Facts about the book of James

[RichardBurger]

Certain parts of the Bible, especially the New Testament, were originally written to a limited group of people. It is my belief, as well as that of most other Christians, that the whole Bible is, nonetheless, aplicable to all Christians. Using your logic, we would have to conclude that Pauls letters were only aplicable to Christians living in specific cities (some of which no longer exist), because that's who they were written to. Luke's Gospel and the Book of Acts are addressed to one specific person. Does that mean that they were only aplicable to him? I think the answer is obvious. Saying that Galatians applies to everybody but James doesn't, when both were originally addressed to limited groups, is inconsistant.

If God says something is written to a specific people who are you to say it was written to everyone? It looks like you see nothing wrong with taking what God had written in Gen. 15 and overlay it with Gen. 22.

What I see is that James referenced Gen 22 where as Paul referenced Gen. 15. God had a reason for this. But along comes man, in order to put those under grace back under law, and says they know better, just blend them together.

 

[RichardBurger]

Point being there are multiple ways to skin a cat and just as many to view the scriptures.



I altered nothing. Your strawman is trying to erect barriers between Apostles teachings when no such things exist.

I understand that you can not see anything I write because you can not see that there was a change in the gospel from law, and the promiesd Messiah, to the grace gospel given to, and taught by, Paul. That is the reason there is so much confusion in the religious church. You can't mix law and grace.

I see no reason for us to continue in a discussion with you on this thread. We are too far apart.

 

[BrenchStevens]

Mr. Burger,

Like I said before, works are the natural output of faith. This is supported by several passages:

1 John 2:3-5 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. 4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. 5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.

Galatians 5:16-26 This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh. 17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would. 18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law. 19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, 21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, 23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. 24 And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts. 25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. 26 Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another.

No one is trying to mingle faith and works or faith and the law. Keeping His commandments are the natural response of knowing Him.

 

[smaller]

I understand that you can not see anything I write

Richard, I've been in your shoes on these matters. I understand your view as thoroughly as you do. Ultimately your view will land you on full blown preterism. Studied that as well. Wanna just cut to that position?

because you can not see that there was a change in the gospel from law,

A lot of people try to make that case. I did as well for many years. It finally didn't work for me because it didn't make sense. The Law is a very deep and interesting subject. I have NOT thrown it away. There are excellent matters therein, just as there are with the ARK.

Part of the difficulty with these studies and understandings would be for example your insistence on seeing the ARK (using your previous reference) as an X physicality matter in a given point in time for a given set of people and circumstances.

I hate to tell ya but these matters are a whole lot more FUN than just that.

There is always MORE to see and to HARMONIZE, and it ain't easy. But it IS enjoyable, to me anyway.

and the promiesd Messiah, to the grace gospel given to, and taught by, Paul. That is the reason there is so much confusion in the religious church. You can't mix law and grace.

I have no issues with either side of these matters and BOTH Law and GRACE have and remain with very particular purposes, MULTIPLE in Divine Conveyances, and can be PROVEN today to remain with many purposes that even you will or could eventually acknowledge.

But in the course of things 'men' in general devise many constructions of these matters, they then become LOCKED into unsupportable positions, and eventually they end up in various FORTRESSES in their minds that they have built to DEFEND. This is the natural order of what happens to MANY.

I see no reason for us to continue in a discussion with you on this thread. We are too far apart.

Oh, you will find me pretty quick to discover the flaws in any doctrinal fortresses, and of course people don't like to deal with that and then they REACT adversely. This also is part of the course of the study of scripture that I am very familiar with.

enjoy!

smaller

 

[Neo]

