WHY DID JAMES NOT WRITE ABOUT THE WORK OF CHRIST?

[heavenly_bound]

I think it is important to know what the different stages in a persons walk with Christ are before you can say you must treat James different than the other epistles.

Each epistle addresses different problems and situations.

James is mostly addressing Christians who have not developed much, if at all. Perhaps these people that James addressed have said a prayer and think that's it, they're in.

If the law is our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ, as Galatians says, then there is lots of work that must be done in order for us to come to Christ and receive His Revelation and Rest. Lots of work in working out your salvation with fear and trembling, studying scripture to make yourself approved, asking for understanding and knowledge and wisdom.

The epistles are like a big puzzle that all fit together perfectly. If you try to make one contradict another then you are using a hammer to put your puzzle together. That's not the way puzzles go together. The pieces should fit together easily.

Although I am not good at actual puzzles.... I would rather use the hammer...

I completely agree with what you say Grandpa, but my problem lies in right division of the word. we take things that differ and co mingle everything as one!!

We need to learn how to rightly divide the word of Truth! we have to distinguish between the OLD and the NEW!

most of what James taught was OT teachings. And if we take his teachings and try to apply them directly to the new creation, we find them contracting with what was revealed to Paul!

 

[heavenly_bound]

I completely agree with what you say Grandpa, but my problem lies in right division of the word. we take things that differ and co mingle everything as one!!

We need to learn how to rightly divide the word of Truth! we have to distinguish between the OLD and the NEW!

most of what James taught was OT teachings. And if we take his teachings and try to apply them directly to the new creation, we find them contracting with what was revealed to Paul!

This is an example of rightly dividing the word of Truth

https://youtu.be/EeTskiB6RAk?list=PLJxv4pVK1dy_sdBh9RE_s158QMIDOXTw5

 

[John146]

James is addressing the "twelve tribes scattered abroad." Whenever Scripture uses the term "twelve tribes" it is always a reference to the nation of Israel as a whole. Making the book of James written to the Jewish Christians who were scattered would contradict every other usage in Scripture of the phrase "twelve tribes."

 

[garee]

Why is it that Apostle James does not mention anything about the the work (Crucifixion, death, burial, quickening, raising, ascension and session) of Christ in his epistle?

My two cents...

I would offer it was not the kind of epistle he was moved by the Holy Spirit to write as a living historically true parable, involving the promised demonstration of Son of man, as Christ the anointing Holy Spirit of God, coming in the flesh for a season.

It was more informative to what a person who was born again as, to how we can hear God by a work of His faith and not in respect to men .

How come that An apostle who did not even believe in Christ during His earthly ministry was appointed to direct the church at its infancy?

Believing Christ, the anointing Holy Spirit of God was a reflection of Jame's earthly ministry .There is nothing to indicate James was not trusting the law of God, as it is written, the gospel of our salvation.

Could it be that this situation has contributed greatly to the struggle the church has been having between grace and law till this day?correct me if what i say is wrong .

The epistle of James supports the kind of struggle as to the difference between a works righteousness doctrine of men and one of grace as doctrine of Christ. . Grace was the outcome of the epistle of those who did have the Spirit of Christ.

If any has not the Spirit of Christ they do not belong to Him.

 

[valiant]

​Why is it that Apostle James does not mention anything about the the work (Crucifixion, death, burial, quickening, raising, ascension and session) of Christ in his epistle?

He was writing to them as Christians giving them exhortations The background was assumed (2.1), and he assumes a knowledge of justification by faith to be well known (2.14-26). He speaks mainly of Jesus as 'the Lord' and Judge (chapter 5 verse 7, 8, 9).


How come that An apostle who did not even believe in Christ during His earthly ministry was appointed to direct the church at its infancy?

Could it be that this situation has contributed greatly to the struggle the church has been having between grace and law till this day?
correct me if what i say is wrong pls

​[/QUOTE]

 

[garee]

Why is it that Apostle James does not mention anything about the the work (Crucifixion, death, burial, quickening, raising, ascension and session) of Christ in his epistle?

My two cents...

I would offer it was not the kind of epistle he was moved by the Holy Spirit to write as a living historically true parable involving the promised demonstration of Son of man .

It was more informative to what a person who was born again as, to how we can hear God by a work of His faith and not in respect to men .

How come that An apostle who did not even believe in Christ during His earthly ministry was appointed to direct the church at its infancy?

Believing Christ, the anointing Holy Spirit of God was a reflection of James earthly ministry .There is nothing to indicate James was not trusting the law of God, as it is written, the gospel of our salvation.

Could it be that this situation has contributed greatly to the struggle the church has been having between grace and law till this day?
correct me if what i say is wrong .

