tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12543231.post1872242180167966955..comments2023-06-15T09:41:19.355-05:00Comments on NT/History Blog: James' Epistle, c.AD 52 (part 3)Bill Heromanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05283809456471966882noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12543231.post-8350435762044370942009-02-25T12:17:00.000-06:002009-02-25T12:17:00.000-06:00Dead on, Neil, for all points. I have a ways to g...Dead on, Neil, for all points. I have a ways to go yet before I get around to justifying a date c.52 AD.<BR/><BR/>Piper vs. Wright is a great illustration of some points I made in <A HREF="http://www.billheroman.com/2009/02/james-epistle-cad-52-part-2.html" REL="nofollow">part two</A>. I haven't read either one (yet) but I've heard enough to know it could go on a while.<BR/><BR/>In my view, acknowledging the historical difficulties shared by James & Paul should give us more grace for interacting with each other these days. It should not, however, require us to diminish our high view of scripture in the least. As you know, seeking that balance is part of my motive in all this.<BR/><BR/>Extremely nice to have you weigh in on this, by the way. :)Bill Heromanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05283809456471966882noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12543231.post-89147508018093657792009-02-25T11:58:00.000-06:002009-02-25T11:58:00.000-06:00It seems to me that your points indicate that the ...It seems to me that your points indicate that the letter could logically fall before OR after the council. You simply take issue with those who argue it HAD to come before.<BR/><BR/>I'd have to agree that a need for clarification on Paul's meaning of the word "justification" may well have endured for years between James and Paul. Just consider that two of our leading theological voices today (John Piper and N.T. Wright) have written entire books within the last couple of years on the subject, with each one trying to outdo the other when it comes to figuring out what Paul meant when he used that word.<BR/><BR/>And I'd have to agree that if James felt he was primarily called to ministry to his own people (as Paul said in Gal 2:9), then he wouldn't have to address Gentiles in his letter, either before or after the council.Neilhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03529468384572557580noreply@blogger.com