Epistle of James

[pnewton]

Going back to the original post, I find a great irony when we have to defend the veracity of any part of the Bible to " Bible-Christians."

 

[hermit]

Christy Beth

Are you implying that the Jesuits teach improper Theology?

 

[Steven_Merten]

Why ask the Protestants about James when they admit that they do not follow the Gospel of Jesus? The Protestants hate Christ’s answer to obey the commandments if they wish to enter into life. They hate Christ’s teachings that those who feed, house and clothe the least of their brother will enter the kingdom of God while those who abandon the least of their brothers will be condemned to hell. The Protestants do not allow Jesus to judge them on the last day because they have judged themselves that they are ‘born again’ in possession of the Kingdom of God.

One Protestant minister told me that they do not follow these teachings of Jesus because after Jesus death eveything changed. Now they follow the “post ressurection” teachings of St. Paul, he told me. Well just who was called to do what Jesus taught? Just those few who heard His three year public ministry?

I say put St. James and St. Paul aside and start addressing the gospel of Jesus, which they do not believe, with the Protestants.

NAB MATTHEW 19:16 The dangers of riches. Another time a man came up to him and said, “Teacher, what good must I do to possess everlasting life?” He answered, “Why do you question me about what is good? There is One who is good. If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments." “Which ones?” he asked. Jesus replied “You shall not kill”; ‘You shall not commit adultery’; ‘You shall not steal’; ‘You shall not bear false witness’; ‘Honor your father and mother’; and ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’”

NAB JOHN 12:50

"Since I know that his commandment means eternal life, . . . . "

NAB MATTHEW 25:41

Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, a stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.’ Then they will answer and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?’ He will answer them, ‘Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.’ And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life." NAB JOHN 15:10

"You will live in my love if you keep my commandments, even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and **live **in his love."

NAB REVELATION 22:12

“Remember, I am coming soon! I bring with me the reward that will be given to each man as his conduct deserves. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End! Happy are they who wash their robes so as to have free access to the tree of life and enter the city through its gates Outside are the dogs and sorcerers, the fornicators and murderers, the idol-worshipers and all who love falsehood.”

Peace in Christ,
Steven Merten
www.ILOVEYOUGOD.com

 

[TertiumQuid]

PrayingTwice:

I know that the reformers wanted it out due to its chapter on good works and that Luther called it an “epistle of straw” but what other arguments are protestants using to discredit it?

FYI:

An interesting fact about this quote (hardly ever mentioned by Luther-detractors!) is that it only appears in the original 1522 Preface To The New Testament. John Warwick Montgomery points out: “Few people realize — and liberal Luther interpreters do not particularly advertise the fact — that in all the editions of Luther’s Bible translation after 1522 the—Reformer dropped the paragraphs at the end, of his general Preface to the New Testament which made value judgments among the various biblical books and which included the famous reference to James as an “Epistle of straw.” Montgomery finds that Luther showed a “considerable reduction in negative tone in the revised Prefaces to the biblical books later in the Reformer’s career.” For anyone to continue to cite Luther’s “epistle of straw” comment against him is to do Luther an injustice. He saw fit to retract the comment. Subsequent citations of this quote should bear this in mind.

Regards,
James Swan

 

[TertiumQuid]

Mjohn1453:

Martin Luther referred to it as too defective to be canonical. Probably because it contradicts faith alone. That is the only argument that I have heard. He justifies degrading it because some, emphasis on some, early Christians didn’t want it in due to questions as to its authenticity. This early balking at its authenticity gave way to nearly universal acceptance by the time of St. Jerome, however.

I have never read Luther words, “too defective to be canonical.” Perhaps you could provide a reference.

Luther says:

“Though this epistle of St. James was rejected by the ancients, I praise it and consider it a good book, because it sets up no doctrines of men but vigorously promulgates the law of God. However, to state my own opinion about it, though without prejudice to anyone, I do not regard it as the writing of an apostle; and my reasons follow.”

The first thing Luther wants to tell us is his awareness that the book of James has an uncertainty in regards to its canonicity, and that he does not consider James an apostle. The editors of Luther’s works include an interesting footnote after the word “ancients”: “In the earliest general history of the church, Eusebius: The Ecclesiastical History (II, xxiii, 25), the author… writes, “Such is the story of James, whose is said to be the first of the Epistles called Catholic. It is to be observed that its authenticity is denied, since few of the ancients quote it, as is also the case with the Epistle called Jude’s.”… Eusebius also includes both epistles in his list of “Disputed Books” (History, III, xxiv, 3)…Cf. the statement by Jerome (d. 420) in his Liber de Viris Illustribus (II) concerning the pseudonymity ascribed to the epistle of James and its rather gradual attainment of authoritative status.” Both Eusebius and Jerome raised similar doubts to the apostolicity and canonicity of James. Neither receives the level of chastisement that Luther does for his opinion. Neither Eusebius nor Jerome is charged with dismantling the canon, or creating their own infallible collection of books.

