Is Epistle of James wrong and unreal?

[souldiver]

I have read in wikipedia and somewhere else that it’s not canonical, real and contradicts “Faith only” requirement.

 

[MarcoPolo]

What you are describing sounds like the assertion of Martin Luther in the 16th century. Though he ultimately did not remove the book from the canon, he did call into question its inspiration, and called for it to be removed from the university as a legitimate source from which to teach. Here are some quotations from Luther on the book of James:We should throw the epistle of James out of this school [Wittenberg]*, for it doesn’t amount to much**.*It contains not a syllable about Christ. Not once does it mention Christ, except at the beginning.*I maintain that some Jew wrote it who probably heard about Christian people but never encountered any.*Since he heard that Christians place great weight on faith in Christ, he thought, ‘Wait a moment!*I’ll oppose them and urge works alone.’*This he did. He wrote not a word about the suffering and resurrection of Christ, althought this is what all the apostles preached about. Besides, there is no order or method in the epistle. No he discusses clothing and then he writes about wrath and is constatntly shifting from one to the other.*He presents a comparison: ‘As the body apart from the spirit is dead, so faith apart from works is dead.’ O Mary, mother of God!! What a terrible comparison that is!!!*LW, 54, 424-425**And he was not fond of James’ teaching on faith and works:*James argues in his letter (Jas. 2:21) that Abraham was justified on the basis of his works. Because the text says:Now I see that you are righteous', he wants to conclude from this that previously Abraham was not righteous. . . . .Abraham was righteous by faith before God acknowledged him as such. Therefore **James*concluded falsely** that now at last he was justified after that obedience,*for faith and righteousness are known by works as by the fruit. But it does not follow, as James raves: Hence the fruits justify’ just as it does not follow: 'I know a tree by its fruit; therefore the tree becomes good as a result of its fruit.Therefore let our opponents be done with their James, whom they throw up to us so often(Luther 4:134).**But the bottom line is, the book of James is considered by the Church as divinely inspired text.

 

[pablope]

I have read in wikipedia and somewhere else that it’s not canonical, real and contradicts “Faith only” requirement.

Well…it is in the Bible…what should it be wrong and unreal?

Is it wrong and unreal because someone does not agree with what is written in it?

 

[Julia_Mae]

I have read in wikipedia and somewhere else that it’s not canonical, real and contradicts “Faith only” requirement.

There is no “faith only” requirement. There is a “love one another as I have loved you” requirement. How did Jesus love us?

He fed, healed, visited, taught and sacrificed for us.

I’d like a link to the wiki page, also.

 

[boldlygo]

I have read in wikipedia and somewhere else that it’s not canonical, real and contradicts “Faith only” requirement.

Take some time this weekend, and read the Letter of James…it is one of the catholic [universal] letters, intended to instruct the entire Church, and it is just as valuable in this sense now as it was 2000 years ago.

 

[midori]

In a Survey of the Old Testament class in undergrad (at a Baptist university), I remember my prof talking about the superficial contradiction between James:

14 What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? 15 Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. 16 If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? 17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

18 But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.”

Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds. 19 You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.

20 You foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is uselessd]? 21 Was not our father Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac 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,”[e] and he was called God’s friend. 24 You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone.

25 In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction? 26 As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.

and Paul:

As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2 in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. 3 All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our flesh[a] and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath. 4 But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. 6 And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, 7 in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. 8 **For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. **10 For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

I believe one of the points brought up in class was that both letters were composed for a specific audience in mind. In the case of James, it was a sort of “letter at large” addressed to the “twelve tribes”-- it encourages Jewish Christians while they are poor, scattered, and oppressed, but reminds them that faith isn’t something that we just do with our minds: it’s a lifestyle.

In contrast, Paul’s letter was directly addressed to the Ephesians. It was a very pagan city, and it talks more about the spiritual aspects of salvation-- salvation that doesn’t come from Zeus, or Apollo, or Isis, or any of the other deities commonly worshiped in that area. Grace is something that’s bigger than all of them, something that none of us can merit on our own, but a gift from God.

Or something along those lines. It’s been a long time. It boils down to two letters, two audiences, two points.

 

[souldiver]

Here’s the link en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistle_of_James. It said something called “Muratorian fragment” which is the earliest list of Bible that is the earliest and James isn’t in there.

 

[SonCatcher]

I have read in wikipedia and somewhere else that it’s not canonical, real and contradicts “Faith only” requirement.

