Tension in the Early Church: Paul vs James

[rose321]

Josephus doesn’t say that in so many words. He only mentions James once. He says that after James was stoned, a group of influential Jerusalemites secretly sent to Agrippa, who was then in Rome, urging him to order Ananus to desist from any further such actions (Ant. XX, 200-201). Does that prove that James himself was an influential citizen who could have stepped in to rescue Paul? I don’t think so.

Always was very interested in this James also known as James the Just, James the Brother of the Lord, known and dearly loved by the Community of the Faithful, also known as the 3 Pillars of the Community of the Faithful in Jerusalem along with St Peter and St John. This James who dies in 62 Ad. Jesus died in 33 AD this James continues in the Community of the Faithful for 30 years after Jesus death and the Temple was destroyed in 70 AD. Which within our Church has a Feast Day.

This James is also mentioned in St Paul writings Gal 1:18-20, Acts 21:18-21 St Luke is careful to mention also ALL where there. James of Alphaeus. St Paul meets often with this James?

According to St Paul writings meets with this James and this James is the last to speak when the Jerusalem council gather along with St Peter, St Paul, Barnabus etc on the issues facing what to do with the gentles, God fearers wanting to join in the Community of the Faithful, This James last to speak gives out 4 Laws recorded in the writings of St Paul, for those who seek to enter the fold of the Faithful. James preached on water Baptism not sacrifice?
There is outside sources written also on this James known as the brother of the Lord, James the Just, Eusebuis( mentions account by Clement), Ebonites, Rufinus, Jerome 300 AD Clementine Holomies, Josephus, Romans also would know this James for they ruled over Jerusalem. Interesting.

Had great influence? Why does James not step in with St Paul? Why was St Paul put into prison on what charges and by whom? All is interesting. Peace

 

[o_mlly]

Romans 3:31

Do we, then, nullify the Law by this faith? By no means! Instead, we uphold the Law.

Viviano tells us, in “Matthew,” as far as modern Christians are concerned, Paul won the fight (641). Moderate Pauline theology did not deny the universal applicability of moral law and found them in the Torah. Johnson notes that neither Matthew nor Paul teaches that rejection of Torah as an ultimate norm for righteousness entailed its rejection as a moral guide (337). Moreover, today no major Christian church requires observance of all 613 precepts of the Old Testament law, ethical and ceremonial, but only the ethical commands such as the Decalogue and command to love God and neighbor (Viviano 641). What is important is that both Paul and Matthew revere the Decalogue illumined by Jesus’ commandment of love. Matthew and Paul looked upon the will to do “all” that Jesus commanded as characteristic of the true disciple (Ellis 145).

Ellis, Peter F. Matthew: His Mind and His Message. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical, 1985.

Johnson, Luke. The Writings of the New Testament: An Interpretation. Minneapolis: Augsburg,
1999.

Viviano, Benedict T. “Matthew.” The New Jerome Biblical Commentary. Ed.
Raymond E. Brown, et al., Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1990.

 

[rose321]

n Acts and Galatians we read of Paul’s interactions with the rest of the leadership of the Church, especially James. While both Paul and James believed in Jesus, Paul was more focused on what Jesus meant for all nations and James was focused on He meant for the Jews. The attitudes and beliefs of these men seem to put a strain on their relationship. Consequently, we see James practically order Paul to go through a purification ritual to prove his loyalty to the Law of Moses and basically sit on his hands when Paul is assaulted by the Asian Jews.

Interesting this James who along with St Peter and St John were known within the Community of the Faithful as The 3 Pillars of the Community of the Faithful, thus all 3 were in Unity and dearly loved by all, this James was known to live on his knees within the Temple, not just anyone would be allowed to do so?

This James preached on water Baptism not sacrifice. This James was thrown off the Temple why? This James, known as the Brother of the Lord, James the Just whom St Paul mentions and meets with this James and Jerusalem Council what to do with the gentles who seek to enter the fold of Faith and about circumcision ( St Paul concerns?) This James as mentioned in St Paul writings after hearing all sides on the issues, this James is the last to stand and speak>Now listen to me…gives out for Laws for the gentles or God fearers to enter the fold and they need not to be circumcised. What were those 4 Laws?? St Paul records such and 2 are dietary Laws also out of the 4 Laws. Will learn more about the Faith, those who enter the fold when they come along weekly to gather on the Sabbaths. But 4 Laws must be obeyed, all in St Paul writings. All agreed by St Peter, St Paul, Barnabus, Jerusalem Elders in the fold of Faith.

