Saul of Tarsus. The first heretic?

JimiTime wrote: »

Got to say, I think the whole James is anti-Paul or vice versa is inaccurate to put it mildly. They are in Harmony. They both say that Faith is essential, but James is saying that just being a hearer or believer is not really cutting it. As he says about the fact that the demons believe but shudder. I think it goes without saying that faith without works is dead. No doubt Paul believed this too, but was saying that no amount of works makes you deserving of saving, which is in agreement with James. Like James says, there are those that look in the mirror and when they look away, they forget the person they are. Its basically saying faith manifests itself in works. There are some foolish folks who just say, 'I believe' and think that thats it. However, the devil believes but condemned himself with his actions. We can believe, and still be wicked in our actions. By Grace we are saved, if we have faith. Works are a manifestation of our faith. Abraham had faith, this was manifested in works with the Issac incident. Job had faith, it was manifested with works. The common theme seems to be, don't be a hypocrite and don't switch on and off. Be the man you should be all the time. True faith manifests itself in every aspect of our life, just saying 'I believe' doesn't cut it. Nowhere do I see James saying works of law is what saves you. He is saying Grace through faith, but not just a wishy washy, 'I believe'.

That all sounds really nice and friendly and it would be great if it were true but the fact remains that relations were running thin and it all pivoted on this one issue. Circumcision! Then it was circumcision, now it's you must stop smoking, stop wearing makeup, you're not allowed to eat that and you must observed this day and that day. Do do this and don't do that is what replaces the circumcision of the new Testament. What Paul is arguing is that none of it makes any difference (circumcision or uncircumcision) only that the spirit is working in you and you can only get him in by faith whether good works are produced or not (the likelyhood being that they will) but that is not the important thing to God. The important thing is that it’s is your faith in the Work of Christ that puts you in Christ and Christ in you. That is all that saves.

Read the following and you will notice that things were not as harmonious in the New Testament Church:

Galatians 2

Paul Accepted by the Apostles
1Fourteen years later I went up again to Jerusalem, this time with Barnabas. I took Titus along also. 2I went in response to a revelation and set before them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. But I did this privately to those who seemed to be leaders, for fear that I was running or had run my race in vain. 3Yet not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, even though he was a Greek. 4This matter arose because some false brothers had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves. 5We did not give in to them for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might remain with you.
6As for those who seemed to be important—whatever they were makes no difference to me; God does not judge by external appearance—those men added nothing to my message. 7On the contrary, they saw that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the Gentiles,[a] just as Peter had been to the Jews. 8For God, who was at work in the ministry of Peter as an apostle to the Jews, was also at work in my ministry as an apostle to the Gentiles. 9James, Peter[c] and John, those reputed to be pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me. They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the Jews. 10All they asked was that we should continue to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do.


Paul Opposes Peter
11When Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong. 12Before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.
14When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter in front of them all, "You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?

15"We who are Jews by birth and not 'Gentile sinners' 16know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified.

17"If, while we seek to be justified in Christ, it becomes evident that we ourselves are sinners, does that mean that Christ promotes sin? Absolutely not! 18If I rebuild what I destroyed, I prove that I am a lawbreaker. 19For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God. 20I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. 21I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!"


I'm tired and need to go to bed, talk ye all tomorrow night night zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Soul Winner wrote: »

That all sounds really nice and friendly and it would be great if it were true but the fact remains that relations were running thin and it all pivoted on this one issue. Circumcision! Then it was circumcision, now it's you must stop smoking, stop wearing makeup, you're not allowed to eat that and you must observed this day and that day. Do do this and don't do that is what replaces the circumcision of the new Testament. What Paul is arguing is that none of it makes any difference (circumcision or uncircumcision) only that the spirit is working in you and you can only get him in by faith whether good works are produced or not (the likelyhood being that they will) but that is not the important thing to God. The important thing is that it’s is your faith in the Work of Christ that puts you in Christ and Christ in you. That is all that saves.

Thats not what i am reasoning. you earlier made accusation against the book of James. I am saying the book of James is not in contradiction with Paul. Yes there were debates raging in the early congregations, but the book of James does not contradict Paul is my point. Yes faith is what saves, but faith without manifestation is dead. That is James' point. He's saying its more than just 'i believe'. Just like he says that worship is looking after orphans and widows. Remember, he's speaking to Jews, used to the ways of the pharisees who were all about lip service etc. As Jesus said, their traditions had overtaken them. He's saying its not just about ritual, its about Loving your neighbour etc. Being active in Faith.

SubjectSean wrote: »

I'm coming from the position of being a human on planet Earth surrounded by people who say they're 'Christians' not doing any works or even thinking they really need to because they've got faith. I'm seeing Christians with many good things and if they loved their neighbours as themselves then their neighbours would have many good things. However the neighbours are dying in the dirt.

I don't agree with alot of your theology, but this point rings absolutely true. As a professing christian, i would be one of the guilty party you speak of above:( Indeed, there are many professing Christians, but few acting ones.

And I'm sat with brothers and sisters dying on me because of it basically, I guess is the bottom line.

Are you referring to the peoples of the world as your bretheren, or was that a literal statement?

JimiTime wrote: »

Thats not what i am reasoning. you earlier made accusation against the book of James. I am saying the book of James is not in contradiction with Paul. Yes there were debates raging in the early congregations, but the book of James does not contradict Paul is my point. Yes faith is what saves, but faith without manifestation is dead. That is James' point. He's saying its more than just 'i believe'. Just like he says that worship is looking after orphans and widows. Remember, he's speaking to Jews, used to the ways of the pharisees who were all about lip service etc. As Jesus said, their traditions had overtaken them. He's saying its not just about ritual, its about Loving your neighbour etc. Being active in Faith.

