• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

The Epistle of James by E W Bullinger

Status
Not open for further replies.

Iosias

Senior Contributor
Jul 18, 2004
8,171
227
✟9,648.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Private
The Epistle of James is addressed:—

To the Twelve Tribes which are scattered abroad.

Doubtless they were believers, up to a certain point; but exactly what they believed, or how far they believed we are not told.

They evidently, as Jews, believed that Christ was the Messiah, and had a certain amount of light: but the question is, Did they, as sinners, believe in Christ as their Saviour; or know that "Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth"? It is clear from the surface of the Epistle that they did not have the standing of those who were "called to be saints": or of members of the spiritual Body of Christ, as set forth in the Epistles addressed to the churches of Ephesus, Philippi, and Colosse.

They were "Christians" as distinguished from Jews and Gentiles, but were they members of "the Church of God?" Who are the "ye" in chapter 4? Who are the "rich men" in 5:1? The stand-point of the epistle is wholly Jewish. They were monotheists as appears from 2:19. Their place of worship was the "Synagogue" (2:2, margin).

In 5:12 the prohibition of swearing is according to the Jewish formula; and, in verse 14 the anointing with oil is in accordance with Jewish practice at that time.

Spiritual and vital Christianity is nowhere seen. Only twice is "Christ" named at all (1:1; 2:1). The word "Gospel" is not used, and the "Mystery" is unknown. The fundamental doctrines of the Gospel are not even alluded to: such as Incarnation, Atonement, Redemption, Resurrection, or Ascension.

The Morality of the Law is there (2:8,13). The coming of the Lord as the Judge is there (5:8,9). Justification by works is there (2:20-26).

All the errors combated refer to Judaism. Religion (threskeia) is there, but it is shown that the works of mercy and charity are better than all the outward forms of religious worship. Fatalism, formalism and hypocrisy, arrogance and oppression, are specially dealt with; but surely these are not the sins which distinguish and characterize the Church of God.

All the phenomena are Palestinian or Eastern, as we may gather from the references to the early and latter rain (5:7); to the fig, oil, and wine (3:12); to drought (5:17,18); to salt and bitter springs (3:11,12); and to the hot wind (1:11).

The Epistle is full of references to the Sermon on the Mount, which (as we shall see later) has reference to the past Dispensation, not to the present. We may compare

James 1:2, 5:10,11 with Matthew 5:10-12
James 1:4 with Matthew 5:48
James 1:5,17, 5:15 with Matthew 7:7,11
James 1:9, 2:5 with Matthew 5:3
James 1:22-25, 2:10,11 with Matthew 5:19
James 1:20 with Matthew 5:22
James 1:22, 2:14, 5:7-9 with Matthew 7:21-26
James 2:1-3 with Matthew 6:2,5
James 2:8 with Matthew 7:12
James 2:10,11 with Matthew 7:12
James 2:13 with Matthew 6:14,15, 7:2
James 2:14 with Matthew 7:21
James 3:1, 4:11 with Matthew 7:1
James 3:12 with Matthew 7:16
James 3:17,18 with Matthew 5:9
James 4:3 with Matthew 7:8
James 4:4 with Matthew 6:24
James 4:8 with Matthew 5:8
James 4:9 with Matthew 5:4
James 4:10 with Matthew 5:3,4
James 4:11 with Matthew 7:1
James 4:13-16 with Matthew 6:25
James 5:2 with Matthew 6:19
James 5:10 with Matthew 5:12
James 5:12 with Matthew 5:34

From other parts of the Lord's teaching in connection with the Kingdom we may compare

James 1:14 with Matthew 15:19
James 4:12 with Matthew 10:28
James 5:1 with Luke 6:24

These phenomena in the subject-matter, when interpreted of the Church of God, and appropriated by those who are "in Christ," and "complete in Him," led to such confusion that, though the Epistle was in the primitive Syriac version from the first (cent. ii.), and was quoted as Canonical by the great Greek Fathers or cent. iv., yet there were always great doubts about its canonicity, and delays in receiving it.

