You are in
BibleNet / Scripture Net » NT » Jas

From Expositors, in loc¹

1. Authorship

Even though this epistle names its author, it does not specify his actual identity. James was a common name in the first century. Indeed, there are in the NT four men called James. Of these, only two have ever been seriously suggested as possible authors of this epistle. A very few scholars have understood the writer to be James the son of Zebedee, one of the twelve apostles. Most scholars, however, have recognized that he was martyred too early (A.D. 44) to have written the epistle (Acts 12:1–2).

Since at least the third century, the most prominent view has been that James, the Lord’s brother (Mark 6:3), wrote the book. This was the belief of Origen (c. A.D. 185–253), Eusebius (c. 265–340), and Jerome (c. 340–520). In more recent times other views have been advanced, such as that the designation “James” (1:1) is a pseudonym, that the epistle was originally anonymous, that it was written by an unknown James, or that it was the product of a disciple of the Lord’s brother and thus represented the teaching of James.

However, the evidence of the epistle itself favors the traditional identification of the Lord’s brother as author. The characteristics of James the brother of the Lord as seen in Acts 21:17–25, in Galatians 2:12, and in the description of “James the Just” by Hegesippus (Eusebius Ecclesiastical History 2.23) all are in harmony with the heavy emphasis on genuine religious practice and ethical conduct apparent in the epistle. The vocabulary of James’s speech and letter in Acts 15:13–29 reveals significant similarity to that of the epistle (Mayor, pp. iii-iv). The authoritative tone of the epistle (forty-six imperatives) agrees well with the authority exercised by James in Acts 15:13 ff.; 21:18.

2. Date

Some writers, not accepting the view that James the Lord’s brother wrote the epistle, have dated it either late in the first century or some time between A.D. 100 and 150. But if the Lord’s brother is identified as author, the book must have originated prior to A.D. 62, when, according to Josephus, James was martyred.

Among those who hold the traditional view of authorship, there are two general opinions. Some argue for a date near the end of James’s life, perhaps in the early sixties; others insist that the epistle was written before A.D. 50. If the latter date is correct, James may have been the first NT book written. Several considerations make it probable that James wrote between A.D. 45 and 50.

1. The Jewish orientation of the epistle fits the earlier period much more naturally than the later. That the author does not refer to Gentiles or related subjects may well point to the time in the history of the early church when Gentiles were only beginning to be reached with the gospel.

2. The absence of any reference to the controversy concerning the Judaizers and their insistence on Gentile circumcision is best explained by the earlier date.

3. The close affinity of the teaching of James to that of the OT and Christ is significant. If the epistle were later, one might expect to find a greater similarity to the writings of Paul, such as is apparent in 1 Peter, for example.

4. Furthermore, the evidence of a simple church order favors the early date. The leaders are “teachers” (3:1) and “elders” (5:14).

5. Finally, the use of the Greek term synagoge (synagogue; NIV, “meeting”) to describe the church assembly or meeting place (2:2) points to the early period when Christianity was largely confined to Jewish circles.

3. Destination

The epistle is addressed to “the twelve tribes scattered among the nations” (1:1). Although this is quite indefinite, it does reveal something about the recipients. The expression “twelve tribes” is clearly Jewish and no doubt was intended to identify the readers as Jews. The description of their congregation or meeting place as a synagoge (2:2) also supports this interpretation. Another indication that the recipients were Jews is the use in 5:4 of the Hebrew title kyriou sabaoth (“Lord Almighty”; lit., “Lord of hosts”).

The author further limits his intended readership by statements that assume the recipients are Christians. The most explicit statement of this kind is the pointed imperative of 2:1: “My brothers, as believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ, don’t show favoritism.” Here James clearly assumes that the Jews he is addressing are followers of Christ. The same fact is less explicitly indicated in the insistence of 5:7, that the brothers should be patient until the Lord comes, and in the further instruction that they “stand firm, because the Lord’s coming is near” (5:8). It would seem then, that the epistle was addressed to Jewish believers in Jesus as Messiah.

The geographical location of these Jewish Christians is not specifically identified. They are merely described as “scattered among the nations” (1:1), which means they were not centered in one locality. Beyond this the biblical text does not take us. It is possible, however, to theorize about the identity of the addresses. Some have suggested that they were the believers who were forced to leave Jerusalem during the persecution that followed Stephen’s death. These Jewish \Christians spread out over Judea and Samaria (Acts 8:1) and even as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus, and Syrian Antioch (Acts 11:19).