I agree with you. There are many parts of the bible that are inauthentic. James is one of those books that I believe the was put in wrongly. They should have chosen Thomas or even Phillip for that chapter. The bible is a compilation of books. It was not put together in a divine setting. I believe it was Athanisius (I know I didn't spell that right) who said that it was up to the church to decide what was canonized scripture. He was one of the forefathers of the Catholic church and thusly the Christian faith. Until we can see that the bible is not a literal truth or a divinely inspired work there will always be this kind of contradictions. They are accounts made by several different people with oppposing views sometimes and that must be taken into account when reading these passages. Many of the gospels were not written until many years after the true followers were dead and gone. Just look at Mark. It is by far the earliest written canonized gospel but it was written around 70-90 AD by either Polythorp or........I can't think of his name right now, but they were followers of Mark. They did not write these gospels because they all believed that the rapture was coming because of Jesus' prophecy that it would come before their live would be over. THEY DIDN'T WRITE ANYTHING BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T SEE THE NEED TO! It was only after it didn't happen did people begin to write the teachings that they had been taught by their elders and religious leaders. It was passed down by oral tradition for many years, and while it was very accurate, it may not be completely accurate. When reading the NT you have to take into account the time is which it was written, the true time, and manner and the audience it was intended for and not to take a literal translation from it. If you do, you will be presented with problems like this and of which there is no real logical answer.

 

[smaller]

I agree with you. There are many parts of the bible that are inauthentic. James is one of those books that I believe the was put in wrongly. They should have chosen Thomas or even Phillip for that chapter. The bible is a compilation of books. It was not put together in a divine setting. I believe it was Athanisius (I know I didn't spell that right) who said that it was up to the church to decide what was canonized scripture. He was one of the forefathers of the Catholic church and thusly the Christian faith. Until we can see that the bible is not a literal truth or a divinely inspired work there will always be this kind of contradictions. They are accounts made by several different people with oppposing views sometimes and that must be taken into account when reading these passages. Many of the gospels were not written until many years after the true followers were dead and gone. Just look at Mark. It is by far the earliest written canonized gospel but it was written around 70-90 AD by either Polythorp or........I can't think of his name right now, but they were followers of Mark. They did not write these gospels because they all believed that the rapture was coming because of Jesus' prophecy that it would come before their live would be over. THEY DIDN'T WRITE ANYTHING BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T SEE THE NEED TO! It was only after it didn't happen did people begin to write the teachings that they had been taught by their elders and religious leaders. It was passed down by oral tradition for many years, and while it was very accurate, it may not be completely accurate. When reading the NT you have to take into account the time is which it was written, the true time, and manner and the audience it was intended for and not to take a literal translation from it. If you do, you will be presented with problems like this and of which there is no real logical answer.

That view is not held by many believers, nor should it be.

The DIVINE ORACLES of the OLD TESTAMENT were FROM GOD through that body of people, meticulously written, contained and preserved through the ages of the nation of Israel. Any who do not accept this as a FACT should find their way in some other field of study.

Notwithstanding that some of your other observations are semi-factual.

enjoy!

smaller

 

[RichardBurger]

Since there is an issue as to who is believing the scriptures as written I want to present the following:

No.1 In the scriptures below we see that there are two gospels spoken of, one to the uncircumsized and one to the circumsized. If these two gospels are the same then why indicate that they are different?

No.2 You will notice that James, Cephas, and John made an agreement with Paul. Since James, Cephas, and John said they would agree that they would go to the Jews and Paul to the Gentiles, why do the religious insist that the grace church is based on the teachings of James, Cephas, and John? Are the gospels the same? If so why indicate that they are different? Does this indicate that James, Cephas, and John are no longer going to keep the Great Commission? --- I think it does because the 12 could not convince the Jews that Jesus was their Messiah and if they couldn't convince the Jews how could they convince the Gentiles?

Galatians 2:6-10
6 But from those who seemed to be something — whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; God shows personal favoritism to no man — for those who seemed to be something added nothing to me.
7 But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter
8 (for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles),
9 and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.
10 They desired only that we should remember the poor, the very thing which I also was eager to do.
NKJV

This is verse 7 re-written to mean both gospels are the same. 7 But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel had been committed to me, as the gospel was to Peter

The above has to be as shown in order to say that there was only one gospel.

But will the na-sayers admit it, no because it does not fit into their preconceived ideas of the scriptures. As for me I will believe the scripture as written.

Ephesians 3:7-11
7 of which I became a minister according to the gift of the grace of God given to me by the effective working of His power.
8 To me, who am less than the least of all the saints, this grace was given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ,
9 and to make all see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ;
10 to the intent that now the manifold wisdom of God might be made known by the church to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places,
11 according to the eternal purpose which He accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord,
NKJV

In the scriptures above we see that he gospel of God's grace WAS HIDDEN IN GOD and revealed to Paul. Notice the use of the word "now" in verse 10. Does that mean anything? --- Notice the words "hidden in God", does this mean the gospel that was given to Paul was already given? I don't think so because I believe the scriptures.