These doubts were revived when translations of the Bible began to be made at the Reformation. Erasmus, Luther, and others questioned the canonicity of the Epistle; and it is well known that Luther went so far as to call it "a veritable Epistle of straw" ("Eine rechte stroherne Epistel").

The same difficulties and doubts are felt to-day. But they are all caused by interpreting of the Church of God that which is written to quite a different class of people belonging to "the Twelve Tribes."

The question is, Do we belong to "the Twelve Tribes"? Do we worship in a Synagogue? Is it our custom, as a People, to anoint with oil? Is not the "Assembly" of James 5:14* identical with the "Synagogue of 2:2?**
[size=-1]* Which is translated "church" in AV and RV. [/size]

[size=-1]** Which is translated "Assembly" in AV and "Synagogue" in RV. [/size]


The answers to these questions will show that the Epistle is not addressed to us, i.e., to those who are "in Christ," and who are "the Church of God." The moment we discern this, and rightly divide off, the class of persons addressed, there will be an end of all the laboured arguments to bring the Epistle of James into harmony with the Epistle to the Romans; and of all attempts to reconcile its teaching with that of Ephesians or Colossians. There will be nothing either to harmonize or to reconcile. James will be seen to be true in what he wrote to those whom he addressed, and Paul will be seen to be true in what he wrote. Both will be seen to be true in what they said to those to whom they were respectively inspired to write, if we rightly divide these portions of the Word of truth.
 

daveleau

In all you do, do it for Christ and w/ Him in mind
Apr 12, 2004
8,984
703
50
Bossier City, LA (removed from his native South C
✟30,474.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Very nice. I always have a hard time discerning from within the ranks of those who call themselves Christians, though. I know not to judge them, but try to avoid people that do not act the way Christ wants on a regular basis.

God bless,
Dave
 
Upvote 0

Dr. E W Bullinger

Ultra-dispensationalist
Oct 27, 2004
37
0
United Kingdom
✟147.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
daveleau said:
Very nice. I always have a hard time discerning from within the ranks of those who call themselves Christians, though. I know not to judge them, but try to avoid people that do not act the way Christ wants on a regular basis.

God bless,
Dave
:scratch: Well safe to say you have lost me :confused:
 
Upvote 0

thereselittleflower

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2003
34,832
1,526
✟57,855.00
Faith
Catholic
Hi AV . .

Of course, Bullinger is highly dispensationalist and so presents his opinions as such . .

However, his opinions do not match up with those of historic Christianity.

He falsely divides believers up into different groups rather than understanding that such distinctions were done away with through the Cross . . .and this results in faslely dividing up the scriptures in the New Testament among those supposed groups . .

This also fails to take into account that the same ones who caonized all these books would not have canonized books that taught in opposition to all of Church teaching, which is that James is talking to the Church as a whole here . . not to some divided group . ..

Luther did try to throw out the book of James . . but not for the reasons presentd by Bullinger . . but because of how James stresses works (the type of which Luther did not understand well it seems, even though he himself also related faith and works to the inseperable elements of fire, light and heat).

As far as his claims regarding Erasmus and the book of James . . I have studied Erasmus, I do not remember this being an issue with him, though my memory could be failing me on this point ;) . . so I would need to see documented proof that what Bullinger claims is indeed supported by fact . . .






As far as EW Bullinger himself, here is some information:
Dr. Bullinger taught the pretribulation, premillennial rapture view, but he was also considered an ultradispensationalist because "he taught that the gospels and Acts were under the dispensation of law, with the church actually beginning at Paul's ministry after Acts 28:28." Bullinger also believed in a heretical view of the extinction of the soul between death and the resurrection. Many of his admirers were annihilationists. Dr. Bullinger died on June 6, 1913, in London, England. Bullinger placed the Four Gospels and the book of Acts under the Law and believed the dispensation of the Church began with the ministry of Paul after Acts 28:28. He believed that the prison epistles (Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians) set forth the fullness of the revelation of the mystery of this church age. He also denied that water baptism and the Lord's Supper are for this age. His dispensational teachings are the foundation of all the ultradispensational teachings from his day to the present.




