Well, that has been your humanistic definition from day one. So why pretend you are looking for a theological definition?
I have demonstrated that non-believers God listened to and honoured their behaviour.
When Nineveh repented He did not judge them, they did a good thing and avoid judgement.
Now I am bringing biblical examples which show "dead works" theology is not biblical, you
have just said I am being humanistic, which is a philosophical response not biblical so
irrelevant and untrue.
But Saul and the army spared Agag and the best of the sheep and cattle, the fat calves and lambs—everything that was good.
1 Sam 15:9
This is a real humanistic response to Gods command, some would call a good thing
using the resources available and not wasting them.
But this was sin, against Gods direct command. Amen.
So I am not a humanist, but of follower of my King and looking for biblical definitions
of ideas.
It appears you are not that interested in this, or of showing me how dead works is
actually right.
Now if you think works by anyone brings salvation, or I hold to this, and balancing of
good works against bad, then you are mistaken and confused about talking about
true righteousness and God and what is good in the way people behave.
Sins problem is it destroys the good and makes it worthless, not the good by itself
is evil.
Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices—mint, dill and cumin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law—justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former.
Matt 23:23
Pharisees did ok on spices but not the more important things. So here is Jesus praising
one aspect but saying it was all destroyed by their failure or sin in other areas.