Introduction
There is an undercurrent of opinion amongst scholars of the early Church and Bible students that James, the brother of Jesus, and Paul the Apostle proclaimed two different gospels – that the book of James contains an authentic look into 1st century Jewish Christianity and what his brother, Jesus, taught, while Paul’s epistles lay out a completely different “religion”. Some of these also believe that, since Paul wrote first, that aspects of his letters were borrowed by the Gospel writers, thus propagating the Paul version of Christianity throughout nearly the entire New Testament. Is this viewpoint correct?
Background
Most of you likely already know that Jesus’ brother James is the purported author of the New Testament’s Book of James, and through Biblical and extra-biblical sources is known to have led the initial Jerusalem-based “church”/assembly of followers of Jesus’ teachings, after Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection[i]. James was never a disciple of his brother during His life and is not mentioned in the New Testament until the late Acts of the Apostles, and then only as a kind of administrator of the Jerusalem assembly.
Paul, on the other hand, was a Pharisee, an opponent of this early church that was beginning to spread to Jews throughout the region because of its claims for the supernatural nature of Jesus’ life and resurrection. Paul, though a persecutor of the church, was given a revelation of Christ on his way to persecute His followers in Damascus that transformed him from a persecutor into the greatest champion of the message of Christ in history. The charge we’re addressing is that this message was different than, and contrary to, the message of the author of James, and the practice of that earliest church in Jerusalem.
But the basic idea of this minority opinion among scholars that James and Paul are professing two distinctly different gospels, with Jame’s being steeped in traditional Jewish faith and practice, Paul’s being an invention unique to him, contra-traditional Jewish faith and practice, has led many off into the theological weeds, taking their eyes off of the essential message Christ brought, and fulfilled. Our aim is to present a different assessment of their hypothesis.
Paul the Author of the Gospel?
As for the theory that Paul’s early writings were used in writing the Gospels, this scenario seems quite improbable. For one, Paul was writing to churches, in some cases over a thousand miles from Jerusalem. And, because of the cost of the materials, it is not likely that he made copies to cc; to his fellow Apostles wherever they were. After a period of perhaps five to ten years co-located in Jerusalem, the Apostles spread out on their ministries to the nations.
While it is impossible to know if Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are the authentic authors of their eponymous books, if they were, they were generally separated physically from Paul. Matthew (Levi) preached in Ethiopia and Persia. (John) Mark actually accompanied Paul on his first missionary journey, but had a falling out with him early in that trip in Pamphylia. Of course, he would have heard Paul’s preaching during the time they were together. He later reconciled with Paul, but ended up spending most of his time with Peter who referred to him as “my son” (1 Pet 5:13).
The Apostle John ministered in Asia Minor and so could have had interaction with Paul, particularly at Ephesus. Luke was likely a companion of Paul in Phillipi, Troas and Corinth as well as with him at the end in Rome. So, yes, he would have no doubt (if he was in fact the author of the Gospel bearing his name) assimilated much of what Paul taught.
Given the authorial tradition of “sacred” writings in the 1st century, it’s likely that none of these disciples were the actual authors of the books bearing their names, though the author may have had a close and transparent relationship with their book’s namesake.
So, it is possible that Paul articulated early Christianity in a form, and with a force, that seeped into the other Gospels. But if that was, in fact, the case, we need to ask: “in what way was that ‘version’ of Christianity inauthentic? Would the other NT authors write contrary to their experience in and around Jesus and His cohort because Paul had said something different? This turns out to be the key question, and one we can begin to answer by comparing and contrasting Paul’s epistles with James (purported to embody “authentic” early Christianity) in his book.
One other editorial note before we dive into James. Many who posit that the practice of Christianity is fraudulent (at Paul’s hand who, remember, was a self-proclaimed “Hebrew among Hebrews” – Phl 3:5) come to that conclusion by claiming it isn’t Jewish enough. In other words, they’re looking for a preservation (assumedly) of the Jewish traditions, festivals, diet, liturgies, etc. They want something like that reported of other early Jewish groups, like the late 1st-century to 4th century Ebionites[ii] (Jesus not divine; James, not Peter, the true leader of the Church), or as described in the Jewish-Christian Didache[iii]. What they are most assuredly not looking for is the “step function” in the history of Israelites with YHWH that Jesus represented. (One wonders what they believe Pentecost was all about, why God vowed His New Covenant [why might He have judged such a thing to have been necessary?], of which the Pentecost appears to be the launching event.)
Nothing in Paul’s epistles prevents, or even disparages, following Jewish customs (except, of course, circumcision as a requirement for Gentiles). What he disparages is them (the Jews) expecting to be declared ‘righteous’ and reunited to their God by simply following those customs and laws.
