Background Information About James

[FHII]

It seems many more knowledgeable than us do not agree with you.

Who? And why?

I posted statements from James's epistle where he is asking a seemingly rhetorical question which indicates that's what he believes.

Instead of saying there are more knowledgeable people who disagree with me, tell me why they do and tell me what they do with these verses.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Ephesians 2.9 does not contradict James; what James is saying is that if there is no evidence of faith, it's dead.

I actually think Ephesians 2:9 is likewise referring to what Paul defined as "works of the law," i.e. the ceremonial laws that had been done away as no longer binding upon believers, including Jews. In context, he again mentions circumcision:

8 for by grace have ye been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, [it is] the gift of God; 9 not of works, that no man should glory.
10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God afore prepared that we should walk in them.
11 Wherefore remember, that once ye, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called Circumcision, in the flesh, made by hands; 12 that ye were at that time separate from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of the promise, having no hope and without God in the world.
13 But now in Christ Jesus ye that once were far off are made nigh in the blood of Christ.

In other words, what has brought the uncircumcised Gentiles (who were far from God as a result of it) near to God is the shedding of Christ's blood.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Instead of saying there are more knowledgeable people who disagree with me, tell me why they do and tell me what they do with these verses.

@GodsGrace. He was polite about it, but I think he got you there, sister. Just teasing you a little, but for future reference when debating, you gotta have an answer for him; I mean, other than telling him that the consensus opinion of "knowledgable people" is in disagreement with him. I wouldn't know who those knowledgable people were either, and I'm not sure I'd be too concerned anyway. Consensus opinions are sometimes dead wrong, unfortunately.

 

[GodsGrace]

Who? And why?

I posted statements from James's epistle where he is asking a seemingly rhetorical question which indicates that's what he believes.

Instead of saying there are more knowledgeable people who disagree with me, tell me why they do and tell me what they do with these verses.

They read the bible and ADD NOTHING to it
and REMOVE NOTHING from it.

 

[GodsGrace]

@GodsGrace. He was polite about it, but I think he got you there, sister. Just teasing you a little, but for future reference when debating, you gotta have an answer for him; I mean, other than telling him that the consensus opinion of "knowledgable people" is in disagreement with him. I wouldn't know who those knowledgable people were either, and I'm not sure I'd be too concerned anyway. Consensus opinions are sometimes dead wrong, unfortunately.

I've got plenty of answers HIH.
Maybe later when I have more time.
NO ONE has ever GOTTEN ME yet.

Know why?
I see the scriptures in a very simple way...just the way Jesus meant it to be.

And , yes, theologians know MUCH MORE than we do.
That's who I meant.
You mean, you want names?
LOL

 

[Hidden In Him]

You mean, you want names?
LOL

Well it would have helped, LoL.

 

[FHII]

I've got plenty of answers HIH.
Maybe later when I have more time.
NO ONE has ever GOTTEN ME yet.

I look forward to hearing your answers so I can get you.

 

[FHII]

They read the bible and ADD NOTHING to it
and REMOVE NOTHING from it.

Have I added or removed anything? If so, what?

 

[FHII]

Yes, I believe the dates are as close as we can get. My point being that James was the first New Testament letter written. I would not say it is outdated as it speaks to those he intended it for, and it certainly speaks to those today who say they have faith, but no works support their claim. To James the one who said he had faith, was the one who still observed the Law, but he had no works.

He had no revelation of the 'Church'. He had no understanding of both Jew and Gentile being formed into one Body. I doubt he had any knowledge of the Law being fulfilled or done away. When James writes he is writing to Jews who believe. (James 1:1-2) "...to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting. My brethren...." See also, (1:18), and (2:1). And he no doubt was witness to and part of the coming of the Holy Spirit in (Acts 2). But this would be Jewish also. Fulfillment of prophecy to the Jews. Done on the day of the Feast of Pentecost. Affecting many of the 12 tribes of Israel who traveled to attend.

Now, I would agree with you that when James wrote he did not see the Gentiles as on equal ground with the Jews. Just as Christ acknowledged. (Matt. 15:26) Such understanding would not come until Paul's revelation from the risen Christ.

But I do not see this as making James outdated or making it not relevant for any Christian, both Jew and Gentile, even though it is Jewish in it's emphasis. All are always saved by faith. Faith always produces works. This is true before the Law, during the Law, and after the Law.

Yes, in (Acts 21) James still held to the Law for Jews. And for the Jew to abandon the Law would be for him wrong. As to exactly how much understanding he had at that time of the Law being done away, I don't know. But in (Acts 15) it was only the Law being placed upon Gentiles that he said was not necessary. And Paul never did argue the point at that time that neither was the Jew under Law anymore.

I personally believe both James and Paul were wrong in (Acts 21). And Paul would have been the more so as he had more revelation and knowledge of the Law being done away. I think both were doing it for the right reasons, but were wrong in the act.

I don't think I have answered anything. (James) is a difficult subject to say the least.

Stranger

Very well put. I think we at least have an understanding of our viewpoints.

