats it. The Reformed reconciliation and Trent's reading of what works do have each other.

What the dispute forces is exactly James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning), James's faith (the faith James calls dead), Revelation 22:11, in the Greek, Sirach 18:22, in the Greek.

  • Stage 1: James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning), James's faith (the faith James calls dead), Revelation 22:11, in the Greek, Sirach 18:22, in the Greek.
    • James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning) is defeated by nothing.
    • James's faith (the faith James calls dead) is defeated by nothing.
    • Revelation 22:11, in the Greek is defeated by nothing.
    • Sirach 18:22, in the Greek is defeated by nothing.
  • Nothing else is forced:
    • James 2:24, read by canon 24 defeats Harmonisation of James 2:24, and nothing forced defeats James 2:24, read by canon 24.
    • James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning) defeats James 2:24, read for the increase of justification, and nothing forced defeats James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning).
    • Harmonisation of James 2:24 defeats James 2:24, read by canon 24, and nothing forced defeats Harmonisation of James 2:24.
    • Revelation 22:11, in the Greek defeats Revelation 22:11, as Trent quotes it, and nothing forced defeats Revelation 22:11, in the Greek.
    • Sirach 18:22, in the Greek defeats Sirach 18:22, as Trent quotes it, and nothing forced defeats Sirach 18:22, in the Greek.
    • Harmonisation of James 2:24 defeats The reward of works (Trent, Session VI, ch. 16), and nothing forced defeats Harmonisation of James 2:24.
    • James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning) defeats James's word, read through Paul's (the renewal reading), and nothing forced defeats James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning).
    • The reward of works (Trent, Session VI, ch. 16) defeats The reward of works, of grace (Westminster XVI.5, XVI.6), and nothing forced defeats The reward of works (Trent, Session VI, ch. 16).

What this rests on. The reasons state 8 defeats and 60 absences of defeat, each a cell of the defeat table, jamesDispute_defeats, computed from the two parties' premises and checked by the kernel. Whether an attack survives turns on the attacker's weakest link and on the rating of what it attacks, so a changed rating can change the verdict. The weakest links:

  • James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning), weakest at well supported:
  • James's faith (the faith James calls dead), weakest at well supported:
  • Harmonisation of James 2:24, weakest at disputed:
  • James 2:24, read for the increase of justification, weakest at disputed:
    • James's ‘justified’ (δικαιόω) means the increase of the justice received — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
  • James 2:24, read by canon 24, weakest at disputed:
    • Good works are a cause of the increase of justification, not merely its fruits — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), canon 24
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), canon 24
  • Revelation 22:11, as Trent quotes it, weakest at disputed:
    • Revelation 22:11 says: he that is just, let him be justified still — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
  • Sirach 18:22, as Trent quotes it, weakest at disputed:
    • Sirach 18:22 says: be not afraid to be justified even to death — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
  • Revelation 22:11, in the Greek, weakest at well supported:
  • Sirach 18:22, in the Greek, weakest at well supported:
  • The reward of works (Trent, Session VI, ch. 16), weakest at disputed:
  • James's word, read through Paul's (the renewal reading), weakest at disputed:
    • Paul's word ‘justify’ means the renewal of the inward man, not only a verdict — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), Decree on Justification, chs. 7–8; VanLandingham 2006
    • James's ‘justify’ (δικαιόω) has the sense Paul's has: the justification of Romans and Galatians — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10; VanLandingham 2006
  • The reward of works, of grace (Westminster XVI.5, XVI.6), weakest at disputed:

james_words_prevail

What James's words say, and what the Greek of Trent's other two texts says, prevails outright. Exactly four positions are forced. James's "justified" (δικαιόω) does not mean the increase of justice. The faith James 2:24 denies is not the faith of the Reformers' formula. Revelation 22:11, in the critical Greek text, does not say "be justified still". And Sirach 18:22, in Greek, does not say "be not afraid to be justified even to death". Nothing in the debate answers any of them.

It does not show that James 2:24 agrees with Paul, or that works are not a cause of the increase of justification. Neither is forced. Nor that the Greek of Sirach 18:22 lacks the word "justified": it has it, in a sentence about vows.

theorem james_words_prevail : Framework.grounded jamesDispute.defeats =
    {JamesParty.lexical, JamesParty.faith, JamesParty.revelationText,
    JamesParty.sirachText}
-- axioms: propext, Classical.choice, Quot.sound

trentOnTheWordAnswered

Why Trent's reading of James's word cannot be defended: the argument from James's word defeats it, and nothing defeats that argument.

