The Book of James, an opinion

[farouk]

farouk, I have not denied that the book of James was inspired by the Holy Spirit. I said so in the OP. What I have shown is that it was not written to be used in the grace church of His body. The Holy Spirit inspired James to say WHO IT IS WRITTEN TO (James 1:1) It was not written to the Gentiles under grace and it should not be used to make the children of God think that their salvation depends on their works.

This is so apparent in my writing but it seems that what I write makes the religious defend the book of James so that the religious can burden those under grace with the requirement to do works to gain salvation. IMHO when the religious do this it is an affront to God because Jesus did everything necessary for mans salvation on the cross. IMHO I don't think God appreciates man trying to share in Christ's glory.

Your use of terminology is so unfamiliar to me that I don't think I'm capable of following what exactly you are saying.

 

[H. Richard]

Most born again Christians do not agree with your strange theology either. You say that the Gospels are not about God's grace, which is very telling. So you have two options (a) go back to square one and study the Gospels to discover the grace of God, or (b) persist in your confused beliefs and confuse others. But it is more than confusion. The Bible says it is deceiving and being deceived.

Why do you insist that I am the one who is confused. Does it elevate your pride. Is it possible that it is you that is confused. No, you would never admit that because of pride.

The conference at Jerusalem with Paul and the 12 in Acts 15 shows there was a difference in the gospel of the 12 for the Jews which included the Law of Moses and Paul gospel which excluded the law but the religious just will not see it. We still see this division in Acts 21 where the believing Jews wanted to kill Paul but not James. Even with all this the religious will insist on putting everything in a blender and mix them up to see what falls out.

It is a fact that the Jews in Jerusalem (Acts 15) were still teaching the Law of Moses and that there were Jews who were telling the Gentiles they had to keep the law of Moses. But in the conclusion of the conference both the 12 and Paul made an agreement that the Jews would go to the Jews and Paul would go to the Gentiles. So why do the religious lean so much on the gospel of the 12?

To the religious the Jews did not keep the agreement they made with Paul. I believe they did.

 

[farouk]

Why do you insist that I am the one who is confused. Does it elevate your pride. Is it possible that it is you that is confused. No, you would never admit that because of pride.

The conference at Jerusalem with Paul and the 12 in Acts 15 shows there was a difference in the gospel of the 12 for the Jews which included the Law of Moses and Paul gospel which excluded the law but the religious just will not see it. We still see this division in Acts 21 where the believing Jews wanted to kill Paul but not James. Even with all this the religious will insist on putting everything in a blender and mix them up to see what falls out.

It is a fact that the Jews in Jerusalem (Acts 15) were still teaching the Law of Moses and that there were Jews who were telling the Gentiles they had to keep the law of Moses. But in the conclusion of the conference both the 12 and Paul made an agreement that the Jews would go to the Jews and Paul would go to the Gentiles. So why do the religious lean so much on the gospel of the 12?

To the religious the Jews did not keep the agreement they made with Paul. I believe they did.

If you are saying that people are still under the law, then I don't see it; Galatians seems strongly to indicate the opposite.

 

[H. Richard]

Your use of terminology is so unfamiliar to me that I don't think I'm capable of following what exactly you are saying.

I use simple words and all I write is based on NKJV scriptures.

 

[Marymog]

If people would see that the 4 gospels were not the message of God's grace; that Jesus and the 12 never rescinded the Law of Moses. And that the Book of Acts is a transitional book from law to grace they would not be in so much controversy.

But most religious people can not see this change.

The children of God have been made children of God for simply believing God's message of grace given to Paul for us. Believing God's message of grace is being obedient to believing Jesus' work on the cross. It is the religious that want obedience to be in the works of the flesh.

It would seem to me that anyone reading the scriptures for what they say and not seeing that just as Eve did not believe God, just as Cain did not believe God. just as the Jews did not believe God when He (GOD) said to go into the land and He (GOD) would drive out the people living with Hornets, that today the only requirement for salvation is to believe God's message He sent to us through Paul..

Thank you.

You have articulated your opinion about scripture very well.

Mary

 

[H. Richard]

If you are saying that people are still under the law, then I don't see it; Galatians seems strongly to indicate the opposite.

