Does the Book of James Attack the Teachings of Paul?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 19 พ.ย. 2023
- Visit www.bartehrman.com/courses/ to shop from Bart Ehrman’s online courses and get a special discount by using code: MJPODCAST on all courses.
For over five centuries (going back to Martin Luther!) many readers of the New Testament have maintained that the letter of James flat-out contradicts the teachings of Paul that a person is made right with God only by faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus. James insists that a person is not justified by faith alone, but by doing good works; but Paul argues with equal passion that a person is justified by faith in Christ and not by doing works of the law. So... aren't these views at direct odds? Bart's views may seem surprising....
Megan asks:
-What is the Book of James, and when was it written?
-As early as the days of Martin Luther, readers have thought that the book of James contradicts the teachings of Paul. Why was this an important issue for Luther and the Protestant Reformation?
-Is there anything that suggests that these two men were actually at odds with each other, historically speaking?
-The two passages that are pointed to as demonstrating disagreement and contradiction between Paul and James are Romans 3:28, and James 2:24. Romans reads “we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law”, and James 2:24 reads “you see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone”. Before we get into whether these passages are in disagreement, can you explain what “justified” means in this context?
-What about “faith” and “works”? And do both James and Paul use the same Greek words, or am I being led astray by English translations?
-It seems as though Paul is saying that faith in Jesus is all you need for salvation. Is this accurate?
-James and Paul seem to be completely contradicting one another in their views on faith and works - are they being contradictory, or are they using the words to mean different things?
-Do other passages in the book of James, and Paul’s letters, speak to the authors’ views on faith and works?
-Why is James attacking a view that Paul didn’t have?
-Even if they’re not actually contradicting one another and are actually talking about different things, the fact that they use the same vocabulary, refer to Abraham, and quote Genesis 15:6 is a little too convenient to be coincidental. What do academics think happened here?
-What are the arguments over whether it was written by James the brother of Jesus?
I never understood why Christians despised Jews as Jesus killers since their entire salvation depended upon his death. They should have been exalted.
I realize his death as salvation came much later but it is the central tenant of Christianity.
Because Christians are brainwashed.
I think it was Martin Luther who called the book of James the "epistle of straw" because of its emphasis on works. But although he had a point, the church continues to take the view that he was mistaken and that the book has its place within the canon. The reason is that it affirms Paul's point in Romans "shall we continue in sin that grace may abound?". True faith brings forth fruit. If it does not, it reveals a problem with the depth and quality of the person's faith. That is James's point and this is consistent with the teachings of Jesus and Paul.
Every time I - as a (lapsed) Catholic - hear a discussion of "justification by faith (alone)", usually out of the mouths of some Protestant pastor, I can't help but think of the so-called "Christian nationalists" who seem to think their beliefs trump their evil deeds and hatred for their brothers and sisters.
I'm glad Bart gave his interpretation of a common understanding between Paul's take on the matter and the later take by the author of "James" (probably by proto-orthodox/catholic Christian communities.
Which _evil deeds_ are you referring to?
I cannot think of something that _"Christian nationalists"_ have actually done; certainly nothing _evil_ comes to mind.
As a fellow lapsed Catholic I agree.
17:25 17:25 17:25 😊😊tu 17:25
I think that self debt the most damaging thing Christianity did to the world.
More than half of the think we don't have to worry about anything. God is going to fix it for us.
@@mikeoveli1028 you think that humanity has fixed anything, especially Catholics of all religions that seem to "fix things" with human effort??
My Grandparents fixed parsnips in southern West Virginia. They enjoyed them, I remember eating pieces of them raw, cabbage like. Seems they were a good root cellar crop, like potatoes. Different way of life. I asked my Grandfather once if he made much money in a small garage he ran, his answer was,
"You don't have to make much money if you raise everything you eat". Appreciate these teachings, Thanks
It seems like Bart is saying that Luther misunderstood what Paul meant by "works".
Dr. Ehrman, I want to thank you for taking the time to make these videos. I grew up in a low income home and wasn't able to go to college. It's a privilege to be able to watch your videos and listen to you speak as if I'm in a scholars classroom and learning from the doctor himself. So again thank you. I've watched every video and lecture you've done [ all the ones on youtube that is ] I've learned so much.
He's a phenomenal deceiver. Sorry you are getting brainwashed by this guy.
@@treysnead9683You should share your incredible knowledge with the rest of us. I assume you are fluent in Greek and can explain the nuances of the passages in terms we can understand, even better than Dr. Ehrman.
Link your videos. I promise to watch.
@@whiskeyhelps8182
You like your ears being tickled
@@whiskeyhelps8182
youtube.com/@thedoormichaelpearl?si=tABj0bHwPzm3sAVa
@@treysnead9683hoes mad
The whole purpose of this show is to see Megan’s new glasses.🐝🐝
Huh?
They're quite wonderful, aren't they?
Roasted parsnips are fantastic. I'm American and I didn't know that most Americans don't know about parsnips. Is that true? We just get them from our local grocery store.
I have been waiting for a Book of James episode since forever, my favorite book of the Bible by far
James the Just is the true Messiah
Book of James was one of the reasons i became a non believer. The silliness of Calvinism started when trying to reconcile James/Hebrews with Pauls teachings
I always liked James over Pauline theology. It was like “just be a decent person”
Why would that make you an atheist? The bible is full of inserted lies and contradictions caused by lying scribes. Jer 8.8. Its up to us to study to show ourselves approved. We must establish the word of truth by 2 or 3 witnesses line upon line precept upon precept. Just because the bible has been corrupted doesn't mean that God doesn't exist nor that he will lead you into all truth if you truly seek it.
@@jdaze1he totally doesnt exist. Or else his "word" wouldnt be so corrupted. He isnt all powerful or all knowing or whatever else he is supposed to be.