James 2:24, read for the increase of justification cannot be defended: no admissible position holds it.

  • James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning) defeats James 2:24, read for the increase of justification, and nothing defeats James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning).

What this rests on. The reasons state 1 defeat and 12 absences of defeat, each a cell of the defeat table, jamesDispute_defeats, computed from the two parties' premises and checked by the kernel. Whether an attack survives turns on the attacker's weakest link and on the rating of what it attacks, so a changed rating can change the verdict. The weakest links:

  • James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning), weakest at well supported:
  • James 2:24, read for the increase of justification, weakest at disputed:
    • James's ‘justified’ (δικαιόω) means the increase of the justice received — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
  • James's faith (the faith James calls dead), weakest at well supported:
  • Harmonisation of James 2:24, weakest at disputed:
  • James 2:24, read by canon 24, weakest at disputed:
    • Good works are a cause of the increase of justification, not merely its fruits — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), canon 24
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), canon 24
  • Revelation 22:11, as Trent quotes it, weakest at disputed:
    • Revelation 22:11 says: he that is just, let him be justified still — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
  • Sirach 18:22, as Trent quotes it, weakest at disputed:
    • Sirach 18:22 says: be not afraid to be justified even to death — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
  • Revelation 22:11, in the Greek, weakest at well supported:
  • Sirach 18:22, in the Greek, weakest at well supported:
  • The reward of works (Trent, Session VI, ch. 16), weakest at disputed:
  • James's word, read through Paul's (the renewal reading), weakest at disputed:
    • Paul's word ‘justify’ means the renewal of the inward man, not only a verdict — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), Decree on Justification, chs. 7–8; VanLandingham 2006
    • James's ‘justify’ (δικαιόω) has the sense Paul's has: the justification of Romans and Galatians — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10; VanLandingham 2006
  • The reward of works, of grace (Westminster XVI.5, XVI.6), weakest at disputed:

trent_on_james_word_indefensible

Trent's reading of James's word cannot be defended. If "justified by works" in James 2:24 is taken to mean the increase of the justice received, being made more just, it cannot be defended in this debate. Outside Paul the word declares, acquits or vindicates. James uses it of Abraham at Genesis 22, after Genesis 15:6 had been spoken, and of Rahab. And nothing in James's setting requires a second, inward sense. The step from that evidence to "the word does not mean the increase of justice" is rated wellSupported. The reading rests on Trent's word alone.

It does not show that works are no cause of the increase of justification. That is a claim about God's verdict, not about James's word, and it is weighed separately (trent_on_works_defensible).

theorem trent_on_james_word_indefensible : ∀ (S : Set JamesParty),
    Framework.Admissible jamesDispute.defeats S → JamesParty.trentOnTheWord ∉
    S
-- axioms: propext, Classical.choice, Quot.sound

trentOnRevelationAnswered

Why Trent's Revelation 22:11 cannot be defended: the Greek defeats it, and nothing defeats the Greek.

Revelation 22:11, as Trent quotes it cannot be defended: no admissible position holds it.

  • Revelation 22:11, in the Greek defeats Revelation 22:11, as Trent quotes it, and nothing defeats Revelation 22:11, in the Greek.

What this rests on. The reasons state 1 defeat and 12 absences of defeat, each a cell of the defeat table, jamesDispute_defeats, computed from the two parties' premises and checked by the kernel. Whether an attack survives turns on the attacker's weakest link and on the rating of what it attacks, so a changed rating can change the verdict. The weakest links:

