Secret book of James (Brother of Jesus)

Early Christianity had far more books than the New Testament offers. One sect of Christian monks deemed Gnostic had to hide their scripture deemed Apocryphal by Athanasius in a cave around 400 AD

Tradition regards these books as forgeries. But the same could easily be said about the Old Testament and the New. I don't think the point was to tell a historic tale, but to write inspiring stories with true teachings.

When you have a book about James writing about secret teachings of Christ, you can scoff or you can be grateful that someone recorded what very well could be a letter written by James about an interaction with Christ.

Is it any harder than believing that a man rose from the dead or that God was crucified, killed and resurrected, ascended to heaven and communicated to Saul a totally different teaching than the one he spent three years spreading?



So, James is writing and the Savior appears to him and the Apostles who are all recording events and words of Jesus, 550 days after the resurrection.

"...no one will ever enter the Kingdom of heaven at my bidding, but (only) because you yourselves are full."

In Hebrew lingo "full" means learned in all Wisdom.

He requests to be alone with James and Peter and proceeds with a very profound lesson that may require multiple readings to grasp but is well worth the time.

Salvation is the major theme. A few quotes:

"Come to hate hypocrisy and evil thought; for it is the thought that gives birth to hypocrisy; hypocrisy is far from the truth."

" Become earnest about the Word! For as to the Word its first part is faith, the second, love; the third, works; for from these things comes life...; unless you receive this from knowledge, you will not be able to find it."

"Hearken to the Word, understand knowledge, love life, and no one will persecute you, nor will anyone oppress you, other than yourselves."

My absolute favorite though:

"Woe to you who stand in need of grace! Blessed will they be who have spoken out and obtained grace for themselves."


Secret Book of James


Enjoy.

a reply to: Szarah
Even if you could prove beyond reasonable doubt James wrote this, it would still be rejected. Anything that doesn't jive with current Christian doctrine and theology is thrown out. Jesus himself would be crucified a second time if he even suggested the church and their holy book might be wrong about him.

a reply to: Klassified

You are correct. I will just have to canonize it myself!

Good stuff.

a reply to: Klassified

James is truly the most historically verifiable person in the Bible so anything with his name on it I read.

He even was the leader of the entire community that surrounds the Dead Sea Scrolls, Ebionites and Zadokites, serious people.

He was known as the Righteous One which became the Just. It was a leaders title in Hebrew making James the man, after Yeshua.

So if it has the name James on a it then it's Kosha, automatically unquestionably
Anything with James attached
That sounds just a little silly

You say lots of things but you don't back any thing up with anything valid other than your own Opinion
and judging by the amount of times you have been banned for less than gracious remarks, most don't value your opinion even a little bit

Even better you have Klass agreeing with you.

Though, I think Klass is right, many in the church would, maybe will try and kill Christ again.

Out of curiosity , first thing that comes to mind reading this is the whole thing Christians use to naysay occult teachers.. Some bible passage about God is open and not hiding and anything hidden does not come from the Lord..

Now I'm no scholar but was raised in church and always heard that in rebuttal to anything outside of canon..

Do you agree? If so how do you reconcile?

a reply to: Szarah

originally posted by: SteamyJeans
Out of curiosity , first thing that comes to mind reading this is the whole thing Christians use to naysay occult teachers.. Some bible passage about God is open and not hiding and anything hidden does not come from the Lord..

Now I'm no scholar but was raised in church and always heard that in rebuttal to anything outside of canon..

Do you agree? If so how do you reconcile?

a reply to: Szarah

I do not even believe in a single canon and believe you can benefit spiritually from defying tradition and embracing that which they don't want you to read.

The reason they don't want you to read them has nothing to do with authenticity and everything to do with authority over man by claiming to know the will of God.

Any limitations on scripture stunts spiritual evolution as you submit to human authority and never wonder why do these books still exist if God has decided they are uninspired.

Further, Papal writings and declarations are believed to have more authority than the Bible in Catholicism.

The Talmud is of greater authority than the Tanakh, as is the Zohar.

Fundamental Christianity is against any non Biblical writing associated with Christ. And pro-authoritarian even forbidding the reading of them.

Which is reason enough to read them. Find out for yourself if you can benefit spiritually from them or not.

a reply to: SteamyJeans

Also Jesus spoke of secret teachings himself and secret meanings to even his public sayings.