It is most reasonable to assume that James, the leading elder of the Jerusalem church, would feel responsible for these former “parishioners” and attempt to instruct them somewhat as he would have done had they still been under his care in Jerusalem. The epistle reveals his intimate knowledge of their circumstances and characteristics. And he writes with the note of authority expected of one who had been recognized as a spiritual leader in the Jerusalem church.

4. Occasion and Purpose

If it is correctly assumed that James, the leader of the Jerusalem church, wrote this epistle to believers who had been dispersed from Jerusalem in the persecution following Stephen’s death, the occasion for writing is fairly clear. These Jewish Christians, scattered throughout the area east of the Mediterranean Sea, no longer had contact with the apostles; nor was James among them to instruct and exhort them.

Difficulties—perhaps persecutions—were confronting them (1:2–4); the ungodly rich were oppressing them (5:1–6); the religion of some was becoming a superficial formality (1:22–27; 2:14–26); discriminatory practices revealed a lack of love (2:1–13); and bitterness in speech (3:1–12) and attitude (3:13–4:3) marred their fellowship. Apparently reports of such problems among the scattered brothers had reached James in Jerusalem. In response, he wrote as pastor in absentia to urge his people to make the needed changes in their lives and in their corporate relationships.

5. Canonicity

The epistle was not readily received into the collection of writings that were viewed as being on a par with the OT Scriptures. It was rejected by some as late as the time of Eusebius (c. 265–340). Few early Christian writers refer to it. The Muratorian Canon (c. 170) omits it, as does the OL version. Such negative evidence could be taken as ground for doubting the authority of the book if it were not that, after a period of questioning, the churches finally granted unanimous recognition to it as canonical. It had successfully passed the test. Further more, there are reasonable explanations for the late acceptance of the epistle. Eusebius himself explained that some denied the book because few ancient writers had quoted from it (Ecclesiastical History 2.23). It was not questioned because any fault was found with its teaching, but merely because it had not been widely used. There are reasons why this condition existed. Among these are its untheological nature, its brevity, the question of James’s identity, the fact that it was not written by one of the twelve apostles, and its general address (sent to no specific person or church).

In due time, such authorities as Eusebius and Jerome (c. 340–420) placed their stamp of approval on the book, and the Council of Carthage (397) recognized its canonicity. Ultimately, churches everywhere were reading it as authoritative Scripture.

6. Relation to Other Writings

Many attempts have been made to trace a connection between the Epistle of James and numerous biblical and extrabiblical writings (e.g., Prov, the synoptic Gospels, Rom, 1 Cor, Gal, 1 Peter, Ecclus, Philo). In a number of cases it is uncertain who influenced whom. In other instances, the similarities prove no literary reliance of any kind. There are, however, two areas where the literary relationships seem relatively well defined and significant. The similarity between the Epistle of James and the teachings of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount has often been noted. A clear example of this connection is seen in James 5:12: “Above all, my brothers, do not swear—not by heaven or by earth or by anything else. Let your ‘Yes’ be yes, and your ‘No,’ no, or you will be condemned.” This teaching was obviously derived from the words of Jesus recorded in Matthew 5:34–37. Jesus said, “But I tell you, Do not swear at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King…. Simply let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.” Other related statements include James 2:5 (Luke 6:20), James 3:10–12 (Matt 7:16–20), and James 3:18 (Matt 5:9). From such parallels we may conclude that James reflects the thoughts and often the very words of Christ.

Another possible literary relationship is that between James and the wisdom writings. Some, in fact, have described James as NT wisdom literature. Ropes, on the other hand, writes, “In the Wisdom-literature, as a literary type, it is impossible to place James” (p. 17).

It is true that James was not written in the same style as Proverbs, where one finds long series of proverbial statements structured in the parallel form characteristic of Hebrew poetry. Nevertheless, the two have noteworthy affinities. For example, the pithy, proverbial style of James should be noted (1:8, 22; 4:17), as well as the juxtaposition of good and evil (3:13–18). Also James’s use of the word “wisdom” is significant (1:5; 3:13–17). In James 1:5 wisdom is the understanding that enables a person to face trials, and in 3:13–17 it is an attitude that determines how one lives. The Book of Proverbs abounds with references to wisdom, always viewing it as the kind of understanding that produces a sensible and an upright life. And in Proverbs as in James wisdom has its source in God. Another evidence of affinity between James and Proverbs appears in the area of quotation and allusion. James 4:6 is a direct citation of Proverbs 3:34. In addition, there are numerous concepts or expressions in James that may be traced back to Proverbs (cf. James 1:5 with Prov 2:6; 1:19 with Prov 29:20; 3:18 with Prov 11:30; 4:13–16 with Prov 27:1; and 5:20 with Prov 10:12). Parallels to other wisdom literature could also be cited.

