James vs Paul (side by side chart)

[Kevin007]

http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org...e/JamesPau.htm

thoughts?

A Chart Comparing and Contrasting

the Teaching of Paul and James

Paul and James did not contradict each other; but rather they complemented each other. What both men wrote was inspired by God (2 Tim. 3:16) and true. Paul’s focus was on the unsaved man and how he might get right with God. James’ focus was on the saved person and how he might show his faith and demonstrate the reality of his faith.

Paul’s Teaching	James’ Teaching
You cannot be saved by works (Ephesians 2:8-9)	You cannot show that you are saved without works (James 2:14,18)
How can a person be saved? By faith alone (Rom. 3:28)	How can a person show that he is saved? How can he “show his faith”? Only by works (James 2:18)
Faith without works saves (Romans 3:28) This is a living faith (saving faith)	Faith without works does not save (James 2:14) This is a dead faith (James 2:17,20,26)
Faith alone saves	The faith that saves is not alone
A person is not saved by works (“works” are rejected by Paul as the means of salvation: it is wrong to say that a person must do good works in order to be saved) These are meritorious works, that is, works done to try to merit or earn salvation	A saved person will perform good works (“works” are understood by James to be the result of salvation: a person does good works because he is saved) These are faith works, that is, works that spring from a faith that is real and living.
Paul agreed with James He taught that good works must accompany saving faith (Eph. 2:10; Tit. 3:8; Gal. 5:6; Phil. 2:11-12).	James agreed with Paul He taught that a person inherits the kingdom only by faith (James 2:5) and that Abraham was justified by faith (2:23)
Paul used the example of Abraham when he first believed in God (Rom. 4:3 and compare Genesis 15:6).	James used the example of Abraham when his faith was tested by God, about 40 years later (James 2:21 and compare Genesis 22)
The error Paul corrected: Salvation is by the works of the law (the error of legalism)	The error that James corrected: Works are unnecessary after a person is saved (the error of antinomianism)
Paul wrote about how a guilty sinner may be justified before God.	James wrote about how a believer can show that his faith is genuine (justification or vindication before men)
At the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 the key issue was that salvation is by grace through faith and not by the works of the law. See the error in Acts 15:1 and Peter’s conclusion in Acts 15:9,11. James, who took a lead role in this discussion never voiced any disagreement with Peter or Paul over this crucial matter.
Paul’s perspective: He was viewing the guilty sinner who needed to be right with God. (The sinner is in view)	James’ perspective: He was viewing the believer (or professing believer) who needed to demonstrate that his faith was real. (The believer is in view) scroll down on that link for detailed comments.

[lilymc]

I'm really glad that we've all been having these religious debates recently, because it caused me to do more research.... and my views on a few different things have been strengthened and clarified.

Here is a really good excerpt on the Paul / James paradox. Bold added by me.

We read in James 2:21, "Was not Abraham, our father, justified by works when he offered Isaac, his son, on the altar?"

In what sense was he justified since he was already pronounced right before God years prior to this? [Genesis 15:6] James is saying, in contrast to Paul, that God was able to see that Abraham was righteous already, but until Abraham lifted his knife over Isaac in obedience, only God knew his righteousness. One event occurred before God who alone knows our hearts, and the other is before man who can only perceive the outward actions. In other words, our faith is invisible and can only be expressed outwardly by our works. This is the point that James is trying to emphasize, we show our faith by our deeds to our fellow man.

Our works justify the believer in the demonstrative sense, not in the procurative sense, meaning good works are not the grounds for our legal justification before God. They justify us before the eyes of man, demonstrating what is alive on the inside. When James says faith without works is dead, he is warning against a "words only" intellectual ascent to faith. James is not speaking about the theological aspect of justification before God, but the practical aspect before man. God alone looks at the heart but by works man is justified before other men, who can only look at the outward appearance.

http://www.letusreason.org/occ1.htm

To GOD, we are justified by faith, because God knows our hearts.

To PEOPLE (and for some, to themselves) we are justified by works, because another man has no idea what is in our heart, they can only see our actions.