Paul came preaching faith in Christ and that you and God work out your salvation with fear and trembling (phobias and traumas in the Greek). He did not come inspecting the fruits of the faith or seeing were you circumcised. This is what those that were in Jerusalem were doing. Setting themselves up as the Judge and Jury of that which Christ poured His life's blood out to purchase. God and God alone has the right to judge the saints not James. The job of the under-shepherds of God which Paul was one is to preach the Gospel (GOOD NEWS). Which said Gospel is Grace and Peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. Grace which is un-earnable favour and peace which is cessation of against-ness. Look at all Paul’s letters and see what he starts out with saying these very words and ends his letters the same way. James’ epistle has no such salutation at the start or at the end. Paul came preaching that God is not against you anymore. What Christ did on the cross took away the curse of the law. God will now take you on a different basis which is trusting in His promises. Just like what he was looking for in the garden from Adam and Eve. They did not believe God when He said that they would die. We all pay the penalty for their transgression. But now that Christ has come, and died to take away that barrier and is risen we have a new start over point with God that never changes from day to day. Doing good works is great and all and will get you loads of friends down here and may stop other so called Christians judging you but it doesn't bring the smile to God's face that you think it does. Only trusting in His Word does that. This was not what James preached. He was more concerned with the fruits of righteousness than how to be righteous in the first place.

Soul Winner wrote: »

Paul came preaching faith in Christ and that you and God work out your salvation with fear and trembling (phobias and traumas in the Greek). He did not come inspecting the fruits of the faith or seeing were you circumcised. This is what those that were in Jerusalem were doing. Setting themselves up as the Judge and Jury of that which Christ poured His life's blood out to purchase. God and God alone has the right to judge the saints not James. The job of the under-shepherds of God which Paul was one is to preach the Gospel (GOOD NEWS). Which said Gospel is Grace and Peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. Grace which is un-earnable favour and peace which is cessation of against-ness. Look at all Paul’s letters and see what he starts out with saying these very words and ends his letters the same way. James’ epistle has no such salutation at the start or at the end. Paul came preaching that God is not against you anymore. What Christ did on the cross took away the curse of the law. God will now take you on a different basis which is trusting in His promises. Just like what he was looking for in the garden from Adam and Eve. They did not believe God when He said that they would die. We all pay the penalty for their transgression. But now that Christ has come, and died to take away that barrier and is risen we have a new start over point with God that never changes from day to day. Doing good works is great and all and will get you loads of friends down here and may stop other so called Christians judging you but it doesn't bring the smile to God's face that you think it does. Only trusting in His Word does that. This was not what James preached. He was more concerned with the fruits of righteousness than how to be righteous in the first place.

I think you are missing my point. The book of James does not contradict this. He never says you are saved by works. He says you are saved by faith, but that faith is more than just 'I believe'. There have been, and are many, who say they believe but are not Christian. Jesus said that a tree will be known by its fruits, so fruitage is a very important part of faith. Those bearing bad fruit, but believing in God are to be approached with caution. Jesus also said about people saying 'We called you lord etc', but by their actions were not in him, he said 'I do not know you'. Yes, by the grace of God we are saved through faith, however, true faith manifests itself. To reiterate, neither I or the book of James says anything to deny this. I think it reiterates, that we need to be weary of those who come as wolves in sheep cloting, professing faith with their mouths, but contradicting themselves with their works. James is a valuable lesson, as are Pauls letters. Their books and letters are in agreement, not at loggerheads.

PDN wrote: »

This shows the inherent weakness of trying to present James and Paul as being in opposition. You have to pick & choose - rejecting or ignoring those parts of Scripture which don't fit your argument, while accepting those as genuine which you can use to support your argument. Both Sean & Soul Winner have been doing this.

So Sean and I are guilty of this but you’re not? I was just showing what Paul said, I did not show you something Paul did not say. It is my belief that James and Paul cannot be reconciled. It is your belief that they can. Fine but don’t say I’m picking and choosing scripture to support my argument. There is more scripture that supports the augment of justification by faith alone than there is to what James is saying. James says it is not by faith alone and Paul says it is by faith alone so how can you reconcile these two views? I firmly believe that James meant what he said about works that without works faith is dead. James was not of the “Faith alone” crowd and Paul was. Why else would those from Jerusalem spy on the Galatians to check if they were circumcised or not? They wanted all new converts Gentile and Jew to have the compromise mark of conforming to the law of Moses by being circumcised. Was not James the leader of the Church at Jerusalem? Then was it not he that sent the false brethren (as Paul calls them) to the Galatians to spy on them? James was a will worshiper apposed to Paul. How you cannot see this is beyond me. I am not postulating this I have shown time and again from the scripture where this is the case.

PDN wrote: »

Our approach to the Bible should be to determine what it is actually saying, not to try to squeeze it into our argument.

That is what I was doing. I’ve quoted more scripture than anyone in this discussion. This is not my argument this is Paul’s argument. He had to contend with this all the time in his ministry. You see the problem with teaching faith alone is that some do take it as a licence to do what they like because they are no longer under law. They are indeed mistaken. The law is a perfect standard but one that cannot bend down to help without compromising itself. That’s why it needed to be fulfilled and put away. God still hates sin but he does not look at you with the telescope of the law anymore if you are in Christ and the only way you get in Christ is when He is in you and the only way you get can Christ in you is by faith. He sees you as Christ if you have faith in Him and accept His sacrifice. Not if you are performing well under the law, other wise he would have to judge you by the whole law. Paul also said that all things are lawful for him to do but not all things are beneficial. He also said that that which is born of the spirit cannot sin. He puts forth the point in Romans that when we become a new creature in Christ Jesus that the old nature is still there. We have two natures which are contrary to one another and which are dug in for trench warfare against each other until death, Romans 7. Only when we die or when we lay down the old nature will the new man in Christ rise to be with Lord unless of course you are around when the Rapture happens but that is a different subject.

