Monday, March 24, 2008
"We think the book of James is trash...I personally cannot find anything of redeeming value from the book of James"
(Brandan Kraft - July 19th, 2007 (Kraft posted the following quote on his forum in a thread titled, "James Exposed." The remark was made in Brandan Kraft's first post on the very first page of the thread).
What does God have to say about Brandan Kraft's remarks?
"For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words, of him shall
the Son of man be ashamed, when he shall come in his own glory, and in his
Father’s, and of the holy angels."
"For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."
This heresy originated with a man named Robert Higby, and Brandan Kraft is a faithful disciple of Robert Higby.
Higby accuses John Calvin of selecting the 66 Books of God's Bible to be the official canon, and then Higby writes the following on the 27th of December 2005 (in the thread titled "Calvin's 66 book canon"):
"So to Calvin; every word enshrined in the books of Esther, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, and James are as sacred and certain as the person and work of Jesus Christ himself."
Thus, we clearly see Higby mocking God's Holy Word.
The true follower of Jesus Christ knows that it is God Himself who put together His Word into one cohesive whole.
Robert Higby wrote:
"The present writer does not believe the Christocentric hermeneutic supports Ecclesiastes or the Song of Songs as having canonical authority."
(quote taken from - The Biblical Canon Study #3: Identifying the Old Testament Canon (study #2) - October 2005)
Here is what Higby says about "Song of Songs" in the same study.
"The Song of Songs is merely a discourse of human love and romance...It is simply the poetic view of two individuals on what constitutes great romance and sex; nothing more. It is not even a standard as to how all must view what constitutes great romance and sex."
Now Higby moves on to attack The Book of Esther.
"The doctrine of revenge present in Esther is against the whole of Old Testament revelation, let alone New Testament revelation. Therefore, Esther is to be rejected as canonical."
(October 8th 2005 - From the thread titled: The multi level canon)
"Esther 9 adds to the law, it is as simple as that. The Law of Moses, according to Christ himself, is not to be added to. Also, the feasts of Lev. 23 are the complete and inspired prophetic picture of Christ's Messianic work. To institute new feasts AS JEWISH LAW, especially ones based on questionable historical acts, this is forbidden."
(Robert Higby - October 19th 2005 - the Multi level canon.)
Here is another attack on the Epistle of James by Brandan Kraft.
Brandan Kraft wrote:
"There are other topics in James that I also find questionable such as chapter 5. What is James' primary beef with rich people? It's almost like it has gnostic roots."
Brandan must be blind to the fact that the Lord Jesus Christ said:
But woe unto you that are rich! for ye have received your consolation.
Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.
The reader should clearly be able to see that what James writes about rich people is in perfect harmony with the words of Jesus Christ himself in the gospels.
The following is Brandan Kraft's response to individuals who reject his heresy:
"These people are on crack!"
Yet God says:
"....he that uttereth a slander, is a fool."
And if that wasn’t enough, two days later, on July 19, 2007, in the James Exposed Thread, Brandan wrote [Post #11]:
"Yes it is in the canon, but reprobates put together the "Canon." The "canon" as everyone calls it is an invention of men. Usually, it's the supporters of the "canon" that resent the dissenters. They can't stand that we think the book of James is trash. I don't think there was any conflict here, and I agree, there is a lot of inspired writing out there that is not in the canon that in my opinion is authoritative. You'll even find some right here on this website."
Brandan Kraft continues:
“I personally cannot find anything of redeeming value from the book of James or from the account of his life found in the gospels and the book of Acts other than the fact that it simply reminds us that we will never be free of the legalizers until Jesus returns. We are experiencing the tribulation that began with "certain" followers of James. . . .”
Below is what Monty Collier wrote on Brandan Kraft's forum before being banned for posting an entire exegesis of James 2 which was removed by Brandan.
"Has anyone considered what happened after the conversion of Paul?
Everyone knew that Saul sought to kill the Christians.
When the Lord saved Saul, God had to speak to Ananias in a special way and show him that Saul was now a Christian (Acts 9:10-16).
When Paul came to the other disciples they did not believe he was a Christian. He had to demonstrate his faith. He did this by preaching sound doctrine (Acts 9:20-21).
Those that heard him were amazed. They were witnessing God's power. When Saul came to Jerusalem the disciples also did not believe him to be a Christian. They knew his former profession. But Barnabas gave evidence of Saul's conversion (Acts 9:26-27).
"Saul's new profession, his works of counfounding the Jews (Acts 9:22) all gave evidence of his conversion.
"Paul himself agrees with James in the first chapter of Galatians. He understood that our faith had to be professed, confessed, defended, and demonstrated before men. Galatians 1:23-24 is an outworking of Christ's teaching in Matthew 5:13-16.
Paul's profession and good works resulted in his acceptance among the church. Among those Christians who knew him only as a persecutor of the faithful, this brought them to accept him as a Christian and to glorify God! Paul states, "But they had heard only, that he which persecutes us in times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed" (Galatians 1:23). Notice how Paul himself emphasizes how his previous profession and works were compared to his present profession and works among them.James, therefore, is in complete agreement with Paul when he states, "Yea, a man may say, thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works" (James 2:18).