So it was "Paul Teachings" 🤔
@jdaze1 where do you get that. Who teaches this stuff. Please be honest I am trying g to source the sort of stuff you are saying.
The doctrine of Paul’s justification by faith and not works theology was to open the religion to the gentiles i.e remove all the barriers to get as much converts as possible. Just speak it and you’re in the club.
Happy Thanksgiving Megan and Bart! You guys rock! 😊
Thank you for this wonderful interpretation of these letters and their seemingly differences! 🙏🧡
First time I've heard anyone praise the English cuisine.
Edit: He answered my question! Thanks!
In the second chapter of the very Epistle to the Romans Paul writes: "God will give each person according to what he has done. To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honour and immortality, he will give eternal life. But for those who are self-seeking and who reject th truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; but glory, honour and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile." (Rm 2, 6-10)
So this passage contradicts fundamental Protestant concepts of "justification by faith alone", and one of the fundamental tenets of Calvinism, "total depravity". God will judge the people on the basis of their deeds (vv. 7-8) and people can do good (vv. 10).
First, Megan, thank you, for always producing a great podcast. I've just recently (the last few months) started listening to this podcast, but have been following Dr. Ehrman for years via you tube., as well as his lectures in the Great Courses. For those who have not listened to Dr. Ehrman on the Great Courses, it's another way to experience his work on early Christianity. There aren't a lot of scholars who share their work so freely and unapologetically as Dr. Ehrman. P.S. And by the way, I do enjoy hearing small talk, like Thanksgiving plans, etc. It makes the interview real.
I trust that Megan is staying COVID-safe and masking as required (i.e. in most indoor settings). The pandemic is NOT over!
Greetings from London to you both ❤
I genuinely like the moments where y'all talk about your personal interests. It's neat to just see y'all be yourselves for a few seconds. I'm also gonna try making yorkshire pudding and parsnips
Me, too...love that side of their humanity.
SUPERB discussion. Thank you both. I love the difference between 'Chill Bart' here - giving us the benefit of his deep scholarship for free and with regular shots of humor - and what I call 'Gladiator Bart'; when he's on one of those forums with a militant theist - in which he's always victorious (from any rational perspective). This discussion really clarified the issue for me and left me thinking about the millions of lives lost over the centuries due to misreading these few sentences.
Thank you so much for answering my question (the final one) in this latest podcast. Great answer and clarified the situation for me regarding why the Jews more than the Romans were blamed for Jesus's death.
No man taketh from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment I have received of my Father. John 10:18🎉❤😊
Great topic! One ask for a later podcast, it would be great to hear about medieval Christianity and how it was practiced in it's most extreme form
@tmtpls1481: Torquemada!!
This is the clearest explanation of these passages I've ever heard. I remember having a discussion with a minister years ago about this and he had no good answer.
James is my favorite epistle
Same here .
Do you prefer Matthew over the other gospels?
I find that those of us who prefer Matthew, almost always favor James.
@@John.Flower.Productions there’s certain things about Matthew I like such as the Beatitudes, Peter walking on water, etc. but I actually prefer Mark because it’s much more interesting to me. I like how there’s no background on Jesus’s childhood and he just appears one day to get baptized and I also love how the original ending is so ambiguous. It’s also nice and short. John is also great for being more poetic. The pericope adulturae being my favorite part (although this is thanks to a later scribe rather than the original author) because it’s a nice kind of asterisk on all the death penalty commands of the Torah. But my biggest problem with it is that the way Jews are depicted in John really disturbs me.
As of right now, I prefer Matthew over the other Gospels and also happen to favor James.
@@thescoobymikeSame here. I love James and Mark (to me) is the best gospel.
This is the best explanation of the difference between these Paul/James books. Thanks!
The Kingdom by Emmanuel Carrère is what led me to your blog. And lots of lectures, webinar podcasts, online course later...here I am. He points to alot of what you say about new book. He had some stuff to say on James. His money is on Luke. Luke was the influencer.
Thank you for addressing this central issue.
The Wiki page on "Faith in Christianity" It states: "The pi'stis-group words in the New Testament can thus be interpreted as relating to ideas of faithfulness, fidelity, loyalty, commitment, trust, belief, and proof. The most appropriate interpretation and translation of pi'stis-group words in the New Testament is a matter of recent controversy, particularly over the meaning of pi'stis when it is directed towards Jesus."
It would be nice to have an episode dedicated to a brief survey of the New Testament though it seems Bart prefers the details of specific books rather than vague generalities.
---
Concerning the distinction between relational trust and propositional statements, to a psychologist I'd guess that they relate to different parts of the brain - the affective and the cognitive. Trust is more immediate especially when applied one to someone you know personally whereas the propositional is based on something one observes e.g. "apples fall to the ground" or a trusted authority, e.g. a priest's words which is accepted by the community/ network. When the object of faith is remote or obscure while its application is immediate, eg. when pressed to take a "leap of faith" or "sow in faith" (as Charismatics/ Evangelicals encourage) then "faith is tested" often leading to delusion. (Many have)
This practical /pastoral aspect of 'faith' is a worthy subject of discussion though it leaves the safe shores of textual criticism and historical speculation.
Beware of Simple Evangelical Confidence Tricks (SECTs) ;)
Exactly the kind of content I come to this channel for.
Parsnips are easy to find in California. But I suppose that makes sense since most of the country's carrots are grown in our coastal valleys, and parsnips grow basically the same.
I love the book of James. An incredible ancient writing.
Another episode where I learned a lot more than I expected to. I saw the title and thought, "That sounds like a minor squabble, probably won't learn much of interest." But I was happily surprised -- especially about the discussion of "faith vs. works." There are complexities of meaning there of which I had no idea. Thank you again for another fine, illuminating episode.