 

[RichardBurger]

That view is not held by many believers, nor should it be.

The DIVINE ORACLES of the OLD TESTAMENT were FROM GOD through that body of people, meticulously written, contained and preserved through the ages of the nation of Israel. Any who do not accept this as a FACT should find their way in some other field of study.

Notwithstanding that some of your other observations are semi-factual.

enjoy!

smaller

Noe; according to the scriptures few will find salvation. Therefore claiming that the belief of the majority makes you right is a slippery slope.

 

[smaller]

Noe; according to the scriptures few will find salvation. Therefore claiming that the belief of the majority makes you right is a slippery slope.

If you see me claiming the 'belief' of the majority, please advise.

I've always considered that any man in Truth will receive hatred and this I know quite well.

And while you are at it, please understand that the very path you think you have avoided is perhaps the one you are in fact standing on in finding destruction for nearly ALL but you in 'your' understanding.

?

s

 

[Neo]

I have a question: If the messiah did return and they started preaching something contradictory to what the orthodox faith believes, would you believe him or cast him out and say he was wrong? Really think about this and search your feelings about it. If someone was inspired by god to say or write something that contradicted what you think, or what is considered conservative, would you believe them without any proof other than their own words? Would you need physical proof to prove their inspiration?

 

[RichardBurger]

Mr. Burger,

Like I said before, works are the natural output of faith. This is supported by several passages:

1 John 2:3-5 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. 4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. 5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.

Galatians 5:16-26 This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh. 17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would. 18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law. 19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, 21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, 23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. 24 And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts. 25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. 26 Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another.

No one is trying to mingle faith and works or faith and the law. Keeping His commandments are the natural response of knowing Him.

Why do you say that when you know you can't do those things all the time. According to the same person that wrote the above Paul did not want to sin but he knew he did (Romans7). -- I do not believe any born again child of God wants to sin or fail to do the things mentioned is the scriptures you gave but I am not blind when I look into my own heart. When you look into your own heart what do you see there? Remember you can lie to others but you can't hide your heart from God.

 

[MarkT]

Facts about the book of James:
Note; All scriptures are from the NKJ Bible:

Everyone should be familiar with what James wrote in James 2:20-24
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?
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.

The above is used by many to show that true faith must be accompanied by works if it is true faith.

Let us explore what James wrote to see if his conclusions are based on facts.

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.

In the above we see that God accounted Abraham as righteous solely for his faith in His Promises, and not by anything that He did.* This event happened many years before Isaac was born. Paul accurately reports this.

It is a fact that James is using Genesis 22 to base his conclusions. However, it seems that James did not consider the account in Genesis 15.* James conclusions are based on the account given in Genesis 22, many years after Isaac was born, when Abraham was well over 100 years old, and he agreed to offer Isaac.
*
Okay, let us look at the facts:

It is a fact that 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. Nor does it say in Genesis 22 that Abraham was accounted as righteous BECAUSE he offered up his son Isaac.

What James wrote, as shown above, is a 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.

In my opinion, based on the facts, the book of James is devoid of the gospel of grace as taught by Paul. Here are some facts that support my opinion. I find them interesting.

1. The word “Law†is found in 18 places
2. The word “grace†is found in 2 places
3. The word “Christ†is found in 2 places
4. The word “Justified†is found in 2 place with the words “by works†after them
5. The words “by faith†is found 1 time (justified by works and not by faith only)

6. The word “cross†is not found
7. The word “reconciled†is not found
8. The word “sanctified†is not found
9. The word “saved†is not found
10. The words “in Christ†are not found

Romans 4:1-7 Abraham Justified by Faith (Genesis 17:10)
1 What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh?
2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God.
3 For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness."
4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.

David Celebrates the Same Truth

5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness,
6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:
7 "Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, And whose sins are covered;
NKJV

So what do we do with the book of James? Should it be in the Bible? --- Of course it should. It was written to the believing Jews; JAMES Greeting to the Twelve Tribes; James 1:1 James, a bondservant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, To the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad: Greetings. --- The above is a fact. It was written to the believing Jews who were still under the law of Moses. --- to apply what James said to the grace church that is under Paul’s gospel of grace is wrong.