7. Theological Values

The Epistle of James is without doubt the least theological of all NT books, with the exception of Philemon. In fact, one of the reasons for the delay in canonical recognition of the epistle was its lack of theological content. Having recognized this, however, one must hasten to insist that the book is not without theological value. The practical emphases of James rest on a solid theological foundation, which is often explicitly revealed and perhaps more often assumed or implied. Three doctrines come to the surface more often than any others, and of these the most prominent is the doctrine of God. In keeping with the ethical nature of the epistle is the repeated stress on the doctrine of sin. And, surprisingly, the third most prominent theological theme is eschatology. God is seen as being generous (1:5) and holy (1:13), the unchanging source of good (1:17). He is the one and only God (2:19), the Father of his people and the prototype in whose likeness men were created (3:9). Furthermore he is sovereign (4:15) and just (5:4), filled with pity and tender mercy (5:11). James views sin as universal (3:2), indwelling all persons (1:14–15) and resulting in death (1:15). It expresses itself in anger (1:20), moral filth (1:21), blasphemy (2:7), discrimination (2:11), bitterness and lust (4:1–3), intimate ties with the evil world (4:4), pride (4:6), and theft and oppression (5:4). In the third area of theological emphasis, James sees the end time as the day of rewards (1:12), the day when God’s kingdom will be introduced (2:5), the day of judgment (2:12; 3:1), and the day when the Lord will return (5:7–8).

Several other doctrines receive limited mention. Christ is described as Lord (1:1; 2:1), but the Holy Spirit is not referred to unless it be in 4:5. In the area of soteriology, James speaks of regeneration (1:18), salvation of the soul (1:21), and justification (2:21–25). He promises the believer forgiveness of sins (5:15). He discusses the relation of saving faith and resultant good deeds (2:14–26). And he makes incidental reference to church order when he speaks of elders (5:14).

8. Bibliography

Adamson, James. The Epistle of James, NIC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976.
Barclay, William. The Letters of James and Peter. The Daily Study Bible Philadelphia: Westminster, 1960.
Blackman, E. C. The Epistle of James. Torch Bible Commentaries. London: SCM, 1957.
Carr, A. Epistle of St. James. CGT. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1895.
Easton, B. S. The Epistle of James. IB. Vol. 12. New York: Abingdon, 1957.
Hort, F. J. A. The Epistle of James. London: Macmillan, 1909.
Lenski, R. C. H. The Interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and of the Epistle of James. Columbus, Ohio: Wartburg, 1946.
Mayor, J. B. The Epistle of St. James. 3rd. ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1954.
Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, A Companion Volume to the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament. 3rd ed. New York: UBS, 1971.
Mitton, C. Leslie. The Epistle of James. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1966.
Moffatt, James. The General Epistles of James, Peter, and Judas. MNT. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1928.
Plummer, Alfred. The General Epistles of St. James and St. Jude. ExB. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1897.
Ropes, James H. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle of St. James. ICC. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1916.
Ross, Alexander. The Epistles of James and John. NIC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1954.
Tasker, R. V. G. The General Epistle of James. TNTC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956.

9. Outline (References in outline are tied to commentary.)

I. Salutation (1:1)
II. Trials and Temptations (1:2–18)
1. The Testing of Faith (1:2–12)
2. The Source of Temptation (1:13–18)
III. The Practice of the Word (1:19–27)
IV. The Condemnation of Partiality (2:1–13)
V. The Relation of Faith and Action (2:14–26)
VI. The Control of the Tongue (3:1–12)
VII. Two Kinds of Wisdom (3:13–18)
VIII. The Worldly Attitude (4:1–10)
IX. Faultfinding (4:11–12)
X. Arrogant Self-Sufficiency (4:13–17)
XI. Denunciation of the Wicked Rich (5:1–6)
XII. Miscellaneous Exhortations (5:7–20)
1. Concerning Patience (5:7–11)
2. Concerning Oaths (5:12)
3. Concerning Prayer (5:13–18)
4. Concerning the Wanderer (5:19–20)

View  Edit  History  Attach  Print  Search     Page last modified on 09/21/2007 09:59:32 AM