I wonder if...there are some posts (ie, books) in the bible that are less "filtered" than others. Meaning, the writer's personality either got more in the way of God saying something or less in the way. Perhaps those writers who earned appellations (eg. David being a man after God's own heart, Daniel being a friend of God, John being the disciple whom Jesus loved) were those most apt to put down on paper exactly what God said, regardless of whether they understood it or not.
If this is true, the Psalms is thus a treasure trove of things past, present and future. David dutifully recorded it all. Surely he had to scratch his head many times and say "I have no idea what I just wrote!"
On the other hand, and I say this gingerly, the book of James may be an example of a writer whose personality just plain got in the way. Martin Luther thought that book shouldn't have even been canonized. Many have seized upon James to justify their proud works over someone's "mere" faith. Confusion and contention stem from James's writings. That's not to say that James shouldn't be in the bible. God has been able to "overcome" James. But it certainly hasn't made things easy for the Church following on the heels of James!
That's why I see James as a sort of spiritual "smoke detector." Depending on the slant someone takes, I can then figure out where their heart is, what their orientation is regarding leading by the Spirit vs. leading by the Flesh.
So I can't relax when I read James. But I can when I read David. Or the prophets. Or John. Or Daniel. Or...