James vs Paul

[day]

Wait and I'll show you more mistakes of James... yes the entire letter is full of mistakes.

Do you believe that the books of the Bible are merely the work of men or are they inspired by God?

If there is seeming contradiction, it is because of your limited understanding, not God's inspiration of the writers.

I am not giving you a simple answer because I don't have one. I know I do not understand everything, but I am certain that the presumption of declaring Scripture wrong is not how to learn. Jesus said "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord', will enter the kingdom of heaven, but those who do the will of my Father who is in heaven." (Matt 7:21). I believe I need to do both, believe and act.

Also, a little side question. All the references sited in many of the above posts say "the faith OF Jesus", not faith in Jesus. Are we saved by Jesus' faith or our own?

 

[williemac]

Do you believe that the books of the Bible are merely the work of men or are they inspired by God?

If there is seeming contradiction, it is because of your limited understanding, not God's inspiration of the writers.

I am not giving you a simple answer because I don't have one. I know I do not understand everything, but I am certain that the presumption of declaring Scripture wrong is not how to learn. Jesus said "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord', will enter the kingdom of heaven, but those who do the will of my Father who is in heaven." (Matt 7:21). I believe I need to do both, believe and act.

Also, a little side question. All the references sited in many of the above posts say "the faith OF Jesus", not faith in Jesus. Are we saved by Jesus' faith or our own?

Jumping in here, You might want to consider that the term "faith of" Jesus is an Old King James English rendering. All modern translations of the original language use the term "faith in" Jesus in the same passages. The word 'of' can be used in a variety of meanings. In this case the King James does not intend it to mean that Jesus is doing the believing on our behalf. The proper understanding of the translation is that it is the faith "of which" Jesus is the object. If it really meant the faith belonging to Jesus then it would be in conflict with modern translations, not to mention with the rest of scripture, which is very clear that it is our faith in Him that is the method by which we receive from God. If we know from scripture that Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him as righteousness, and that this is the example for us to follow, then we should put away the nonsense about Jesus doing the believing for us.

We are saved through faith in Jesus, as John 3:16 clearly states, as well as John 5:24. cheers, Howie

 

[veteran]

Paul states that Abraham's works are not what is important, but his Faith, through which he was justified. He gives the physical example, showing a work that Abraham preformed because of his preexisting faith.

James states that without preexisting faith, Abraham would not have been able to do the work he was told to do. His works proved the faith he already had.

In both James' and Paul's message... The result of faith is works...

Yet both men are delivering slightly different messages... As I understand it...
...Paul says Abraham's works were not what God was looking at, but his faith...
...James says Abraham's works are a physical manifestation of faith... and that the 2 go together.

BOTH James and Paul are correct at the same time. No one is saved by their 'works' like Paul said, but the example that one has the Faith is works to back it up.

The OSAS doctrine of devils going around today telling people they're saved while allowing them to continue in wickedness is designed to try and destroy this concept that one's proof of their Faith is by their works.

 

[Eltanin]

BOTH James and Paul are correct at the same time. No one is saved by their 'works' like Paul said, but the example that one has the Faith is works to back it up...

I agree. That was the point I was trying to make.

I do not agree with OSAS. If someone is saved, their life changes, and also it their actions show it...

 

[James Forthwright]

They both use this same event (Abraham) to reach a conclusion for what they're preaching... tell me, are these man preaching the same gospel?
What conclusion do they reach about Abraham's justification?

I await your sincere answer.

Since there have been a number of excellent responses to your second question, I'd like to primarily address your first question, i.e., Are these man (sic) preaching the same gospel?

No, I don't believe the Apostles James and Paul preached the exact same gospel, at least with respect to many aspects of God's Law. Just as there are numerous doctrinal variances in the Church of Christ today there were certainly different schools of religious thought and practice in the first century Church.

