III. HISTORICAL ANALYSIS


1. Problem addressed in 2:14-26

  • Issue: What is the trouble in the text?
  • James is not writing an abstract theological discourse on faith and works but addressing a very specific and real situation: What is that situation?


2. Real or Hypothetical Situation?

  • The conditional ("if") clauses that open not only 2:14-26 (vv 14, 15-16) but also 2:1-13 (v 2) have led many scholars to conclude that the situation being addressed in James 2 is hypothetical and does not address a real situation.
    • The NIV thus translates 2:15 not "If a brother or sister..." but "Suppose a brother or sister..." (so also 2:2)
    • Douglas Moo: "How realistic is this incident? ...the Greek construction James uses to describe the incident (ean with the subjunctive mood) suggests (though it does not require) that James is giving a hypothetical example. And the hypothetical nature of the situation is underscored by the indefiniteness of brother or sister" (The Letter of James. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000, p. 124).
  • Response #1: Grammatical argument
    • Better to view 3rd class condition as describing a general or common situation.
  • Response #2: Contextual argument
    • Emphasis expressed through addition of "or sister" and present tense of participle "lacking"
    • Blomberg & Kamell: "James could be presenting a hypothetical objection for the sake of his argument, but it seems likely that some in his congregation were making precisely this inquiry. Why else would vv. 14-26 rebut the viability of a lifeless orthodoxy so strenuously?" (James. Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 2008, p. 129)
  • Response #3: "from you" in v 16
    • Dan McCartney: "Two little words make it clear that this situation is not simply a parabolic analogy. James says, 'If someone from among you [ἐξ  ὑμῶν, ex hymôn] says' (2:16). If he were only making a comparison, he simply would have said, 'If someone says,' not specifying 'from among you'" (James. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2009, p. 156)
  • Response #4: Rhetorical argument
    • Duane Watson: "Even if [the situation] is hypothetical, historical information can still be gleaned from the example because it was selected to address a specific rhetorical situation" ("James 2 and Greco-Roman Argumentation," New Testament Studies 39 [1993] p. 98)


3. Discrimination against the Poor

  • On a general level, the historical situation is clear: the church is showing favoritism to the rich and discriminating against (2:1-13) and neglecting (2:14-26) the poor.
    • 2:15: Church fails to help out "a brother or sister who is without clothes and daily food."
    • 2:2-4: Problem made clearer by previous verses in chapter 2 which explicitly refer to church showing special attention to the rich and discriminating against the poor.
  • On a specific level, the historical situation is less clear
    • Option #1: Worship context
      • Verse 2: "If a man comes into your meeting (synagôgê) ..."
      • Synagogue: one of the activities that took place at a synagogue is worship.
    • Option #2: Judicial context
      • Verse 2: "If a man comes into your meeting (synagôgê) ..."
      • Synagogue: another one of the activities that took place at a synagogue is the adjudication of legal matters.
      • Note verse 6: "Is it not the rich who oppress you and drag you into court?"
  • Conclusion: Although the specific historical context remains uncertain (a worship or juridical context?), the general context is clear: the Jewish Christian church's favoritism of the rich and discrimination and neglect of the poor.
  • Serious problem in light of the law's summary to love not only God but also one's neighbor (cited by James in verse 8: "If you really fulfill the royal law, according to the scriptures, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself'...")
  • Significance:
    • James' discussion of faith and works in 2:14-26 needs to be heard in this particular historical context.
    • To a church community which is discriminating against and neglecting its poor members, James emphasizes "works"--not as a means to obtain righteousness but as a natural and essential element of true, saving faith.
    • James in 2:14-26 is not contrasting faith versus works but two kinds of faith: a false faith versus a true faith.


4. Explanation of 1st negative example
1st example (vv 15-16): Instead of giving a fellow believer in need clothes and food, the church gives only empty words: "Go in peace! Keep warm and well fed!"

  • 1st command: "Go in peace!" (Greek: hypagete en eirênê) is a common Hebrew expression of farewell: leku leshalom.
    • Thus words are an empty pious cliché (NAB: "Good-bye and good luck!").
  • 2nd Command: "Keep warm and well fed!"
    • These two commands correspond to the two needs identified in previous verse
      • Need #1: "naked" Pious cliché: "Keep warm!"
      • Need #2: "lacking daily food" Pious cliché: "Keep well fed!"
    • Luke Timothy Johnson: "The exhortations correspond to the conditions of nakedness and hunger, revealing that the speaker knows the needs but refuses to meet them" (The Letter of James. New York: Doubleday, 1995, p. 239).
  • Application:
    • The kind of faith that sees someone in need and then only utters a pious cliché is a faith that is "all talk and no action."
    • False or non-saving nature of this kind of faith is indicated by the apodosis: "What is the profit" (v 16b)--a rhetorical question that always expects a negative answer.
    • James spells this out in v 17: "In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead."
    • Contrast in 1st example is not faith versus works but rather a false, non-saving faith (with no works) versus a true, saving faith (with works).
    • Douglas Moo: "It is absolutely vital to understand that the main point of this argument, expressed three times (in vv. 17, 20 and 26), is not that works must be added to faith but that genuine faith includes works. That is its very nature” (James. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985, 99).