The bible does not contradict itself, so people have to be careful not to throw out tons of other scriptures in order to accept one that appears to say something different. I've debated a lot of atheists over the years, and one of the things they do is have a "first glance" mindset. For example, God ordering the Israelites to wipe out entire groups of people.... they see a passage like that and immediately assume the worst, without digging deeper. We need to dig deeper sometimes. The bible does not contradict itself, and it should be looked at as a whole.

[fr33]

If they existed, neither one of them were named Paul or James. That is English revisionist history.

[Kevin007]

I'm really glad that we've all been having these religious debates recently, because it caused me to do more research.... and my views on a few different things have been strengthened and clarified.

Here is a really good excerpt on the Paul / James paradox. Bold added by me.

We read in James 2:21, "Was not Abraham, our father, justified by works when he offered Isaac, his son, on the altar?"

In what sense was he justified since he was already pronounced right before God years prior to this? [Genesis 15:6] James is saying, in contrast to Paul, that God was able to see that Abraham was righteous already, but until Abraham lifted his knife over Isaac in obedience, only God knew his righteousness. One event occurred before God who alone knows our hearts, and the other is before man who can only perceive the outward actions. In other words, our faith is invisible and can only be expressed outwardly by our works. This is the point that James is trying to emphasize, we show our faith by our deeds to our fellow man.

Our works justify the believer in the demonstrative sense, not in the procurative sense, meaning good works are not the grounds for our legal justification before God. They justify us before the eyes of man, demonstrating what is alive on the inside. When James says faith without works is dead, he is warning against a "words only" intellectual ascent to faith. James is not speaking about the theological aspect of justification before God, but the practical aspect before man. God alone looks at the heart but by works man is justified before other men, who can only look at the outward appearance.

http://www.letusreason.org/occ1.htm

To GOD, we are justified by faith, because God knows our hearts.

To PEOPLE (and for some, to themselves) we are justified by works, because another man has no idea what is in our heart, they can only see our actions.

The bible does not contradict itself, so people have to be careful not to throw out tons of other scriptures in order to accept one that appears to say something different. I've debated a lot of atheists over the years, and one of the things they do is have a "first glance" mindset. For example, God ordering the Israelites to wipe out entire groups of people.... they see a passage like that and immediately assume the worst, without digging deeper. We need to dig deeper sometimes. The bible does not contradict itself, and it should be looked at as a whole.

hey Lily, did you discover this website through me? It's great, eh?

[RJB]

I notice that in the chart the bible verses can't stand alone without some legalistic gymnastics and explanations.

Instead follow the saviors simple words:

Luke 18:9-14

10 “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’

13 “But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’

14 “I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.”

John 13:35
By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.

Ironically, some of the biggest fools live this Wisdom, while this escapes some of the great theological minds.

[mosquitobite]

I have always put more weight on the red words in the Bible than anything else. Yes, Paul's words are divinely inspired. But I'll take Jesus' words over Paul's any day of the week!

And the bottom line from that is I have FELT God is love, Jesus came to show us love, and this world would be a better place if our hearts poured out in love.

Debate can be divisive, a stumbling block. I too have succumbed to it. Just know that God doesn't need us to ARGUE on His behalf. I am convinced He wants us to only witness in love. If we can't, then we need to do some relationship building with Him before we move on to others.

[Terry1]

http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org...e/JamesPau.htm

thoughts?

A Chart Comparing and Contrasting

the Teaching of Paul and James

Paul and James did not contradict each other; but rather they complemented each other. What both men wrote was inspired by God (2 Tim. 3:16) and true. Paul’s focus was on the unsaved man and how he might get right with God. James’ focus was on the saved person and how he might show his faith and demonstrate the reality of his faith.