Excellent. Why not do a session on striking similarities between Sumerian Tablets and the Biblical accounts?
Megan, I'm sorry to hear of your daughter's struggle with asthma, I hope she and you are doing okay
Fantastic! This is definitely one of the best podcasts yet! 🎉
oh, i felt a lot of supposition ... eg, no one named James is said anywhere in the Bible to be Jesus' sibling.
@@russellmiles2861 Aren’t the Pauline Epistles in the Bible. Doesn’t Paul specify in these Epistles that Jesus had a brother named James that Paul met in person?
@@jeffryphillipsburns that is a common view. Much like there are 10 Commandments. The text doesn't say either - rather the nature of translation leaves this ambivalent and impossible to know. The Greek adelphoi can mean sibling and even in NT is also used to describe Bro (akin to comrade). But if you know what the author intended ... That is your right to believe that.
James' body is also said to have been taken to now Spain in a crewless ship without sails. There are many folk who believe that. I've been to where James early remains a buried. It is an amazing place.
@@russellmiles2861 _But if you know what the author intended ... That is your right to believe that._
It takes much effort to see this as an _ambivalent and impossible to know_ translation issue.
In Matthew 13:55+56 Jesus is said to be the son of a carpenter, have a mother named Mary, have brothers (αδελφοὶ ~ adelphoi) named James/Joses/Simon/Judas and have sisters (αδελφαὶ adelphai).
How can that be read as: father, mother, -brothers- _Bros (comrades)_ and sisters?
Paul was also quite unambiguous, as he did not refer to Peter as being Jesus' brother or _Bro (comrade)_ but specifically referred to James as being his brother {Galatians 1:18+19}.
Why would he use the word brother (αδελφὸν adelphon) for James but not for Peter, since Jesus and Peter were certainly _Bros (comrades)?_
I feel you are picking out random verses to support your ideological view. @@John.Flower.Productions Hebrews 2:11 and 1 Corinthians 5:11 among quite a few various other lines use ἀδελφοὺς but in context don't refer to siblings but comrades or fellow Christians. s but comrades or fellow Christians.
You may be correct. But cannot sustain for certain that the writer meant sibling.
Of course, you are right to believe what you choose. My opinion is just that: and I may be incorrect.
Hi Bart and Megan, and thank you.
A few years ago, the Cambridge press? announced that after great study, they had released a new lexicon which far better translated the ancient Hellenic into a new volume which would help us better translate ancient tomes.
Are you aware of those latest editions, and have the new translations shed clearer light on potentially mistranslated works?
I would doubt this ... The issue is ancient Hebrew had about 8000 words and no vowels. Koine Greek around 30000 words. This compares with modern European languages of about 120,000. Thus, to derive meaning places greater emphasis on context and cultural understanding - which is often hard to know.
The classic illustration of this issues is the Greek word stauroo which verb firm of stauros, meaning cross. This is the word used to describe how Jesus was executed. It means hung up or impaled. When translated to Latin crucifixus. This is a more precise meaning.
Now the Greek writers may have meant hung from a cross and readers understanding context or history of story knew this. It may have meant hung from a pole or some other arrangement to cause death.
Now the Latin translators would have been aware of tradition, Roman practices of execution, etc so assigning crucifixus is an adequate translation . But a better translation would be fortasse crucifixus: indicating it may have been crucifixion.
However, doubt in a sacred text is avoided for ideological reasons. The translation are essentially a range of value judgements. This is why there are so many different translation: 400 in Latin and Germanic languages alone and growing all the time.
Professor E often asserts precision where he clearly knows the text doesn't support such.
@@russellmiles2861 Great post
Thank you for the opportunity to join the discussion regarding salvation & how to achieve it. This subject, in my view, can't be addressed with justice till we clarify the purpose of religion or religious life. So, I would be grateful if you could share your view on the purpose of religious phenomenon. Thanks.
What I love about the protoevangelium & Paul’s epistle to the romans, is the idiosyncrasies in evangelizing. While both promote refinement, one was through the law, & the other through faith. Jesus read the Torah, observed the Torah, importantly embraced it in his life. As did Paul but we see Him exclaim in M 23:26 “ First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean.” Or to quote Paul “for those who are pure at heart everything is pure “ it’s not just the personal harmony of Law but also the single purpose of salvation that places ascents in the heart. people are surprised when I say that Jesus was not Hasidic, yet had the zeal of the Jewish prophets, or chutzpah
Unrelated, you both might very much appreciate the latest announcement from University College Dublin!
After extensive LiDAR work in the Carpathian basin, they have discovered about 100 sites which make contemporary Mycenaean, Hittite and Levantine city states look like backwater towns.
Some of the Carpathian sites had boundary ditches stretching 33km!
It appears that they were founded at roughly 1600BCE.
Give or take, right after Thera erupted ~1613BCE.
Despite their distance from coasts, they appear to have collapsed around 1200, so did they 'just' fall apart, find suitable farmland elsewhere via land routes (their location in the basin would suggest they weren't proficient sailors).
Whatever the answer is, it's compelling, and I don't doubt that future discoveries will be an immense boon to the Archaeo-historical community as a whole, if not writing a new chapter in the tomes of human knowledge.
18:05 great explanation, and I've often had trouble figuring out this distinction, so that was helpful to me.
But this is actually a contradiction, at least in the mind of the author of James, since he is misunderstanding Paul's use of the term, exactly as you explain.
James 2:14-26, James sums it up, faith and works both.
@@FeWolfEphesians 2:4-8 We are saved by grace. Not by works??
@@timothygibney159 it is both, works and faith, you can believe in God, and go murder people, Jesus own words, Matthew 5:16
In the same way, let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven. I think I will follow Jesus before I will follow Paul.“If you love me, you will keep my commandments.