AV . I know you call yourself an ultradispensationalist; were you awre of this and do you also deny that water baptism amd the Lord's Supper are for this age? Do you also believe in the annihilation of the soul after death?




Peace to all!
 
Upvote 0

@@Paul@@

The Key that Fits:Acts 28
Mar 24, 2004
3,050
72
55
Seattle
✟26,081.00
Faith
Baptist
Being labeled "hyper" (a toned down ultra), I would not reject water baptism AND the Lord's Supper for this dispensation. However, I see the difference between necessity and the symbolism which we have today. i.e. neither one is a requirement > but they do serve a purpose.

annihilation of the soul?? I have no idea, depends on what one thinks a soul is. Should it be heretical? probably not.
 
Upvote 0

Iosias

Senior Contributor
Jul 18, 2004
8,171
227
✟9,648.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Private
thereselittleflower said:
Hi AV . .





As far as EW Bullinger himself, here is some information:
Dr. Bullinger taught the pretribulation, premillennial rapture view, but he was also considered an ultradispensationalist because "he taught that the gospels and Acts were under the dispensation of law, with the church actually beginning at Paul's ministry after Acts 28:28." Bullinger also believed in a heretical view of the extinction of the soul between death and the resurrection. Many of his admirers were annihilationists. Dr. Bullinger died on June 6, 1913, in London, England. Bullinger placed the Four Gospels and the book of Acts under the Law and believed the dispensation of the Church began with the ministry of Paul after Acts 28:28. He believed that the prison epistles (Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians) set forth the fullness of the revelation of the mystery of this church age. He also denied that water baptism and the Lord's Supper are for this age. His dispensational teachings are the foundation of all the ultradispensational teachings from his day to the present.


AV . I know you call yourself an ultradispensationalist; were you awre of this and do you also deny that water baptism amd the Lord's Supper are for this age? Do you also believe in the annihilation of the soul after death?​
Hi thereselittleflower,


yes I was aware of Dr. Bullinger's teachings on these. I do deny water baptism for this age but not the Lord's Supper (hence the communion table in my Armour). No I am not an annihilationist so you can 'calm down' now :)
 
Upvote 0

thereselittleflower

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2003
34,832
1,526
✟57,855.00
Faith
Catholic
AV1611 said:
[/indent]Hi thereselittleflower,


yes I was aware of Dr. Bullinger's teachings on these. I do deny water baptism for this age but not the Lord's Supper (hence the communion table in my Armour). No I am not an annihilationist so you can 'calm down' now :)
Hi AV

Well thank you for your concern, however, really, no "calming down" is necessary as I was never agitated to begin with . . I was truly curious about this . .

Now .. What I am puzzled about is why would someone who denies communion be looked to as a leader in right Christian theological thinking?



One of the Apostolic Fathers had this to say about such:
"Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes" (Ignatius of Antioch Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2–7:1 [A.D. 110]).



If an Apostolic Father had this to say about those who held such a position, then why are people today looking to them as rightful teachers of Church doctrine?


Peace to all!
 
  • Like
Reactions: jbarcher
Upvote 0

Iosias

Senior Contributor
Jul 18, 2004
8,171
227
✟9,648.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Private
thereselittleflower said:
One of the Apostolic Fathers had this to say about such:
"Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes" (Ignatius of Antioch Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2–7:1 [A.D. 110]).​
Surely that statement would condemn all non-Catholocs for no Protestant believes that "the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ".


As for the calming down...I was quoting a well known UK advert which I guess you aint seen being American :)
 
Upvote 0

thereselittleflower

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2003
34,832
1,526
✟57,855.00
Faith
Catholic
AV1611 said:
[/indent]Surely that statement would condemn all non-Catholocs for no Protestant believes that "the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ".


As for the calming down...I was quoting a well known UK advert which I guess you aint seen being American :)
LOL I guess not, since I am not in the UK! :)

As for the statement and all of Protestantism, no . . the statement of Ignatius specifically says "abstain" . ..