Now will come those who will refuse to discuss the facts as presented above but will try to marginalize and demonize me for having the audacity to say the above. But facts are facts and truth is truth.

You’ve got things out of order. The order is works, belief, faith, works. Works : We were sinners. We did nothing good to deserve a reward. We were not good when God called us. That’s what Paul was talking about - the unearned nature of salvation. Belief: We believe because it is God’s good will that we believe. Faith: We live by faith in the Son of God. Works: We follow the teachings we received. We seek. We grow. We keep the commandments. We imitate the Lord Jesus. We warn the wicked. We correct the misguided. That’s what James was talking about when he said faith without works is dead. Works follows faith.

 

[RichardBurger]

You’ve got things out of order. The order is works, belief, faith, works. Works : We were sinners. We did nothing good to deserve a reward. We were not good when God called us. That’s what Paul was talking about - the unearned nature of salvation. Belief: We believe because it is God’s good will that we believe. Faith: We live by faith in the Son of God. Works: We follow the teachings we received. We seek. We grow. We keep the commandments. We imitate the Lord Jesus. We warn the wicked. We correct the misguided. That’s what James was talking about when he said faith without works is dead. Works follows faith.

Thank you for telling me my faults but in the end it is just your opinion vs mine.

IMHO all you are doing is fooling yourself. You still live in a body of flesh and no where in the scriptures does it say the flesh is sinless or that it becomes sinless. In other words we are still sinners in the flesh.

You are saying that we must keep the commandments of the Law of Moses. Jesus told the Jews that they THOUGHT they were keeping the law when in fact they were not. I suspect the same to be true with you.

To say we must keep the Law of Moses is to refuse God's grace. Perhaps you have a Bible with all of Paul's writings taken out.

I got a laugh out of your statement that we "We imitate the Lord Jesus. We warn the wicked. We correct the misguided." Don't try that with me. You sin just like I do. If you say you have no sin the scriptures say you are a liar.

 

[smaller]

Jesus and A L L the Apostles advised us quite well to KEEP ALL THE COMMANDMENTS and advised also HOW that is to be done.

Read all about it in Romans 13:8-10 for starters. Then look up the myriad of 'love thy neighbors as thyself' admonishions for kickers.

There is no VARIANT. Any command in the Old Testament is to be understood HOW Paul described them.

The LAW is SPIRITUAL.

 

[Sparkey]

Facts about the book of James:
[Quote truncated by Sparrowhawke]
So what do we do with the book of James? Should it be in the Bible? --- Of course it should. It was written to the believing Jews; JAMES Greeting to the Twelve Tribes; James 1:1 James, a bondservant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, To the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad: Greetings. --- The above is a fact. It was written to the believing Jews who were still under the law of Moses. --- to apply what James said to the grace church that is under Paul’s gospel of grace is wrong.

Now will come those who will refuse to discuss the facts as presented above but will try to marginalize and demonize me for having the audacity to say the above. But facts are facts and truth is truth.

What you state as fact contains substantial error. For one single example, the Book of James was written by the Holy Spirit through James, an Apostle of the Lamb. James was a eye witness to the ministry of Jesus Christ the Righteous from the beginning and throughout His time here while Jesus was physically present on the earth, and he --James, also witnessed the death and resurrection of our Lord. James witnessed the change that came to him as the Holy Spirit continued the ministry of service that was started by Jesus and continued through him personally and shared (under that direct guidance), some of the wisdom he had gained while sitting at the feet of his Master and then later as had been taught to him by the Holy Spirit.

At that time the 'church' was centered in Jerusalem and consisted of the people who had either heard directly the teaching of Jesus - or had heard indirectly through his followers, the disciples of Christ. Yes, the epistle was addressed to the diaspora, those of the 12 tribes who had been dispersed abroad. It was NOT addressed to Jews (members of the Children of Israel from the 2 tribes who remained).