The epistle of James supports a struggle as to the difference between a works righteousness doctrine and one of grace. Grace was the outcome.

I see no difference. Both being moved by the same mutual faith of Christ in respect to the faith of God that worked in Paul and James. If there seems to be irreconcilable differences it would have to be in the way we interpret in a hope of by rightly dividing it as our goal to seek His approval through it.

 

[valiant]

​Why is it that Apostle James does not mention anything about the the work (Crucifixion, death, burial, quickening, raising, ascension and session) of Christ in his epistle?

He clearly felt that the believers were well grounded in the Gospel (2.1). His was a word of exhortation to Christians. He wrote to both Jewish and Gentile Christians as the contents of the letter makes clear.

He makes no reference to Gentiles in the letter, which would have been impossible if he was writing to Jews only, for their position over against the Gentiles would have demanded it, The 'twelve tribes of Israel' was therefore an address to the whole church.

How come that An apostle who did not even believe in Christ during His earthly ministry was appointed to direct the church at its infancy?

The simple answer is 'ask God'. But He was clearly satisfied that James had an important message to give to the church. James had been a Christian long enough to have the credentials for writing,

Could it be that this situation has contributed greatly to the struggle the church has been having between grace and law till this day?

Correctly interpreted it causes no difficulty as respects grace and law. He makes it clear that he is not referring to true faith in Jesus Christ, but to a nominal 'faith' that wasn't really faith at all..

 

[heavenly_bound]

He clearly felt that the believers were well grounded in the Gospel (2.1). His was a word of exhortation to Christians. He wrote to both Jewish and Gentile Christians as the contents of the letter makes clear.

He makes no reference to Gentiles in the letter, which would have been impossible if he was writing to Jews only, for their position over against the Gentiles would have demanded it, The 'twelve tribes of Israel' was therefore an address to the whole church.



The simple answer is 'ask God'. But He was clearly satisfied that James had an important message to give to the church. James had been a Christian long enough to have the credentials for writing,




Correctly interpreted it causes no difficulty as respects grace and law. He makes it clear that he is not referring to true faith in Jesus Christ, but to a nominal 'faith' that wasn't really faith at all..


[/SIZE]

nothing can be further from the truth here! I think you don't still get it!

 

[heavenly_bound]

He clearly felt that the believers were well grounded in the Gospel (2.1). His was a word of exhortation to Christians. He wrote to both Jewish and Gentile Christians as the contents of the letter makes clear.

He makes no reference to Gentiles in the letter, which would have been impossible if he was writing to Jews only, for their position over against the Gentiles would have demanded it, The 'twelve tribes of Israel' was therefore an address to the whole church.



The simple answer is 'ask God'. But He was clearly satisfied that James had an important message to give to the church. James had been a Christian long enough to have the credentials for writing,




Correctly interpreted it causes no difficulty as respects grace and law. He makes it clear that he is not referring to true faith in Jesus Christ, but to a nominal 'faith' that wasn't really faith at all..


[/SIZE]

if you had read just this epistle alone, would you have understood what the gospel is? would you have understood the message of the cross for it to bring about your salvation?

 

[heavenly_bound]

He clearly felt that the believers were well grounded in the Gospel (2.1). His was a word of exhortation to Christians. He wrote to both Jewish and Gentile Christians as the contents of the letter makes clear.

He makes no reference to Gentiles in the letter, which would have been impossible if he was writing to Jews only, for their position over against the Gentiles would have demanded it, The 'twelve tribes of Israel' was therefore an address to the whole church.



The simple answer is 'ask God'. But He was clearly satisfied that James had an important message to give to the church. James had been a Christian long enough to have the credentials for writing,




Correctly interpreted it causes no difficulty as respects grace and law. He makes it clear that he is not referring to true faith in Jesus Christ, but to a nominal 'faith' that wasn't really faith at all..


[/SIZE]

The letter opens with a clear audience addressed to. He Couldn't have been writing to gentiles bc the gentile Christians were never Jews to know anything about the law of Moses.
secondly
is there any proof to your claim that James had been a Christian long enough to have the credentials for writing?
Do you know that according to historical facts this book was one of the last book to be included in the Canon of the NT? why the hesitance if he had been a christian for long and has credentials?

History has it that James was still a fervent keeper of the law of Moses even when he became a christian. He still went to the temple to pray!!
in Fact He hid the fact that he was a Christian so that he could still carry on with the temple worship!!
if you think i am exaggerating , then find that out for yourself.

 

[Yahshua]

like Abraham lies, David's adulatory and murder etc right? So these too where given by inspiration of God?

