Gray Too Easily Dismisses James and Jude as Anti-Paul Works - Deligitimizing Anti-Paulinism in Bible

Part 5 is at    • Gray Omits How Matt 5:17-19 is Clearly Ant...   The full list of episodes on the Gray Book Review is here: Episode 1 - Intro:    • Gray’s Smears of Anti-Pauline Jesus-Centri...   15 min. Episode 2 - Holmes Gore & Book of Revelation --    • Gray Omits "Christ or Paul" by Gore & Jesu...   22 min. Episode 3 - Second Peter -    • Gray Does Not See How Second Peter is Anti...   19 min. Episode 4 - James & Jude -    • Gray Too Easily Dismisses James and Jude a...   11 min. Episode 5 - Matthew esp. Matt 5:17-19    • Gray Omits How Matt 5:17-19 is Clearly Ant...   11 min. Episode 6 -- Apocalypse of Peter & Jerome -    • Gray Omits Anti-Paul Apocalypse of Peter S...   21 min. Episode 7 - Paul's Own Writings - Anti-Paul Evidence Itself -    • Gray Omits Paul's Own Writings as Potentia...   44 min. Episode 8 - Founders of Reformation -- First Carlstadt, and Luther in 1537 till 1546 di    • Gray Omits Mention Both Founders of Reform...   23 minutes. Episode 9 - Tertullian Downplayed as "Wariness" only.    • Gray Says Tertullian was "wary" of Paul bu...   59 min. Episode 10 - Ebion -- 12 Apostles Church - Downplayed.    • Gray Gives Short Shrift to Ebion -- 12 apo...   Episode 11 - Renan and Wrede -    • Gray Misreads Renan as Anti-Paul; Ignores ...   25 mnis. Episode 12 - Clementine Homilies -    • Gray Omits Any Mention of  Clementine Homi...   7 mins.. Episode 14 - Ebion Writigs in Dead Sea Scrolls -    • Gray Incredibly Omits Greatest Discovery o...   7 min Episode 15 - Could Gray have Seen Kierkegaard As a Brilliant and Brave Anti-Paulinist?    • Could Gray have Seen Kierkegaard As a Bril...   25 min. Episode 16 - Could Gray have Seen Kierkegaard As a Brilliant and Brave Anti-Paulinist? - 44 min.    • Could Gray have Seen Kierkegaard As a Bril...   Quick Dismissals of Canonical Sources of Anti-Paulinism: James & Jude In Gray's list of canonical sources of Anti-Paulinism, Gray mentions there are two possible canonical critics of Paul -- namely James and Jude. (Kindle Loc. 506-08.) But as to James, he quickly marshals there is a panoply of interpretations that dismiss James' words that man is not justified by "faith alone" is supposedly not truly about Paul's doctrine. See James 2:14. Thus, Gray raises only doubts whether James is really addressing Paul. But it is obvious that all of James' epistle addresses Paul, as Augustine pointed out in 413 AD, as discussed above. For James not only takes on Paul's claim of faith alone, and crushes it, but also he takes on Paul's assertion that Abraham was justified by faith alone, and crushes it too. In fact, there are over 11 topic areas that James refutes Paul. See James versus Paul. Luther had it right, by looking not just at the verse "faith alone does not justify" in James 2:24, as Gray does. Instead, Luther also compared 2:24 to James 2:21 which likewise contradicted Paul's view that Abraham was supposedly justified by faith alone. As Luther wrote: Many sweat hard at reconciling James with Paul, but unsuccessfully. ‘Faith justifies [Romans 3:28] stands in flat contradiction of ‘faith that does not justify’ [James 2:24.] If anyone can harmonize these sayings, I’ll put my doctor’s cap on him and let him call me a fool....Flatly against St. Paul and all the rest of Scripture, it [James] ascribes righteousness to works, and says Abraham was justified by his works, in that he offered his son Isaac [James 2:21], though St. Paul, on the contrary teaches in Romans 4 [vv. 2-3], that Abraham was justified without works, by faith alone, before he offered his son, and proves it by Moses in Genesis 15 [v.6]. [Quoted in Jason Von Vliet, Living Waters from Ancient Springs: Essays in Honor of Cornelis Van Dam (Wipf & Stock Publishers 2011) at 103.] Incidentally, Paul's error in Romans 4:2-3 was to rely upon the ambiguous part of the mistranslation of Genesis 15:6 by the Septuagint Greek translation from 257 BC. See Jesus' Words on Salvation, ch. 26, part 7 at this link. In the original Hebrew, it merely says that Abraham regarded God's promise of a son in old age as justness / righteousness toward Abraham. It had nothing to do with salvific justification by faith, let alone by faith alone. JUDE The same defect applies to Gray's treatment of Jude. Gray again solely focuses upon a single verse in Jude. This isolated verse is about an "ungodly person" who has perverted God's "grace" to open a door for "licentiousness." (Kindle Loc. 544.) But Gray quickly dismisses its importance to proving Jude is aimed at Paul. For example, Jude equates a "wolf in sheep's" clothing who penetrated Christianity with a lawless doctrine that twists God's "grace" into "licentiousness," and who shares the lessons of Balaam. The latter aspect clearly refers to Paul because Paul taught Balaam's doctrine which Jesus references and then condemned in Rev. 2:14 --- that it was inherently ok to eat meat sacrificed to idols although not expedient when around a brother who thinks it wrong. See 1 Cor. 10:28-29 and 1 Cor. 8:4-12. Thus, George Reber, a Paul defender, in The Christ of Paul (1876) defensively said: "The Epistle of Jude is nothing but a bolt hurled at the head of Paul." (Link.) If you want to see how Jude's proofs apply to Paul and his principles, see this link.