Paul’s Teaching	James’ Teaching
You cannot be saved by works (Ephesians 2:8-9)	You cannot show that you are saved without works (James 2:14,18)
How can a person be saved? By faith alone (Rom. 3:28)	How can a person show that he is saved? How can he “show his faith”? Only by works (James 2:18)
Faith without works saves (Romans 3:28) This is a living faith (saving faith)	Faith without works does not save (James 2:14) This is a dead faith (James 2:17,20,26)
Faith alone saves	The faith that saves is not alone
A person is not saved by works (“works” are rejected by Paul as the means of salvation: it is wrong to say that a person must do good works in order to be saved) These are meritorious works, that is, works done to try to merit or earn salvation	A saved person will perform good works (“works” are understood by James to be the result of salvation: a person does good works because he is saved) These are faith works, that is, works that spring from a faith that is real and living.
Paul agreed with James He taught that good works must accompany saving faith (Eph. 2:10; Tit. 3:8; Gal. 5:6; Phil. 2:11-12).	James agreed with Paul He taught that a person inherits the kingdom only by faith (James 2:5) and that Abraham was justified by faith (2:23)
Paul used the example of Abraham when he first believed in God (Rom. 4:3 and compare Genesis 15:6).	James used the example of Abraham when his faith was tested by God, about 40 years later (James 2:21 and compare Genesis 22)
The error Paul corrected: Salvation is by the works of the law (the error of legalism)	The error that James corrected: Works are unnecessary after a person is saved (the error of antinomianism)
Paul wrote about how a guilty sinner may be justified before God.	James wrote about how a believer can show that his faith is genuine (justification or vindication before men)
At the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 the key issue was that salvation is by grace through faith and not by the works of the law. See the error in Acts 15:1 and Peter’s conclusion in Acts 15:9,11. James, who took a lead role in this discussion never voiced any disagreement with Peter or Paul over this crucial matter.
Paul’s perspective: He was viewing the guilty sinner who needed to be right with God. (The sinner is in view)	James’ perspective: He was viewing the believer (or professing believer) who needed to demonstrate that his faith was real. (The believer is in view) scroll down on that link for detailed comments.

Yes Kevin--I have thoughts--LOL They are not in contrast to one another they are in direct reconciliation of one another because Paul is talking about dead works under the curse of the OT Covenant Mosaic Law to the Jews and James is talking about "works of faith" under the New Covenant of Grace through faith. They are both saying the very same thing--you just can't see it.

I've have tried and probably wrote a book in here already attempting to explain the difference to you who believe in the perseverance of the saints doctrines that denies that there are differences between these two major covenants and laws and works associated with them. May blind eyes be opened Lord.

[RJB]

I have always put more weight on the red words in the Bible than anything else. Yes, Paul's words are divinely inspired. But I'll take Jesus' words over Paul's any day of the week!.

To me, Paul re-iterates Christ's words. James 2 is written about the love of God that we must show. St Paul is the same way.

I've misjudge Ronin Truth. He posts about Christ's love alone without faith. On the other hand there are people who read James and Paul and only see faith alone without mentioning love. Who is following in the Lord's footsteps?

[erowe1]

I notice that in the chart the bible verses can't stand alone without some legalistic gymnastics and explanations.

Instead follow the saviors simple words:

Ironically, some of the biggest fools live this Wisdom, while this escapes some of the great theological minds.

Your post looks to me like an abbreviation of exactly what the OP says.

If this is really what you believe, that's encouraging.

[Ronin Truth]

"Christianity is the religion founded by Paul, which replaces Jesus' Gospel with a Gospel 'about Jesus' - a religion that should rather be called Paulinism." -- Dr. Wilhelm Nestle, Church Historian

If it's all the same with you, I think that I'd just much rather stick with Jesus.

Actually, even if it's not the same with you.

[erowe1]

"Christianity is the religion founded by Paul, which replaces Jesus' Gospel with a Gospel 'about Jesus' - a religion that should rather be called Paulinism." -- Dr. Wilhelm Nestle, Church Historian

If it's all the same with you, I think that I'd just much rather stick with Jesus.

Actually, even if it's not the same with you.

Who is Jesus?

[Ronin Truth]

Who is Jesus?

Jesus Is an Anarchist (pdf)

[William Tell]

Jesus is the King of Kings.

[erowe1]

Jesus Is an Anarchist (pdf)

From my perusal of that article, it looks like everything the author says about Jesus is based on books contained in the Bible that are written about Jesus by other people, like Paul. Can't we just use one of the books that Jesus himself wrote, and cut out the middle man?

[Ronin Truth]

Jesus is the King of Kings.

