Quote:
Originally Posted by Cassidy
Igzy, I don't consider your response as baiting, just healthy debate.
Yes, I think James' propensity toward keeping the law is not something we believers need to practice. He has many other edifying points but keeping the OT law was a mixture. Then the question comes up why are such teachings allowed to be included. Some variation is there to show different perspectives as you said, however, I believe that God also includes things to show us what not to do. OT law keeping was a big problem to the early church as previously shown. We can all learn from that.
|
Okay, but here's a problem. Once you generally undermine the book of James, you may undermine some things he taught that God doesn't want us to lose sight of, that are top shelf stuff.
For example, James knew what he was doing when he seemed to challenge the teaching of justification by faith. He knew Paul taught it. He wasn't committing an ignorant error that somehow God and creative theologians have saved. He was saying if you don't have works you don't have faith, perhaps not even saving faith. He was tweaking Paul's teaching, or at least the misapplication of it.
So in other words, James may not exist primarily to tell us not to take law-keeping too far. It may exist primarily to tell us not to take disregarding the law too far!
Here's another piece of evidence. Every serious Christian I've ever seen since I left the LRC--I mean those who walk the walk and don't just talk the talk--highly regard the book of James. That says something.