The challenge of James is, of course, a double one. The more important one is to do what it says; that’s hard. But there is also the challenge of finding coherence in its message: What is James about? What is its point? And linked with this: What is its structure? I will start with the latter.
End of July, my mom passed away. I am sad but grateful for a life well lived. But for this reason, there is no recording this month; perhaps later!
Structure?
There are those who find virtually no structure; James, so they argue, is simply about many things, a string of pearls, much like the book of Proverbs. That certainly is the first impression we get. The illustration with many arrows fits James so well, I reuse the image this month. But it is also unlikely, especially seeing James has given great attention to detail in how he presents his thoughts.
Some find a chiastic structure in James but have not been successful in persuading their colleagues of this. Others argue for a structure in line with the principles of ancient rhetoric. In this view, James 1:2-18 is the exordium, the introduction, and James 1:19-27 the propositio or thesis statement (Witherington 2007: 406). Not only would this be a rather long thesis statement, but like chiasm, it has also failed to convince most scholars, who find it forced (so for instance McCartney 2009: 60-62).
There is at least one point of agreement among interpreters: James 1 functions as an introduction because many of its topics and terms reappear in the remainder of the letter.
Richard Bauckham (1999: vi; 63-69) therefore sees James 2-5 as the exposition of what is stated briefly in James 1. In addition, he points to hard, structural markers in James 2-5 that break the text into 12 units. The crucial markers are the address of the readers as brothers and/or a question at or near the beginning of a unit plus an aphorism, a short, memorable saying, at the end.
I have included an overview of these 12 units as an appendix to this issue, which also makes visible that some of these units topically belong together.
In terms of structure, this is probably as good as it gets. What about coherence?
It is a mistake to think that coherence in James must be sought in the form of a logical sequence of thought running through the whole text. (Bauckham 1999: 112)
Main Idea?
Is there a main idea or central concern that gives James coherence? There are rather different views on this. A few examples.
Dan McCartney (2009: 56f) identifies genuine faith as the “controlling theme”.
David Dockery (1986: 69) explains how consistency, or true piety, is interwoven with much of the message of James:
James pictures true piety as the direct application of the implanted word in the life of the believer. The result vertically is the submission to and worship of God. The result horizontally is concern for the poor, widows and orphans in distress. The result relationally is living peaceably with others in the church. The result inwardly is the humility, purity and gentleness of character that comes from heavenly wisdom.
Christopher Morgan (2010) argues for “wisdom for consistency in the community”.
My own take in the previous issue was “be doers of the word”.
There are many more. How can we know?
Cohesion and Coherence
Is James simply about many things or does it have a coherent message and a centre? At this point, a distinction pointed out by Stanley Porter (2019: 46-48) is useful.
Coherence is about ideas: How do the ideas presented in a text relate to each other? Or do they not?
Cohesion is about the text: How is it put (and therefore ‘hangs’) together? This includes structure and much else.
Porter goes on to show that James shows substantial cohesion. The text is carefully crafted. Strong cohesion makes it unlikely that coherence would be lacking. So let’s search for it by tracing cohesion.
One tool to create cohesion is the use of chain words in James 1:
“Trials” in James 1:2 repeats as “testing” in James 1:3 combined with “steadfastness”.
“Steadfastness” is repeated in James 1:4 together with its aim of being “perfect” and “lacking nothing”, near-synonyms (repeated in James 1:17, 1:25 and 3:2; the idea also appears in the Sermon on the Mount, Mt. 5:48).
“Lacking” reappears in James 1:5 as “lacks wisdom”, together with “ask”.
“Ask” is repeated in James 1:6 with “faith” and “no doubting”.
James 1:9-11 looks like an interruption; it shows no obvious textual link to its immediate context. Perhaps the “lowly brother” is the one being tested, and the rich person is one source of the other’s trials (as suggested by James 2:6 and the “therefore” in James 5:7, which follows a paragraph denouncing rich and abusive landowners). But certainly, poverty would be a significant source of trial and testing: it is hard to be poor. James points to the upside, based on the upside-down values of the kingdom.
This paragraph on rich and poor is therefore definitely related to the immediate context of trials. As Cynthia Westfall (2019: 41) put it: “A person with the challenge of being poor can take pride in their high position in God … The rich must embrace humiliation – they are the ones with the problem”.
James 1:12ff picks up the terms “trial”, “test”, “tempted”, and “steadfast”. By the way, steadfastness in trials will return as a subject toward the end of the letter, in James 5:7-11.
The two halves of James 1 (2-18 and 19-27) are chain-linked by the reference to “the word of truth” in James 1:18 which needs to be heard, which needs to be received, which needs to be done in James 1:19 and following. And so it continues. Cohesion indeed.
Clearly, steadfastness in trials and doing the word, or rather, more broadly, the practice of true and pure religion emerge as two major and central concerns of the letter.
But there is more.
Six Pairs of Contrasts
In a thorough analysis of James 1, Cynthia Westfall (2019: 26f) discovers six pairs of contrasts that give it structure. Each pair is about desired and undesired characteristics of a person:
- Asking in faith versus doubting (James 1:5-8)
- The poor versus the rich (James 1:9-11)
- Remaining steadfast under trial versus tempted by evil (James 1:12-15)
- Being quick to hear versus anger etc. (James 1:19-21)
- Doers of the word versus hearers only (James 1:22-25)
- Worthless religion versus pure and undefiled religion (James 1:26f)
Again we find steadfastness in trials and active religion or piety as foundational concerns in James. And with this, the author is not giving general teaching or instruction, but is reacting to what he knows is taking place in the communities he addresses:
1. They are facing trials, and this is “How You Should Respond to the Issues that You Are Facing” (ibid.: 41). In conclusion, James 1:16-18 urges them not to be deceived and misinterpret what is happening to them. The response to problems and trials is also the subject of James 5:7-18 and thus frames almost the entire text of James.