Interestingly, that is also what they called the first ruler of the Persian Empire.

Son of a gun, what are the odds?

[erowe1]

Interestingly, that is also what they called the first ruler of the Persian Empire.

Son of a gun, what are the odds?

I'm not familiar with that label for the first ruler of the Persian Empire, but the odds aren't very low, since before the Persian Empire had arisen, the prophet Daniel, who served as a high official under Cyrus the Persian king, had already applied similar titles to both God and Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon. So this would be in the background behind both the Persian usage and the early Christian usage.

[Ronin Truth]

From my perusal of that article, it looks like everything the author says about Jesus is based on books contained in the Bible that are written about Jesus by other people, like Paul. Can't we just use one of the books that Jesus himself wrote, and cut out the middle man?

People like Paul? Lordy, how many ROMANS were involved in all of this, early on?

The Libertarian From Nazareth?

[erowe1]

People like Paul?

Don't blame me, you're the one who presented us with that article.

But then, if the Jesus you want to go with is not the Jesus of the Bible, like the article that you posted does, then what Jesus is it?

[Ronin Truth]

Don't blame me, you're the one who presented us with that article.

But then, if the Jesus you want to go with is not the Jesus of the Bible, like the article that you posted does, then what Jesus is it?

No blame, you are forgiven. Did you like the article?

Jesus Christ, Libertarian


Well, you see, this Archangel, it was probably Uriel, I didn't ask, came down to me in my sleep one night .................

[Ronin Truth]

I'm not familiar with that label for the first ruler of the Persian Empire, but the odds aren't very low, since before the Persian Empire had arisen, the prophet Daniel, who served as a high official under Cyrus the Persian king, had already applied similar titles to both God and Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon. So this would be in the background behind both the Persian usage and the early Christian usage.

Really, are you sure that you want to do that?

INCOMING: https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...62.rTJnlD_JIUk

[Ronin Truth]

Who is Jesus?

Well according to Colton Burpo and Akiane Kramarik, this is a pretty close current likeness of Jesus.

http://graceology.org/receive-jesus-christ/

[Influenza]

I'm not familiar with that label for the first ruler of the Persian Empire, but the odds aren't very low, since before the Persian Empire had arisen, the prophet Daniel, who served as a high official under Cyrus the Persian king, had already applied similar titles to both God and Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon. So this would be in the background behind both the Persian usage and the early Christian usage.

"Shahanshah" is a Persian word that means King of Kings and was used as a title for the King/Emperor of Persia under the Archaemenid empire and afterwards. But any true prophet of God would not associate a worldly king with God. Whatever story you are quoting is surely wrong.

[Ronin Truth]

"Shahanshah" is a Persian word that means King of Kings and was used as a title for the King/Emperor of Persia under the Archaemenid empire and afterwards. But any true prophet of God would not associate a worldly king with God. Whatever story you are quoting is surely wrong.

Thanks for your confirming help. +rep

[Kevin007]

Paul is saying we are JUSTIFIED through faith (with God)
James is saying we are JUSTIFIED by works BEFORE MAN.

[jmdrake]

My thoughts? I think this part of the chart could be worded better.


Paul:
Faith without works saves
(Romans 3:28)
This is a living faith (saving faith)

James:
Faith without works does not save
(James 2:14)
This is a dead faith (James 2:17,20,26)

That makes it look like Paul and James are contradicting each other, when that is clearly not the author's intent nor yours.

Instead:

Faith saves without works
(Romans 3:28)
This is a living faith (saving faith)

Faith without works does not save
(James 2:14)
This is a dead faith (James 2:17,20,26)


In other words while it's not the works that save, if your faith does not produce works then it's not really faith.

The key to all this is Hebrews 11:6

And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.

It's not enough to believe that God exists. You have to also believe that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him? What is the evidence that you believe He rewards those who earnestly seek Him? Why earnestly seeking Him of course.

http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org...e/JamesPau.htm

thoughts?

A Chart Comparing and Contrasting

the Teaching of Paul and James

Paul and James did not contradict each other; but rather they complemented each other. What both men wrote was inspired by God (2 Tim. 3:16) and true. Paul’s focus was on the unsaved man and how he might get right with God. James’ focus was on the saved person and how he might show his faith and demonstrate the reality of his faith.

