Igzy,
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.
I understand that concern but it is manageable. Early in my christian life I was very bothered about a direct teaching of Jesus. The one about if you committed certain sins you should pluck your eyes out or cut your hand off. A brother got me through that one but it did not cause me to lose sight of everything else in the gospels or that particular book. (ZNP, that is a direct teaching but don't go doing anything drastic!
)
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.
I do not know if James was tweaking Paul's teaching or the misapplication of it. Maybe he was. However, I do not see a conflict between the two teachings as I view one as the cause and the other as the proof. One is about life and the other is about living. I have no quarrel with those who think the two are utterly incompatible but I myself do not think there is an issue with both standing side by side.
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!
I don't agree with this as pertains to believers because it is impossible to keep the law and as James says if you break one point you've broken the whole. The law was a child conductor and at some point the child conductor is no longer needed. I am also fine with teaching children the 10 commandments and others parts but once they are regenerated Christ has come. I also think the law liberally should be applied to rowdy teenagers.
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.
It does say something but it is not definitive. 2000 years ago some might have considered that if all the Christians in Jerusalem are zealous for the law then that should be considered as relevant.