@@timothygibney159 Revelation 20:11-15 ESV / 48
Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. From his presence earth and sky fled away, and no place was found for them. And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done. And the sea gave up the dead who were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them, and they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done. Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire. Pretty Clear
@@timothygibney159 Ephesians was almost certainly not written by Paul.
Thank you.
❤ Duck + parsnips. Megan and Bart. And yes I also love Thanksgiving over all other holidays.
One of the most attractive things about Christianity and Christians is that good works such as care for the sick and feeble who are often overlooked, is a religious requirement. This is a conferral of public benefits and we are all poorer if it is abandoned in favour of a doctrine of justification by faith alone.
I love parsnips! but, yeah, sometimes they are hard to find, and they don't always grow well.
Hello from Ann Arbor! ✊
A must see every week. You two are a great team! Thanks Bart and Megan.
Except Ehrman is a Jewish apologist, probably due to his book deals with being labeled New York Times bestsellers.
@@stylichoWhat?
@davidkeller6156 watch the last part of his video here where he says he doesn't believe the Jews condemned Jesus to death and instead blamed everything on Pontius Pilate and the Romans. As if saying you were the Messiah wasn't going to piss off a bunch of Pharisees and Sadducees
I finally got it the second time thru. Was thoroughly confused by the first viewing.
I have grown up believing the James was the first books of the New Testament to be written and that seems to be the common consensus. my question is how do we know that Paul was not responding to James instead of the other way around?
Jesus w-ar-ne-d about the Fer-oc-1ous w0lv3s in she-ep's clo-thi-ng.
The crucial question to you is:
Where are we likely to find one?
A) Within the she-ep flock because he's already in she-ep's clo-thi-ng
OR
B) Outside of the sheep flock because he's NOT in she-ep's clo-thi-ng
Thank you Dr. Ehrman for the view of how James and Paul likely agree and how the words are misleading many to think they are opposed, again. I am not a fan of Paul but now will not use the faith-vs-works issue as one of the reasons.
Hi,
I found your comment interesting.
Jesus w-ar-ne-d about the Fer-oc-1ous w0lv3s in she-ep's clo-thi-ng.
The crucial question to you is:
Where are we likely to find one?
A) Within the she-ep flock because he's already in she-ep's clo-thi-ng
OR
B) Outside of the sheep flock because he's NOT in she-ep's clo-thi-ng
*******
Thanks to Paul of the Bible, each and every fundamental doctrine of the faith called Christianity is against Jesus of the Bible. Truth is a bitter pill to swallow.
Christianity h-e-a-p-s the gr-ea-te-st I-N-S-U-L-T-S on Jesus of the Bible. The Bible testifies.
The game is really good. The constellation system had me theorycrafting for hours.
It definitely has a lot of replayability.
Dr. Bart, Thanks for the many videos. I'm all in on your understanding of history with all it's embellishments. Like you, my personal journey from born-again Christian to becoming a critical thinker match up closely. Yet still today I find myself struggling to leave behind the many years of believing in an afterlife.
In this mind set the thought occurred to me of a Biblical passage about the creation of man, probably written long before any biological understanding of the how the human body functions, suggests that God BREATHED into man the breath of life and he became a living being.(loose translation). Therefore if one believes this God cannot die (even despite all the false narratives purported in scripture), then I suggest a Gods breath is eternal and we're along for the ride whittling or not. Just a thought??
"...... becoming a critical thinker......"
That's fantastic. The approach demonstrates an honest seeker of truth. It's your innate disposition to search for the truth. God made us that way. Tell me if the following intrigues you:
*Do YOU realize that the ONLY people on the face of the earth who practice and uphold and preach and defend the doctrine and honor of Jesus OF THE BIBLE are the Muslim* ?????
It's an amazing situation really. On each and every fundamental doctrine, Christianity (overwhelming) is AGAINST Jesus of their very own scriptures BUT the Muslim is calling the Christians to go by what Jesus precticed and preached. 🤗
👉 Jesus gave the Trinity-DESTROYING testimony that THE FATHER (SINGLE PERSON) IS THE ONLY TRUE GOD but the Christians (overwhelming) testify that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit (The Trinity) is the true God.
👉 John 4:21-22
Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, *WORSHIP THE FATHER* .
Ye worship ye know not what: *WE* know what *WE WORSHIP* : for salvation is of the Jews.
Have another look:
*WE WORSHIP*
(The J-E-W nation INCLUDING ME - Jesus)
👉 “And this is life eternal, that they might know *YOU THE ONLY TRUE GOD* , and Jesus Christ, whom *YOU* have sent.”
John 17:3
👉 John 20:17: “Jesus saith unto her, ...I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and TO MY GOD, AND YOUR GOD.”
Have another look!
".... *TO MY GOD and YOUR GOD* "
ME and YOU 👉 *WE*
*WE WORSHIP*
THE ONLY TRUE GOD - THE FATHER who is THE GOD OF ME (Jesus) and YOU 👉 *OUR GOD*
👉 And Jesus answered him, THE FIRST OF ALL the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord *OUR GOD* is one Lord
Mark 12:29
👉 Jesus teaches: “Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and *HIM ONLY* shalt thou serve” Luke 4:8. Notice the words: “HIM ONLY.” Jesus did not say “US only,” or “Him and I only.” How could he possibly i it more clear than that? Jesus told to worship ONLY THE FATHER - who is THE GOD of Jesus too.