2. In various ways, they are getting off track in living their faith, reverting to the ways of the world, and James calls them back to the practice of true religion. This will be dealt with in more detail in James 2-4.
This is not only cohesive but also coherent. We are getting closer to the central concern of James.
A Coherent Message
Notice how well James 2 links with the end of James 1: Concern for widows and orphans (alias the poor) leads into an argument against partiality in relation to the rich; instead, love your neighbour. Faith must express itself through works (of love), or it is dead.
This has nothing to do with Paul. It is not primarily theological, an argument about justification by faith or by works. The concern of James is practical: true and pure religion means to do acts of love (James 1:27 and 2:15f). Their absence means the absence of true religion and faith.
James 3 turns from the absence of the good to the active negative: the evil of the tongue, a metonymy for speech, and the underlying evil passions. Evil speech leads to strife and other issues and is an indication of “friendship with the world” (James 4:4). Here, James becomes direct in his confrontation. Essentially, he is exhorting them to turn but uses forceful and imaginative words for this.
Then follows a denouncement of the rich, beginning in James 4:13. But there are two groups. The rich at the end of James 4 are merchants and in part insiders: James seeks to correct them. James 4:13-16 is therefore transitional. In structure, it resembles what follows, but in content, it is part of the corrective exhortation of James 3 and 4.
The rich in James 5:1-6 are landowners and outsiders; James denounces them as an Old Testament prophet would. Notice that James 5:7ff sets “the brothers” in contrast to the rich, calling on the believers to patiently wait.
It may well be, therefore, that the rich of James 5:1-6 are a significant cause of the trials indicated in James 5 and James 1:9-11. The connection between James 5:1-6 and 5:7-11 and James 2:6 suggest this. The passage on prayer (James 5:13-18) would then be part of the remedy: pray like Elijah (against Ahab). And of course, prayer is also a remedy for other trials the readers may face, such as illness.
James 5:19-20 seems abrupt; to some, it is a symptom of the incoherence of James. But considering the above, the final exhortation makes sense. Those in the communities who are on the right track (standing the test) need to help those who have departed from true faith and piety.
The Main Idea of James
I would therefore summarize the main idea of James as follows:
Pursuing true religion in the face of dealing with problems (trials)
But go and check for yourself. It will take more than one reading. But you will benefit much more from reading James than from reading my take on its structure and coherence.
Appendix: Richard Bauckham’s 12 Units
Below follows an overview of the 12 units in James 2-5 distinguished by Richard Bauckham (1999: 63-69). It is based on the presence of structural markers: address as brothers (B) and/or a question (Q) at the start and an aphorism at the end (A).
Instead of an aphorism, we have a closing question (A=Q) in James 4:12 and a reference to a biblical parallel (Job and Elijah) in James 5:7-11 and 5:13-18. In two cases, the address “Come now, you…” functions as the opening marker instead of “brothers”. In addition, I indicate in the final column which units appear to be topically related.
Interestingly, James 3:13 and 4:1 lack any opening address (B); James 4:11f is so clearly related to 3:1-4:10 topically that it is easy to see James 3:1-4:12 (or-17) as a cohesive unit.
If the rich of James 5:1-6 are a significant cause of trials of James 5 and James 1:9-11 (as suggested by the connection between James 5:1-6 and 5:7-11 and by James 2:6), the passage on prayer (James 5:13-18) may be part of the remedy: pray like Elijah (against Ahab).
Notice that this division establishes structure and to some extent cohesion, but not coherence.
Attribution
Geralt <https://pixabay.com/illustrations/arrows-center-direction-central-1738067/> [accessed 12 June 2023] CC0
References
Unless indicated differently, Scripture quotations are from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®, copyright © 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
Bauckham, Richard. 1999. James: Wisdom of James, Disciple of Jesus the Sage, New Testament Readings (London; New York: Routledge)
David S. Dockery. 1986. “True Piety in James: Ethical Admonitions and Theological Implications”, Criswell Theological Review 1.1: 51-70 <https://biblicalelearning.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Dockery-PietyInJames-CTR1.pdf> [accessed 19 July 2023]
McCartney, Dan G. 2009. James, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic)
Morgan, Christopher W. 2010. A Theology of James: Wisdom for God’s People, Explorations in Biblical Theology (Phillipsburg, N.J: P&R Pub)
Porter, Stanley E. 2019. “Cohesion in James: A Response to Martin Dibelius”, in The Epistle of James: Linguistic Exegesis of an Early Christian Letter, Linguistic Exegesis of the New Testament, Volume 1, ed. by James D. Dvorak and Zachary K. Dawson (Eugene, OR; Hamilton, Canada: Pickwick Publications; McMaster Divinity College Press), pp. 45-68.
Westfall, Cynthia Long. 2019. “Mapping the Text: How Discourse Analysis Helps Reveal the Way through James”, in The Epistle of James: Linguistic Exegesis of an Early Christian Letter, Linguistic Exegesis of the New Testament, Volume 1, ed. by James D. Dvorak and Zachary K. Dawson (Eugene, OR; Hamilton, Canada: Pickwick Publications; McMaster Divinity College Press), pp. 11-44.
Witherington, Ben. 2007. Letters and Homilies for Jewish Christians: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on Hebrews, James and Jude (Downers Grove, IL; Nottingham, UK: IVP Academic; Apollos)