  • Revelation 22:11, in the Greek, weakest at well supported:
  • Revelation 22:11, as Trent quotes it, weakest at disputed:
    • Revelation 22:11 says: he that is just, let him be justified still — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
  • James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning), weakest at well supported:
  • James's faith (the faith James calls dead), weakest at well supported:
  • Harmonisation of James 2:24, weakest at disputed:
  • James 2:24, read for the increase of justification, weakest at disputed:
    • James's ‘justified’ (δικαιόω) means the increase of the justice received — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
  • James 2:24, read by canon 24, weakest at disputed:
    • Good works are a cause of the increase of justification, not merely its fruits — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), canon 24
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), canon 24
  • Sirach 18:22, as Trent quotes it, weakest at disputed:
    • Sirach 18:22 says: be not afraid to be justified even to death — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
  • Sirach 18:22, in the Greek, weakest at well supported:
  • The reward of works (Trent, Session VI, ch. 16), weakest at disputed:
  • James's word, read through Paul's (the renewal reading), weakest at disputed:
    • Paul's word ‘justify’ means the renewal of the inward man, not only a verdict — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), Decree on Justification, chs. 7–8; VanLandingham 2006
    • James's ‘justify’ (δικαιόω) has the sense Paul's has: the justification of Romans and Galatians — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10; VanLandingham 2006
  • The reward of works, of grace (Westminster XVI.5, XVI.6), weakest at disputed:

trent_on_revelation_indefensible

Trent's Revelation 22:11 cannot be defended as a text for the increase of justification. "He that is just, let him be justified still" is the Latin Vulgate's wording (iustificetur adhuc). The Greek, as modern editions print it and as the Catholic Church's own translation gives it, says "the righteous must still do right". And the original, "written by the inspired author himself", outweighs any translation (Divino Afflante Spiritu §16).

It does not show that Trent's citation is an error of doctrine. Taken as Pius XII takes Trent's decree on the Vulgate, as a reading the Church approves and holds free from error in faith, it is consistent with all he says, and rests on the Church's authority and not on the inspired text (the chapter Trent's two Latin texts).

theorem trent_on_revelation_indefensible : ∀ (S : Set JamesParty),
    Framework.Admissible jamesDispute.defeats S → JamesParty.trentOnRevelation
    ∉ S
-- axioms: propext, Classical.choice, Quot.sound

trentOnSirachAnswered

Why Trent's Sirach 18:22 cannot be defended: the Greek defeats it, and nothing defeats the Greek.

Sirach 18:22, as Trent quotes it cannot be defended: no admissible position holds it.

  • Sirach 18:22, in the Greek defeats Sirach 18:22, as Trent quotes it, and nothing defeats Sirach 18:22, in the Greek.

What this rests on. The reasons state 1 defeat and 12 absences of defeat, each a cell of the defeat table, jamesDispute_defeats, computed from the two parties' premises and checked by the kernel. Whether an attack survives turns on the attacker's weakest link and on the rating of what it attacks, so a changed rating can change the verdict. The weakest links:

  • Sirach 18:22, in the Greek, weakest at well supported:
  • Sirach 18:22, as Trent quotes it, weakest at disputed:
    • Sirach 18:22 says: be not afraid to be justified even to death — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
  • James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning), weakest at well supported:
  • James's faith (the faith James calls dead), weakest at well supported:
  • Harmonisation of James 2:24, weakest at disputed:
  • James 2:24, read for the increase of justification, weakest at disputed:
    • James's ‘justified’ (δικαιόω) means the increase of the justice received — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
  • James 2:24, read by canon 24, weakest at disputed:
    • Good works are a cause of the increase of justification, not merely its fruits — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), canon 24
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), canon 24
  • Revelation 22:11, as Trent quotes it, weakest at disputed:
    • Revelation 22:11 says: he that is just, let him be justified still — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
  • Revelation 22:11, in the Greek, weakest at well supported:
  • The reward of works (Trent, Session VI, ch. 16), weakest at disputed:
  • James's word, read through Paul's (the renewal reading), weakest at disputed:
    • Paul's word ‘justify’ means the renewal of the inward man, not only a verdict — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), Decree on Justification, chs. 7–8; VanLandingham 2006
    • James's ‘justify’ (δικαιόω) has the sense Paul's has: the justification of Romans and Galatians — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10; VanLandingham 2006
  • The reward of works, of grace (Westminster XVI.5, XVI.6), weakest at disputed:

trent_on_sirach_indefensible

Trent's Sirach 18:22 cannot be defended as what the verse says. "Be not afraid to be justified even to death" is the Vulgate's verse. The Greek, in a sentence about paying vows, says "do not wait until death to be justified", and the Catholic Church's own translation renders that "do not wait until death to fulfill them". Whether Sirach is Scripture is not in question here: the verdict holds on Trent's own list of the biblical books.