James is in complete agreement because he is not talking about how God justifies a man. The context of the entire Book of James demonstrates that James is not writing on how God justifies a man. Logic and context rule in the interpretation of Scripture. The mistake that Higby, Gill, and Nicholas have made is that they have equivocated on the term 'justify'. The word has more than one meaning. The context determines the meaning. Alvin Plantinga once wrote a book called "Warranted Christian Belief."In this book he tries to justify Christianity as an acceptable intellectual position, that is, he was trying to prove to other men, among other things, that you can be Christian and intelligent. No one thought Plantinga was teaching Justification by Faith Alone in that book. The point is that the word has a demonstrative meaning and a legal meaning. Paul uses the legal meaning in Romans and James uses the demonstrative meaning in James.
"Concerning James 1:17, Bob thinks that because a Muslim can interpret this verse according to his own belief system that the verse must be rejected. This is absurd. The ability to misinterpret, does not negate the fact that there is a correct interpretation. Just because one does not understand a verse, a chapter, or even an entire Book of the Bible, does not mean that they should tear out that which is obscure to them.Thomas Jefferson also tore out many parts of the Bible in order to accomodate his own Deistic system of belief.
"He, like some on P-net, justified his actions by appealing to his own understanding of history.
"The reason Catholics and Arminians read and interpret James in this manner is to attack Sola Fide. The reason Higby, Kraft, and Nicholas take the Catholic interpretation is to attack the book itself. Let me just point out that regardless their motives, they have taken that first step back to the Roman Catholic Church. "
By Monty Collier
Brandan Kraft wrote:
"To say James is authoritative because it's in the bible is about as dumb a statement that can be made because the BIBLE is not authoritative. The BIBLE is a COLLECTION of books that a group of men DECIDED was authoritative."
Below the reader will see further proof that Robert Higby seems intent on attacking the very words of Almighty God.
First he expresses his objections to Mark 9-18 being authentic.
Robert Higby writes:
"The main theological problems with Mark 16:9ff are two, as I see it:
"1. The ’signs’ that are predicted to follow those that believe have not really been manifested as such, at least to some degree (the drinking of poison and avoiding death, etc.) and
"2. Mark 16:16 teaches that ’he that believeth AND is baptized shall be saved,’ whereas Paul and John clearly teach that genuine belief with an AMEN (faith alone) evidences salvation. The water may be a testimony to the gospel but the lack of it does not negate eternal life! "
For a biblically accurate teaching of Baptism in Mark 16:16 please read the following article.
Robert Higby even has some issues he'd like to deal with in 2 Peter, 3 John and Jude.
"There are some very minor issues with 2 Peter, 3 John, Jude, etc. but they are not worth a major argument and I would prefer to deal with the largest issue first."
This third quote is further proof he rejects The Books of Esther, Ecclesiastes and James. Why you ask?
"My personal rejection of Esther, Ecclesiastes, and James is the false doctrine that they contain; the same reasons for rejecting other apocryphal works."
(Robert Higby - January 4th 2006 - 'Calvin's 66 book Canon')
Finally, we finish with Higby's "trouble" accepting 3 John as Scripture along with 2 Peter and James.
"For me, the remaining 4 NT books that were originally antilegomena remain an open issue for study. I have the most trouble with 3 John, as it has no attestation of existence until the 3rd century (like James and 2 Peter) and gives no definite gospel testimony. Plus we do not know anything about who the characters mentioned in that book actually were historically."
(Robert Higby - July 21st 2007 - From the thread 'James Exposed')
The final quote is from Brandan Kraft's myspace profile. Under the question of his favourite books he writes:
"...Dead Sea Scrolls, Most of the books from what is referred to as the "Bible" - I despise the book of James!"
The Dead Sea Scrolls are those which Brandan Kraft states are inspired by God and authoritative.
Here is the quote again:
Brandan Kraft writes:
"There is a lot of inspired writing out there that is not in the canon that in my opinion is authoritative."
Here is a final word from A.W.Pink:
"In Romans 3:28 the Apostle Paul declared “that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law,” and then produces the case of Abraham to prove his assertion. But the Apostle James, from the case of the same Abraham, draws quite another conclusion, saying, “Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only” (James 2:24). This is one of the “contradictions in the Bible” to which infidels appeal in support of their unbelief. But the Christian, however difficult he finds it to harmonize passages apparently opposite, knows there cannot be any contradiction in the Word of God. Faith has unshaken confidence in the inerrancy of Holy Writ. Faith is humble too and prays, “That which I see not teach Thou me” (Job. 34:32). Nor is faith lazy; it prompts its possessor unto a reverent examination and diligent investigation of that which puzzles and perplexes, seeking to discover the subject of each separate book, the scope of each writer, the connections of each passage."
For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
2 Peter 3:17-18
...Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.
2 Timothy 3:16-17
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.
The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: because the spirit of the LORD bloweth upon it: surely the people is grass.
The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.
Below is a list of further scripture references refering to those who pervert and dismantle Scripture:
Wrest Scripture: 2 Peter 3:15-17
Perverting the word: Jeremiah 23:36
No tampering with the Word of God: Exodus 20:7; Leviticus 24:16; Deuteronomy 4:2; Revelation 22:18-19; Deuteronomy 12:32; Proverbs 30:5-6
Adding man's traditions: Matthew 15:1-9; Mark 7:6-9, 13; Colossians 2:8.
Idle words: Matthew 12:36.