I will not continue with you. You miss quote what I say and I am not going to constantly address your taking what I say and twisting it.

Either you can't read or you are disingenuous.

I have NEVER said that today people are under the Law of Moses. I have said in all my writing that today the Children of God are under grace, NOT LAW.

 

[farouk]

I will not continue with you. You miss quote what I say and I am not going to constantly address your taking what I say and twisting it.

Either you can't read or you are disingenuous.

I have NEVER said that today people are under the Law of Moses. I have said in all my writing that today the Children of God are under grace, NOT LAW.

Well, okay, thanks for the clarification. I don't understand about what you seem to say about different Apostles - James - preaching a different Gospel from the one Paul preached. (If, in fact, you are saying this. You seemed to be saying this, and I suppose I am of average intelligence.)

 

[bbyrd009]

Consider the “works” of the flesh. And the “fruit” of the Spirit. Always wondered why God changed it from “works” to “fruits”? Why didn’t God just say the “works” of the flesh are these....and the “works” of the Spirit are these...and clear up a lot. but consider the significance in the change from “works” of the flesh ...to “fruit” supplied by the root of the Father.

ok and see no one like changes color or gets a halo over their head or anything, in doing the second rather than the first, right. So imo what most often happens is that cover is provided for those who refuse to confess, and will even interpret "I cannot possibly sin now" rather than admit that faith = works, whether you choose to call them "fruit of the spirit" or not.

So imo a common progression might be something like
"I'm gay, but I have faith in God. But the Bible says no "effeminate" nor "homosexuals" will inherit the kingdom, which never mind the hideously poor translation, nor the fact that the Bible should not be Read that way anyway, bc that is the same way, the only way, that I might get my ego--the part I have come to know as "me," and the only part I really care about--into immortality and go up to heaven when I die.

So don't even bother reminding me where the kingdom of heaven really is according to Christ, in Scripture, bc 1+1=3 dammit, and you cannot prove any differnt."

 

[H. Richard]

Well, okay, thanks for the clarification. I don't understand about what you seem to say about different Apostles - James - preaching a different Gospel from the one Paul preached. (If, in fact, you are saying this. You seemed to be saying this, and I suppose I am of average intelligence.)

See these words of mine.

YES, the 12 were preaching to the Jews who were under the Law of Moses. Read Acts 21:20.

Paul is preaching the grace message that Jesus gave him for the whole world. Today the Law of Moses only condemns those that refuse to accept Jesus' work on the cross as the payment for the sins of the world. Salvation only comes to those who believe in God's (Jesus') work on the cross.

Do not take any of my words out of the context they are in and do not add any words to them

 

[bbyrd009]

Which is imo what leads ppl to discount James, which is strictly a sign, this two-eyed reading method that btw will not even stand up to 5minutes of inspection. It's all crap ok, and James is still going to be there and valid after your head has exploded from being rejected by the deceived, all bc you wanted to sing When We All Get to Heaven!

So everyone in the equation gets exactly what they deserve imo

 

[farouk]

See these words of mine.

YES, the 12 were preaching to the Jews who were under the Law of Moses. Read Acts 21:20.

Paul is preaching the grace message that Jesus gave him for the whole world. Today the Law of Moses only condemns those that refuse to accept Jesus' work on the cross as the payment for the sins of the world. Salvation only comes to those who believe in God's (Jesus') work on the cross.

Do not take any of my words out of the context they are in and do not add any words to them

Well, those referred to in Acts 21.20 should have learned how to stop being zealous for the law, and rely on God's grace instead.

The true believer now belongs with the carcasses of the discarded sacrifices that were burned without the camp. This is where I belong. Organized religion and law keeping go away.

"For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp.

Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.

Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach." (Hebrews 13.11-13)

 

[bbyrd009]

See these words of mine.

YES, the 12 were preaching to the Jews who were under the Law of Moses. Read Acts 21:20.

Paul is preaching the grace message that Jesus gave him for the whole world. Today the Law of Moses only condemns those that refuse to accept Jesus' work on the cross as the payment for the sins of the world. Salvation only comes to those who believe in God's (Jesus') work on the cross.