👉 NEVER preached about Original Sin
👉 NEVER preached that for salvation, people needed to believe that Jesus died (will die) for their sins
👉 NEVER preached that the wages of sins is death
👉 PREACHED that for the forgiveness - NO payment needed, NO sacrifice of Jesus, NO Jesus paid for us
👉 PREACHED that just turn away in sincere repentance and the Merciful God forgives
👉 PREACHED adherence to the comprehensive Law Code as the path to salvation
👉 PREACHED that for certain transgression (like mur-der) on the Law Code, CAPITAL punishment - PUTTING the transgressors to DE ATH - needed to be administered
👉 PREACHED that his followers SHALL IN NO WAY ENTER THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN if they do not keep the comprehensive Law Code even better and moreso than the Scribes and the Pharisees
👉 DID NOT eat p.i.g
👉 FASTED and PREACHED FASTING
👉 Greeted with the phrase "peace be with you"
👉 Jesus was CIRCUMCISED. AN EVERLASTING COVENANT IN FLESH for the believers till the end of times
👉 PREACHED that his followers follow the comprehensive Law Code which the Scribes and the Pharisees tell people to follow - that includes oblution / washing of the hands and feet before worship or entering a place of worship
Of course the term the Father in the Jewish context. NOT that God has a Son.
There's a simpler explanation. Childbirth was a terrifying event in the lives of ancient people. Mothers and babies often died, and babies were often stillborn. Even if a man had never attended a human childbirth in the birthing chamber, ancient Hebrews were pastoral and had attended the birthing of their domestic animals.
At the point a mammal is born it is unknown whether it is alive or death. The first crucial moment is when the child successfully takes its first breath outside the womb. If it never takes a breath, it is stillborn.
So this is exactly why ancient Jews believed that life began "at the first breath" and that belief is reflected in the creation myth.
Ancient indo Europeans had similar beliefs. They also were pastoral people. The word "atmen", breath, also came to mean "soul" in Sanskrit, and in Latin "spiritus" which comes from the word breathe, becomes the word for the Holy Ghost, among other things.
12:20 well, the verb would be "to right", as in "he was beginning to steer crookedly, until he righted himself, just in time".
You could also have "to put right", eg. "A person is not put right by faith alone".
Great podcast again, i enjoy listening wvery week.
Words tend to have. Ore than one meaning. Ehrman is specifying that particular meanings he ascribes to Paul and “James”.
@@jeffryphillipsburns sorry, I don't follow what your point is.
Does it relate to whether there's a verb form of the word "righteous"?
I don't know.
But it is an interesting question.
Let me get back to you after doing some research.
The point of emphasis of the Epistle of Yacov (Yacobus) is that one of the gohim needs to demonstrate their stamina in the faith be following the torah, and that the should be tested in this regard. The author of the text makes it clear that colorful ideas and beautiful speach alone are nit evidence of ones endurance of faith, that one must demonstrates one committment by continued work and examination if necessary. Not only shoukd one commit the helping the widow and orphan, but the torah itself.
This is far cry more stingent than what Paul is offering.
Another wonderfully interesting talk -- thank you both!
Sending good thoughts to Megan's kids.
And, I'm going out today to get round glasses!
the curious thing is that we are in this moment that i watch this discussing sweet potato casserole, particularly whether it requires marshmallows or not
39:53 - well, Genssis 5:1-3 says that Adam bro7ght forth sons and daughters in his likeness and his image in the same way that elohim brought forth male and female in their image, so this idea of Jesus being the second Adam based on Adam being in God's likeness seems to be incompatible with Genesis 5 from the outset, right?
Bart as usual surprised me and took a very nuanced position.
They conflict on the topic of good works, but I don't know whether it makes sense to characterize the disagreement as an attack.
Oh my goodness. I'm in Austin area!!!!
Hello, Megan. I'm curious: have you considered that the environment your daughter is in may be correlated with the (possible) allergies she has? Many times, I've been told about people moving, and the issues they've had to deal with for years had radically changed for the better. If she doesn't have allergies (to particular pollen, for example) the issue (asthma) may be due to/exacerbated by some other irritant in the air.
Thank you for everything you do for us all.
!00% my personal experience - and it even relates to pollen! I grew up in the UK and was plagued with pollen allergy all through childhood and into adulthood; I'm talking SEVERE, disabling symptoms all through the summer months in Manchester. I moved to the US in my early 30s, to the rural mid west where pollen season is severe, and my symptoms disappeared overnight. On occasional trips back to the UK to see family, the hay fever would return with a vengeance. Just anecdotal I know but location was a real factor in my case. Hoping Megan and her kids get some respite from what is a chronic stress creator.
@@dominicestebanrice7460
Did you ever get a chance to find out what caused your reaction?
I had horrific allergies as a kid and grew out of the worst of them by my teens, but still always had issues year-round and was always told it was just pollen and similar allergies. Then when I went off to college, my allergies completely disappeared even though the campus was covered in flowers and trees and there was pollen absolutely everywhere. At some point I mentioned it to a doctor and he told me it’s probably because where I grew up was about 5-10 miles as the crow flies from a major river and apparently there is a certain mold or type of molds in the area that are a big allergen for tons of people. I know it’s not really an option for most people to pack their bags and move several hours away to a new environment, but if they are bad enough it might be worth considering
James is the OG of TH-cam response videos.
34:40 I think it’s the Midwestern recipes that get weird
Rectify, make right, become righteous.
Justification, justice, justness.
There are lots of verb and noun options. Bart may have good reasons for saying these options are not good translations, but it's not true that they don't exist.
Hey Bart, just FedEx some parsnips to Megan.🤣🤣
LOVED this topic!
Intro: 0:28 - 0:56, begins in earnest: 3:15.
3:15 discussion begins
They all begin about 3 minutes. Any time I watch these with Megan, I go to the 3 minutes mark.
@@junkabogado That seems to be the plan. Short introduction of the topic, but before we get to that, Bart, how are you, small talk until 3 minutes, then the lecture starts. Similarly at the end, the prompt for Bart to make a summary.