PDN wrote: »

Paul certainly did come inspecting the fruit of Christians' faith. He most certainly did not subscribe to the belief that only God could judge the saints. He also clearly saw the job of under-shepherds to both preach the Gospel and to rebuke and judge those who were failing to display the fruits of faith.

He did not judge them in the sense of their eternal standing before God though. His judgement was one of a Pastor’s heart. He rebuked just like a father would rebuke his child. He condemned their actions not them themselves. Paul established these churches and when their behaviour got out of hand yes he rebuked them but that has nothing to with being righteous in the sight of God. These people for the most part came from backgrounds where it was their culture to practice pagan rituals and worship false God’s. It was a cultural heritage they had and sometimes slipped back into. This is a problem few churches have to deal with today except those who do missionary work in the remote isolated trible regions of the world. If you've converted a head hunting tribe in Nothern Luzon and a you find out a few months down the line that they are back to taking heads you'd be like Paul telling them that is not how to behave in the Church. And if they disobeyed you you would cast them out. Obey those who have rule over you for they watch for your soul. If someone won't obey the Pastor in relation to the rules of a Church then that Pastor should kick their butts out. But it has nothing to do with what the Gospel means and how now there is a new apporach to God without the law.

PDN wrote: »

Consider the following quotes from Paul:

"It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that does not occur even among pagans: A man has his father's wife. And you are proud! Shouldn't you rather have been filled with grief and have put out of your fellowship the man who did this? Even though I am not physically present, I am with you in spirit. And I have already passed judgment on the one who did this, just as if I were present." (1 Corinthians 5:1-3)

Paul had nothing but problems with this Corinthian Church. Some say that Paul's 1st letter to them was in response to a letter he got from them where they criticised him. This was a menial matter in terms of the church as a whole but a serious one for the Corinthian Church locally and one Paul dealt with at its source. Of course someone shouldn’t behave in such a way. That is a given. It wasn’t like someone making mistake and asking for forgiveness. They were actually proud of this guy for some wierd reason. How off the mark can you be from the faith in God if this is your attitude? Paul called the Corinthian Church plutocrats in the spirit. They were boasters and proud and Paul spent more time dealing with them and correcting them than he did with any other church. He used the Philippian Church as an example of how they should behave but did not command it of them. 2 Cor 8

PDN wrote: »

"If any of you has a dispute with another, dare he take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the saints? Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life! Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, appoint as judges even men of little account in the church! I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? (1 Corinthians 6:1-5)

What has this got to do with Righteousness in the sight of God? Again it is a menial matter. Remember these are letters written to a specific church with specific problems that in the reading some cases can speak to us today and have relvenace but in others they are not really that relevant.

PDN wrote: »

"I already gave you a warning when I was with you the second time. I now repeat it while absent: On my return I will not spare those who sinned earlier or any of the others" (2 Corinthians 13:2)

I refer to the answer I just gave. Paul was angry about something and I’m sure he dealt with it adequately. You’re the Pastor of a Church yourself surely you can see the difference?

PDN wrote: »

"Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you—unless, of course, you fail the test?" (2 Corinthians 13:5)

Most definitely. We should always "everyday" examine ourselves to see if we are in the FAITH not in the law. Yes we should test this. Are we trusting God or our own performance.

PDN wrote: »

"The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God." (Galatians 5:19-21)

Of course they won’t. These deeds are the result of God turning them over as described in Romans 1. They did not give glory to God for the creation so he turns them over to forces greater than themselves and these deeds are the result of this tuning over act on the part of God. The wrath of God is not poured out in them because they do these things, it was already poured out on them because they did not recognise his hand in the creation nor gave him glory for it. These acts of the sinful nature are the result of God’s wrath on them not the cause of it, the word “Therefore” is very important in the following versus. It shows you which side of the wrath the sinful acts are on.

“The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles. Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.” Romans 1:18-24

And here is the result:

“Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.”

Anyone here guilty of any of these things? Gossips maybe? Envy? Arrogance?

And if you think all these people in the above account are so terrible and such bad sinners then Romans 2 starts out saying that those who judge them are even worse than they:

“You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. Now we know that God's judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. So when you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God's judgment? Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness leads you toward repentance?”

So you see there is a judging of menial things with a discerning sprit and there is the prideful judging of others with relation to their eternal standing with God. I can judge my kids when they break the rules of the house but that is not the kind of Judging that Paul is condemning here. If you were not circumcised in the Jerusalem Church you were not considered a true Christian. You were judged a sinner even if you had faith in Christ. “To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.” Gal 2:5

JimiTime wrote: »

But that is what the book of James is saying. Maybe you are taking into account other sources about James, but reading the book of James, he is saying that Faith is the key. He's elaborating though when he says its more than just 'I believe'. Its like he's telling us how to see Faith in action, he's not contradicting. As I said, Jesus himself told us to look out for the fruitage of people. Its how we distinguish the charlatans from the true. He never says that faith with works save. He says that Faith should manifest itself in your life, and not just be a belief, for the demons believe but are wicked.

The book of James does say by faith one is saved, but he tells us of the fruitage of faith. It is a valuable lesson, as I said, to filter the charlatans from the true.