Do not take any of my words out of the context they are in and do not add any words to them

tell 'im Roman, lol, tell him how he has to do it, if you like.
Your mind isn't made up and set in stone at all right, and all your "beliefs" are just that, aren't they, no absolute truths in there at all huh.

Imo we would all get further in a discussion with a fourteen year old girl, lol

And my apologies for calling you something yesterday, ok, forgot what...ah yes, the outburst at your prediction that someone would disagree with you on a forum lol, or perhaps mention some characterization of you if you think you are going to make James look bad, or maybe make God look bad for including James? Gee, what a prescient prediction

I should know better than to even be here, where you cannot hear anyway, as you have made abundantly clear. Reap what you have sown ok, and best of luck to you on the immortality thing, and the trashing of Scripture too I guess

 

[bbyrd009]

Well, those referred to in Acts 21.20 should have learned how to stop being zealous for the law, and rely on God's grace instead.

The true believer now belongs with the carcasses of the discarded sacrifices that were burned without the camp. This is where I belong. Organized religion and law keeping go away.

"For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp.

Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.

Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach." (Hebrews 13.11-13)

I'm guessing he is more likely to go Catholic than do that though, like most every other "Protestant"

 

[VictoryinJesus]

homosexuals" will inherit the kingdom, which never mind the hideously poor translation, nor the fact that the Bible should not be Read that way anyway, bc that is the same way, the only way, that I might get my ego--the part I have come to know as "me,"

So there you go...flesh or Spirit. Kind of solidifies the disobedient comes from the flesh and flesh can not produce the other narrow way that you hint at there, but as you always say is not seen with two eyes. get what you are saying. But the only reason you are not left with “ego” is by the work of the Spirit of God(and His circumcision)and not because of anything you have done to deserve it...otherwise you would still be back at “ego” -uncircumcised -spouting your own hate agenda.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

The true believer now belongs with the carcasses of the discarded sacrifices that were burned without the camp. This is where I belong.

Worthy of repeating. What are they burned with?

 

[bbyrd009]

Ha, they don't get burned, don't even smell like smoke?

So there you go...flesh or Spirit. Kind of solidifies the disobedient comes from the flesh and flesh can not produce the other narrow way that you hint at there, but as you always say is not seen with two eyes. get what you are saying. But the only reason you are not left with “ego” is by the work of the Spirit of God and not because of anything you have done to deserve it...otherwise you would still be back at “ego” spouting your own hate agenda.

I think that is certainly true in a sense, but right after that we all become figments of God's imagination? I will not ignore work while it is day nor change your mind, leave the world, leave the camp, etc, all things that in my understanding require action or tbh I would say faith on my part, bc I certainly do not gain worldly from walking out my front door broke, or doing any of the other things that look to me like work to make your calling and election sure.

And if I'm seeking the glory then it won't much look like that up there anyway I guess? But I don't like this "work of the spirit of God" being used like that, it is too easy to turn that into an abdication of responsibility, don't you think?

"Ima stay here in this recliner bc Jesus said 'It is finished,' and ViJ said God was gonna do everything else"

who went and bought garlic, was that God or you. Was God somehow responsible? sure, you could make the argument. Do you deserve any credit for choosing garlic over meds? certainly make the argument there too I guess. Do you deserve an award for doing that? Diff story.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

I would say faith on my part, bc I certainly do not gain worldly from walking out my front door broke, or doing any of the other things that look to me like work to make your calling and election sure.

Many have walked out that front door. Many have went who were not sent of Him and it comes to nothing. Do you say there is a guarantee that if someone gives up everything and walks out that front door ...then it is a sure deal? No. You can’t say that because someone else has to be there(the Spirit). @ unless it dies it abides alone. So what is the dying if the responsibility remains? Hebrews 9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? Where is the “enter into My Rest”?

But I don't like this "work of the spirit of God" being used like that, it is too easy to turn that into an abdication of responsibility, don't you think?

What is offensive about “work of the Spirit of God” when the word says “the fruit of the Spirit” are these...?

You mention ego how is “work of the Spirit” fit with ego?

"Ima stay here in this recliner bc Jesus said 'It is finished,' and ViJ said God was gonna do everything else"

Romans 8:20
[20] For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,

Vanity. What is one must die and seize from works and enter into His Rest then?
hope: Ephesians 5:9-10 (For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth [10] Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord.