There are other inconsistencies but this one alone serves to demonstrate that there are not "two gospels" written by the Holy Spirit, one to the "Jews" and another that targeted "us". The law is being written into the hearts of those who love God no matter their official bloodlines. Goy is a Hebrew biblical term for "nation" that around Roman times acquired the meaning "non-Jew". It no longer matters if we are adopted children or not - Goyim have been grafted into the Tree of Life - Jesus is the root and the branch and the Way and the Life. We know that none can go to the Father, except by HIM.

By the way, Jesus too was a "Jew" sent to the physical children of Y'israel. Born into that family. That was essential because the Promise was given to the seed of the woman, Eve. It was by the act of rejection, the stone that the builders rejected, that the Gift of Grace was extended to Gentiles (nations/non-Jews). Our Father is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow - there is no changing Him. There is no shadow of turning in Him. Nothing to grab onto when we try. It is Him, by His grace, His mercy and His long-suffering and patience that we call our salvation. If we count His Longsuffering as our salvation, how much more so should we see that He will give the same to the Diaspora, the first children of the Promise? How much more so should we bear long with our brother?

We must needs be careful when we speak and even when we think about such things, knowing that if God did not spare "them", surely we (adopted children) can not think ourselves in too high-minded a manner.

 

[RichardBurger]

What you state as fact contains substantial error. For one single example, the Book of James was written by the Holy Spirit through James, an Apostle of the Lamb. James was a eye witness to the ministry of Jesus Christ the Righteous from the beginning and throughout His time here while Jesus was physically present on the earth, and he --James, also witnessed the death and resurrection of our Lord. James witnessed the change that came to him as the Holy Spirit continued the ministry of service that was started by Jesus and continued through him personally and shared (under that direct guidance), some of the wisdom he had gained while sitting at the feet of his Master and then later as had been taught to him by the Holy Spirit.

At that time the 'church' was centered in Jerusalem and consisted of the people who had either heard directly the teaching of Jesus - or had heard indirectly through his followers, the disciples of Christ. Yes, the epistle was addressed to the diaspora, those of the 12 tribes who had been dispersed abroad. It was NOT addressed to Jews (members of the Children of Israel from the 2 tribes who remained).

There are other inconsistencies but this one alone serves to demonstrate that there are not "two gospels" written by the Holy Spirit, one to the "Jews" and another that targeted "us". The law is being written into the hearts of those who love God no matter their official bloodlines. Goy is a Hebrew biblical term for "nation" that around Roman times acquired the meaning "non-Jew". It no longer matters if we are adopted children or not - Goyim have been grafted into the Tree of Life - Jesus is the root and the branch and the Way and the Life. We know that none can go to the Father, except by HIM.

By the way, Jesus too was a "Jew" sent to the physical children of Y'israel. Born into that family. That was essential because the Promise was given to the seed of the woman, Eve. It was by the act of rejection, the stone that the builders rejected, that the Gift of Grace was extended to Gentiles (nations/non-Jews). Our Father is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow - there is no changing Him. There is no shadow of turning in Him. Nothing to grab onto when we try. It is Him, by His grace, His mercy and His long-suffering and patience that we call our salvation. If we count His Longsuffering as our salvation, how much more so should we see that He will give the same to the Diaspora, the first children of the Promise? How much more so should we bear long with our brother?

We must needs be careful when we speak and even when we think about such things, knowing that if God did not spare "them", surely we (adopted children) can not think ourselves in too high-minded a manner.

Since you can not see that there WAS two gospels in the book of Acts, one that fadded away, and since I do, we are too far apart to come to any same conclusions. By the way, I find it amazing that you want everyone to just accept the ideas of man and not search the scriptures to see if those ideas are correct. You just want us to accept man's doctrines deveoloped by man and keep quite. You speak of the 12 Apostles as if they were the ones sent to the Gentiles. You fail to see that the 12 made an agreement with Paul that they would just go to the Jews and Paul would go to the Gentiles. When you come to that scripture you just close your eyes and refuse to accept that it exists. You insist that the Great Commission is the commission of the grace church. Jesus commissioned Paul to be the Apostle to the Gentiles and you want to treat him as a lessor Apostle.

I don't need your sermon about James. I can read the scripture for my self. What I see in Acts 21 is that James and the elders in that Jewish church you spoke of were still teaching that the Jews had to keep the law and were upset that Paul was not teaching the same thing. But your eyes and understanding will not let you see it.