First of all, before Johannes Gutenberg's invention of the printing press in the 13th century not many folks were able to own a complete copy of the sacred scriptures so there weren't many who were able to compare the differences between the teachings of Paul and James. The first century Church was composed of two primary Orthodox groups; the Churches in and around Jerusalem led by Peter, James and John and the Gentile churches founded by Paul, Barnabas and Silas scattered throughout the Mediterranean region.

Though these two sectors of Christianity were essentially identical regarding their beliefs in salvation only through belief in Christ and His propitiatory sacrifice on the Cross of Calvary, baptism, repentance, etc., there existed considerable differences regarding observance of the biblical Feast days, honoring the seventh day Sabbath, circumcision and many other matters of God's Law such as strict obedience to the scriptural definition of what constitutes clean and unclean food.

After the Fall of Jerusalem in 70AD, the Church in Jerusalem was widely dispersed and the Pauline gospel became the dominant Christian theology until the present day. However, as many Christians today begin to research the doctrine of the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel, there is a resurgence of believers who are discovering their true Israelite heritage with a subsequent revival of the faith practiced in the Church of Jerusalem and a renewed respect and obedience of God's Law.

 

[veteran]

Since there have been a number of excellent responses to your second question, I'd like to primarily address your first question, i.e., Are these man (sic) preaching the same gospel?

No, I don't believe the Apostles James and Paul preached the exact same gospel, at least with respect to many aspects of God's Law. Just as there are numerous doctrinal variances in the Church of Christ today there were certainly different schools of religious thought and practice in the first century Church.

But I certainly do believe both Paul and James preached the 'same' Gospel, simply because there can only be ONE Gospel of Jesus Christ, period.

The difference between what was preached to Israel vs. the Gentiles is in regard to two different 'administrations' of the same Gospel.

As written in Acts 10 and 15, Apostle Peter preached also to Gentiles, just as Apostle Paul was also given to preach to Israelites (Acts 9:15).

In the 1800's, certain men in Britain like John Darby et al, devised the un-Biblical doctrine of a pre-tribulational rapture of the Church to Heaven prior to the "great tribulation" our Lord Jesus foretold.

Those men then had to come up with an explanation as to why our Lord Jesus foretold His elect they would be gathered AFTER... the "great tribulation" per Scripture like Matthew 24:29-31 and Mark 13:24-27.

Then others took that idea and created the idea of a non-existing separation between Israel and the Church further, claiming the Gentile Church is raptured while Israel is not.

This then led later to Dispensationalists on the Pre-trib Rapture theory to begin preaching the un-Biblical doctrine of two different Gospels, one for Gentiles and another for Israel.

Their whole wall's foundation is built upon fabrication after fabrication.


So What Really Is The Meaning By Apostle Paul In Galatians 2?

Christ separated Apostle Paul in order to preach The Gospel to 1) the Gentiles; 2) to kings; and 3) to the children of Israel (Acts 9:15). One of the reasons "the children of Israel" had to be included with Paul's preaching of The Gospel was simply because of the scattered ten lost tribes that were among those Gentiles he preached to.

Another reason why Paul was given a separate 'administration' in The Gospel was because God long ago separated Israel into 2 parts, and He promised to always have one tribe of Israel in Jerusalem before Him for His servant king David's sake, while the rest of Israel was rent (scattered among the Gentiles). See 1 Kings 11 forward. As per the prophecy about the ten tribes being scattered in the Book of Hosea, God said He would preserve a faithful remnant of Judah to Him while the ten tribed house of Israel would be scattered losing their heritage of Israel's sabbaths, feasts, new moons, essentially losing their heritage as the larger part of Israel. Thus the larger part of Israel scattered among the Gentiles became as Gentiles, living as Gentiles, the majority of them not realizing their Israelite heritage (as it still is today, and I'm not speaking about Jews with this, which are a separate part of Israel than the ten scattered tribes).