You just don't seem to be getting it. You are putting faith and works at loggerheads, when they are not mutually exclusive. Faith and action go hand in hand. True faith manifests itself. If it doesn't, or the professing christian is bearing bad fruit, then a question must be asked of the persons faith. Yes we will sin and slip up, but a professing Christian who constantly commits adultery is someone who one must beware of. He is not bearing good fruit. David Koresh could recite scripture after scripture, he came accross as a faithful man, but his fruitage showed him up as a charlatan. Fruitage is our insight, not our saving grace, but our insight.



So you are basing your arguement on other things. I think what both myself and PDN, are talking about is 'THE BOOK' of James. I see nothing in 'THE BOOK' of James to indicate he opposes Paul, or the justification by faith message.



Could you show me from the book of James, where he says that Faith is 'not' the key?

Ok then let us stick to 'THE BOOK' as you put it of James. I agree that belief is not enough. I can say the same to you today, that believe is still not enough, but James wasn’t saying that though. He was saying that faith is not enough. Faith is different to belief. It is a noun in the English but it is an action word in the Greek. Pistis is the noun form and Pisteo is the verb. Pisteo is action based upon belief and sustained by confidence in the faithfulness of the object being “Pisteo’d” in or faithed in. We don’t have the verb form of faith (faithed) in the English which is a real tragedy. It didn’t transition from Greek over into Englsih properly. Satan won a great battle here. When one thinks of faith in the English one assumes that it means just belief but it doesn’t. It means acting on a belief and continuing that action with confidence. I pointed this out in another post which I will quote here to save time re-typing:

“Faith (or Pistis the noun in the Greek or the verb which is Pisteo) is an action word. An action based upon belief and sustained by confidence in the object of the action. By that definition everyone has Faith because everyone acts upon beliefs and sustains those actions every day. It is not restricted to Religious connotations. You act in Faith when you simply walk. You assume your feet will stay on the ground because experience has thought you that gravity (invisible though it may be) will keep them there and you act accordingly. It’s something you don't even think about most of the time. But what’s the difference between this kind of faith action and saving Faith which is Faith in God? Well Faith in God’s Word is acting on a promise made by God in His Word and continuing that action until that which was promised becomes a fact. And that fact could materialise on this side of eternity or on the other side but the important thing to remember is that you are acting on His promise(s).

An example of this could be when someone is very sick. The promise in God's Word that someone who is sick could claim is: "I am the Lord that heals you". But how would someone go about actually claiming that promise? Well God's Word also tells us that "we are not to descend in the debts and bring Him up or to ascend into the heavens and bring Him down. The word is already near you, speak it forth for with the heart man believes and with the mouth proclamation is made unto salvation." Is there a limit on what promises we can claim? No, it also says that “all the promise of God in Him are yes and Amen” in other words you can claim all of the promises in God’s Word based on this verse of scripture. This means a sick person can have salvation by simply believing in his heart that God promises to heal him and then actually speak the promise with his mouth unto God who is faithful to his promises. Does the sick person need anyone else to hear this? Not at all, only God. You don’t need to shout it from the roof tops (although you could if you wanted to) but as Jesus says you can go into your closet and speak to God in private. This act of faith the scripture says puts you in Christ and Christ in you (to use legal terminology). In other words God does not see you as you anymore whether you get healed or not. Once you act in Faith in a promise of God you are seen as though you are Christ. “How?” You may say. “I don't deserve to be seen as though I am Christ.” You're right but Christ paid the price for God to be able to do this. When Christ bore the sins of the world God looked at Him in a way He did not deserve so that once this act of sacrifice was completed He could then turn to us on a new premise which is Faith in God’s promises as apposed to the old premise which was the way of the Law by which standard all have sinned and are hopeless.” (I don't believe it I'm plagiarising myself )

And sometimes even the word Pisteo is translated in our English Bible as just belief or believed.

Faith and Works are ALREADY at loggerheads when it comes to salvation and I didn’t put them there. James just didn’t know what faith actually was or if he did he didn’t think it was enough for you to be saved. He’s not alone. Most of Christianity today is the same and most religions in fact. They have one thing in common. You need works produced by fleshly effort. Checklist religion. Yes I did that , I did that, I did this other thing, I didn’t do that, and didn’t do that and didn’t do this and on it goes ad nauseoum. Where’s the faith??? But let us stick with just Christianity. They just do not believe that faith alone can save you. Oh they’ll tell you that you start out with faith but then you must add works. When you add works you nullify faith. “This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?” Galatians 3:2-3. Paul says if you come under the law one tiny fraction then you are indebted to do all of it. Why do you think the Ark of the Covenant had a solid gold Covering on it? That Covering was a type of the work wrought only in Christ. It is between us and the unbroken 'second set' of tablets of the Law (the first set of tablets were broken by the hand of Moses when he came down from the mountain) which were placed inside the Ark, which itself was also a type of Christ, because only in Christ is the Law kept 'un-broken'. To add works to your faith is like removing the Covering of the Ark and exposing yourself to the Perfect Standard. You have removed the covering of Christ when you stop acting in faith and rely on your works. “But God struck down some of the men of Beth Shemesh, putting seventy of them to death because they had looked into the ark of the LORD. The people mourned because of the heavy blow the LORD had dealt them,” I Samuel 6:19 “Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.” Galatians 5:2. It is all faith, it starts with faith, continues with faith and ends with faith.

Ok, so moving onto the differences between 'THE BOOK' of James and Paul:

James

“What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?” If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit? Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.!” James 2:14-26

“Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone” and "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only"

It reads pretty much like James does not believe in Faith alone by this wouldn’t you agree?

“..shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.”

Paul says “I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ” Galatians 1:6-7. The word “pervert” in the Greek means to put that which is in front behind and that which is behind in front. You don’t show faith by works, it is the other way around you show works by faith. Good deeds are but the natural outgrowth of the indwelling Holy Spirit which is literally God being Himself through you. You can only get His Spirit in you by faith alone and not by works or even by faith mixed with works. I really believe this message was lost on James because just by reading his epistle he seems completely blind to it.