One thing I will comment on is the notion that faith produces works. I am probably going to be ridiculed by certain people for this, but I can agree that it can produce works. However, works ARE NOT evidence of faith. If they are, only to men and not to God. James said so in his epistle (2:18) and Paul said so in Romans 4:2. No, not directly, but it is implied. Jesus himself said in Matthew 6 that praying, fasting and giving should be done secretly. So those things are only for God to see, and if you do it before others, their admiration is your reward... But God won't honor it.

So, Stranger... Is there anything I have not addressed that you are wanting me to?

 

[GodsGrace]

Well it would have helped, LoL.

Here are some:
CS Lewis
Scott Hahn
RJ Neuhause
Dave Hunt
F. Morrison

and plenty more.
Also some priests, pastors
and currently a monk.

 

[GodsGrace]

You're confusing me, LoL. The paragraph reads:

The Gospels and Acts portray Peter as the most prominent apostle, though he denied Jesus three times during the events of the crucifixion. According to the Christian tradition, Peter was the first to whom Jesus appeared, balancing Peter's denial and restoring his position. Peter is regarded as the first leader of the early Church,[21][22] though he was soon eclipsed in this leadership by James the Just, "the Brother of the Lord."[23][24] Because Peter was the first to whom Jesus appeared, the leadership of Peter forms the basis of the Apostolic succession and the institutional power of orthodoxy, as the heirs of Peter,[25] and is described as "the rock" on which the church will be built.[21]

That's what the Wiki on James said (not that Wiki is always 100% on). But it too stated that James became the head of the church when Peter left Jerusalem after the persecution began : )

Trust me.
Peter was the head of the church.
It's not important enough to debate.
He was very much looked up to and was consulted when
there were problems.

I'll see if I could find some more links quick....

Here. Who can know more than them?
Actually, if you study church history, this is confirmed even by evangelicals.

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles

 

[GodsGrace]

Who? And why?

I posted statements from James's epistle where he is asking a seemingly rhetorical question which indicates that's what he believes.

Instead of saying there are more knowledgeable people who disagree with me, tell me why they do and tell me what they do with these verses.

See post 70.
Need more?

I have plenty.

What I'm saying is that we can't read the bible ALL ON OUR OWN.
The Holy Spirit helps us to understand.
If we're not saved Christian concepts MEAN NOTHING to us...
1 Cor 2:14

But reading persons that have studied the bible for years and learning from those that specifially teach, seems to be a good idea to me.

We'd agree more on everything.
I think.

 

[GodsGrace]

I look forward to hearing your answers so I can get you.

TOO LATE!
My husband got me.

And I don't remember the question.
If you remind me,,,I'll answer it tomorrow.
Midnight here.

 

[GodsGrace]

Have I added or removed anything? If so, what?

I didn't mean that you do this.
But we all take very simple words and make them very complicated.
I know one guy who would go on for pages over ONE WORD.

This is silly, unless that one word is very important...can't think of any....except maybe if it was NOT...

 

[FHII]

Here are some:
CS Lewis
Scott Hahn
RJ Neuhause
Dave Hunt
F. Morrison

and plenty more.
Also some priests, pastors
and currently a monk.

Well, send them on over and I will debate them too. I'd be interested in what they have to say.

Now, anyone have anything serious and important to say?

 

[Hidden In Him]

NO ONE has ever GOTTEN ME yet.

Trust me.
Peter was the head of the church.
It's not important enough to debate.
He was very much looked up to and was consulted when
there were problems.

I'll see if I could find some more links quick....

Here. Who can know more than them?
Actually, if you study church history, this is confirmed even by evangelicals.

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles

I'll take a look. I recall you saying you weren't actually Catholic, but I kinda sensed this might be coming. Hard to run from ones roots and all : )

 

[Enoch111]

Now, anyone have anything serious and important to say?

Sure. If Paul were here today, he would say that Christians should take the epistle of James to heart and apply it to themselves. Not debate about its merits.

 

[Stranger]

Very well put. I think we at least have an understanding of our viewpoints.

One thing I will comment on is the notion that faith produces works. I am probably going to be ridiculed by certain people for this, but I can agree that it can produce works. However, works ARE NOT evidence of faith. If they are, only to men and not to God. James said so in his epistle (2:18) and Paul said so in Romans 4:2. No, not directly, but it is implied. Jesus himself said in Matthew 6 that praying, fasting and giving should be done secretly. So those things are only for God to see, and if you do it before others, their admiration is your reward... But God won't honor it.

So, Stranger... Is there anything I have not addressed that you are wanting me to?

No, I believe you covered it. Sounds good.

I will say this concerning 'faith producing works'. In the believers life, faith will produce works. This doesn't mean however that if you don't see the works, that the person is not a believer. It can mean they are not at that time exercising the faith that they once did.

But whenever they do once again start to walk by faith, that faith will produce works.

And this is I think the thrust of James. You say you have faith, but I see no works. Don't tell me you have faith if the works are not there. You may have it. But before men, don't tell me you have it and expect me to believe it if the works are not there.

Paul is looking at the righteousness of God through God's eyes. James is looking at the righteousness of God as men see it.

Stranger

 

[GodsGrace]

Well, send them on over and I will debate them too. I'd be interested in what they have to say.

Now, anyone have anything serious and important to say?

YOU asked.
I answered.

Next time, if you don't want THE ANSWER
DON'T ASK THE QUESTION and waste my time.

Thanks.