What does it really mean by "all scripture is given by inspiration of God"

if we interpret ever scripture literally, we will end up with the notion that God is in support of Abraham's lies , David's murders and adulatory etc!

Now James just preach the gospel in his own way as you put it! so what was his message? we know that the gospel is the message of the cross!!

so can someone explain to me how is it possible to think that James preached the gospel without any mention of the gospel(good new of the cross) itself!!

God expect us to rightly divide the worth of Truth bc in the bible, there are thinks that differ; things that do not co mingle; things that are mutually exclusive!!

James did preach the gospel throughout his entire epistle. The issue you're having is that there's a confusion as to which gospel is being preached.

The Gospel of the Kingdom of God isn't the Gospel of Christ. One is the good news about the kingdom of God and the other is the good news about Christ. Both are closely linked but are two different things.

Scripture says Christ *himself* preached to everyone the gospel of the Kingdom of God during his ministry...but not once did he tell any of the public he was going to the cross to die for them. Not once. He only told his closes few and then told them to keep it a secret. So if scripture says Christ went throughout the land preaching the gospel of the Kingdom of God, but never told them about him dying on the cross, then the cross isn't the gospel of the kingdom.

The Gospel of the Kingdom of God: "Restoration; destruction of all the works of the devil including sickness and death; eternal peace through love one to another and through love to God. Obedience."

The Gospel of Christ: "Christ is the chief cornerstone; the foundation of the building, who broke the power of sin on the cross with his death and resurrection, without whom we can not preach the gospel of the kingdom of God as the kingdom wouldn't be possible without 'Christ in you'."

With the kingdom now possible (through Christ), James is leading his readers in the work of building that kingdom, explaining what *we* now need to *do*. Note how he starts his epistle with "the servant of God and of the lord Jesus Christ", and in chapter 2 with "believers of Jesus Christ must not...", with his instructions being "ok now you have the faith so now it's time to work. Don't turn back to your filthiness but on to holiness; resist temptations, etc.; fulfill the royal law by loving one another. Show your faith by what you do." So that when Christ returns he *also* becomes the capstone of the building.

James repeats the same themes that Christ addressed during his ministry, so we can no more reject James' words than we can reject Christ's words.

 

[heavenly_bound]

Are you speaking of James? Or Paul?

I am speaking of James the Lord's brother. He was never one of the Lords disciple during His earthly tenure. He never believed until after the resurrection and appearance of Christ to him!

 

[John146]

The letter opens with a clear audience addressed to. He Couldn't have been writing to gentiles bc the gentile Christians were never Jews to know anything about the law of Moses.
secondly
is there any proof to your claim that James had been a Christian long enough to have the credentials for writing?
Do you know that according to historical facts this book was one of the last book to be included in the Canon of the NT? why the hesitance if he had been a christian for long and has credentials?

History has it that James was still a fervent keeper of the law of Moses even when he became a christian. He still went to the temple to pray!!
in Fact He hid the fact that he was a Christian so that he could still carry on with the temple worship!!
if you think i am exaggerating , then find that out for yourself.

Neither was he writing to Jewish Christians for his address is to the twelve tribes which is always a reference to the nation of Israel as a whole and never to a called out specific group within the nation.

 

[heavenly_bound]

James did preach the gospel throughout his entire epistle. The issue you're having is that there's a confusion as to which gospel is being preached.

The Gospel of the Kingdom of God isn't the Gospel of Christ. One is the good news about the kingdom of God and the other is the good news about Christ. Both are closely linked but are two different things.

Scripture says Christ *himself* preached to everyone the gospel of the Kingdom of God during his ministry...but not once did he tell any of the public he was going to the cross to die for them. Not once. He only told his closes few and then told them to keep it a secret. So if scripture says Christ went throughout the land preaching the gospel of the Kingdom of God, but never told them about him dying on the cross, then the cross isn't the gospel of the kingdom.

The Gospel of the Kingdom of God: "Restoration; destruction of all the works of the devil including sickness and death; eternal peace through love one to another and through love to God. Obedience."

The Gospel of Christ: "Christ is the chief cornerstone; the foundation of the building, who broke the power of sin on the cross with his death and resurrection, without whom we can not preach the gospel of the kingdom of God as the kingdom wouldn't be possible without 'Christ in you'."

With the kingdom now possible (through Christ), James is leading his readers in the work of building that kingdom, explaining what *we* now need to *do*. Note how he starts his epistle with "the servant of God and of the lord Jesus Christ", and in chapter 2 with "believers of Jesus Christ must not...", with his instructions being "ok now you have the faith so now it's time to work. Don't turn back to your filthiness but on to holiness; resist temptations, etc.; fulfill the royal law by loving one another. Show your faith by what you do." So that when Christ returns he *also* becomes the capstone of the building.