More James:

“Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?”

Is not James saying here that Rahab’s works saved her? He does not say her faith saved her. Do you know what her works were? She lied to the soldiers that came looking for the spies from Joshua and sent them out another way after she had hid them in the hay. That is lying. That is not what saved her.

The writer to the Hebrews (whom I believe was Paul) says that she was saved by Faith.

“By faith the prostitute Rahab, because she welcomed the spies, was not killed with those who were disobedient.” Hebrews 11:31

She welcomed the spies. She knew who was going to win the victory in Jericho and chose the right side. She believed the word of God that the walls of the city would be destroyed and acted on it. She obeyed the spies and (acting on belief in God's Word) hung the scarlet thread from her window and was thus saved she and all her family. But James says her lying saved her??? Read it again: “Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?”

No mention of her faith there at all.

More Paul

“For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: "The righteous will live by faith." Romans 1:17

First to last, start to finish, and no mention of works anywhere.

“Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, "The righteous will live by faith." Galatians 3:11

“For in just a very little while, “He who is coming will come and will not delay. But my righteous one will live by faith. And if he shrinks back, I will not be pleased with him." But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who believe and are saved.” Hebrews 10:37-39

Each of these verses is quoting a verse from the Old Testament:

“For the revelation awaits an appointed time; it speaks of the end and will not prove false. Though it linger, wait for it; it will certainly come and will not delay. "See, he is puffed up; his desires are not upright— but the righteous will live by his faith” Habakkuk 2:3-4

More contradiction between James and Paul

James 4:17

"Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn't do it, sins."

But Paul points out in Romans 7 that this is wrong. He says it is no longer he who sins but sin in him.

Romans 7:14-20

“We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it."


When coming to the close of his epistle James gives some advice but contrast that advice with the advice given in the closing verses of Ephesians:

James 5:12

“But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation”


Ephesians 6:16

“Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.”


Shall we continue?

Soul Winner wrote: »

Ok then let us stick to 'THE BOOK' as you put it of James. I agree that belief is not enough. I can say the same to you today, that believe is still not enough, but James wasn’t saying that though. He was saying that faith is not enough. Faith is different to belief. It is a noun in the English but it is an action word in the Greek. Pistis is the noun form and Pisteo is the verb. Pisteo is action based upon belief and sustained by confidence in the faithfulness of the object being “Pisteo’d” in or faithed in. We don’t have the verb form of faith (faithed) in the English which is a real tragedy. It didn’t transition from Greek over into Englsih properly. Satan won a great battle here. When one thinks of faith in the English one assumes that it means just belief but it doesn’t. It means acting on a belief and continuing that action with confidence. I pointed this out in another post which I will quote here to save time re-typing:

“Faith (or Pistis the noun in the Greek or the verb which is Pisteo) is an action word. An action based upon belief and sustained by confidence in the object of the action. By that definition everyone has Faith because everyone acts upon beliefs and sustains those actions every day. It is not restricted to Religious connotations. You act in Faith when you simply walk. You assume your feet will stay on the ground because experience has thought you that gravity (invisible though it may be) will keep them there and you act accordingly. It’s something you don't even think about most of the time. But what’s the difference between this kind of faith action and saving Faith which is Faith in God? Well Faith in God’s Word is acting on a promise made by God in His Word and continuing that action until that which was promised becomes a fact. And that fact could materialise on this side of eternity or on the other side but the important thing to remember is that you are acting on His promise(s).

An example of this could be when someone is very sick. The promise in God's Word that someone who is sick could claim is: "I am the Lord that heals you". But how would someone go about actually claiming that promise? Well God's Word also tells us that "we are not to descend in the debts and bring Him up or to ascend into the heavens and bring Him down. The word is already near you, speak it forth for with the heart man believes and with the mouth proclamation is made unto salvation." Is there a limit on what promises we can claim? No, it also says that “all the promise of God in Him are yes and Amen” in other words you can claim all of the promises in God’s Word based on this verse of scripture. This means a sick person can have salvation by simply believing in his heart that God promises to heal him and then actually speak the promise with his mouth unto God who is faithful to his promises. Does the sick person need anyone else to hear this? Not at all, only God. You don’t need to shout it from the roof tops (although you could if you wanted to) but as Jesus says you can go into your closet and speak to God in private. This act of faith the scripture says puts you in Christ and Christ in you (to use legal terminology). In other words God does not see you as you anymore whether you get healed or not. Once you act in Faith in a promise of God you are seen as though you are Christ. “How?” You may say. “I don't deserve to be seen as though I am Christ.” You're right but Christ paid the price for God to be able to do this. When Christ bore the sins of the world God looked at Him in a way He did not deserve so that once this act of sacrifice was completed He could then turn to us on a new premise which is Faith in God’s promises as apposed to the old premise which was the way of the Law by which standard all have sinned and are hopeless.” (I don't believe it I'm plagiarising myself )

And sometimes even the word Pisteo is translated in our English Bible as just belief or believed.

