James Ch 1 Verses 21-15...If I'm wrong Plz Share your Knowledge with me.

[rodneyo777]

The letter of James was written in 45AD, which is approximately twenty to forty years before any of the rest of the New Testament letters were written.


This means James small letter, was written without James, or anyone else having any knowledge of a compilation of books called the bible because none of the other books were even written yet.

The first "canon" was the Moratorian Canon, which was compiled in A.D. 170.

The Muratorian Canon included all of the New Testament books except Hebrews, James, and 3 John.

Here is where most people become suspect, because some do not trust church officials on or after 100 A.D. But in A.D. 363, the Council of Laodicea stated that the 27 books of the New Testament could be read in the churches.


Consider 5 very revealing verses in Chapter one of James.

Ch1:21-25 says:

"21 Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls.

22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.

23 For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass:

24 For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.

25 But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed."


Please consider a few verses that substantiate James claim of hearing, and doing:


Luke 6:46
"Why do you call me, 'Lord, Lord,' and do not do what I say?

(Calling Him "Lord, Lord", in this verse would not just apply to those who Jesus was speaking to then, but to us now, as would the words above "what I say").


Luke 6:47
As for everyone who comes to me and hears my words and puts them into practice, I will show you what they are like.

Hebrews 4:12
For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart.

(Heb 4:12 is NOT speaking of the bible).

Matthew 4:4
But he answered, "It is written, "'Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God."

(IF God is dead, and no longer speaks, then maybe you could apply this verse to the bible, but that would be untrue, so this verse applies to us today. Words coming from the mouth of God, must be heard with the ear of the spirit or the physical ear).



Now being that the above is true and to the best of my ability accurate, and since the bible was first printed in the 1500's, what can we gather from the verses above from the letter of James, and specifically verses 21-25, and his use of the words "THE WORD", and "hearing".


1). James is NOT speaking about the bible, because it does not exist, and James has just written the very first NT letter, and James is saying we must not only "HEAR" (present tense), but we must obey what The Spirit says to us. This is the testimony of James concerning the living word.

2). James states this engrafted word, (which is heard, if you are in Christ, and if you have His Spirit); is able to save your souls.

 

[Revmitchell]

1). James is NOT speaking about the bible, because it does not exist, and James has just written the very first NT letter, and James is saying we must not only "HEAR" (present tense), but we must obey what The Spirit says to us. This is the testimony of James concerning the living word.

2). James states this engrafted word, (which is heard, if you are in Christ, and if you have His Spirit); is able to save your souls.

I will just deal with this sophomoric attempt even though the entire op is absurd.

It is clear you do not understand the process by which God gave His revelation. You want to rely solely on man's part in this process and completely leave out God's part in order to tear down God's word. I suggest you take a great amount of time to study how God's word has come about before trying to tell everyone about it.

James is speaking about the word of God. It matters not that the canon was not yet compiled yet because all of the Bible is considered God's word. If everything in the canon is God's word then James was speaking of that even if some of it had not yet been written. God's word is still God's word before we say that and after.

Your coming here with massive amounts of posts being copy and pasted all over the place made you suspicious. This post just confirmed out suspicions.

 

[DHK]

The letter of James was written in 45AD, which is approximately twenty to forty years before any of the rest of the New Testament letters were written.


This means James small letter, was written without James, or anyone else having any knowledge of a compilation of books called the bible because none of the other books were even written yet.

The first "canon" was the Moratorian Canon, which was compiled in A.D. 170.

The Muratorian Canon included all of the New Testament books except Hebrews, James, and 3 John.

It is true James was written ca. 50 A.D.
It is also true that Matthew was written around the same date.
Both of the epistles that were written to the Corinthians were written within 6-8 months of each other ca. 55 A.D.

This makes much of what you just said false.
In fact the only books to be written "40 years later" were the writings of John. The only books to be written approximately 20 years later would have been Jude and Hebrews.
All of Paul's epistles and Peter's epistles would have had to be written before 68 A.D. the approximate date that both died. And they didn't write their epistles on the day they died.

There are many MSS existing that have all 66 books of the Bible before the Muratorian Canon so-called was written.

The most important fact is that all the NT was written ca.98 A.D. and after that the Canon was closed. The apostles taught the early church which books were inspired and which were not. They also taught them that false prophets would arise and pervert the doctrine that they had taught them. They knew the truth and the truth of scripture would be preserved, not by the RCC, but by early believers true to the Word of God.

 

[rodneyo777]

I will just deal with this sophomoric attempt even though the entire op is absurd.

It is clear you do not understand the process by which God gave His revelation. You want to rely solely on man's part in this process and completely leave out God's part in order to tear down God's word. I suggest you take a great amount of time to study how God's word has come about before trying to tell everyone about it.

James is speaking about the word of God. It matters not that the canon was not yet compiled yet because all of the Bible is considered God's word. If everything in the canon is God's word then James was speaking of that even if some of it had not yet been written. God's word is still God's word before we say that and after.

Your coming here with massive amounts of posts being copy and pasted all over the place made you suspicious. This post just confirmed out suspicions.

I like your response...Especially this part "I will just deal with this sophomoric attempt even though the entire op is absurd."...Are you really a rev?

OK I understood what you wrote, and please except my question as that, just a question...