People who take the critical position seem to universally be unwilling or unable to accept the Christ event for what it was; the end of the Old Covenant between God and Israel. Jesus had brought the New Covenant under which the Abrahamic blessing of his progeny becoming a blessing to all the nations/families of the earth would be realized[iv]. The Old Covenant mandated Israel to change themselves to be obedient to their God. The New abandoned that formula and instead unilaterally decreed that God Himself would change them so that they would love and obey Him.
I am thankful, first of all, for having been dragged into this study by the “James has the real Christianity” devotees because I will admit, until this study I thought they had a substantial point. Let’s look at what our authors have to say and what we can identify as their similarities and their dissimilarities.
Comparing Paul and James – Their Similarities
One of the first distinctions to notice is that while Paul’s epistles are all addressed to his churches or companions, we’re not sure who James’ intended audience was. Certainly, he presents some exhortation against sinners (Jas 4:8-10). He addresses it to “the twelve tribes in the Dispersion”, so perhaps there were churches of Jews in the Galilee or the Decapolis? Josephus thought they were “beyond the Euphrates”. Who knows where he thought the members of those twelve tribes were. We just don’t know.
Let’s look at some similarities between the two texts.
Suffering for the Faith
James encourages his readers in enduring their suffering (assumedly associated with their faith). This is precisely the message of Paul.
James:
Jas 1:2-3 2 Count it all joy, my brothers, when you meet trials of various kinds, 3for you know that the testing of your faith produces steadfastness.
Jas 1:12
12 Blessed is the man who remains steadfast under trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those who love him.
Paul:
Rom 5:3 Not only that, but we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, 4 and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, 5 and hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us.
Partiality
James:
Jas 2:9 9But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors.
James here says that us treating someone specially based on their status/identity is a sin. Paul’s focus is on the impartiality of God.
Paul:
Ro 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.
Ro 10:12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him.
This seems to be a distinction without a difference. Paul talked of God’s impartiality and James exhorted his brethren, in following God’s example, to be impartial.
The Hesed of God is Impartial
James:
Jas 3:17 But the wisdom from above[v] is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere.
Paul:
22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,
James:
Jas 2:8 8If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing well.
Paul:
Ga 5:14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”
Here, obviously, the two have locked arms in a chorus of Kumbaya. 😉
Treat Each Other as Brothers in Christ
James:
Jas 2:12 12So speak and so act as those who are to be judged under the law of liberty. (i.e. the law that applies to transformed believers)
Paul:
Ga 6:2 Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ
Ro 12:10-13 10 Love one another with brotherly affection. Outdo one another in showing honor. 11Do not be slothful in zeal, be fervent in spirit, serve the Lord. 12 Rejoice in hope, be patient in tribulation, be constant in prayer. 13 Contribute to the needs of the saints and seek to show hospitality.
Ro 13:9 For the commandments, “You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,” and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” 10 Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.
Gal 5:13-14 For you were called to freedom, brothers. Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another. 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”
Eph 4: 2 with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love,
Once again, it seems the two, to the extent that they both identify the “freedom that is in Christ” as the Christ-follower’s new state, are in agreement.
Control of One’s Speech
James:
Jas 3:2-6 2For we all stumble in many ways. And if anyone does not stumble in what he says, he is a perfect man, able also to bridle his whole body. 3If we put bits into the mouths of horses so that they obey us, we guide their whole bodies as well. 4Look at the ships also: though they are so large and are driven by strong winds, they are guided by a very small rudder wherever the will of the pilot directs. 5So also the tongue is a small member, yet it boasts of great things. How great a forest is set ablaze by such a small fire! 6And the tongue is a fire, a world of unrighteousness. The tongue is set among our members, staining the whole body, setting on fire the entire course of life, and set on fire by hell.
Paul:
Eph 4:29 Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear.
Eph 5:4 Let there be no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking, which are out of place, but instead let there be thanksgiving.
Col 4:6 Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person.
Once again, agreement.
Judging
James says “don’t do it”. Paul says: “If you do it, here are the consequences.”
James:
Jas 4:11 11 Do not speak evil against one another, brothers. The one who speaks against a brother or judges his brother, speaks evil against the law and judges the law. But if you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law but a judge.
Paul:
Ro 14:4 Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand.
Ro 14:10 Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God; 11 for it is written,
“As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me,
and every tongue shall confess to God.”
12 So then each of us will give an account of himself to God.
Both say judging is going to be costly to the one who does.
Living In/With the World
James:
Jas 4:4 4 You adulterous people! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.