If course James is canonical. It was discerned as part of the canon by ecumenical councils (Hippo and Carthage) in the 4[sup]th[/sup] century.

Also, James does not contradict the requirement for faith but explains that it must be lived out in our works.

Show me your faith without works and I will show you my faith by my works. (paraphrase)

Here’s the link en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistle_of_James. It said something called “Muratorian fragment” which is the earliest list of Bible that is the earliest and James isn’t in there.

The fragment dates from before the relevant council and was part of the Church’s discernment process for determining what is part of canon. The councils defined the canon which has been in use since the 5th century.

 

[JRKH]

I have read in wikipedia and somewhere else that it’s not canonical, real and contradicts “Faith only” requirement.

Short answer…It is the letter by St James is neither wrong or unreal…

As for the “Faith only” requirement…Perhaps you would share where one would find that in the bible.
So far as I know the only place where the “faith alone” appears is in the James.

Better to stick with the 2000 year old teachings of the Church instead of wikipedia…

Peace
James

 

[Julia_Mae]

and Paul:

As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2 in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. 3 All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our flesh[a] and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath. 4 But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. 6 And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, 7 in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. 8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works,

I think this is a great quote from Ephesians for this discussion, I just wanted to bold the part after you did.

We are given faith by grace in order to do good works.

We are not saved by our faith, we have no faith to give, but we have faith as a gift.

Now what? Now we can know God’s will for us: to do good works through Christ, as Christ did.

 

[MarcoPolo]

It said something called “Muratorian fragment” which is the earliest list of Bible that is the earliest and James isn’t in there.

The Muratorian Fragment, or canon, lists a number of books received into the Church at that time by that author. It doesn’t say anything one way or another about James. It also includes 1 epistle by Peter and questions it. Nor does it mention the epistle to the Hebrews. I caution against reading a canonical list that does not purport to be exhaustive to be a rejection of an unmentioned text.

 

[R_C]

“Faith alone” is indeed a requirement…for the anathemas of Canons IX, XIV, and XXIX of the Council of Trent

Jokes aside, the Epistle of James is infallibly Sacred Scripture. Some quotes from the Catholic Encyclopedia:

In the first centuries of the Church the authenticity of the Epistle was doubted by some, and amongst others by Theodore of Mopsuestia; it is therefore deuterocanonical. It is wanting in the Muratorian Canon, and because of the silence of several of the Western Churches regarding it, Eusebius classes it amongst the Antilegomena or contested writings. St. Jerome adds that with time its authenticity became universally admitted. The Council of Trent dogmatically defined the Epistle of St. James to be canonical.

In the Latin Church it was known by St. Clement of Rome (before A.D. 100), the Pastor Hermas (about A.D. 150), St. Irenæus (125?-202?, 208), Tertullian (d. about 240), St. Hilary (d. 366), St. Philaster (d. 385), St. Ambrose (d. 397), Pope Damasus (in the canon of about A.D. 382), St. Jerome (346-420), Rufinus (d. 410), St. Augustine (430), and its canonicity is unquestioned by them.

In the Greek Church, Clement of Alexandria (d. 217), Origen (d. 254), St. Athanasius (d. 373), St. Dionysius the Areopagite (about A.D. 500), etc., considered it undoubtedly as a sacred writing.

Sure, Martin Luther called it “epistle of straw”. Of course. How do you think he felt when he read:

Would you not like to know, o vain man, that faith without works is useless?

 

[MaryT777]

Short answer…It is the letter by St James is neither wrong or unreal…

As for the “Faith only” requirement…Perhaps you would share where one would find that in the bible.
So far as I know the only place where the “faith alone” appears is in the James.

Better to stick with the 2000 year old teachings of the Church instead of wikipedia…

Peace
James

Mary: James I am a new member and your posts are so inspirational to me in solidifying my Catholic faith. Thank you for your time in posting them.
Peace in Christ this Christmas season.

 

[JRKH]

Mary: James I am a new member and your posts are so inspirational to me in solidifying my Catholic faith. Thank you for your time in posting them.
Peace in Christ this Christmas season.

Thank you…If I offer anything of worth it is only by the working of the Spirit.
Praise God that he chooses to use such a one as me…

Peace
James

 

[po18guy]

I have read in wikipedia and somewhere else that it’s not canonical, real and contradicts “Faith only” requirement.

Let’s see: We begin to disbelieve one of Jesus’ hand-picked Apostles. Who do we disbelieve next? Many already disbelieve Jesus, in rejecting his command to be baptized.