Note also this James rules within Jerusalem along with the 3 Pillars, St Peter, St John for 30 years ( long time and well known also??) even by the Romans who ruled over Jerusalem loved him, till his death in 62 AD and the Temple was not destroyed till 70 Ad. There are out side sources besides what is written on this James within the Bible>>Hegessipus, Jerome 300 Ad, Ebonites, Clement Holomies, Rufinus 300 AD Eusebus( mentions account of Clement) St Paul, St Luke, Josephus etc.’’

And why does James order St Paul to go through a purification? For what purpose?

James had great influence within Jerusalem, dearly Loved, by all within the Community of the Faith Faithful, even the Romans after 30 years would come to know this James called also James the Just and why all go to this James, large gathering taking place, all would believe him, about the crucifixion > now a HUGE gathering is outside the Temple>>while James was in the Temple>>>later by his enemies threw him off, did not like to hear what this James said to the whole who all gathered below >>

Peace

 

[rose321]

Josephus and Hegessipus seem to say James wielded great influence in Jerusalem.

Agree wielded great influence for James ruled within the community of the Faithful in Jerusalem, was greatly loved along with St Peter and St John who were known as the<<>> 3 Pillars of the Mother Jerusalem Assembly of the Faithful for 30 years after Jesus death this James died in 62 Ad and the Temple was not destroyed to 70 Ad where when the Temple was being destroyed>> great persecution took place among the Jews, and why the Jews scattered into other Nations >>where they were not under Roman rule?
It is where St Paul goes to meet with this James on the matter of circumcision, a huge issue for St Paul to get followers ( those who were not Jews?) out of fear, painful in doing so etc? Peace

 

[rose321]

James preached on water Baptism as with Jesus and John Baptist not sacrifice, repent repent repent, Return to me and I Will return to you>> obey the Commandments and Sermon on the Mount, love thy neighbor, faith along side works?

Show me you faith without works and I will show you my faith by my works? You will know them by their fruits, actions? Jesus when he walks the earth quotes heavily from what we call OT so does St Paul quote heavily from OT, for the NT did not exist till decades later.

When Jesus was alive walked the earth, in pondering on, Jesus commands his listening audience to search the Scriptures>>question came to me, What Scriptures?? for NT did NOT exist till decades later after all had pass. Jesus Holy Scriptures what we call OT Jesus 5 Books of Moses and Jesus must of being reading also the Books of the Prophets, Jesus reads from Isaiah and King David, Jonah,Job,Elijah Amos, Samuel etc.

St Paul epistles were letters given to individual churches dealing with the different issues facing each one. Peace

 

[rose321]

However, Josephus is clear that when the Procurator Festus died suddenly in about A.D. 62, in the power vacuum, and before Albinus could come out to take control, the Jerusalem Sanhedrin was illegally convened for the sole purpose of executing James and others of the high ranking Christian leaders.

Respectfully>> Sorry do not believe the Sanhedrin would seek to persecute James, dearly loved by all Jerusalem>>>>>>>>>> find that interesting for the Sanhedrin was ruled over by Gambriel who sons, grandson, later succeeded him in the Sanhedrin Council >> for the Jerusalem Temple was not destroyed till 7O AD

Gambrie ruler over Sanhedrin council of Jerusalem>>>>>. was not one to persecute so easily others that came before him like the>>> Apostles, St Peter themselves, Gambriel stating more or less>>> let them go they did nothing wrong( broke no laws in what they were teaching) along when Jesus who came before them also >>>when brought before about breaking the Sabbath Laws, does Jesus not rebuke and ask, where does it say >>Man cannot feed himself on the Sabbath? Gambiel of the Sandedrin was greatly morn, when he passed by ALL within Jerusalem.

Gambriel practice tolerance and find it hard to believe he would seek to put to death James known as James the Just>> who lived on his knees within the Temple, so much so, his knees were like camel skin? This James would not be allowed to do so within the Temple>> for He was greatly Loved, admired, thought of as being very very Holy. Sorry hard to accept that with all other outside sources out there even within our own church Elder writings also. Peace

 

[NotThatHarvey]

In the NT it says that he “wore the miter” somewhere.

 

[NotThatHarvey]

The requirement for circumcision to be a Christian was a roadblock designed to keep out the gentiles. It was incredibly painful.
Remember that the Jews still thought of themselves as the chosen people and the rest- gentiles- were to serve as their footstools- as is clearly the theme in the OT. The Messiah was to bring that about.
So Jesus’ message of universal salvation- as preached by Paul- was truly revolutionary for the times. Understandably, the Second Temple High Priesthood felt threatened.
When James and the Christian leadership in Jerusalem eased up on the strict requirements for circumcision, they became further outliers to the point of threatening the Second Temple operation.