Faith and Works are ALREADY at loggerheads when it comes to salvation and I didn’t put them there. James just didn’t know what faith actually was or if he did he didn’t think it was enough for you to be saved. He’s not alone. Most of Christianity today is the same and most religions in fact. They have one thing in common. You need works produced by fleshly effort. Checklist religion. Yes I did that , I did that, I did this other thing, I didn’t do that, and didn’t do that and didn’t do this and on it goes ad nauseoum. Where’s the faith??? But let us stick with just Christianity. They just do not believe that faith alone can save you. Oh they’ll tell you that you start out with faith but then you must add works. When you add works you nullify faith. “This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?” Galatians 3:2-3. Paul says if you come under the law one tiny fraction then you are indebted to do all of it. Why do you think the Ark of the Covenant had a solid gold Covering on it? That Covering was a type of the work wrought only in Christ. It is between us and the unbroken 'second set' of tablets of the Law (the first set of tablets were broken by the hand of Moses when he came down from the mountain) which were placed inside the Ark, which itself was also a type of Christ, because only in Christ is the Law kept 'un-broken'. To add works to your faith is like removing the Covering of the Ark and exposing yourself to the Perfect Standard. You have removed the covering of Christ when you stop acting in faith and rely on your works. “But God struck down some of the men of Beth Shemesh, putting seventy of them to death because they had looked into the ark of the LORD. The people mourned because of the heavy blow the LORD had dealt them,” I Samuel 6:19 “Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.” Galatians 5:2. It is all faith, it starts with faith, continues with faith and ends with faith.

Ok, so moving onto the differences between 'THE BOOK' of James and Paul:

James

“What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?” If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit? Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.!” James 2:14-26

“Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone” and "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only"

It reads pretty much like James does not believe in Faith alone by this wouldn’t you agree?

“..shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.”

Paul says “I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ” Galatians 1:6-7. The word “pervert” in the Greek means to put that which is in front behind and that which is behind in front. You don’t show faith by works, it is the other way around you show works by faith. Good deeds are but the natural outgrowth of the indwelling Holy Spirit which is literally God being Himself through you. You can only get His Spirit in you by faith alone and not by works or even by faith mixed with works. I really believe this message was lost on James because just by reading his epistle he seems completely blind to it.

More James:

“Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?”

Is not James saying here that Rahab’s works saved her? He does not say her faith saved her. Do you know what her works were? She lied to the soldiers that came looking for the spies from Joshua and sent them out another way after she had hid them in the hay. That is lying. That is not what saved her.

The writer to the Hebrews (whom I believe was Paul) says that she was saved by Faith.

“By faith the prostitute Rahab, because she welcomed the spies, was not killed with those who were disobedient.” Hebrews 11:31

She welcomed the spies. She knew who was going to win the victory in Jericho and chose the right side. She believed the word of God that the walls of the city would be destroyed and acted on it. She obeyed the spies and (acting on belief in God's Word) hung the scarlet thread from her window and was thus saved she and all her family. But James says her lying saved her??? Read it again: “Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?”

No mention of her faith there at all.

More Paul

“For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: "The righteous will live by faith." Romans 1:17

First to last, start to finish, and no mention of works anywhere.

“Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, "The righteous will live by faith." Galatians 3:11

“For in just a very little while, “He who is coming will come and will not delay. But my righteous one will live by faith. And if he shrinks back, I will not be pleased with him." But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who believe and are saved.” Hebrews 10:37-39

Each of these versus is quoting a verse from the Old Testament:

“For the revelation awaits an appointed time; it speaks of the end and will not prove false. Though it linger, wait for it; it will certainly come and will not delay. "See, he is puffed up; his desires are not upright— but the righteous will live by his faith” Habakkuk 2:3-4

More contradiction between James and Paul

James 4:17

"Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn't do it, sins."

But Paul points out in Romans 7 that this is wrong. He says it is no longer he who sins but sin in him.

Romans 7:14-20

“We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it."


When coming to the close of his epistle James gives some advice but contrast that advice with the advice given in the closing verses of Ephesians:

James 5:12

“But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation”


Ephesians 6:16

“Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.”


Shall we continue?

I think you're right actually. I had another read of James, and he does say that faith alone does not save. I probably read it the last time with a view to proving a point rather than seeking some truth. I think its a natural instinct to argue a point you think you know:o Thanks for sticking with it.
To note though, I agree wholeheartedly that faith 'alone' saves. I always iterpretted James as saying that faith means action not just belief though (which it is) as you explained earlier. However, you are right, he seems to be saying that is faith 'and' works.

So would you see the book of James having any spiritual value then?

JimiTime wrote: »

I think you're right actually. I had another read of James, and he does say that faith alone does not save. I probably read it the last time with a view to proving a point rather than seeking some truth. I think its a natural instinct to argue a point you think you know:o Thanks for sticking with it.
To note though, I agree wholeheartedly that faith 'alone' saves. I always iterpretted James as saying that faith means action not just belief though (which it is) as you explained earlier. However, you are right, he seems to be saying that is faith 'and' works.

So would you see the book of James having any spiritual value then?

Well Praise God for JimiTime

Indeed we will fight harder for something we have said than we world for the same thing if we hadn't said it. There are a few things James says that I like and what I've just said relates to one of them. He describes the tongue as the bridal of the body. What you say inevitably leads you. As a bridal controls the direction of a horse so our toungues control the directions of our bodies. Our tongues get us into more trouble than anything else. Best thing do with our big mouths is to mouth promises of God. Instead or worrying what the day will bring just speak forth the promise "As my day so shall my strength be". There is a promise for every circumstance we find ourselves in. We just need to mine the debts of God’s Word to find them and once found we speak them forth. If your sick, then it’s “I am the Lord that heals you” if you need provison the it’s “Jehovah Jira, the Lord will provide”. “With the heart man believes and with the mouth proclamation is made unto salvation” Not just believing but acting on the belief. This is the lost message of the Church. This is as true today as it was in the New Testament. God is immutable, meaning He does not change.

James also says to resist the devil and he will flee. This is true but we must keep on our guard because the word flee in its original meaning paints the picture he will back off, looking for another opening. He does not leave you alone completely. He's just awaiting your guard to be dropped. That's why Paul says to take up the shield of faith where with we can quench the fiery darts of the wicked.