Bart thinks he is doing a chat show. And he imagines that he is very funny constantly providing a laugh track for his comments. The guy is pathetic, a desperately insecure personality.
@@junkabogado The last started after seven minutes of irrelevant nonsense. In any case, it’s nice to know the precise time and 2) it’s much easier to just a button than to scroll ahead.
@@KaiHenningsen Of course it’s the PLAN, but isn’t a very one.
érgon (singular) and érga (plural) is neutrum in Old Greek.
Sorry, but I had Old Greek at school (humanistisches Gymnasium).
That word "attack" is used way too much and often wrongly. Let's try "refute."
You say you are right.
Both Paul and James had been observant Jews and it's my understanding that by performing mitzvot- good deeds- you helped bring about the arrival of the Messiah and the establishment of a new Eden. Now if both James and Paul believed that Jesus was the Messiah, then it would seem that they would both see no legal necessity to perform mitzvot for their original intention. You would thus perform good deeds of your own will or through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit whom Jesus sent for just that purpose. Is my thinking flawed here?
I've seen this misstated so many times, I have to point out the following Catholics, and I assume a great many other Christian sects do NOT claim that Jesus "was raised" from the dead (passive) but ROSE from the dead (active.)
There is a huge difference.
Also, the "faith alone" people generally claim that if you have that faith, you will automatically do good works, and many people who don't have faith might do good works but not be saved.
James is correct, your life is always a reflection of your maturity, your ability to trust life. As Jesus said, the fruit is always a result of the type of tree.
Even Revelation says clearly, each is judged by his deeds. Your actions reflect you truthfully.
As a Christian I benefited a lot from Ehrman’s explanation of this. Both Paul and James are addressing different issues in their letters when they talk about works but both held the view the Christian cannot be saved without good actions.
Paul: Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. Galatians 5
James: If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good[b] is that? 17 So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. James 2
Jesus w-ar-ne-d about the Fer-oc-1ous w0lv3s in she-ep's clo-thi-ng.
The crucial question to you is:
*Where are we likely to find one?*
A) Within the she-ep flock because he's already in she-ep's clo-thi-ng
OR
B) Outside of the sheep flock because he's NOT in she-ep's clo-thi-ng
@@truthdoesntcomeeasy743Matt: 10:36
James 3xp0s3d Paul the Fer-oc-1ous w0lf in she-ep's clo-thi-ng:
Of all the things James could do to exp0s3 Paul and Paul's Gospel from the DE_V-I-L, James made Paul offer a sacrifice. That is waaaaay after Jesus supposedly had made the ultimate eternal sacrifice.
*Acts 21:21*
They (the believers in Christ) have been informed that YOU (Paul) teach all the J3-w-s who live among the Gentiles to turn away from Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or live according to YOUR (the path which James and the actual disciples followed as preached and practiced by Jesus) customs.
21:22
What shall we do? They (the believers in Christ) will certainly hear that YOU (Paul) have come (the Christ believers will k1ll you Paul) ,
21:23
so do what we tell YOU (Paul). There are four men (believers in Christ) with US (actual disciples) who have made a vow (which includes performing sacrifice for sin).
21:24
Take these men (the believers in Christ), 👉 *JOIN* 👈 in their purification rites (Law which includes offering sacrifice for sin) and pay their expenses, so that they can have their heads shaved (Mosaic Law). THEN everyone will know there is no truth in these reports about YOU (Paul), but that YOU (Paul) yourself are living in obedience to the law (of Moses).
@@tommerphy1286
The foretelling about God's FINAL Prophet 👉 Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). God th-re-at-en-1ng those who won't acknowledge and follow his message.
D3ny at your own p3r1l.
Deuteronomy 18:18 “I (God) will raise them up a Prophet from among their
brethren, like unto thee (Moses), and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.”
Deuteronomy 18:19 we read: “And it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require [it] of him.”
(I will require [it] of him - in some translations: “I will be the RE-VE-NG-ER” / “I will take VE-NG-EA-NC-E” / "I WILL HOLD HIM. AC-COU-NTA-BLE"
Maybe I missed it but I was struck that with all of this talk about justification etc., there was no mention that James’ official title is JAMES THE JUST!!
43:22 When she mentions Seinfeld it would be funny if we heard that ubiquitous SEINFELD BASS LINE whenever there was an outside scene change on SEINFELD 😃😁😅th-cam.com/video/yI9UIzbxArQ/w-d-xo.html
Doesn't Matthew 25 suggest that only works, and not faith, are required for salvation?
Love the podcast. Question: Does Paul hold that gentile followers of Jesus should observe the 10 commandments? Or a portion thereof? That would count as works. Thanks
Not for salvation, but it's obviously preached in Christianity all of the time.
The epistle of James is all about rebuking the teaching of the false apostle Saul/ Paul. The 8th chapter of first Corinthians say plainly that Paul is an false apostle.
Well, if he didnt travel to India, how do you account for similarities between Budhdhist teachings and the teachings of Christ, including folded hands during prayer's?
🤔 ...It's almost like we are being set up, so that you make a choice based on where your heart is.
I suspect James is a pretty late text. Paul is embroiled in the discussion of whether Gentiles must follow Jewish law in order to be saved. James and Ephesians are both after that debate has happened.
Was this released out of cycle?
I imagine it was released a day early because of Thanksgiving.
I still adamantly believe that the Book of James DOES contradict the teachings of Paul. (It also contradicts the teaching of Luther for that matter).
As a cradle catholic I was also taught that no human could earn salvation, it was both unearned and undeserved, but on the other hand was never taught that works don't matter, because sin can cause you to lose your salvation. I'm not sure how you could read the gospels and read what Jesus had to say about the Law and doing wrong to others and come to the conclusion that, as a Christian, works don't matter.
