Using engineering principles, we have either
sequential logic and bayesian events
- in a sequence of dependencies or events:
When A, then B, then C, then D, ...., then Y, then Z.
Such that when Z happens, it is presumed A thro Y had already happened.
parallel events but collective dependencies
- in multithreaded, events/requirements A thro Z, happen in parallel, but the final justification requires all of them to have happened.
parallel and independent events without any mutual dependencies.
- Events/requirements A thro Z happens regardless of each other.
I think people need to analyse the meaning of the word [δικαίω-θεντες], rather than accepting the English word by blind-faith from the translators.
[δικαίω]in its various declensions is found across the Christian epistles.
[δικαίω] in its various declensions means
- make right, to punish, chastise
- correct/make right by act or by consent or by judgement
- to give someone justice
[δικαίωθεντες] is found only in three places and two occurrences in Romans 5, and the other in Titus.
[δικαιούςθαι] in Romans 3:28
I think that ... [θεντες] = plural of [θεν]
which is a suffix to mean setting or putting in place.
I want to say that [δικαίωθεν] or [δικαίωθεντες] would imply the final-judgment.
All the [δικαίω] occurrences in the Christian epistles are not the same as [δικαίωθεν], but all of them translated as "justified".
Therefore, in Romans 5:1, 9 - would mean at the ultimate justification/judgment.
Which means the "justified" of Romans 3:28, 5:1 & 9 is not the same "justified" as the other occurrences of "justified" found in the Christian epistles.
While James say, your being judged justly and rightly has sequential or collective dependence of your chain of actions, the "justified by faith alone" sola fide of Paul, is the final-rung in the sequential-chain or parallel-threads of events.
Is it because of the (mis)understanding of these two modes of the word, that the protestant churches are in disagreement with the Orthodox and Catholic churches. Whilst the protestant churches are dependent on the inadequately translated German bibles and the miserable KJV, the Orthodox and Catholic theologians have a more intimate understanding of the various occurrences of [δικαίω].
I do not think my understanding of the various forms of [δικαίω] and [δικαίωθεν] are accurate - simply that I am of the persuasion that ya'll Christians need to seriously indulge in a further understanding of the differences of these two forms, before jumping into the Martin Luther conclusion.
Therefore when it comes to the basis of the Greek text, Martin Luther's sola fide may have a rather poor foundation, aliasing two different concepts, and selling them as the same thing.
(aliasing = signal engineering term for confusing two different signals as the same, by having them share the same silhouette or footprint).
I don't think I am answering your question completely which asks for specific "deeds" in the sequential chain or collective actions for James-mode justification. However, I am pointing out that James-mode and Paul-mode justification are not the same, grammatically and synthetically.
Also, you have to pay attention to the differences between sola fide's totally independent "justification" vs the sequential and/or collective dependencies proffered by the differentiating James-mode and Paul-mode justification.
I had to bring in Paul-mode justification, because it is inescapable having to discuss sola fide, when discussing Christian justification theology.