I'm all for leaving James in the Bible. I think we've all learned a valuable lesson by his inclusion don't you agree?

JimiTime wrote: »

Well when you're wrong, you're wrong. No point in just continuing dumb. These days it seems to be looked on as an achievement to say you're wrong, 'tis a bit mad really isn't it. Don't praise God for Jimitime yet though:) As alot will tell u in these parts, I'm not a christian because I don't accept the well established doctrines. Don't believe in literal Hellfire, the immortal soul or the trinity doctrine:eek:

Paul says in I Cor 4:3-4 "But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self. For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord." So it doesn't really matter what anyone else thinks of you. If you are a Christ centred person then you are a Christian. You can resolve a lot of those others issue you mentioned like hellfire etc.. by resolving the question as to who has the last authority in these matters? If Jesus rose from the dead as a fact of history as reported then what He says should be your foundation for what you believe. He spoke of the lake of fire so that's a good basis for believing in it I think. You can proceed along these lines with many things. Like the books of the Old Testament that Jesus quoted from, that sort of stamps His seal of approval on them, and as He is the One who rose form the dead then who else matters? All you need is faith in Christ to be a Christian you do not have to understand the inner workings of the universe. Paul said “we see through a glass darkly but then face to face”, so just trust Him on the matters that pertain to your everyday life. That’s what being a Christian is all about, nothing else. Do you think the thief on the cross understood the trinity or ever even heard of it? Yet because of His faith Jesus said He’d be with Him in Paradise that very same day. These stories should put to rest doubts about what we ought to understand in terms of eternal truths, just stick to the basics and worry about the other stuff over there.

JimiTime wrote: »

I certainly have learned from the book of James. So do you believe that the bible can be erroneous? I never call it 'the word' of God myself, i believe thats a title reserved for Christ.

I believe God is in control of everything especially His Word. “Heaven and Earth will pass away but my Word will never pass away” You must remember He is dealing with imperfect mankind who is prone to mistakes and errors but He enters even into our mistakes to work His good. Instead of analysing where the Bible is unclear it would be better to go by where it is absolutely clear. Always start with Christ and work outward from Him. Like the issue of Jonah, Daniel and Noah. A lot of people just don’t believe those people even existed or if they did they don’t believe in their stories, yet Jesus spoke of them. And Jesus said before Abraham was He (Jesus) was, so He would know wouldn’t He? You see we can be very dumb at times, but if we keep our focus on Jesus a lot can be resolved within our own spirit at least. Or you must dismiss Jesus as believing in fairy tales Himself. It reminds me of a story I heard about a person who wouldn’t allow the doctor to see to his wound until he found out who shot him. Once he found out then he wanted to know what trajectory the bullet entered. Then its speed. Then the temperature of the day at the time and so on and so on, and by the time it came to fixing him he died. If there are errors in God’s Word then it is not due to God. The Bible has a long history. It is made up of many different books. All written by different people in different times and in languages before English was a language. You would have to have all the original manuscripts in their original state laid out in order to say with absolute certainty that there is errors. If you wait around for this you’ll miss all the important stuff in between which is living by faith. Just stick to what is clear in the Bible especially where it repeats itself is the best advice I can give.

Jakkass wrote: »

Without dogma there is no coherent Christian view of the scriptures. People are free to make it mean what they want.

thats precisely the attitude i hate tbh. Its not necessary IMO. The moment you legislate, thats when you get men in silly hats and the like. The hierarchy forms, and before you know it you've got organised religion. yes its organised, but completely off the mark.
Religion: 'Psst, i can sell you salvation'
Jimitime: 'No thanks, yeshua gave it to me for free'.

Jakkass wrote: »

There is meant to be a structure, tradition and organisation.

No, there is meant to be Love. Everything else is secondary. Looking at what 'structure, organisation and trdition' has done, i think its quite clear that love was considered secondary.

As long as it's under check, and people have a Bible to read from, I don't think things can go so sour really. We know the stance you described is not Biblical.

Of course you don't see it as biblical, you're an anglican. You're all about tradition and ritual. if you want to get biblical, then why do your 'religious leaders' wear uniforms? Why is it not local elders? Why does the 'eucharist' get presented in an image of the sun? Why do you indulge in pagan ritual at this time of year? Paul condemned folk for going back to the old customs of their cultures. He never suggested rebranding. Religious folk like to get biblical when it suits IMO.

Jakkass wrote: »

Wear vestments you mean? That's inherited from Judaism. The priestly class of the Levites had to wear special garments when they were performing animal or grain sacrifices. To think they had to do that for mere animal sacrifices. Thus if we are performing a celebration of the most important and all complete sacrifices as not to defile it, one should wear the priestly garments. (Although I would admit they are quite different to the Jewish ones described in Exodus).

Image of the sun?

Actually Jesus' birth is predicted to be either near Sukkot (the Jewish festival), I read this on a site of Jewish Christians, or in the Advent period. Not so far off.

This is far from paganism, and you know it. Wearing the vestments is merely respecting the commemoration of the Eucharist. Which is a sacrament necessary for salvation. (one of the 2 sacraments in the Anglican faith).

This isn't rebranding, it's merely continuation.

Also love is definitely not considered secondary to Anglicans.

Could you show me biblically where Jesus instructs us on vestments? or Paul even?

Could you show me where Jesus asks us to celebrate his birth? or even gives us the date of his birth? or early christians celebrating his birth? could you also show me where the early christians are bringing fir rees into their homes to decorate etc? Could you show me where Jesus or early christians say rebranding pagan customs dedicated to false gods is a method to be used? I know Paul condemned those for going back to such customs.

As I said, you like to get biblical when it suits.