However Catholicism uses the doctrine of original sin to explain why it's necessary to be baptized no matter how righteous you are. In Catholicism it's a dual pillar.
The idea that you're saved no matter what you do to others is a doctrine of narcissism and impunity and is likely why research in the US has shown that certain religious practices decrease empathy.
A faith that saves produces work. We produces good works because we’re saved!
No one can earn Salvation. Absolutely none!
If we could work out our own Salvation then why did Jesus die?
Yes.
Aren’t they supposed be illiterate during that time regardless if James was Jesus brother.
Someone was kind enough to invite us for thanksgiving when we lived in the States. Thanksgiving food is weird. Best take on thanksgiving is in The Addams Family, Family Values. ;0)
In my view as a passionate reader of Paul, the question Paul asked concerning faith vs works of the written law was about the source of power for living a life that is pleasing to God. Does it come from:
1) wilful observance of a set of man-made-rules and bodily circumcision or
2) obedient faith-ship, which is living every moment by the power of the Spirit, being mystically united with Christ, and thus always seeking what is best for your fellow human being.
For the Paul I have come to know through my studies, It is certainly very important how one lives ones life as a ‘participant in Christ’.
Having faith in the ‘Pauline’ sense entails an obedient response to God, in imitation of Jesus, empowered by the spirit for a life of sanctification. A life that will entail suffering for Christ. This is ‘Christ in you’ which Paul taught everywhere in all of his churches.
I do not think there is anything in the letter of James that Paul would disagree with, if Paul were faced with a situation where a ‘faith’ void of an obedience directed to God (which is an oxymoron) was promoted. What Paul meant with ‘faith’ entailed by logical necessity discipleship by imitation of the ‘mindset of Jesus the Messiah’. If James is writing against Paul, it is against a perversion of Paul’s teaching. Paul himself fought this perversion, as evidenced in his fight against ‘wild beasts’ (false teachers) in Ephesus.
2nd Peter is written against the same perverted teaching: ‘faith’ without obedience, leading to licentiousness. An empty ‘faith’ without acknowledging the Lordship of Christ, will make itself known when one does not desire to cultivate virtue. I have little doubt that Paul and the pillars would agree here.
As a passionate reader of Jesus, it's clear as day that Paul is the Fer-oc-1ous w0lf in she-ep's clo-thi-ng whom Jesus wa-rn-ed about.
****************
Jesus w-ar-ne-d about the Fer-oc-1ous w0lv3s in she-ep's clo-thi-ng.
The basic and important question to you is:
Where are we likely to find one?
A) Within the she-ep flock because he's already in she-ep's clo-thi-ng
OR
B) Outside of the sheep flock because he's NOT in she-ep's clo-thi-ng
@@TruthIsABitterPillToSwallow I am afraid that you are missing out on the rich gospel truth that Paul the apostle of Christ taught, by imitating the mindset of Jesus and by pointing to the many scriptural templates that testify to the way of living prescribed for the Kingdom of God.
I don’t know how you have arrived at the conclusion that Paul should be one of the false dangerous teachers he himself warns against - in line with the warnings of Jesus.
The ‘wild beasts’ (false teachers) are described by both Paul and Peter.
A couple of examples:
Read 2nd Peter chapter 2 and 1 Corinthians 15.32-34 and and 1 Timothy 1.18-20 and 4.1-7 and 6.3-20.
There you have clear apostolic warnings against the ‘wolves in sheeps clothing’ - false teaching among the Sheep of Christ. True followers of Jesus acknowledge the Lordship he was Granted by God the Father in both word and deed.
I recognize the mindset of Christ in Paul.
Kind Regards, Christian
There are a lot of levels in this discussion.
The actual James, the brother of Jesus, seems to hold the earliest view: That faith in Jesus is critical, his message was essentially a Jewish message and Gentiles need to convert to Judaism and follow Torah law if they want to follow Jesus.
Paul's actual letters taught that faith in Jesus's death and resurrection superseded the Law and thus that Gentiles could become Christian without converting to Judaism or following the law, but he still taught that good works were important, just not the Law.
Apparently later followers of Paul, possibly including the author of Ephesians, extended that to include faith alone being important and that even good works were not necessary.
The author of James responded to that, arguing that faith alone was not enough. That, which is essentially what Paul taught, remained Church doctrine for more than a thousand years.
Until Luther came along and misread Paul (and the Deutero-Pauline letters) the same way the author of James did, but in his case, agreed with them and declared faith alone sufficient. Creating one of the major divides between Catholicism and Protestantism that lasts until today.
With a conflict between Paul and James the brother of Jesus and another between the author of Ephesians (writing as Paul) and the author of James (writing as James) , but not actually the same conflict, despite using similar terms.
What I'm not sure of from Bart's discussion here is how well the author of James was interpreting Ephesians. Was he right about that being about justification through faith alone, ignoring behavior and just wrong about that being Paul more generally or was that not actually the intent of Ephesians?
James is as likely to have written the Book of James as the Stratfordian Shakspere is as likely to have written the works of Shakespeare.
Yeah, but the latter doesn't really matter.
James sounded more like Jesus and Paul sounded more like a Roman putting down Jesus.
Agreed
18:50 sounds like James is countering a strawman of Paul’s position
I would love to know how the cult of peter emerged in Rome, even though Peter seems to live in Paul's shadow. Is Peter's presence in Rome an apology for paul having never seen jesus during his life? I liken peter and paul to the double miracle of Matthew. There were two demoniacs in chains- in reality just one. 2 equine species jesus somehow jesus enters jerusalem on. And somehow 2 apostles, peter and paul, that we often mention together as if they were really the same person in a narrative of martyrdom.
