Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Was James confused?

Or was he still preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom, which included the Law?

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)

No, he was not!!!!!!!  ---- 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. 

Gen 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)

Not only that, but God accounted him righteous solely for his faith in His Promises, and not by anything that He did.  Paul accurately reports this.  It seems that James, in order to mix salvation by works and faith, did not consider this fact in the scriptures.  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.

Neither of those last two statements jives with 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 Isaac. As a matter of fact I cannot find a statement in the O.T. that says Abraham was called a friend of God.

Based upon faulty premises, one is bound to come to a faulty conclusion:

24 You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.

Which is, as shown above, a direct contradiction of the Gospel that Paul taught and the account given in the scriptures.

In my opinion 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 “sanctifiedâ₠is not found
9. The word “saved†is not found
10. The words “in Christ†are not found

Written by: Richard Burger, 2003
 
The Apostle Paul wrote:

Gal 1: 9 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.

Gal 1:19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother. 20 Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not.

Gal 2:9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision. 10 Only they would that we should remember the poor; the same which I also was forward to do.

Odd, Paul believes that James was a Pillar in the Church and I only read one account of where Paul rebuked another Apostle, and it wasn't James...
 
StoveBolts said:
The Apostle Paul wrote:

Gal 1: 9 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.

Gal 1:19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother. 20 Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not.

Gal 2:9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision. 10 Only they would that we should remember the poor; the same which I also was forward to do.

Odd, Paul believes that James was a Pillar in the Church and I only read one account of where Paul rebuked another Apostle, and it wasn't James...

You said nothing about the issue I raised. All you posted is just alot of verbage that does not deal with the issue.
 
RichardBurger said:
In my opinion the book of James is devoid of the gospel of grace as taught by Paul.

I understand your argument. I simply responded to that in BOLD.

Most say that the book of James was written around AD 48 while Galatians was written around AD 50, yet we see no rebuke of James by Paul... Only a rebuke to Peter... all while stating that James was a pillar int he church.

If your argument is correct, why no rebuke to James by Paul?
 
StoveBolts said:
RichardBurger said:
In my opinion the book of James is devoid of the gospel of grace as taught by Paul.

I understand your argument. I simply responded to that in BOLD.

Most say that the book of James was written around AD 48 while Galatians was written around AD 50, yet we see no rebuke of James by Paul... Only a rebuke to Peter... all while stating that James was a pillar int he church.

If your argument is correct, why no rebuke to James by Paul?

You still have not addressed the issues raised in the OP. What you want to do is to re-focus the subject to another one. You are certainly arragant if you think I should address your issue while you refuse to address mine.

There is an OP on this forum about what Paul was teaching both Jews and Gentiles and what James and the Elders were teaching the Jews. In Act 21 we see the believing Jews were angry at Paul for teaching the Jews that a person did not have the be circumsized. HOWEVER, the believing Jews were only angry at Paul. CONCLUSION; obvously James and the Elders were not teaching what Paul was teaching.

Are people so dogmatic in their theology that they cannot see. If they were angry at Paul then why weren't they angry with James and the Elders????????????????? ---- If, as most say, they were all teaching the same thing isn't it most likely that the beleiving Jews would have been angry with James and the Elder TOO??????????
 
Excellent post, Richard!


stevebolts said:
If your argument is correct, why no rebuke to James by Paul?

If Paul was correct, then ...
Why is the book of James talking in favor of the law?
why isnt the book of James talking about being saved by faith only?

Both of them cant be correct simultaneously.
 
Is Richard confused?


Richard. It is not hearers of the law that are justified but doers of the law that are justified.

KJV Rom 2:13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

NIV For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous.


This was written by Paul circa 64 AD. So now you have an issue with both James AND Paul. If we investigate further, will we not find that you have an issue with the entire bible?
 
God Himself says the law is to be kept.
Jesus and the prophets said the same thing...and James is no exception.

Paul is the ONLY one in the bible who speaks against the law. Even Jesus in Pauls 'visions' did not say anything about the law being done away with for good. Yet, christians follow Pauls words rather than Jesus' words.
 
Jesus' turn...

And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: Matt 7:26

We must do to be saved. That doing comes from being. If righteousness is alive, the one in whom righteousness lives will work righteousness.


Mat 7:21 ¶ 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. Mat. 7:21

Not convinced?
 
Paul contradicts not only the rest of the bible, but HIMSELF!!!

Judge for yourself!


Here he calls the law a "curse"....
Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree."
- Galatians 3:13


(Did he just say Jesus was cursed because he was hung???)


And here he calls the law holy...

So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good.
- Romans 7:12


Still no contradiction, people?????
 
sk0rpi0n said:
God Himself says the law is to be kept.
Jesus and the prophets said the same thing...and James is no exception.