Now, becaue of hundreds of years of separation from the Catholic Church, the beliefs of the original reformer, Luther, that the bread and wine were indeed the flesh and blood of Christ have been laid aside for a more symbolic meaning in most protestant/nc communities . . . . .but still, there is some meaning in many Protestant groups that when one partakes in communion that they are partaking in/of Christ, if even symbolically . . . At the time of Ignatius, there was absolutely no question it was really the body and blood of our Lord . ..

What is significant about his statement in regards to Bullinger is that Ignatius specifically mentions ABSTAINING from partaking . . . which is what Bullinger advocates.

Those who do not accept a literal presence of Christ in the Eucharist, usually at least recognize a spiritual presence and partake as often as they will . . (regarding those who don't even recognize this much, what can I say?)

But Bullinger denies that we should even partake at all . . . Bullinger advocates that we should ABSTAIN. . . .


Such a one is heterodox according to Ignatius who had the words of the living Apostles ringing in his ears . .


Should such a one be looked to to provide good solid foundational teaching on matters of the Christian faith who is condemned by those who founded and pastored the Church even in the first century of its life?


Perhaps you all are OK with that . ..


I think I will stick to more orthodox teachers myself. ;)

Peace to all!
 
Upvote 0

thereselittleflower

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2003
34,832
1,526
✟57,855.00
Faith
Catholic
@@Paul@@ said:
Ya, it's just good to know there was little ultra-dispy's running around in 100ad. :)
Well Paul . . please show them to us! I would love to meet them!

No, wait, I forgot . . you would have to go to a parallel universe or something to find them . . . .well, that's probablu too hard . .but if you can pull it off, let me know! ;)


Peace to all!
 
Upvote 0

@@Paul@@

The Key that Fits:Acts 28
Mar 24, 2004
3,050
72
55
Seattle
✟26,081.00
Faith
Baptist
thereselittleflower said:
AV

I have to ask . . if you deny water baptism for this dispensation, then what do you and others who believe like you do with this part of the Nicene Creed:

"I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins. "

?


Peace to all!
I don't reject water baptism, and to that i will agree...
Eph 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,

Col 2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.
 
Upvote 0

@@Paul@@

The Key that Fits:Acts 28
Mar 24, 2004
3,050
72
55
Seattle
✟26,081.00
Faith
Baptist
thereselittleflower said:
Well Paul . . please show them to us! I would love to meet them!

No, wait, I forgot . . you would have to go to a parallel universe or something to find them . . . .well, that's probablu too hard . .but if you can pull it off, let me know! ;)


Peace to all!
Why else would someone reject the necessity of water baptism and the Eucharist if they did not see a clear and distinct difference between Israel and the Mystery introduced by Paul?
One of the Apostolic Fathers had this to say about such:
"Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes" (Ignatius of Antioch Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2–7:1 [A.D. 110]).

Maybe they were Hyper-Dispy's from Buckaroo Banzi's eighth dimension. ;)
 
Upvote 0

thereselittleflower

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2003
34,832
1,526
✟57,855.00
Faith
Catholic
@@Paul@@ said:
Why else would someone reject the necessity of water baptism and the Eucharist if they did not see a clear and distinct difference between Israel and the Mystery introduced by Paul?


Maybe they were Hyper-Dispy's from Buckaroo Banzi's eighth dimension. ;)
"Laugh while you can monkey boy!"

:D

LOL


Peace in Him!
 
  • Like
Reactions: @@Paul@@
Upvote 0

Iosias

Senior Contributor
Jul 18, 2004
8,171
227
✟9,648.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Private
thereselittleflower said:
AV

I have to ask . . if you deny water baptism for this dispensation, then what do you and others who believe like you do with this part of the Nicene Creed:

"I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins. "

?


Peace to all!
@@Paul@@ beat me to it but I will post it anyway:

Eph 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,

You may wish to join in here: http://www.christianforums.com/t1123828-baptism-an-alternative-view.html :)
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.