IF I don't see the word as possibly 2 different subjects based upon context, then we lose the meaning of words, right?

In other words IF every time you see the the word "WORD" and you think the written word, then is James an idiot, why didn't he say read the word, instead of hear the word...

Hearing implies something is spoken, and someone else hears it...

The word was heard, before it was ever written. That is true in each and every case. It was that way with the prophets, and with the disciples.

 

[Revmitchell]

I like your response...Especially this part "I will just deal with this sophomoric attempt even though the entire op is absurd."...Are you really a rev?

OK I understood what you wrote, and please except my question as that, just a question...

IF I don't see the word as possibly 2 different subjects based upon context, then we lose the meaning of words, right?

In other words IF every time you see the the word "WORD" and you think the written word, then is James an idiot, why didn't he say read the word, instead of hear the word...

Hearing implies something is spoken, and someone else hears it...

The word was heard, before it was ever written. That is true in each and every case. It was that way with the prophets, and with the disciples.

Whether spoken or written it is the same. The word of God is the word of God and in either case has the same authority and power.

 

[rodneyo777]

Thanks for the reply, and the friendly response...

Thanks for clearing up the dates for me. I got them out of an old bible. They must be wrong.

Also could you kindly address the reading verse hearing from my response to the rev.

And lastly I have a question about God preserving the scriptures for us.

It seems obvious God did preserve the torah, and the Old Testament. But why not preserve the New Testament. Certainly He has the power to do so.

You hear people say all the time "we have no original articles of the New Testament, we only have copies"...

Why don't we have the originals, if God had only preserved them, we would have them...

If this is true that we don't have any of the original articles, why preserve the copies and not the original articles...

If he could preserve one, he certainly could preserve the other.

It is true James was written ca. 50 A.D.
It is also true that Matthew was written around the same date.
Both of the epistles that were written to the Corinthians were written within 6-8 months of each other ca. 55 A.D.

This makes much of what you just said false.
In fact the only books to be written "40 years later" were the writings of John. The only books to be written approximately 20 years later would have been Jude and Hebrews.
All of Paul's epistles and Peter's epistles would have had to be written before 68 A.D. the approximate date that both died. And they didn't write their epistles on the day they died.

There are many MSS existing that have all 66 books of the Bible before the Muratorian Canon so-called was written.

The most important fact is that all the NT was written ca.98 A.D. and after that the Canon was closed. The apostles taught the early church which books were inspired and which were not. They also taught them that false prophets would arise and pervert the doctrine that they had taught them. They knew the truth and the truth of scripture would be preserved, not by the RCC, but by early believers true to the Word of God.

 

[DHK]

Thanks for the reply, and the friendly response...

Thanks for clearing up the dates for me. I got them out of an old bible. They must be wrong.

Also could you kindly address the reading verse hearing from my response to the rev.

You replied:

In other words IF every time you see the the word "WORD" and you think the written word, then is James an idiot, why didn't he say read the word, instead of hear the word...

Hearing implies something is spoken, and someone else hears it...

The word was heard, before it was ever written. That is true in each and every case. It was that way with the prophets, and with the disciples.

I am not sure I am following. But it started with this scripture:
Consider 5 very revealing verses in Chapter one of James.

Ch1:21-25 says:

"21 Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls.

22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.

23 For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass:

24 For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.

25 But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed."

James seems to be referring to the Word of God throughout the passage.
He speaks first about hearing the Word of God, and then doing something about it--obeying it.
He then uses an illustration of a mirror which Paul also uses in 1Cor.13:10-13. Does a man spend fifteen minutes (or more) in front of a mirror shaving his face, combing his hair, etc., and then walk away and forget what he looks like (even what he has done.)
So is the man who looks at the pages of the "law of liberty" (the Word of God) --how God reveals to us what we are like, and then we walk away and forget what God has said?? You read the Bible and then forget what the Bible has said?? You fail to act upon it?
But the man that does act upon that which he does read, he shall be blessed.

And lastly I have a question about God preserving the scriptures for us.

God has preserved his Word. He promised he would and I believe he has. The "how" is something many of us disagree on. We must believe by faith, and I believe we can all agree on that much.

It seems obvious God did preserve the torah, and the Old Testament. But why not preserve the New Testament. Certainly He has the power to do so.

In as much as He has preserved the OT he preserved the NT, and there is no reason to doubt that he hasn't.

You hear people say all the time "we have no original articles of the New Testament, we only have copies"...

The same is true of the OT.
But Jesus never doubted the books of Moses even though they didn't have the originals, even then. Moses lived 1440 B.C. Those papyri wouldn't have lasted that long. I don't believe that the Jews had all the originals of the OT even at Jesus time. But Christ never doubted the authenticity of what they did have.

Why don't we have the originals, if God had only preserved them, we would have them...

If this is true that we don't have any of the original articles, why preserve the copies and not the original articles...

If he could preserve one, he certainly could preserve the other.

We have over 5,000 MSS, some dating back to the second century or just a few years after the death of John. The manuscript evidence is overwhelming. None of these MSS contradict each other in doctrine, only in minor areas of spelling and some omissions or additions that would be common for one who spends time copying scripture to make.
All in all we can be assured that what we have today is God's preserved Word and should not be ashamed to call it the preserved Word of God.