It does not show that the Greek has no "be justified". It has the verb. What it lacks is the Latin's "be not afraid ... even to death", the words in which Trent reads continued growth in justice.

theorem trent_on_sirach_indefensible : ∀ (S : Set JamesParty),
    Framework.Admissible jamesDispute.defeats S → JamesParty.trentOnSirach ∉ S
-- axioms: propext, Classical.choice, Quot.sound

trentOnWorksStands

Why Trent's reading of what works do can be defended: it answers the one position that attacks it, the Reformed reconciliation.

James 2:24, read by canon 24 is accepted on some resolution.

  • A position holding James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning), James's faith (the faith James calls dead), James 2:24, read by canon 24, Revelation 22:11, in the Greek, Sirach 18:22, in the Greek can be held.
  • None of James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning), James's faith (the faith James calls dead), James 2:24, read by canon 24, Revelation 22:11, in the Greek, Sirach 18:22, in the Greek defeats another, and each attack on them is answered from among them:
    • Harmonisation of James 2:24 defeats James 2:24, read by canon 24, and James 2:24, read by canon 24 defeats Harmonisation of James 2:24.

What this rests on. The reasons state 2 defeats and 59 absences of defeat, each a cell of the defeat table, jamesDispute_defeats, computed from the two parties' premises and checked by the kernel. Whether an attack survives turns on the attacker's weakest link and on the rating of what it attacks, so a changed rating can change the verdict. The weakest links:

  • James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning), weakest at well supported:
  • James's faith (the faith James calls dead), weakest at well supported:
  • James 2:24, read by canon 24, weakest at disputed:
    • Good works are a cause of the increase of justification, not merely its fruits — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), canon 24
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), canon 24
  • Revelation 22:11, in the Greek, weakest at well supported:
  • Sirach 18:22, in the Greek, weakest at well supported:
  • Harmonisation of James 2:24, weakest at disputed:
  • James 2:24, read for the increase of justification, weakest at disputed:
    • James's ‘justified’ (δικαιόω) means the increase of the justice received — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
  • Revelation 22:11, as Trent quotes it, weakest at disputed:
    • Revelation 22:11 says: he that is just, let him be justified still — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
  • Sirach 18:22, as Trent quotes it, weakest at disputed:
    • Sirach 18:22 says: be not afraid to be justified even to death — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
  • The reward of works (Trent, Session VI, ch. 16), weakest at disputed:
  • James's word, read through Paul's (the renewal reading), weakest at disputed:
    • Paul's word ‘justify’ means the renewal of the inward man, not only a verdict — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), Decree on Justification, chs. 7–8; VanLandingham 2006
    • James's ‘justify’ (δικαιόω) has the sense Paul's has: the justification of Romans and Galatians — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10; VanLandingham 2006
  • The reward of works, of grace (Westminster XVI.5, XVI.6), weakest at disputed:

trent_on_works_defensible

Trent's reading of what works do can be defended, together with the argument from James's word, the argument about James's faith, and the Greek of both verses. It accepts that James's "justified" is a verdict, and holds that the works by which James says a person is justified are a cause of that verdict's increase and not merely its fruit. The Reformed reconciliation denies this, and the debate cannot choose: at that point each side rests on its own confession, rated disputed.

It does not show that works are a cause of the increase. The reading is not forced (trent_on_works_not_forced).

theorem trent_on_works_defensible : Framework.CredulouslyAccepted
    jamesDispute.defeats JamesParty.trentOnWorks
-- axioms: propext, Classical.choice, Quot.sound

trentOnWorksAnswered

Why it is not forced: a set of positions that can be defended includes the Reformed reconciliation, which defeats it.

James 2:24, read by canon 24 is not accepted on every resolution.

  • A position holding James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning), James's faith (the faith James calls dead), Harmonisation of James 2:24, Revelation 22:11, in the Greek, Sirach 18:22, in the Greek can be held, and it holds Harmonisation of James 2:24; Harmonisation of James 2:24 conflicts with James 2:24, read by canon 24: Harmonisation of James 2:24 defeats James 2:24, read by canon 24, and James 2:24, read by canon 24 defeats Harmonisation of James 2:24.
  • None of James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning), James's faith (the faith James calls dead), Harmonisation of James 2:24, Revelation 22:11, in the Greek, Sirach 18:22, in the Greek defeats another, and each attack on them is answered from among them:
    • James 2:24, read by canon 24 defeats Harmonisation of James 2:24, and Harmonisation of James 2:24 defeats James 2:24, read by canon 24.
    • The reward of works (Trent, Session VI, ch. 16) defeats Harmonisation of James 2:24, and Harmonisation of James 2:24 defeats The reward of works (Trent, Session VI, ch. 16).
    • James's word, read through Paul's (the renewal reading) defeats Harmonisation of James 2:24, and James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning) defeats James's word, read through Paul's (the renewal reading).