Paul is the ONLY one in the bible who speaks against the law. Even Jesus in Pauls 'visions' did not say anything about the law being done away with for good. Yet, christians follow Pauls words rather than Jesus' words.


Paul actually backs up the law! He is against using the law itself as a justifier. But his words can be twisted unto destruction as Peter says.

As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. 2 Pet. 3:16
 
I have a bizarre and unusual interpretation of the book of James: I think it means what it says. James is repudiating "easy believism," the doctrine that if you say a prayer and mean it, with no repentance and no new birth, that you are still saved. Faith that does not produce good works in not saving faith, because it did not produce a new birth.
 
@Adullam

Read Pauls words again.
You cant back up the law while teaching agaisnt it. Paul taught against the law, as is made clear in several places in his books.
 
I know this will not satisfy your question before I start; but.

Paul writing to Gentile believers used the term "Fruits of the Spirit", James writing to Jewish believers used "Works", a term more familiar to them.

Now as a faith that produces no "Fruit' is no faith, so is one that produces no "Works" (or fruits) of the Spirit.

James is not teaching Law, he is doing everything to convince his readers they cannot fulfill the law. That the Law is dead works, and that faith based on Law is dead faith.
 
sk0rpi0n said:
Paul contradicts not only the rest of the bible, but HIMSELF!!!

Judge for yourself!


Here he calls the law a "curse"....
Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree."
- Galatians 3:13


(Did he just say Jesus was cursed because he was hung???)


And here he calls the law holy...

So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good.
- Romans 7:12


Still no contradiction, people?????


Before Christ, we were unable to accomplish the law according to the spirit of the law. The law is perfect; we are not (without Him). So the law condemns us as being unlawful. When Christ indwells us then we can fulfill the law through Christ who strengthens us. There is no sin in Christ within us. So we do the works of righteousness and holiness through Christ.

Then the law no longer condemn us...it justifies us! (since we are keeping it now)

This is the good news! Jesus Christ is come in the flesh...just like us! He overcame sin and then helps us to do as He did.

John says...

He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.1 john 2:6
 
samuel said:
I know this will not satisfy your question before I start; but.

Paul writing to Gentile believers used the term "Fruits of the Spirit", James writing to Jewish believers used "Works", a term more familiar to them.

Now as a faith that produces no "Fruit' is no faith, so is one that produces no "Works" (or fruits) of the Spirit.

James is not teaching Law, he is doing everything to convince his readers they cannot fulfill the law. That the Law is dead works, and that faith based on Law is dead faith.

What makes you think the law cannot be fulfulled? And if fulfilling the law is not possible, then why would Jesus ask his followers to keep the law?

Besides...


But you must obey the Lord your God. You must keep his commands and rules. They are written in this Scroll of the Law. You must turn to the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul. What I'm commanding you today is not too hard for you. It isn't beyond your reach.
-Deuteronomy 30:10-11


Still think its not possible for people to keep the law? Then why do you suppose keeping the law is equated to being rightous in several places in the bible?
 
What the vast majority of believers never understand is that Jesus Christ gives us power over sin. The power of the divine nature. IF you have this nature and walk in it....it is impossible to sin!

Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. 1 John 3:9

Pay attention to the truth...not human reasoning. Look at the implications of the gospel head on. And put faith in Christ our deliverer.

This is the test of faith then...do you believe in Christ? Then walk in the victory of the cross! Mere belief won't do this...it must be faith!

Only through this victory can all the verses be reconciled.
 
What makes you think the law cannot be fulfulled? And if fulfilling the law is not possible, then why would Jesus ask his followers to keep the law?

Besides...


But you must obey the Lord your God. You must keep his commands and rules. They are written in this Scroll of the Law. You must turn to the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul. What I'm commanding you today is not too hard for you. It isn't beyond your reach.
-Deuteronomy 30:10-11

Still think its not possible for people to keep the law? Then why do you suppose keeping the law is equated to being rightous in several places in the bible?

1: You are totally devoid, and incapable of understanding the scriptures. OR
2: You are just trying to be argumentative; in either case I have no time to waste on such.
 
Adullam, all that is fine, but you are not addressing the real issue.

I will ask you one simpe question, please answer to the point...

God and all the prophets he sent all said that the law is to be kept.
Paul,by his own words, is the only one who taught AGAINST it. How do you reconcile to this??
 
samuel said:
1: You are totally devoid, and incapable of understanding the scriptures. OR
If you understood scriptures, you would have addressed my point. But sadly you have not done so.

samuel said:
2: You are just trying to be argumentative; in either case I have no time to waste on such.

Please move on then. :)
 
Back
Top