 

[dadof10]

So what do we do with the book of James? Should it be in the Bible? --- Of course it should. It was written to the believing Jews; JAMES Greeting to the Twelve Tribes; James 1:1 James, a bondservant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, To the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad: Greetings. --- The above is a fact. It was written to the believing Jews who were still under the law of Moses. --- to apply what James said to the grace church that is under Paul’s gospel of grace is wrong.

You assume too much. First and foremost, you are ASSUMING that the word "works" means the same to Paul and James. It doesn't. Paul is obviously writing about "works of the law", James obviously about charitable "works". Works of the law have nothing to do with salvation, works of charity do.

Secondly, you are assuming that justification is a one time thing, never to be repeated. The example of Abraham shows the opposite.

We both agree that Abraham was justified by faith in Gen. 15. What you may not realize is that Abraham was justified BY FAITH in Gen. 12.

"By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place which he was to receive as an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing where he was to go. 9 By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise. (Hebrews (RSV) 11)

Hebrews 11 refers back to Gen 12:4 "So Abram went, as the LORD had told him; and Lot went with him."

I think you'll agree that Abraham was justified here even though the text doesn't use the word "justified", unless you want to make the case that there are people who have a real, true faith (like Abraham did in Gen. 12) and are NOT justified.

Abraham had faith in the promises of God and was justified, he was justified again when he "believed God" in Gen. 15 and again when he "offered his son Issac on the altar" in Gen. 22. The only difference is that in the last instance, he was justified by faith and deeds working together, as James says:

"You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by works, (James (RSV) 2)

I haven't read all the posts here, so if this has been covered already, just point me to where and I'll respond accordingly. Thanks.

 

[RichardBurger]

It seems that I am the only one on this thread that understands that the flesh cannot keep the Law.

Okay folks you keep trying to be saved and kept saved by your works. Let me know how that works out for you.

 

[MarkT]

Thank you for telling me my faults but in the end it is just your opinion vs mine.

IMHO all you are doing is fooling yourself. You still live in a body of flesh and no where in the scriptures does it say the flesh is sinless or that it becomes sinless. In other words we are still sinners in the flesh.

You are saying that we must keep the commandments of the Law of Moses. Jesus told the Jews that they THOUGHT they were keeping the law when in fact they were not. I suspect the same to be true with you.

To say we must keep the Law of Moses is to refuse God's grace. Perhaps you have a Bible with all of Paul's writings taken out.

I got a laugh out of your statement that we "We imitate the Lord Jesus. We warn the wicked. We correct the misguided." Don't try that with me. You sin just like I do. If you say you have no sin the scriptures say you are a liar.

I didn't say anything about sin. All I said is you have got things out of order. You say the flesh is sinful. I agree. But I am born of the Spirit so it's really neither here nor there.

I didn’t say anything about the law of Moses. I said works follow faith. If you love Jesus then you will keep his commandments.

John 14:15 rsv
"If you love me, you will keep my commandments.

John 15:10 rsv
If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father's commandments and abide in his love.

Isn't eternal life given to those who believe and have faith? And who did this teaching come from? From Jesus. And who do we trust? Jesus. Remember his teaching, that he came to fulfill the prophets, that not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished, and whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven. Mt. 5:17-20

Then Jesus gave us the royal law. That's how we keep the law of Moses. When we follow the commandments we received from Jesus, we abide in his love and we abide in the love of God.

That`s not to say the flesh isn`t sinful or that we do not sin. Paul referred to the desires of the flesh. We might say there`s a physiological reason for sin ie. hormones, pleasure centers, etc. The flesh is weak. I confess that I do sin. But if I say it is no longer I that do it, but sin which dwells within me, then I would be agreeing with Paul. Romans 7:17

Anyways there`s no disagreement between Paul and James. You just have things out of order.

 

[dadof10]

It seems that I am the only one on this thread that understands that the flesh cannot keep the Law.

Okay folks you keep trying to be saved and kept saved by your works. Let me know how that works out for you.

Loosely translated: I have no arguments for my man-made traditions, yet refuse to admit it and accept the truth.

Let me know how this mind-set works for ya....