Paul:
Ro 12:2 Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.
2 Cor 6:14-17 Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? 15 What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever? 16 What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said,
“I will make my dwelling among them and walk among them,
and I will be their God,
and they shall be my people.
17 Therefore go out from their midst,
and be separate from them, says the Lord,
and touch no unclean thing;
then I will welcome you,
Phl 3:18 For many, of whom I have often told you and now tell you even with tears, walk as enemies of the cross of Christ. 19 Their end is destruction, their god is their belly, and they glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things. 20 But our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ,
Both agree that the world is a corrupting influence on the believer.
Life/The Time is Short
Paul is infamous for seeing the Eschaton as immanent – right around the corner – to the point he counsels “don’t get married. There’s no point” or words to that effect. James was a bit more philosophical about man’s brevity on earth and subject to God’s will. But he too understood that the Day of the Lord could come at any time.
James:
Jas 4:13-15 13Come now, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go into such and such a town and spend a year there and trade and make a profit”— 14yet you do not know what tomorrow will bring. What is your life? For you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes. 15Instead you ought to say, “If the Lord wills, we will live and do this or that.”
Jas 5:7 7Be patient, therefore, brothers, until the coming of the Lord. See how the farmer waits for the precious fruit of the earth, being patient about it, until it receives the early and the late rains. (Difference in attitude – change your behaviors because its soon going to happen vs just be patient until it happens)
Paul:
1 Cor 7:29 This is what I mean, brothers: the appointed time has grown very short. From now on, let those who have wives live as though they had none,
2 Cor 4:17 For this light momentary affliction is preparing for us an eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison, 18 as we look not to the things that are seen but to the things that are unseen. For the things that are seen are transient, but the things that are unseen are eternal.
While slightly different points of emphasis, it doesn’t appear there is any disagreement.
Care for One Another’s Faithfulness
James:
Jas 5:16 16Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person has great power as it is working.
Jas 5:19-20 19My brothers, if anyone among you wanders from the truth and someone brings him back, 20let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from his wandering will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.
Paul:
Gal 6:1 Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Keep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted. 2 Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.
Both agree the new believer can be wayward and need re-grounding from his brethren.
Comparing Paul and James – Their Purported Differences
Grace vs Works in Salvation
No doubt the most well-known alleged difference in these two messages is Paul’s famous declaration that Ep 2:8:
8For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,
Against this (misunderstood) statement is James equally adamant Jas 2:14,20,26
14What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? 20Do you want to be shown, you foolish person, that faith apart from works is useless? 26For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead.
I’ve laid out this misunderstanding before, so here I’ll only summarize the key point. Paul, in Eph 2:8 is talking about one aspect of the attainment of salvation from God. He’s simply saying you can’t do it yourself by working for it or buying it. It is conveyed as a gift.
James, on the other hand, is talking about one who has received this gift (sometime in the past). He’s saying now, having received this gift (which he doesn’t get into but assumes everyone knows – see Jas 4:5), doing works of care and serving is not only normal for a Christ-follower, but represents a proof of the person’s faithful dedication to God and His Christ.
Paul tells us that we are justified[vi] apart from works of the Law (Ro 3:28). He’s talking about ceremonial law; things you “work at” – feasts, festivals, circumcision, kosher, etc. Those things no longer (and never did) affect a person’s standing with God. They only serve to preserve his identity as a member of the chosen people. He’s not talking about the law we are to live out following this justification (James’ “royal law”). On that point, he and James are in total agreement.
Both authors understood that the indwelling of the Spirit of God following conversion was the animating force that led the Christ-follower to not only love God and his neighbor but also to carry out works in accordance with His will, just as Christ would do if He was you.
So, this misunderstanding of what these apostles say is a failure of the Protestant church movement to understand perhaps 90% of Paul’s epistles[vii]. Once you understand what both men are saying, you understand they’re saying the same things.
Keeping the Law
It is widely claimed that Paul taught abandoning the Torah, while James taught continuing to follow it. Both claims are incorrect.
What Paul taught, vis-à-vis the law, is that adherence to it was not the means by which righteousness was judged by God. I noted the following in an earlier piece:[viii]
“However, Paul does teach that after Christ’s sacrifice and resurrection, adherence to the Mosaic law (by which he meant all of its ceremonial content) is no longer the operative mechanism for identifying who is in God’s family (“justification”/righteousness). Following Christ, that mechanism is faith in Christ. This is Paul’s entire thrust in Rom 3. He repeats this message with clarity here, Ro 10:4:
[4] For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.