I really liked this, but some things about Romans and James stick out to me that make me question your conclusion. Romans itself seems to say that you can be saved by propositional believing and confessing. Also, if you look at the actual passage quoted about Abraham, Abraham literally just believed to be credited righteousness. There were no actions involved in the initial belief and in the initial righteousness. Paul does seem to imply that the "performing" was also credited as righteousness, but Idk.. doesn't say anything about being justified in the chapter about Abraham offering his own son, at least to my memory...
Excellent program - thank you. Bart, are the current Jewish people in Israel related by dna to the Jewish people of Biblical days? If not, where are those Jews living, who are most related to Biblical Jews?
they are, we have DNA data. Both Jews and Palestinians are related to ancient Canaanites. Dan McClellan has a vid on this iirc
I believe the reconciliation of Paul and James here is a little too neat. I accept the possibility of somewhat different uses of the term /pistis/ (faith) and distinguishing between /erga/ (works) and /erga nomou/ (works of the Law). But where do we hear Paul saying that without specific forms of conduct one cannot be saved? Yes, certainly Paul believes that the way of faith must also be lived, and he seems to think that righteous living flows naturally to those who are attached to the Spirit. But what if it does not flow or flows very imperfectly?
Those here who know the NT better than I do, does Paul ever say that sinners in conduct will not be saved, even though they have faith? For his part, James asserts that obedience and works are needed for salvation. But Paul says, as one example: "because if you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For one believes with the heart and so is justified, and one confesses with the mouth and so is saved" (Romans 10:9-10). Why isn't this the kind of propositional faith that Ehrman described?
So even if Paul did not precisely, black-on-white say what James appears to be arguing against, it would seems to be an easy consequence of Paul's theology-as evidenced both by early Christian thought, such as in the book of Ephesians (mentioned in the video) and, of course, many later Protestants.
"But where do we hear Paul saying that without specific forms of conduct one cannot be saved?" I refer you to Romans 2:5-11:
5 But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, 6 who will repay each person according to his deeds: 7 to those who by perseverance in doing good seek glory, honor, and immortality, He will give eternal life; 8 but to those who are self-serving and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, He will give wrath and indignation. 9 There will be tribulation and distress for every soul of mankind who does evil, for the Jew first and also for the Greek, 10 but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who does what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 11 For there is no partiality with God.
With regards to your comment about:
But Paul says, as one example: "because if you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For one believes with the heart and so is justified, and one confesses with the mouth and so is saved" (Romans 10:9-10). Why isn't this the kind of propositional faith that Ehrman described?
If you read Paul in context, the part where he talks about "and believe in your heart that God raised him..." is not the propositional faith you think of. Believing with your heart for Paul is the end result of your fruitful relationship with Jesus (being righteous), and leads to salvation. This is reflected in Paul's letters. I can think of Romans 2:25-29 with the "circumcision of the heart" but also Titus 1:15,16
@@SeekingTheTruth232 Thank you for your reply and for bringing up Romans 2. The problem is that apparently most Christians don't take that passage literally or seriously. I mean, if Paul really means it, then so much else taught by Christianity (and Paul) seems wrong. There can indeed be divine salvation and blessing in and through the way you live your life.
@@KingoftheJuice18 I think you'll find Paul is often misunderstood - especially in protestant thought. The Catholic and Orthodox churches firmly stand by Romans 2. For Paul, genuine faith is really building a relationship with God through Jesus, and the necessary implications of that faith are good/righteous works. This does not contradict that we are saved by grace and not through the ritualistic Mosaic law - we don't have to physically circumcise, but our faith demands that we are spiritually circumcised (think back to Romans 2:25-29).
I'll give you another reference for faith leading to good works.
1 Cor 6:9-11 (NASB)
"9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor [a]homosexuals, 10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor those habitually drunk, nor verbal abusers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and [b]in the Spirit of our God."
This makes it clear. Being washed/sanctified/justified necessitates a cease of sexual immorality, of adultery, of theft etc. You will only know your faith is genuine when you abstain from sins such as these.
Hope this all makes sense. God bless.
@@SeekingTheTruth232 There is no "ritualistic Mosaic law." That attitude reflects Paul's personal, psycho-spiritual burden, not sacred Scripture. If you need a reminder, go back and see that the Pentateuch is proclaimed as God's own eternally holy commandments, not some human invention by Moses. Or just read the longest psalm, 119.
But here's the point: If Romans 2 is correct, then good, righteous living (NOT divine perfection) is sufficient. Faith is not enough to save, as James teaches. It's about how you live, not your theology of atonement or some such, that counts. The primary thing-for righteousness and judgment-is one's right actions, since "He will repay according to each one’s deeds: to those who by patiently doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; while for those who are self-seeking and who obey not the truth but wickedness, there will be wrath and fury."
Therefore, it is not necessary to specifically be a Christian in order to be right with God, as Paul teaches in Romans 2 (but surely not everywhere).
parsnips roasted with honey... yum. And properly roasted potatoes (crispy outsides and fluffy insides) I have even grown into Brussel Sprouts - fried with bacon bits.
Thanksgiving and the relationship to Christmas so close after has raised ponderings for me over time. I can see that a non religious holiday in a country of immigrants with many religious roots is attractive. However if you do the extended family get together over a big turkey meal late Nov, what does that leave for Christmas? Do Americans use one for the big family stuff and the other for a more nuclear/intimate family gatherings??
Just as a Brit not used to having 2 big 'dos' so close together
*_"parsnips roasted with honey... yum. And properly roasted potatoes"_*
I am also a Brit and you just named two of my most favourite things.
The only thing missing is gravy! 😋
{:o:O:}
Recipe for good, roast potatoes?
Hope the baby feels better soon.
How commen of a name is James in Jerusalem? Honestly seems quite unlikely
My favorite topic