Jakkass wrote: »

It originates from earlier than this. I think you should be asking yourself is why didn't Jesus or Paul condemn this practice which was widespread, if it wasn't appropriate to do so?

TBH, its not of great importance, its just you said I was being 'non-biblical', when your own religion has 'non-biblcal' customs. Including your hierarchy. Jesus actually did condemn pharisees who wore their fancy garments to stand out. Something about the size of the frills?

This is Biblically based, if you wouldn't mind looking to Exodus that is.

So all your priests are levites? and they wear a breastplate with 12 precious stones on it? Come on. We are Christians not Jews. Do you eat pork? Our high priest is now Yeshua our Messiah. Why do you base your point on exodus, when Paul told us of our christian structure?

I have to say that this really assumes that I don't think Christmas is corrupted in any shape or form.

It was never anything else! It was pagan in the beginning.

It's not commanded that we do so,

So its not biblical. My point exactly. You point the finger at me wrongly for 'not being biblical'. When really, being biblical is not of such great importance to you anyway. Your tradition is whats important.

At least this pagan festival is now dedicated to the true God if that is any constellation

Is it? Also, why is 'rebranding' not an option with Paul? He condems those who go back to pagan customs. He doesn't say, 'i tell you what, keep doing everything you do on saturnalia, but just call it christmas'. Its something that baffles me about most christians. they really don't see any issue with using pagan customs dedicated to pagan gods to worship God No matter what you say, it just never can sit right. In Jerimiah it talks about those decorating fir trees. it doesn't say lets rebrand it and stick an image of abraham on top. Anyway.

I don't have a problem with the festival itself however. The majority of Christians would regard it as the same.

i know, thats what I find crazy.but back to your original accusation, its not biblical.

Jakkass wrote: »

The purpose of the vestments is not so the priests stand out. The priests wear the vestments so that they honour the sacred role of the Eucharist in the church and respect the sacredness of the altar by which they carry out the process.

Ok, so there is a reason, I'm not disputing that. but its not biblical.

As I said this is the same reason why the Jewish priestly class wore vestments in carrying out the sacrifices in the Tent of the Lord's Presence and ultimately the temple. Nothing about the size of the frills or standing out. For the third time (I think it's the third), I must say it is biblical.

You keep talking about the Jewish priests though. Yes its biblical that the levite priest wore vestements in carrying out his role, this does not move on to christianity though. The role of the high priest has been fulfilled in Christ, so drawing from the old Jewish way is irelevant. So once again, no its not biblical. Could you show me where Yeshua or Paul says that a ministers clothing should be a certain way etc? As I said though, I'm not saying its a huge deal, just that you are wrong to say that the anglican way is biblical.

No they aren't Levites of course not. They are most likely Gentile to the core.

Then the vestements of Exodus are irrelevant.

That is true the high priest is Jesus, but that does not mean that we should still not wear vestments on the altar. He or anyone else did not speak against it, if he found the practise to be worthy to be spared reform in the New Covenant.

Well the fact that he is the high priest means that the need for the old high priest role is no longer needed, so it goes without saying. Also, saying we were not told not to do something, does not mean to do it is 'biblical'. you may well argue that there is nothing in the bible that says not to do it, but it doesn't mean its biblical. Your arguement means you should have priests wearing trditional jewish vestments, and that they should be levite. Once you say that they shouldn't, then you are getting into non biblical ground. You agree that Jesus is our high priest, so you have already acknowledged that the high priest role has been fulfilled in him. To use the old way to justify the new is absurd, and non biblical.

So I guess you didn't celebrate it like the rest of us?

No I didn't. Why would I?

It is actually accurate to say that Christ was born either near the Jewish festival of Sukkot, or the Advent period according to something I came across earlier:
http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Articles/Christmas/christmas.html

So what. he never asked us to celebrate his birth. He never saw it important enough to give us a date. He saw his death as important enough to put a date on. He also felt it important enough to tell us to 'keep doing this in rememberance of me' regarding the last supper. Never once do we see either him or any early christians celebrate his birth. so even if you do discover the exact date, its still contentious. All of this is even before we get into the pagan origins of all the ritual surrounding the festival.

My tradition comes from the Bible.

One Word, christmas.

Hm JimiTime, Paul discussed people who largely fell back to their own pagan ways, involving physically worshipping a false god, or eating meat that was sacrificed to an idol / false god.

Really? If I recall correctly he says in Romans about people falling back into their old customs. Now he never suggested rebranding as a solution.

By reforming Christmas to what it is today, it actually gives us an appropriate time to worship God

Worshipping God happens every day, or at least 'should'. Using lots of pagan ritual to do it is highly inappropriate IMO. When Moses saw the Hebrews with the golden calf, why did he not just rebrand? Why in jerimiah was the act of bringing the fir tree into ones home condemned, without a 'rebranding' solution?

Actually what do you think of other holy days for Easter, Pentecost, Ash Wednesday etc? Are they just rebranding too?

Well Nisan 14 is the date of rememberance of Christs sacrifice for us. Even calling it easter is highly inappropriate. Ishtar, fertility god, eggs etc. Go to Czech Republic and you see the 'christians' carry out their ancient pagan tradition of men hitting women with sticks, and the the women give the men eggs. Seriously, the whole rebranding thing is awful IMO.

I don't find it crazy at all. It's an appropriate time to worship Jesus, and the Advent period allows for deep thought in the ways of Christ and it allows for self-examination to see if we are following the ways of Christ adequately. I think it's in fact necessary. It and Lent have been traditionally times of fasting.

This is part of the craziness! 'Every' day is the appropriate time. 'Every' day we should be thinking of Christ and examining ourselves. Anything less, and there is a problem.