In other words, attaining righteousness before YHWH is no longer effective by following the practices (of which most were ceremonial) specified in the “Mosaic” Law and being a Jew, as some had thought. From Christ on, that mechanism is trust in Jesus as Lord — the King of the Kingdom of God.”
James’ statement that faith not accompanied by doing “works” is dead, has become a cliché. His inferred example in Jas 2:15 is feeding and clothing a brother or sister in need. It is definitely not carrying out the ceremonial laws of sacrifice, festivals, observances, food laws, etc.
He sees doing these “royal law” works as obeying what he calls the “perfect law, the law of liberty” — Jas 1:25:
25But the one who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, he will be blessed in his doing.
It is this law, not Torah, that James is admonishing his readers to “do”. Earlier he said to be doers of the “word” (3056. λόγος lógos). The term usually has the meaning of word/speaking as a creative expression of an intelligence, in this case God’s. If he had meant Torah, assumedly he would have used the term 3551. νόμος nómos, law, not lógos.
The term “law of liberty” sounds suspiciously like Paul’s idiom of the “law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus” (Rom 8:2) setting one free from the “law of sin and death”. Paul seems to be alluding to the Spirit of God within his believers as this freeing “law” – a superseding law, so to speak. Its sounds entirely possible that this is precisely the law James has in mind that yields “liberty”.
Wisdom vs Eschatology
There is no question that the two Apostles view “right living” from different points of emphasis. But James’ wisdom-based council is sufficiently opaque that his apparent minimization of an eschatological view (Jas 5:1-9, in which he uses end-time language and images) may be deceiving. For example, In Jas 1:5 and 3:17 he says:
Jas 1:5 5 If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives generously to all without reproach, and it will be given him.
Jas 3:17 17But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere.
In both instances James is talking about wisdom supplied to the reader from God. He doesn’t explain how he understands that wisdom being transmitted to the reader. And, we have to admit that James’ context here seems to be normal life; not a new Christ-initiated state of being. It seems to echo verses in the Hebrew Bible where the subject either asks for wisdom (1 Kings 3:9) or is encouraged to ask for wisdom (Prv 2:3-6, Job 28:12-28).
However, there is another possibility for what James may have had in mind. We see it in Is 11:2, Dt 34:9, and Prv 1:23. In these verses we see the wisdom/knowledge of God being equated with the giving of His Spirit. This mechanism is, of course, exactly the image Paul has in his mind as related in 1 Cor 2:10-13, Eph 1:17, and Col 1:9.
The Wealthy
James seems to go out of his way in his short book to caution his readers of the danger of wealth corrupting one’s character, sounding not unlike some of his prophetic ancestors. Paul’s testimony isn’t quite as threatening and sounds more pastoral.
James:
James is sharply critical of the rich, warning them of coming judgment (James 5:1–6) and condemning favoritism toward them in the church (James 2:1–7).
Paul:
Paul also warns against the love of money (1 Timothy 6:9–10), but he’s more nuanced—he gives instructions to the rich on how to be generous and humble (1 Timothy 6:17–19).
James is more prophetic and confrontational; Paul is more pastoral and instructive.
What Paul Taught that James Does Not
At first blush we should believe that Paul wrote about a lot that James didn’t. Paul wrote 43,000 words in his epistles to Jame’s 2,340, or about 20 times more.
The Working of the Spirit of God
To me, one of the significant differences is that Paul’s entire corpus seems to be centered on the ministry of the indwelt Spirit of God in his Christ-followers, while James may not mention it. He does have this in Jas 2:26:
26For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead.
The question is: what “spirit” is he referring to here? Being, reportedly, a Christ-follower, it is of course possible that he’s referring to the indwelt Spirit of God in a kind of symbolism where “death” is spiritual death, or simply separation from God.
It is just as likely that the spirit he’s referring to is the living person’s soul/life; in Hebrew the 5397. נְשָׁמָה nešāmāh – the thing that makes one alive.
The one place in James that he does appear possibly to directly reference the Spirit of God is Jas 4:5:
5Or do you suppose it is to no purpose that the Scripture says, “He yearns jealously over the spirit that he has made to dwell in us”?
(However, I think it is very interesting that the ESV translators didn’t capitalize the word, apparently assuming its human spirit meaning.)
This is not a trivial or incidental distinction. For whatever reason, James seems to either not have gotten the memo on the outpouring of the Spirit into repentant followers of Christ, or did but just didn’t have much experience with it, or any idea of pneumatology in general. He also writes a bit more tentatively on issues that might involve the Spirit. For Paul, it is the bedrock of his message appearing some 97 times in his epistles specifically mentioning the indwelt Spirit of God iv.