Another reason was, because of both houses of Israel falling away into false worship, God ended the reign of the house of David in Jerusalem, and the majority of the small remnant of Judah in Jerusalem rejected Christ Jesus and The Gospel.

And yet another reason was, God had already promised His Birthright would fall upon Ephraim and Manasseh, the two sons of Joseph. God's Birthright includes caretaker and defender of The Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Faith which was given to Abraham 430 years prior to the giving of the law. God had already prophesied through Jacob that Ephraim would become "a multitude of nations" and that his brother Manasseh would also become "great" (Genesis 48). God had foretold Jacob that from his seed would come "a nation" and "a company of nations" (Gen.35:11).

And still another reason, was so that God's Salvation would be full, those "multitude of nations" under The Gospel of Jesus Christ would have possession of God's Birthright Blessings IN ORDER TO take The Gospel to ALL NATIONS AND PEOPLES on earth.


Dispensationalist's idea of a rapture of the Church to Heaven prior to the tribulation while Israel is left behind tries to 'destroy' all those above Biblical facts, revealing signs that such Dispensationalist doctrines were not just fabricated through Biblical ignorance, but on purpose as an attack against Christ and His Church of both believing Israelite and Gentile.

 

[Sargento]

Andy...

As James wrote, Abraham was declared righteous by God when he believed in him, not when he did the works. The works were only the evidence that what God had declared was true...

And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness:

This verse is not about Abraham being saved at the time he offered Isaac. It is about what God had done earlier in declaring Abraham righteous being proven true.

I am not against works. True faith will result in works, but works do not save. Faith does not save. Only God saves - only He can impute righteousness. And He does so in response to faith.

You're changing James's words.
That "And" comes from something... and that something is Abrahams works.

Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? {Seest...: or, Thou seest}
And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
James 2:21-23


James dissimulated this scripture, and you're dissimulating his.

Eltain...

Paul states that Abraham's works are not what is important, but his Faith, through which he was justified. He gives the physical example, showing a work that Abraham preformed because of his preexisting faith.

James states that without preexisting faith, Abraham would not have been able to do the work he was told to do. His works proved the faith he already had.

In both James' and Paul's message... The result of faith is works...

Yet both men are delivering slightly different messages... As I understand it...
...Paul says Abraham's works were not what God was looking at, but his faith...
...James says Abraham's works are a physical manifestation of faith... and that the 2 go together.

DAY...

Do you believe that the books of the Bible are merely the work of men or are they inspired by God?

If there is seeming contradiction, it is because of your limited understanding, not God's inspiration of the writers.

I am not giving you a simple answer because I don't have one. I know I do not understand everything, but I am certain that the presumption of declaring Scripture wrong is not how to learn. Jesus said "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord', will enter the kingdom of heaven, but those who do the will of my Father who is in heaven." (Matt 7:21). I believe I need to do both, believe and act.

Also, a little side question. All the references sited in many of the above posts say "the faith OF Jesus", not faith in Jesus. Are we saved by Jesus' faith or our own?

The catholic bible has more books than the protestant bible. Are those books word of GOD or man?
How do you differentiate the word of GOD from the word of man? Because someone told you so?
Do you accept those books has word of GOD? If not why not?

I say the letter of James is wrong because it's against the gospel and the glory of GOD not because I felt like... I I have showing one of his many mistakes, but no one admit that James might be wrong because "that's the word of GOD"...
What makes you say that this is the word of GOD? Because man selected it? Because they told you so?
HOW DO YOU DIFFERENTIATE WORD OF GOD FROM WORD OF MAN?


We're saved by the faith HE gives us... that's why it requires faith but at the same time it's a gift, if faith was a product of us than salvation it would not be a gift but a payment ... that's why election is undeniable.
If you recognize the gospel you'll end up in election.





JAMES...

Since there have been a number of excellent responses to your second question, I'd like to primarily address your first question, i.e., Are these man (sic) preaching the same gospel?