 

[rose321]

Respectfully sorry so many post but find James the Just interesting is all, even St Paul writes about this James, Luke and in acts. 30 years is a long time, had to be much known about this James in his time and even by the Romans who ruled over them at the time of this James also.

St Paul Galatians 2:7-9 speaks about St Peter Apostle to the circumcised and St Paul to the uncircumcised for a reason, why?

And mentions within those bible verses >>as acknowledge>> James, St Peter, St John as Pillars of the Community of the Faithful, allow such and accept St Paul along with Barnabas the right to fellowship.

St Paul has a serious issue with circumcision hard to get gentles, followers to enter the fold of Faith, very painful, infection and what about those in old age etc etc. Why St Paul meets with James and along with the Jerusalem Council along with the Elders, St Peter, Barnabas, St Paul etc etc.

James puts forth as written in St Paul letter, Gentles do not have to be circumcised to enter the Fold of Faith, Covenant was not make with them, but with the Hebrew Israelites??

But this James, last to speak stands up and states (written in St Paul) now listen to me>>>gives out 4 Laws Gentles must obey and live by to enter the fold of Faith>.the Major Tenants of the Faith.
Forbidden Fornication
Forbidden Idolatry
Forbidden to eat strangled animals with blood still within
Forbidden from Blood>>all written in St Paul epistles, he list them.
2 are dietary laws out of the 4 Laws>>interesting

Agreed by all present, James the Brother of the Lord, St Peter, St Paul, Barnabus, Jerusalem Council of Elders. 4 Laws given and Gentles, do not need to be circumcise to enter the fold of Faith.

The rest they will learn weekly in Sabbath gatherings.
So this James wielded influence and Elders sought this James for instructions did they not? Peace

 

[rose321]

For the most part they were speaking to different audiences.

Their delivery was different becuase it needed to be.

Agree 2 different audiences. Apostles and St Paul
Apostles commanded by Jesus to go only to the Lost Sheep of Israel?
St Paul goes to the uncircumcised those who knew not of the One God? or about a Messiah a Savior was coming? or about Commandments or Sermon on the mount etc etc or heard about a Torah?

St Paul >>epistle to The Romans >>Chapter 1 is all about knowing the transgressions of the Law what is righteous and what is not righteous, about judgment, the Law and those who judge etc?.

St Paul writes Romans 1:14-15 " I am a debtor both to Greeks and to barbarians, both to the wise and to the foolish 15) hence my eagerness to proclaim the gospel to you also who are in ROME".

Peace

 

[rose321]

St Peter as written stating does he not? I am just an Elder among Elders, trembled when one came to bow before him, St Peter stated what? Do not do that, I am just a man, does he not state such? Thus early saying Bishops among Bishops? Peace

 

[James817]

Timothy was a son from a Greek father and Jewish mother. Paul’s actions were not the same as Peter’s in this regard.

 

[spina1953]

James the brother of John the Apostle was made Bishop of Jerusalem who was one of the pillars of the community that Paul spoke of which had to have happened before 41 or 42 AD when Herod Agrippa had James the brother of John beheaded and had Peter put into prison where by the angels help escaped. James the Just of Alphaeus was appointed Bishop of Jerusalem who was the one who presided over the Council of Jerusalem when Paul came to Jerusalem to have the question of circumcision answered. This James of Alphaeus was not one of the pillars that Paul was speaking of . The Pillars of the Community was Peter James the brother of John and John Zebbdee.

James of Aphaeus was appointed Bishop of Jerusalem, so make both the James Bishops of Jerusalem? Peter maybe, or in union with the other Apostles? Most likely in union with the other Apostles is my guess. It seems to me all of those the Apostles as well as the seventy Disciples all taught the same Gospel which Paul would have had to know also. Which means Paul was preaching and teaching the same. paul was always it seems being confronted by converted Pharisees as well as Pharisees. Converted Pharisees were preaching and teaching converted Gentiles that they could not be saved unless the followed the law of Moses and preform the Jewish rituals. This is what Paul was speaking against when he says works of the law, he does not mean no good works or good deeds which is different from Jewish rituals under the law of Moses that all jews had to do. Paul is saying no one is saved doing the Jewish rituals under the law of Moses. One needed to have faith in Christ Jesus to be saved and if one had faith in Christ jesus they do good works and good deeds. Paul states in his Epistle to the Colossian Chapter i:9-10 where he says in part," You will multiply good works of every sort and grow in in the knowledge of God." Its obvious that Paul in no way was saying not to do good works or good deeds that one is not saved by doing them, but instead was saying he was against doing the Jewish works under the law of Moses as doing that was not going to save anyone. If one has faith in Christ Jesus one does good works and good deeds.