James repeats the same themes that Christ addressed during his ministry, so we can no more reject James' words than we can reject Christ's words.

you have made some points here but you still haven't my questions! maybe you should go through other posts i have posted here and see what i trying to find out. Thanks for the post anyway.

 

[resurrection33]

​Why is it that Apostle James does not mention anything about the the work (Crucifixion, death, burial, quickening, raising, ascension and session) of Christ in his epistle?

How come that An apostle who did not even believe in Christ during His earthly ministry was appointed to direct the church at its infancy?

Could it be that this situation has contributed greatly to the struggle the church has been having between grace and law till this day?
correct me if what i say is wrong pls

​

There were certain things that James thought people needed to be made aware of. It wasn’t his intention to set down the entire Gospel in that one letter.

I don’t think it mattered that Paul didn’t believe in Jesus in the beginning. He had the ability and willingness to do the things the Lord wanted him to do.

The struggle between grace and law would certainly come about no matter who the missionaries were. Both grace and law are important.

 

[heavenly_bound]

Neither was he writing to Jewish Christians for his address is to the twelve tribes which is always a reference to the nation of Israel as a whole and never to a called out specific group within the nation.

Great! Its good that you pointed this out yourself!!
That is exactly what i am talking about- the co mingling thing; the co mingling of the OT and the New!!
This is one of the reasons why the church finds it so hard to accept the free gift of grace without any works!!

Do You now agree with me that its not everything that is written in this epistle that is directly addressed to the new creation in Christ?

 

[John146]

Great! Its good that you pointed this out yourself!!
That is exactly what i am talking about- the co mingling thing; the co mingling of the OT and the New!!
This is one of the reasons why the church finds it so hard to accept the free gift of grace without any works!!

Do You now agree with me that its not everything that is written in this epistle that is directly addressed to the new creation in Christ?

Absolutely! I rightly divide the word of truth according to dispensations. I believe the book of James is specifically used to address the nation of Israel during the tribulation in which they will be literally scattered abroad searching for answers. The book of James will provide many answers for them during this period.

We can certainly glean some truth from James, but to make the entire book written to Christians only is not treating the word wisely.

 

[heavenly_bound]

There were certain things that James thought people needed to be made aware of. It wasn’t his intention to set down the entire Gospel in that one letter.

I don’t think it mattered that Paul didn’t believe in Jesus in the beginning. He had the ability and willingness to do the things the Lord wanted him to do.

The struggle between grace and law would certainly come about no matter who the missionaries were. Both grace and law are important.

no, i don't think the struggle would have continued Had he not carried the law from the old into the new!
Paul clearly thought that the law has been fulfilled and made obsolete but James still insisted on the keeping of the law by Christians!
oh yes the things he thought people needed to be made aware of is of course the circumcision of Christians; thereby insisting on the continuity of the law system!
The consequences is that the work of Christ is just an addition to the mosaic system!

 

[resurrection33]

no, i don't think the struggle would have continued Had he not carried the law from the old into the new!
Paul clearly thought that the law has been fulfilled and made obsolete but James still insisted on the keeping of the law by Christians!
oh yes the things he thought people needed to be made aware of is of course the circumcision of Christians; thereby insisting on the continuity of the law system!
The consequences is that the work of Christ is just an addition to the mosaic system!

James and Paul both made valuable contributions. We'd be in bad shape if we lost one or the other. Jesus didn't say he came to abolish the law. He said he came to fulfill it (Matt 5:17).

There are those laws, or ordinances, or whatever you want to call them, that just apply to Jews. When will the jubilees occur? When do you sacrifice a ram? But the commandments have to be obeyed by everyone. That is the value of James: teaching us that we must obey the commandments. John does the same thing.

 

[FlSnookman7]

I believe James is writing to people who consider themselves Christians, it's why he calls them "brethren" or "brothers". I believe he is most concerned with the growth of the new church and trying to teach his brethren how to reach out to others and share the gospel. Many people like to try and refute grace with this book and that is unfortunate. For those people even if James was not in the bible they would find other verses and twist them to prove their point.
Taken in context with the entire message of grace Jesus gave Paul the letter fits right in as it should. For instance when James says faith without works is dead,(mostly in James 2) he is not saying works are required to attain or maintain one's salvation. Instead he is saying that unless the fruit of that salvation manifests itself by works the individual's faith and the churches ability to spread that faith will decline to the point of death.
Again, those who believe they somehow contribute to keeping their salvation do not have a James problem they have an ego and faith problem. We who know and trust Christ also know obedience and works produce the most fruit. The mistake occurs when people try and use the Word (any part of it) to prove what they think instead of what the Word says.