Truly, the blind who believe this should question their man-made faith. Last I checked, the bible contained quite a bit more than Romans 3:28.

 

[Qoeleth]

The Epistle of James, the Head of the Jersulem Church, reflects the actual teachings of Jesus- works, observance of the Law, the merit of poverty, abstention from class distinctions, absentions from oaths.

‘Faith only’ is a terrible, terrible idea. Even the devils have faith. But it will not help them.

The we have only one short Epistle of James, in much greater in importance and authority than all the letters of Paul combined.

James was an ‘insider’ to Jesus’ circle. Paul was an outsider. Charitable works, observance of the law, and poverty. These are the keys to Heaven. ‘True religion is this- to keep oneself uncontaminated by the world, and to come to the aid of widows and orphans.’

 

[R_C]

Let’s see: We begin to disbelieve one of Jesus’ hand-picked Apostles. Who do we disbelieve next?

Initially there seemed to have been some doubt on the actual authorship, but already by the third century there was no such doubt left.

 

[po18guy]

Initially there seemed to have been some doubt on the actual authorship, but already by the third century there was no such doubt left.

It seems that in the rush to reject the authority of the Catholic Church, the baby was in danger of being thrown out with the bath water (actually, He was). The reformers did not like James, then Hebrews, then Jude, then Revelation. And, never mind the exclusion of the Deuterocanon, which necessitated the man-made concoction of the “inter-testamental period” where, they allege, God was mysteriously silent in the two centuries preceding Christ. Ha!

Fortunately, the Church spoke on this long ago. For example, Hebrews does not have to be 100% of Pauline provenance - its content has been tested and found to be inspired.

 

[jcrichton]

I have read in wikipedia and somewhere else that it’s not canonical, real and contradicts “Faith only” requirement.

…actually, “faith only” is Luther’s personal contribution to the chaos of Christ’s Body… the only place in Scriptures that speak about “faith alone” is precisely guarding against such abuses of personal interpretations:

19 You believe in the one God – that is creditable enough, but even the demons have the same belief, and they tremble with fear. 20 Fool! Would you not like to know that faith without deeds is useless? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by his deed, because he offered his son Isaac on the altar? 22 So you can see that his faith was working together with his deeds; his faith became perfect by what he did. 23 In this way the scripture was fulfilled: Abraham put his faith in God, and this was considered as making him upright; and he received the name ‘friend of God’. 24 You see now that it is by deeds, and not only by believing, that someone is justified. (St. James 2:19-24)

…now… what Luther did, and not a single non-Catholic Christian will call him on it, is abuse the Word of God that Commands that not a single letter be added or removed from Sacred Scriptures… well, Luther, relying on his own authority (did Lucifer not do a similar thing) penciled in “alone” next to “faith;” this was the only way his personal theology could make sense… so he blinded himself to the fact that he was acting as a god by correcting the Word of God–he also went as far as excluding the 7 books that the Catholic Church includes as part of the Canon… but he stepped it up by removing Apocalypse (Revelation) and some other books… further, he spoke of the Epistle of St. James as the “epistle of straw”–I can only gather that it is because it did not agree with his personal theology.

…sadly, it took one malcontent to sprout an alternative belief system which soon became bankrupt as more and more malcontents continued Luther’s example… today we have over 30, 000 “Christian” groups all claiming Luther’s right and authority (faith/Scriptures alone based on personal revelations of the Holy Spirit)–none think that separation from the One Body of Christ means alternative faith-base built not on Christ’s Church/Apostles but on man’s disobedience!

Merry Christmas!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

In a Survey of the Old Testament class in undergrad (at a Baptist university), I remember my prof talking about the superficial contradiction between James:

and Paul:

I believe one of the points brought up in class was that both letters were composed for a specific audience in mind. In the case of James, it was a sort of “letter at large” addressed to the “twelve tribes”-- it encourages Jewish Christians while they are poor, scattered, and oppressed, but reminds them that faith isn’t something that we just do with our minds: it’s a lifestyle.

In contrast, Paul’s letter was directly addressed to the Ephesians. It was a very pagan city, and it talks more about the spiritual aspects of salvation-- salvation that doesn’t come from Zeus, or Apollo, or Isis, or any of the other deities commonly worshiped in that area. Grace is something that’s bigger than all of them, something that none of us can merit on our own, but a gift from God.

Or something along those lines. It’s been a long time. It boils down to two letters, two audiences, two points.

…actually… it boils down to “not by faith alone!”

Merry Christmas!

Maran atha!

Angel