Baptism
James never mentions the word.
Paul mentions his involvement in it once in 1 Cor 1:16-17. Otherwise, he only mentions its symbolism in Ro 6:4, Eph 4:5 and Col 2:12.
Eucharist
James doesn’t mention it. But, then again, he isn’t reported to have been in attendance at the original event, nor to have been told about it later (though it is hard to believe that he wasn’t). James’s focus is intensely ethical and practical—he’s concerned with how faith is lived out in community, not with liturgical or sacramental theology.
Paul – 1Co 11:23-26
23For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, 24and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body, which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” 25In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood[ix]. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.
He then goes on to urge his readers not to engage in the Eucharist memorial in an “unworthy manner”.
Some slander Paul for this passage claiming that he is enfranchising the Catholic view of transubstantiation. He is doing no such thing. He is reporting Jesus’ words (which assumedly he received directly from the Source) instructing His disciples to establish a memorial of His death for them, as often as they ate bread or drank of the “cup”.
Conclusions[x]
The Law
On both authors’ view of the Mosaic law, I think we’ve shown that they are in basic agreement. The tricky thing about saying anything about the Mosaic law or “Law of Moses”, etc. is that by the 1st century it had morphed over the centuries from a simple, concise, moral law – Moses’ Torah, into something unrecognizable (corrupted by the “lying pen of the scribes” – Jer 8:8) – filled with all manner of Levitical ceremonial rules and regulations that God (through Moses) never spoke.[xi]
So in, say, the 9th century BC, the “Law”, to the extent it was known at all, was apparently Moses’ autograph moral laws. In the 1st century AD Moses’ law was still (mostly) buried within what was then called Torah, but it was only a tiny fraction of the Pentateuch. So, when Paul talks about “works of the law” he’s talking about all this other added stuff[[xii]] — practices that demonstrated one was a Jew. And when James exhorts us to uphold the “royal law”, he’s talking about the moral heart of the law.
Paul stresses liberation from the Law’s ceremonial demands (as well as introducing the concept of the “law of the Spirit” [Ro 8:2]), as does Jesus (Mt 23:4); James upholds the Law’s moral core as integral to Christian living while also preaching the “law of liberty”.
Emphasis on Wisdom and Speech
James devotes significant space to the power of the tongue (James 3) and the importance of wisdom from above (James 1:5; 3:13–18).
Paul addresses speech ethics too (e.g., Ephesians 4:29), but his focus is more on theological instruction and community order than on proverbial wisdom.
James leans more into Jewish wisdom tradition; Paul leans into theological exposition and ecclesial structure based on his profound revelation.
Prayer and Healing
James gives detailed instructions on prayer, confession, and anointing the sick (James 5:13–16), reflecting a very practical, communal spirituality.
Paul discusses prayer often, but healing and confession are less central in his letters, and more often associated with charismatic gifts (1 Corinthians 12).
James offers a more structured, almost procedural approach; Paul emphasizes spiritual gifts and personal intercession.
Did James encourage his readers to continue “doing” Torah? No, he did not. Did Paul tell his Jewish readers to abandon following Torah? No, he did not. He simply explained how the meaning of following the Torah had been brought into sharp focus following Christ’s advent. James’ “law of liberty” and Paul’s “law of the Spirit of Christ Jesus” seem, at the very least, intimately related.
I hardly think that James presents a message opposed to the message that Paul presents. If anything, based on this brief (and far from comprehensive) survey, it appears that they had far more in common in their views than in distinction. If you feel differently, I’d love to read your comments as to why you feel that way.
[i] We think we actually know where their place of assembly was on top of the Western Hill of Jerusalem. It is thought to be the scene of both the last supper and of the Acts 22 Pentecost event, and has an apse and niche that point in the direction of Golgotha.
[iv] Jesus’ Fulfillments – A Pilgrim’s Search
[v] Some scholars theorize that James’ phrase “wisdom from above” is his way of asserting the influence of God’s Spirit in the Christian. That may be possible. But it is unusual that he would use a characteristic of the Spirit rather than His title in his reference.
[vi] Called “just” by God, and welcomed by Him into His family. This is the result of the Christ-follower’s conversion.
[ix] The word rendered “blood” is Haíma which by itself serves to denote life passing away in bloodshed, and generally life taken away by force.
[x] Some of these summary points are written by CoPilot, the Microsoft AI tool.
[xi] You may not agree, and if so, that’s fine. It’s taken me many, many months of research and study to come to this (what now seems obvious to me) conclusion.
[xii] What Did the “Law of Moses” Mean to — Paul? – A Pilgrim’s Search