No, I don't believe the Apostles James and Paul preached the exact same gospel, at least with respect to many aspects of God's Law. Just as there are numerous doctrinal variances in the Church of Christ today there were certainly different schools of religious thought and practice in the first century Church.

First of all, before Johannes Gutenberg's invention of the printing press in the 13th century not many folks were able to own a complete copy of the sacred scriptures so there weren't many who were able to compare the differences between the teachings of Paul and James. The first century Church was composed of two primary Orthodox groups; the Churches in and around Jerusalem led by Peter, James and John and the Gentile churches founded by Paul, Barnabas and Silas scattered throughout the Mediterranean region.

Though these two sectors of Christianity were essentially identical regarding their beliefs in salvation only through belief in Christ and His propitiatory sacrifice on the Cross of Calvary, baptism, repentance, etc., there existed considerable differences regarding observance of the biblical Feast days, honoring the seventh day Sabbath, circumcision and many other matters of God's Law such as strict obedience to the scriptural definition of what constitutes clean and unclean food.

After the Fall of Jerusalem in 70AD, the Church in Jerusalem was widely dispersed and the Pauline gospel became the dominant Christian theology until the present day. However, as many Christians today begin to research the doctrine of the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel, there is a resurgence of believers who are discovering their true Israelite heritage with a subsequent revival of the faith practiced in the Church of Jerusalem and a renewed respect and obedience of God's Law.

Well, I saw no good answers... I saw who tried to change James's words, who tried to ignore the words of Paul about "without works", etc... good answers I saw none... If I was to accept those answers I would have to ignore what is written like almost all did, I would have trust more in them that in the scripture because none of their answers covers all, because every time they forge an answer to something I ask they HAVE to leave something out in order to validate that answer, and if I make look to another part they left out they forge another answer and forget about the first... so I can't accept none or I would be sinning against my consciousness.

About YOUR answer...

"No, I don't believe the Apostles James and Paul preached the exact same gospel,"

I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
As we said before, so say I now again, If any {man} preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
Gálatas 1:6-9


Do you know who was he talking about? Read what follows in this same letter which is about the mistake of justification by works:


For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.
And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.
But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before {them} all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?
We {who are} Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles,
Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ (the fight with the ones that came from James), even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, {is} therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.
Gálatas 2:12-17

 

[IBeMe]

Sargento: Now, this is a very controversial topic...

Just because two different people use the same two words, "works" and "Abraham" doesn't mean they're talking about the same subject or event.

Paul is saying, Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness without works.

James is saying, Abraham showed that he believed God by doing what God told him to do.

Jesus; "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven."

doeth = works

So, we're saved by faith, but then we have to doeth works to reap the reward.

What do we doeth? ... "Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you..."

As Paul says, we're saved by faith without works.

As James says, we must show our faith by works; "all things whatsoever I have commanded."

 

[Sargento]

ELTAIM...

Paul states that Abraham's works are not what is important, but his Faith, through which he was justified. He gives the physical example, showing a work that Abraham preformed because of his preexisting faith.

James states that without preexisting faith, Abraham would not have been able to do the work he was told to do. His works proved the faith he already had.

In both James' and Paul's message... The result of faith is works...

Yet both men are delivering slightly different messages... As I understand it...
...Paul says Abraham's works were not what God was looking at, but his faith...
...James says Abraham's works are a physical manifestation of faith... and that the 2 go together.

Sorry Eltaim, I quoted you but forgot to answer you...

No, they're both talking about the justification of Abraham, and one of them says he was justified by works and the other says it was by faith.
IBEME...

Sargento: Now, this is a very controversial topic...

Just because two different people use the same two words, "works" and "Abraham" doesn't mean they're talking about the same subject or event.

Paul is saying, Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness without works.

James is saying, Abraham showed that he believed God by doing what God told him to do.

Jesus; "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven."

doeth = works

So, we're saved by faith, but then we have to doeth works to reap the reward.

What do we doeth? ... "Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you..."