It is impossible that the New Testament contains all his teachings in 33 years.

Years 12-30 are a blank. Egypt is likely but nobody knows where he was or what he did.

And if he can appear to Paul even if only psychically he can appear to the Apostles and in his human form if he wants.

John ends his Gospel saying the deeds of Christ could fill more books than the world can hold.

originally posted by: Raggedyman
So if it has the name James on a it then it's Kosha, automatically unquestionably
Anything with James attached
That sounds just a little silly

You say lots of things but you don't back any thing up with anything valid other than your own Opinion
and judging by the amount of times you have been banned for less than gracious remarks, most don't value your opinion even a little bit

Even better you have Klass agreeing with you.

Though, I think Klass is right, many in the church would, maybe will try and kill Christ again.

You are misrepresenting what I said. I said I will read anything with James name on it.

Nothing about kosher legitimacy at all.

I have no question that I have said nothing that is worthy of a negative response either.


What's your beef?

originally posted by: Raggedyman
So if it has the name James on a it then it's Kosha, automatically unquestionably
Anything with James attached
That sounds just a little silly

You say lots of things but you don't back any thing up with anything valid other than your own Opinion
and judging by the amount of times you have been banned for less than gracious remarks, most don't value your opinion even a little bit

Even better you have Klass agreeing with you.

Though, I think Klass is right, many in the church would, maybe will try and kill Christ again.

Are you a Fascist, are opinions based on knowledge bad or forbidden? I am not talking about minotaurs here and the history of the early church is murky, sketchy even.

The oldest Bible is mid 3rd century. The Nag Hammadi scriptures are about as old.

I just don't think you understand them or are even ambitious enough to try.

And are bias by the majority opinion and desire to belong to the in crowd. You are welcome to conform if you choose.

But don't hate me because I refuse and have found a better Way for me.

Maybe following is your destiny. The WIDE path.

And mine is total independence. The narrow path.

Can't argue with that.
Thanks for the response.

While slightly predictable, That was more or less always my opinion on the whole thing also.

Once it's forbidden , one must question the authority and at least Give it a look...



a reply to: Szarah

originally posted by: SteamyJeans
Can't argue with that.
Thanks for the response.

While slightly predictable, That was more or less always my opinion on the whole thing also.

Once it's forbidden , one must question the authority and at least Give it a look...



a reply to: Szarah

Agreed. Why is it banned and was it proper are things I must judge for myself.

My answer was predictable or your opinion? Which since we agree more or less I am guessing that you mean it is obvious that this opinion is more logical than following the rulers rules.

Yea predictable for me because it makes the most sense...

Also being raised baptist and still surrounded by it in my family life, I can basically argue both sides of this coin with what I would consider convincing arguments.. So ya on my internal argument your response would be expected ..

Only to be rebuked with " The holy bible is holy and perfectly how God wants it"

So obviously there the shut down and the call to "faith"... Which apparently James called of 1st importance... But I suspect he meant a different kind of faith than the water downed submissive sort most "Christians" subscribe too..

"Christians" because on my first 16 years of life being in churches I probably witnessed 20 people maximum with what I would consider "Christ like qualities"... You know the hard ones to achieve, not the easy ones like hating gays,etc..

a reply to: Szarah

a reply to: Szarah

This is the most Hebrew of the texts of the Gnostic Christians and has a great chance of matching the legitimacy of any Bible book.

Thank you for the link. There are indeed many scriptures which are rarely/never talked about. The Vedas are the oldest scriptures on Earth, yet are rejected because many people misunderstand the label "Hindu". "True "Hinduism" is not a religion. There are orthodox extremists the same way there are extremists "Christians", and members of every other religion.

originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: Szarah
Even if you could prove beyond reasonable doubt James wrote this, it would still be rejected. Anything that doesn't jive with current Christian doctrine and theology is thrown out. Jesus himself would be crucified a second time if he even suggested the church and their holy book might be wrong about him.

It is strange Jesus didn't write a line himself.
What did he say about the off world beings that were well known to ancients? Of angels that were well known to the Jews?
Why the Christian Church in Middle ages forbade the mention of all names of archangels except for the 3 well known? Why is it still taboo to talk about that, centuries after Galileo?

I wouldn't touch the moral teaching, but certainly it is as explosive.

Jesus would be brutally killed today if he would have come again as common man. Thanks God he would not!