James of Alphaeus who wrote his Epistle was being confronted by converted Pharisees who were preaching and teaching in Jerusalem that one had no need or doing any works at all one only just needed faith that one is saved. Its apparent that these converted Pharisees lumped good works and good deeds with the ritual words. James said just to have faith but doing nothing with it not going to save anyone. if one has faith then they do good works and good deeds. James when he talks about doing good works and good deeds was not referring to the Jewish rituals works but works towards others that he helping others as one can. Faith without good works or good deeds was a dead faith and meaningless and will not save anyone.

Eusebius who wrote Ecclericetical History is a good reference in understanding between Paul and James.

 

[po18guy]

Wasn’t it actually worse? Timothy should have been circumcised on the 8th day, if he was to be a Jew. To do so in the Christian era was to render void the new covenant - Christ! Paul was self-admittedly the Apostle to the Genties, yet did this to avoid offense to the Jews? And, this was apparently after the Council at Jerusalem (called to settle Paul’s report) had declared circumcision null and void (Acts 15)? Who was it that wrote “There is neither Jew nor Greek…”??? (Galatians 3:28)

 

[James817]

Nope, as I said, Timothy was Jewish by his mom and Greek by his dad. From Paul’s letter to Timothy it seems he was raised Jewish.

 

[rose321]

I mean, really! After 2,000 years, are we going to discover something that Ignatius of Antioch did not know? That Saint Augustine did not know? That Saint Jerome did not know? That Saint Thomas Aquinas did not know? When we conjure up supposed disputes, let us first doubt ourselves.

Respectfully well one has discovered James the first Bishop of Jerusalem after Jesus death, for 30 years and did weld much influence, writings etc and after his death?

Where many because of great persecution by the Romans in Jerusalem, Hebrew Israelites, fled into Pella? Nations that were not ruled over by Romans?

Large Jewish community and 1 million settled also in Alexander Habor, great Alexander Library there? Which was later destroyed by the Romans?
Could explain why much was written in Greek, there were Greek Jews?>> Hellinics Christians? Judah Christians?

Those who succeeded James, >in those times known by all as the brother of the Lord, James the Just>> after his death list of those Bishops who followed after him in succession?

Bishop Symeon of Klopa or Simon 70 Ad/07 of Jerusalem
Bishop Justus 1 (107-111)-134 with 12 more Bishops that followed James the Just?
Bishops were
Zaccheus
Tobias
Bejaman 1st.
John 1st
Matthias1st
Phillip
Sineca
Justus 2nd
Leuis
Ephraim
Joseph 1
Judas >all Bishops of Pella?
Stand to be corrected but there is much history out there, just never knew of such history, surprised is all if all is true? Books are written on such in those areas?
This James the Just did much writing and in forming the church etc Peace

 

[po18guy]

Remember that circumcision was the entry into the Judaic covenant. It was done on the eighth day of life. And, Timothy was not circumcised - that fact could not be hidden. As well, we know that, by Paul’s own hand ‘there is neither circumcision nor uncircumcision’, and that all of this happened in the Christian era.

Peter merely ate with the Jews so as not to offend them. Paul seems to have caused the permanent mutilation of Timothy so as to avoid offense. Which is easier undone? Which is easier atoned for?

 

[James817]

Remember that circumcision was the entry into the Judaic covenant. It was done on the eighth day of life. And, Timothy was not circumcised - that fact could not be hidden. As well, we know that, by Paul’s own hand ‘there is neither circumcision nor uncircumcision’, and that all of this happened in the Christian era.

Peter merely ate with the Jews so as not to offend them. Paul seems to have caused the permanent mutilation of Timothy so as to avoid offense. Which is easier undone? Which is easier atoned for?

Timothy was fully Hebrew in everything except parentage. So if you are looking at it from Paul’s perspective, you have a kid who’s been raised as a Jew but isn’t circumcised. What do you do? Especially when this kid is going to preach to Jews and already has knowledge of the Scriptures?

On the other hand, Peter’s actions confirmed the Judaizers claims that the Gentiles were second class citizens in the Kingdom. In that day and age, not eating someone’s food was the same as proclaiming that you wouldn’t be caught dead with him.

 

[po18guy]

Just trying to point out that the ‘Protestant Pope’ was not without sin. He admits as much. We need not pit one against the other, as they both were absolutely necessary in the proclaiming the Gospel.

 

[James817]

We do that already when we make Paul look bad to make Peter look good.