As Paul says, we're saved by faith without works.

As James says, we must show our faith by works; "all things whatsoever I have commanded."

No, they both talk about Abraham justification, and this is what James says:

Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
James 2:21

 

[williemac]

ELTAIM...




Sorry Eltaim, I quoted you but forgot to answer you...

No, they're both talking about the justification of Abraham, and one of them says he was justified by works and the other says it was by faith.

IBEME...

No, they both talk about Abraham justification, and this is what James says:

Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
James 2:21

Justified for what?
When we examine James' letter, we find that he was indeed validating faith. This was his purpose in speaking of the works of both Abraham and Rahab. The works that they did were proof of their faith. That was his point. In saying that Abraham was justified by his works, we cannot overlook why he said it. He explained why. He said that the works proved his faith. Therefore the works participated in his justification, but only in the fact that they proved that he believed God. Thus he was justified by way of his works for that reason. This point is clear enough. The wording was not meant to exclude the reason for it. James explained himself.

This was/is a God inspired scripture. Therefore the way we understand it properly is to be dependent upon the Holy Spirit to reveal what it means. Our friend Sargento, has sidestepped this pathway and has embarked on the use of human logic and the use of taking a verse from its context and using it out of its context to make a point. These are "amateur" methods in bible study. I recommend not taking him seriously on this topic. (with all due respect)

I'm sneaking in for another post, as I have been meditating further on this and have another inspiration for a comment.
The word justify basically means to have sufficient legal reason. And it can be applied to any number of contexts. From biblical perspective we typically associate it with salvation, or everlasting life.
The discussion in this case has to do with faith vs.works. In terms of salvation, Paul said it himself, that we are justified by way of faith. But Paul in no way invalidated the importance of works. He in fact made them the focal point concerning the judgment seat of Christ. As we know, that seat is there to determine the gain or loss of rewards. These rewards have nothing to do with salvation but everything to do with works.

What we do in this life with what we have been given is most important, to the degree that God has set up a so called 'incentive' program, as it were. Therefore as His children, our works definitely count for something. Therefore they justify us for something. They provide 'sufficient reason' for rewards.

James in his letter, was not telling them what they needed to do to be saved. He was asking them that if they were indeed saved by faith, then where was the evidence? In his letter he spoke of their conduct toward one another. This could well have been Paul doing the same, as he spoke often about the conduct of believers, frequently using stronger language than what we see in James. He spoke of fruit, and the importance of it as opposed to the folly of walking in the flesh.

I would caution some in this discussion to avoid this one track mind thinking that pits these two men of God against each other.

 

[IBeMe]

Sargento: No, they both talk about Abraham justification, and this is what James says:

There's no conflict.

======
Paul; "Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is."
=======
James; "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified (made manifest)(shown righteous), and not by faith only."
=======

justified means "shown righteous" in James 2:22.

The way you're trying to force the meaning, makes absolutely no sense.

You're saying James says: Abraham was made righteous by works, thus fulfilling the scripture where Abraham was made righteous by faith.

Your interpretation doesn't make any sense.

"Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?"

"Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?"

"And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God."

"Abraham ... imputed unto him for righteousness", takes place in Genesis 15.
"offered Isaac his son", takes place in Genesis 22.

Paul is talking about Genesis 15.

James is taking about Genesis 22.

What's James saying?

Abraham was shown to be righteous by works "And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness..."


(justified) {
G1344

Original: δικαιόω

Transliteration: dikaioō

Phonetic: dik-ah-yo'-o

Thayer Definition:

to render righteous or such he ought to be
to show, exhibit, evince, one to be righteous, such as he is and wishes himself to be considered
to declare, pronounce, one to be just, righteous, or such as he ought to be
Origin: from G1342

TDNT entry: 05:31,2

Part(s) of speech: Verb

Strong's Definition: From G1342; to render (that is, show or regard as) just or innocent: - free, justify (-ier), be righteous.
}