5. Explanation of 2nd negative example
2nd example (v 19): The false or non-saving faith of the demons is defined as believing that "God is one."

  • Phrase "God is one" is clear reference to the "Shema": "Here, O Israel: The Lord, our God, the Lord is one."
    • Most important monotheistic confession of Jews (Deut 6:4; Josephus, Ant. 3.91; 4.201; 5.112; Ep. Arist. 132; Sib. Or. 3.629)
  • Application:
    • True, saving faith involves more than just knowing about God.
    • The demons know about God's existence and oneness ("Even the demons believe that ...") but their faith is clearly insufficient ("... and they shudder").
  • Reformers: Distinguished 3 aspects of faith
    • Knowledge (notitia): intellectual understanding of something.
    • Belief (assensus): belief that this something is true.
    • Trust (fiducia): commit yourself personally to this true thing.
  • Example of Marriage
    • It is one thing to intellectually understand the concept of marriage (notitia) and also to believe in it as a valid human institution (assensus); it is quite another thing to walk down the aisle and say, "I do!" (fiducia).
    • It is one thing to intellectually understand God's existence (notitia) and also to believe God's existence (assensus); it is quite another thing to personally commit yourself to God (fiducia).


6. Explanation of 1st positive example
1st example (vv 21-24): James illustrates true, saving faith by reminding his readers of the "binding of Isaac" story.

  • Story would have been well-known to his Jewish readers and there is no need for him to spell out all of the details of Abraham's life, including the offering of his son, Isaac, on the altar.
    • If the modern audience is not familiar with these details, the preacher must spell it out for them, since James assumes the knowledge of these things.
  • Explanation (v 22): James explains this example by stating: "You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did."
  • Plural "actions" and imperfect tense ("were working") are significant: James is not thinking of just this one action of offering up Isaac but the actions (plural!) throughout Abraham's life that testified to his true, saving faith.
  • Conclusion (v 24): James concludes this positive example of true, saving faith by stating, "You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone."
    • James here sounds contradictory to Paul.
    • Key, however, is the last word in the sentence: "alone" (monon).
    • Faith alone for James is a false faith that has no works.


7. Explanation of 2nd positive example
2nd Example (v 25): James illustrates true, saving faith by reminding his readers of Rahab story (Joshua 2).

  • As with "binding of Isaac" story, the "Rahab" story would also have been well-known to his Jewish readers and there is no need for James to spell out all of the details.
  • Also no need to repeat explanation given already to the "binding of Isaac" story (vv 22-24).


8. Why pairing of Abraham & Rahab?
Issue: Why does James pair the example of Abraham with that of Rahab? Out of all the OT "heroes of faith" (Heb 11), why these two?

  • Option #1: Hospitality
    • Many commentators believe that Abraham and Rahab were paired because of their reputation for hospitality--Abraham to the three visitors (Genesis 18); Rahab to the two spies (Joshua 2).
    • Duane Watson: "The examples of Abraham, father of the faith, and Rahab, a harlot, are a strange combination, but one found in the tradition because both exemplified hospitality" ("James 2 and Greco-Roman Argumentation," New Testament Studies 39 [1993] 116).
    • Evaluation:
      • Strength: Fits the context well--need for church to provide clothes and food to needy members (vv 15-16).
        • Further support: Abraham (but not joined with Rahab!) highly praised in Rabbinic tradition for hospitality.
      • 1st (major) weakness: James does not cite story of three visitors (Gen 18) but story of Abraham offering up Isaac (Gen 22).
      • 2nd (major) weakness: Rahab is justified not just by her providing lodging for the spies but also by her "sending them out by another way."
      • 3rd (minor) weakness: Pairing of Abraham and Rahab not very common in Jewish or Christian tradition (only 1 Clem 10 and 12 which date after James).
  • Option #2: Extremes (Merismus)
    • I propose that James has paired Abraham and Rahab because they serve as two extremes: Abraham is the father and hero of the Jewish nation, whereas Rahab is a Gentile, a woman, and a prostitute.
    • Literary device in Hebrew poetry: Merismus--the use of two parts (usually the extremes) to describe the whole:
      • "morning and night" = whole day
      • "heaven and earth" = everywhere
      • "root and fruit" = everything
    • Blomberg & Kamell: "The two exemplars of James' principle of works completing or vindicating one's faith--Abraham and Rahab--contrast with each other in several respects, creating a powerful merismus, a figure of speech 'which makes equal the most extreme members of a whole and therefore all the other members who fall in between'” (James. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000, p. 125).
  • Application:
    • The call for demonstrating true, saving faith is the same for all of God's people--whether you are a patriarch or a prostitute.
    • Makes no difference whether you are the great hero of the Jewish faith, Abraham, or the Gentile, female, prostitute Rahab.
    • All believers are called upon to demonstrate the kind of true faith that manifests itself clearly in works of kindness and obedience.


9. Simile involving "body" and "spirit"
Verse 26: "Just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without deeds is dead."

  • The "spirit" here is the life principle that causes the "body" to come to life (Gen 2:7; Ps 30:6; Ezek 37:10; Luke 8:55; 23:46).
    • No spirit = dead body
    • No works = dead faith
  • Conclusion: Faith and works cannot be separated!


Остання зміна: вівторок 7 серпня 2018 10:46 AM