Paul’s Teaching	James’ Teaching
You cannot be saved by works (Ephesians 2:8-9)	You cannot show that you are saved without works (James 2:14,18)
How can a person be saved? By faith alone (Rom. 3:28)	How can a person show that he is saved? How can he “show his faith”? Only by works (James 2:18)
Faith without works saves (Romans 3:28) This is a living faith (saving faith)	Faith without works does not save (James 2:14) This is a dead faith (James 2:17,20,26)
Faith alone saves	The faith that saves is not alone
A person is not saved by works (“works” are rejected by Paul as the means of salvation: it is wrong to say that a person must do good works in order to be saved) These are meritorious works, that is, works done to try to merit or earn salvation	A saved person will perform good works (“works” are understood by James to be the result of salvation: a person does good works because he is saved) These are faith works, that is, works that spring from a faith that is real and living.
Paul agreed with James He taught that good works must accompany saving faith (Eph. 2:10; Tit. 3:8; Gal. 5:6; Phil. 2:11-12).	James agreed with Paul He taught that a person inherits the kingdom only by faith (James 2:5) and that Abraham was justified by faith (2:23)
Paul used the example of Abraham when he first believed in God (Rom. 4:3 and compare Genesis 15:6).	James used the example of Abraham when his faith was tested by God, about 40 years later (James 2:21 and compare Genesis 22)
The error Paul corrected: Salvation is by the works of the law (the error of legalism)	The error that James corrected: Works are unnecessary after a person is saved (the error of antinomianism)
Paul wrote about how a guilty sinner may be justified before God.	James wrote about how a believer can show that his faith is genuine (justification or vindication before men)
At the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 the key issue was that salvation is by grace through faith and not by the works of the law. See the error in Acts 15:1 and Peter’s conclusion in Acts 15:9,11. James, who took a lead role in this discussion never voiced any disagreement with Peter or Paul over this crucial matter.
Paul’s perspective: He was viewing the guilty sinner who needed to be right with God. (The sinner is in view)	James’ perspective: He was viewing the believer (or professing believer) who needed to demonstrate that his faith was real. (The believer is in view) scroll down on that link for detailed comments.

[Ronin Truth]

My thoughts? I think this part of the chart could be worded better.


Paul:
Faith without works saves
(Romans 3:28)
This is a living faith (saving faith)

James:
Faith without works does not save
(James 2:14)
This is a dead faith (James 2:17,20,26)

That makes it look like Paul and James are contradicting each other, when that is clearly not the author's intent nor yours.

Instead:

Faith saves without works
(Romans 3:28)
This is a living faith (saving faith)

Faith without works does not save
(James 2:14)
This is a dead faith (James 2:17,20,26)


In other words while it's not the works that save, if your faith does not produce works then it's not really faith.

The key to all this is Hebrews 11:6

And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.

It's not enough to believe that God exists. You have to also believe that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him? What is the evidence that you believe He rewards those who earnestly seek Him? Why earnestly seeking Him of course.

I sure hope that you aren't messing with the unalterable HOLY WORD OF GOD, without a signed and notarized permit from the holy ghost.

[Ronin Truth]

From my perusal of that article, it looks like everything the author says about Jesus is based on books contained in the Bible that are written about Jesus by other people, like Paul. Can't we just use one of the books that Jesus himself wrote, and cut out the middle man?

Sure, I'm more than willing to cut out Paul, the ROMAN middle man.

"All the good in Christianity can be traced to Jesus, all the bad to Paul." - Franz Overbeck, Protestant Theologian

[erowe1]

But any true prophet of God would not associate a worldly king with God.

The phrase "associate with" covers a lot of things. Why would no true prophet do that?

[erowe1]

Sure, I'm more than willing to cut out Paul, the ROMAN middle man.

How? Where's the book that Jesus wrote?

[jmdrake]

I sure hope that you aren't messing with the unalterable HOLY WORD OF GOD, without a signed and notarized permit from the holy ghost.

I wasn't messing with the word of God. I was messing with the chart someone made interpreting the word of God. Why would that be a problem?