Regards,
James Swan

 

[jimmy]

hermit:

That is absolute nonsense, the letter of James contains more pure Christ than all the ravings of Paul.

The reformers probably wanted to remove it because the letter of James illuminates just how much Paul corrupted the message of Jesus.

I will take St. Pauls writings, you can come up with your modern interpretation of the teachings of Christ that allow you to do what ever you want.

 

[jimmy]

hermit:

That is absolute nonsense, the letter of James contains more pure Christ than all the ravings of Paul.

The reformers probably wanted to remove it because the letter of James illuminates just how much Paul corrupted the message of Jesus.

So you only accept three of the gospels and a few of the letters. That is a good way to discount the teahcings of Christ if they disagree with you.

 

[francisca]

hermit:

That is absolute nonsense, the letter of James contains more pure Christ than all the ravings of Paul.

The reformers probably wanted to remove it because the letter of James illuminates just how much Paul corrupted the message of Jesus.

Wait a minute… we are getting confused more and more here…

 

[Steven_Merten]

**The Jesus vs. St. Paul debate. **

The misunderstanding is that St. Paul is debating the law of circumcision and not the Law of God’s commandments. St. Peter warns us to be very careful when reading St. Paul’s writings. Martin Luther and the Protestants stumble right past St. Peter’s warnings to base the foundation of the Protestant faith on their misunderstandings of St. Paul’s writings.

St. Paul says,

Galatians 2:16…who know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.

Jesus says,

NAB MAT 19:16

“Teacher, what good must I do to possess everlasting life?” He answered, “Why do you question me about what is good? There is One who is good. If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments." “Which ones?” he asked. Jesus replied “You shall not kill”; ‘You shall not commit adultery’; ‘You shall not steal’; ‘You shall not bear false witness’; ‘Honor your father and mother’; and ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’”

St. Paul’s writings were debating the law of circumcision and the Pharisee created Church laws and not God’s Law of the commandments.

NAB ACT 15:1Some men came down to Antioch from Judea and began to teach the brothers, “Unless you are circumcised according to Mosaic practice, you cannot be saved.” This created dissension and much controversy between them and Paul and Barnabas.NAB ACT 21:20

“You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews have come to believe, all of them staunch defenders of the law. Yet they have been informed that you teach the Jews who live among the Gentiles to abandon Moses, to give up the circumcision of their children, and to renounce their customs.” NAB PHI 3:5

(St. Paul is speaking.) I was circumcised on the eighth day, being of the stock of Israel and the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrew origins; in legal observance I was a Pharisee, and so zealous that I persecuted the church. I was above reproach when it came to justice based on the law. (GAL 6:13)NAB 1CO 7:19

(St. Paul is speaking.) Circumcision counts for nothing, and its lack makes no difference either. **What matters is keeping God’s commandments.**NAB ROM 2:13

(St. Paul is speaking.) For it is not those who hear the law who are just in the sight of God; it is those who keep it who will be declared just.

NAB 2PE 3:14 Preparation for the Coming.

**Consider that our Lord’s patience is directed toward salvation. Paul, our beloved brother, wrote you this in the spirit of wisdom that is his, dealing with these matters as he does in all his letters. There are certain passages in them hard to understand. The ignorant and the unstable distort them (just as they do the rest of Scripture) to their own ruin. You are forewarned, beloved brothers. Be on your guard lest you be led astray by the error of the wicked, and forfeit the security you enjoy.**Peace in Christ,

Steven Merten
www.ILOVEYOUGOD.com

 

[hermit]

jimmy:

So you only accept three of the gospels and a few of the letters. That is a good way to discount the teahcings of Christ if they disagree with you.

I don’t recall saying I only accepted three of the gospels. Next you will accuse me of using the Thomas Jefferson bible.

 

[jimmy]

hermit:

I don’t recall saying I only accepted three of the gospels. Next you will accuse me of using the Thomas Jefferson bible.

You said how bad the teachings of Paul were. Luke was one of the disciples of Pual. If you reject the teachings of Paul, then you also reject Luke who also wrote The Acts of the Apostles.

 

[francisca]

I think to follow God by observing the Law is minimal.

Because Jesus teach us to do ‘more’ than the law.

Matthew 5:27
"You have heard that it was said, ‘YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY’;

Matthew 5:28
but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Matthew 5:31
"It was said, ‘WHOEVER SENDS HIS WIFE AWAY, LET HIM GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE’;

Matthew 5:32
but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

Matthew 5:33
"Again, you have heard that the ancients were told, ‘YOU SHALL NOT MAKE FALSE VOWS, BUT SHALL FULFILL YOUR VOWS TO THE LORD.’