What is acceptable unto the Lord if not the fruit of ‘the Spirit’?

 

[Waiting on him]

What is acceptable unto the Lord if not the fruit of ‘the Spirit’?

That’s all that’s acceptable. This is why he nailed his flesh to that stick

 

[aspen]

James 2:20-21
20 But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead?
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar?
(NKJ)

Okay, then how do you explain this?
He was accounted righteous before God several years earlier, BEFORE the birth of Isaac, and before he had done anything to "prove" his faith in God. Check it out in Genesis 15;4-6 below..

Genesis 15:4-6
4 And behold, the word of the LORD came to him, saying, "This one shall not be your heir, but one who will come from your own body shall be your heir."
5 Then He brought him outside and said, "Look now toward heaven, and count the stars if you are able to number them." And He said to him, "So shall your descendants be."
6 And he believed in the LORD, and He accounted it to him for righteousness.
(NKJ)

It seems that God accounted him righteous solely for his faith in His Promises, and not by anything that he did. There is nothing in Genesis 15 that mentions any works that Abraham did. Paul accurately reports this. It seems that James did not consider the account in Genesis 15. It was not until Genesis 22, many years after Isaac was born, when Abraham was well over 100 years old, that he agreed to offer Isaac.

James writes:
22 You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did.
23 And the scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness," and he was called God's friend.
24 You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.

Neither of those last two statements are in the Genesis 15:4-6 account.
Nowhere does the OT Scripture say that Abraham "was called God's friend" BECAUSE he was willing to offer up his son Isaac. In Isaiah 41:8 it states that God called Abraham His friend but nowhere in the context of the chapter does He say it was because Abraham offered up his son Isaac.

What James wrote, as shown above, are direct contradiction of the Gospel that Paul taught and the account given in Genesis 15:4-6. Abraham was righteous before God solely because he believed God’s promises.

The religious who advocate works can argue this until they are blue in the face but it does not change the FACTS as shown in Genesis.

In my opinion the book of James is devoid of the gospel of grace as taught by Paul.

However, it was compatible with the law of Moses. Since the word of God has to be based on truth, I find the book of James is not based on FAITH in Christ’s work on the cross but only on works of the law and is not for this age of God’s grace. The very fact that it was addressed to Jews (James 1:1) is more proof that it was only for the Jews who were under the law.

It remains to be seen that the religious will try to destroy what I have written by attacking me, personally, and it will show that they want people to believe we are under the law in this age of God’s grace. They can easily attack me but they can not say that the scriptures I have presented do not say what I have reported them to say.

Under grace a person must place their faith (belief) in God’s promise of salvation based on their belief in what He (Jesus) did on the cross where He paid for the sins of the whole world. Through the gospel of grace that was given to Paul God, Himself, paid for the sins of the world and a person has to believe it to have salvation. If they do not then they are condemned because they do not believe God.

Written by H. Richard 2019

Um...I agree with you! The OP is definitely your opinion...

Or

The Bible contradicts itself

Or

Faith and works cannot be separated, which agrees with James and Paul and does not contradict Genesis

 

[Phoneman777]

Ha, they don't get burned, don't even smell like smoke?

I think that is certainly true in a sense, but right after that we all become figments of God's imagination? I will not ignore work while it is day nor change your mind, leave the world, leave the camp, etc, all things that in my understanding require action or tbh I would say faith on my part, bc I certainly do not gain worldly from walking out my front door broke, or doing any of the other things that look to me like work to make your calling and election sure.

And if I'm seeking the glory then it won't much look like that up there anyway I guess? But I don't like this "work of the spirit of God" being used like that, it is too easy to turn that into an abdication of responsibility, don't you think?

"Ima stay here in this recliner bc Jesus said 'It is finished,' and ViJ said God was gonna do everything else"

who went and bought garlic, was that God or you. Was God somehow responsible? sure, you could make the argument. Do you deserve any credit for choosing garlic over meds? certainly make the argument there too I guess. Do you deserve an award for doing that? Diff story.

Groper's gotta grope. Just as Crazy Uncle Joe