What this rests on. The reasons state 6 defeats and 57 absences of defeat, each a cell of the defeat table, jamesDispute_defeats, computed from the two parties' premises and checked by the kernel. Whether an attack survives turns on the attacker's weakest link and on the rating of what it attacks, so a changed rating can change the verdict. The weakest links:

  • Harmonisation of James 2:24, weakest at disputed:
  • James 2:24, read by canon 24, weakest at disputed:
    • Good works are a cause of the increase of justification, not merely its fruits — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), canon 24
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), canon 24
  • James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning), weakest at well supported:
  • James's faith (the faith James calls dead), weakest at well supported:
  • Revelation 22:11, in the Greek, weakest at well supported:
  • Sirach 18:22, in the Greek, weakest at well supported:
  • James 2:24, read for the increase of justification, weakest at disputed:
    • James's ‘justified’ (δικαιόω) means the increase of the justice received — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
  • Revelation 22:11, as Trent quotes it, weakest at disputed:
    • Revelation 22:11 says: he that is just, let him be justified still — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
  • Sirach 18:22, as Trent quotes it, weakest at disputed:
    • Sirach 18:22 says: be not afraid to be justified even to death — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
  • The reward of works (Trent, Session VI, ch. 16), weakest at disputed:
  • James's word, read through Paul's (the renewal reading), weakest at disputed:
    • Paul's word ‘justify’ means the renewal of the inward man, not only a verdict — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), Decree on Justification, chs. 7–8; VanLandingham 2006
    • James's ‘justify’ (δικαιόω) has the sense Paul's has: the justification of Romans and Galatians — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10; VanLandingham 2006
  • The reward of works, of grace (Westminster XVI.5, XVI.6), weakest at disputed:

trent_on_works_not_forced

Nor is it forced. A consistent set of positions that answers every attack holds the Reformed reconciliation, with the arguments from James's word and James's faith, and cannot hold Trent's reading of what works do with it.

theorem trent_on_works_not_forced : ¬Framework.SkepticallyAccepted
    jamesDispute.defeats JamesParty.trentOnWorks
-- axioms: propext, Classical.choice, Quot.sound

harmonyStands

Why the Reformed reconciliation can be defended: it answers Trent's reading of what works do.

Harmonisation of James 2:24 is accepted on some resolution.

  • A position holding James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning), James's faith (the faith James calls dead), Harmonisation of James 2:24, Revelation 22:11, in the Greek, Sirach 18:22, in the Greek can be held.
  • None of James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning), James's faith (the faith James calls dead), Harmonisation of James 2:24, Revelation 22:11, in the Greek, Sirach 18:22, in the Greek defeats another, and each attack on them is answered from among them:
    • James 2:24, read by canon 24 defeats Harmonisation of James 2:24, and Harmonisation of James 2:24 defeats James 2:24, read by canon 24.
    • The reward of works (Trent, Session VI, ch. 16) defeats Harmonisation of James 2:24, and Harmonisation of James 2:24 defeats The reward of works (Trent, Session VI, ch. 16).
    • James's word, read through Paul's (the renewal reading) defeats Harmonisation of James 2:24, and James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning) defeats James's word, read through Paul's (the renewal reading).