Matthew 5:34
"But I say to you, make no oath at all, …"But let your statement be, ‘Yes, yes’ or ‘No, no’; anything beyond these is of evil.

Matthew 5:38
"You have heard that it was said, ‘AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH.’

Matthew 5:39
"But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.

I would say that what Paul is trying to explain is that one cannot find justification by merely doing works. Because if one can work his own salvation out, he does not need any christ to die for him.
Therefore one is saved by faith in Jesus. So Jesus says “your faith saves you” in many places in the Gospel books.

So Paul doesn’t contradicts Jesus’s teachings, but he elaborates Jesus’ teachings in relations with the law. Pauls letters are more difficult because he is a Pharisee and therefore he talks a lot about the Old Testament books and relate those with Jesus’ teachings.

God bless.

 

[hermit]

jimmy:

You said how bad the teachings of Paul were. Luke was one of the disciples of Pual. If you reject the teachings of Paul, then you also reject Luke who also wrote The Acts of the Apostles.

Now that’s a stretch if I ever saw one. What does the Acts of the Apostles have to do with the letters of Paul. One is a history of the early church the other is one mans opinion of christianity.

 

[George_G]

hermit:

Now that’s a stretch if I ever saw one. What does the Acts of the Apostles have to do with the letters of Paul. One is a history of the early church the other is one mans opinion of christianity.

You don’t understand. The Church infallibly declared these writings to be inspired by God. That doesn’t mean that Paul went off on some emotional tangent when writing; it means that these are the very words of God and are completely inerrant. God is the author of all scripture–to believe otherwise is heresy.

And yes, any supposed Jesuit speaking differently is teaching heresy. Not that that’s a surprise.

 

[twf]

Wait before we continue, we better clarify here. Hermit, I’m assuming you are not a Catholic…am I correct? Sorry if my assumption is wrong, but if you are, then do you reject that the Church is infallible in matters of faith and morals? Do you consider yourself greater than the Church? Are you wiser than all the saints, doctors, and bishops of the Church over the last 2000 years? I don’t mean to put you down nor to offend you, but I’m trying to make a point here…

Paul was too judgemental? Well then I suppose Jesus was as well: 16 But if he hear thee not, take with thee one or two more, that at the mouth of two witnesses or three every word may be established.
17 And if he refuse to hear them, tell it unto the church: and if he refuse to hear the church also, let him be unto thee as the Gentile and the publican.
18 Verily I say unto you, what things soever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and what things soever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. (From Matthew 18).

Jesus instituted the practice of excommunication. We are not to judge, but that does not mean judgement in general. You can not just take one or two verses out of context…it means we can not judge without knowing the facts, nor judge without love. Nor are we to judge those outside the Church…but we are to judge those within, in a loving spirit, with discernment, respect, and gentleness. Harsh, premature judgement, unkind, disrespectful judgement is condemned. Making wise judgements as to the morality of another brother’s actions is called for. This is what Paul tells us, and clearly Christ did as well.
(See 1 Cor. 6:1-10).

 

[hermit]

twf

If you have the self-imposed authority of excommunication then be my guest.

 

[Apologia100]

hermit:

twf

If you have the self-imposed authority of excommunication then be my guest.

No-one has the “self-imposed” authority to excommunicate. The Church gets her authority to excommunicate from Jesus, as it was clearly stated in the above post.

 

[hermit]

Is Woodbridge in the Diocese of Arlington or Richmond?

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

PrayingTwice:

I was listening to EWTN Open-Line a few weeks ago and I heard a caller debate salvation with John Martignoni. Once the Epistle of St. James was brought up, the caller tried to undermine the letter and discredit it. I couldn’t hardly make out what he was saying and I was surprised to hear that some non-Catholic christians didn’t believe in its inspiration.

I know that the reformers wanted it out due to its chapter on good works and that Luther called it an “epistle of straw” but what other arguments are protestants using to discredit it?

That’s not quite what Luther said - he said it was an epistle of straw **compared to **some other NT writings. I’ve never yet come across a Catholic who has not misquoted this sentence. Which is very unjust; we are no position to complain of misrepresentation, if we do it to others​

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

hermit:

It was not my intent to divert attention away from the letter of James. In fact, you will see that I listed the letter of James as my favorite letter in the NT in another thread.

IMHO the letter of James contains the essence of the teachings of Jesus and he is not judgemental like Paul.

I am not surprised that non-catholics do not like James because he clearly points out that faith and works are both essential.

The reformers also blocked the letter of Clement to the Corinthians from the canon, which I consider an error in judgement.

Did they even know of it in the 16th century ?​