What this rests on. The reasons state 6 defeats and 57 absences of defeat, each a cell of the defeat table, jamesDispute_defeats, computed from the two parties' premises and checked by the kernel. Whether an attack survives turns on the attacker's weakest link and on the rating of what it attacks, so a changed rating can change the verdict. The weakest links:

  • James's word (δικαιόω, by the rule of least meaning), weakest at well supported:
  • James's faith (the faith James calls dead), weakest at well supported:
  • Harmonisation of James 2:24, weakest at disputed:
  • Revelation 22:11, in the Greek, weakest at well supported:
  • Sirach 18:22, in the Greek, weakest at well supported:
  • James 2:24, read for the increase of justification, weakest at disputed:
    • James's ‘justified’ (δικαιόω) means the increase of the justice received — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
  • James 2:24, read by canon 24, weakest at disputed:
    • Good works are a cause of the increase of justification, not merely its fruits — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), canon 24
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), canon 24
  • Revelation 22:11, as Trent quotes it, weakest at disputed:
    • Revelation 22:11 says: he that is just, let him be justified still — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
  • Sirach 18:22, as Trent quotes it, weakest at disputed:
    • Sirach 18:22 says: be not afraid to be justified even to death — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
  • The reward of works (Trent, Session VI, ch. 16), weakest at disputed:
  • James's word, read through Paul's (the renewal reading), weakest at disputed:
    • Paul's word ‘justify’ means the renewal of the inward man, not only a verdict — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), Decree on Justification, chs. 7–8; VanLandingham 2006
    • James's ‘justify’ (δικαιόω) has the sense Paul's has: the justification of Romans and Galatians — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10
    • an inference step — Tanner 1990, §Trent, Session VI (1547), ch. 10; VanLandingham 2006
  • The reward of works, of grace (Westminster XVI.5, XVI.6), weakest at disputed:

harmony_holds_fruit

The Reformed reconciliation derives, from Westminster's proof texts, that works are the fruit of faith and not its ground.

theorem harmony_holds_fruit : Entails (jamesDispute.node
    JamesParty.harmony).premises (p Claim.worksAreFruitNotGround)
-- axioms: propext, Classical.choice, Quot.sound

trentOnWorks_denies_fruit

Trent's reading of what works do denies that.

theorem trentOnWorks_denies_fruit : Entails (jamesDispute.node
    JamesParty.trentOnWorks).premises (∼p Claim.worksAreFruitNotGround)
-- axioms: propext, Classical.choice, Quot.sound

worksContested

Whether works are only the fruit of justification is contested, and the weighing confirms it. The Reformed reconciliation holds it. Trent's reading of James 2:24 by canon 24 denies it. Each can be defended, and neither is forced. So the rating disputed on that premise (worksAreFruitNotGround) agrees with what the weighing finds.

def worksContested : Contested jamesDispute (p Claim.worksAreFruitNotGround) :=
  { holder := JamesParty.harmony,
    denier := JamesParty.trentOnWorks,
    holds := harmony_holds_fruit,
    denies := trentOnWorks_denies_fruit,
    holderDefensible := worksContested._proof_1,
    denierDefensible := trent_on_works_defensible }

What each position rests on

james_warrants

Where each position rests on someone's word alone.

Trent's reading of the reward texts rests on the council's word at one claim: that the reward is given to merits. The reading through Paul rests on Trent's word at one claim: that James's "justified" is Paul's. For Paul's word as renewal it has VanLandingham's argument from the lexicon.

Each of Trent's other four readings rests on Trent's word at the reading itself. The two readings of the Greek rest on the word of Pius XII and of Westminster alike, at the principle that the original outweighs any translation.

The argument from James's word, the argument about James's faith, and the Reformed reconciliation, which now derives "fruit, not ground" from Westminster's proof texts, rest on nothing but Scripture and evidence.

theorem james_warrants : jamesLexicalCase.restingOnAuthority = [] ∧
    jamesFaithCase.restingOnAuthority = [] ∧
    jamesHarmonyCase.restingOnAuthority = [] ∧
    catholicJamesOnTheWord.restingOnAuthority =
    [Claim.jamesJustifyDenotesIncrease] ∧
    catholicJamesOnWorks.restingOnAuthority =
    [Claim.worksCauseIncreaseOfJustification] ∧
    trentOnRevelation.restingOnAuthority = [Claim.rev22_11BeJustifiedStill] ∧
    trentOnSirach.restingOnAuthority = [Claim.sir18_22BeJustifiedToDeath] ∧
    revelationTextCase.restingOnAuthority = [Claim.originalTextDecides] ∧
    sirachTextCase.restingOnAuthority = [Claim.originalTextDecides] ∧
    trentOnReward.restingOnAuthority = [Claim.rewardRenderedToMerits] ∧
    renewalOnTheWord.restingOnAuthority = [Claim.jamesUsesDikaioAsPaul] ∧
    westminsterOnReward.restingOnAuthority = []
-- axioms: propext