Bible Commentaries
James

JAMES

I

HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION TO JAMES

The first point to which attention is called is the place of this epistle in the New Testament canon. This letter of James, and some others, were called antilegomena. In other words, they were in dispute or in doubt. Later on the letter of James received universal acceptance. After a careful examination into its claim it was received by all Christian people as a part of the New Testament, until the Reformation. Luther, in the preface to his commentary on it, uses language which may be translated thus: "A very strawy epistle." The thought with him was that it flatly contradicted the teaching of Paul on justification by faith, and Luther would not accept anything from anybody that contradicted that teaching. The trouble with Luther was that he misconceived the teaching of James. It is quite true that the letter of James was slow in coming into circulation, but it gradually worked its way into general acceptance, and there is no just ground for questioning its authenticity or canonical place.

The heading in the King James Version is, "The General Epistle of James." The word "general" is left out of the American Standard Revised Version. The Greek word, katholikos, meaning "general," or "universal," is not found in the Bible, neither in the Greek of the Old Testament nor in the Greek of the New Testament. That is one of my objections to the position of certain Baptists on the universal, or Catholic Church; they should not insist upon using a word which has not the recognition of the Word of God, neither in the Old Testament nor in the New Testament. It is certain that the word "general" was put there some centuries after Christ, and it was meant to indicate the character of seven letters: James; 1 and 2 Peter; 1, 2, and 3 John; and Jude. The letters of Paul to the Romans, to the Corinthians and to Timothy, are special letters. The word "catholic," when it first came into use, did not mean orthodox, but simply general, as opposed to particular, or special. Later it came to mean orthodox – "the holy Catholic Church." It does not belong in the New Testament, and hence the revisers very wisely left it out.

Who wrote this letter, how, when, why, and to whom was it written? As to who wrote this book, our own answer is, James, the eldest half-brother of our Lord; that is, he was younger than Jesus, who was Mary’s first-born, and the first son of both Joseph and Mary. And yet it is a question which has been very much controverted in some of its phases, and I must go a little into the controversy. In Mark 6:3, the people of Nazareth say concerning Jesus, "Is not this the carpenter, the Son of Mary, and brother of James, and Joses, and Judas, and Simon? And are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended in him." The first question to be determined is, what was the relation of these four brothers there mentioned, and these sisters whose names are not given, to Jesus, the Son of Mary? I refer the reader to some elaborate discussions on the conflicting theories. The best, clearest, simplest, and most forcible is found in Dr. Broadus’ Commentary on Matthew on Matthew 13:55. In Schaff’s "History of the Christian Church" (page 272, Vol. I, second edition), the author discusses the matter with great clearness and force, and agrees with Dr. Broadus throughout. Another book is Lightfoot on Galatians, one of the finest commentaries ever prepared. Dr. Lightfoot elaborately discusses the question of the relationship of these four men and these unnamed sisters of our Lord. He takes a different position from Dr. Broadus and Dr. Schaff. These authorities are accessible, and a bright student who wants to keep up with the discussions on important matters in the Bible should acquaint himself with these discussions.

Here is the sum of the whole matter: There are three theories as to who these people were. One theory is the one advanced in my answer, that they were the younger half brothers and sisters of Jesus, Joseph and Mary being their parents; hence it is called the brother-theory, as Dr. Broadus describes it. This is styled in classical history, "The Helvetian Theory." About A.D. 383 Rome, which was coming into power, attacked this position.

Second theory: They were the children of Joseph by a former marriage and were half-brothers of our Lord. That is called the theory of Epitheanus. That is the theory Lightfoot advocates, and the theory upon which the Greek Catholic Church stands. (The first theory is sometimes called the Protestant theory.)

Third theory: That they were cousins of Jesus, the children of Mary who was a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus. And this theory maintains the identity of James, the brother of our Lord, and James the son of Alpheus, in the list of the twelve apostles. It also maintains the identity of Jude, the author of another letter, with Judas, not Iscariot, another one of the apostles, and that the Simon mentioned in Mark 6:3 was another one of the apostles. So this theory claims that three of the brothers of Jesus Christ were apostles. Then it also identifies Alpheus and Cleopas. This is the Roman Catholic theory, and its object is to prove the perpetual virginity of Mary, the Mother of our Lord. Later, the Roman Catholics by an "infallible" bull declared the perpetual virginity of Mary, and made its acceptance essential to salvation.

The Catholic theory is in every way preposterous. The idea of making three brothers of Jesus members of the original twelve of the apostolic college, when just a little while before Jesus was crucified, John says emphatically that his brothers did not believe on him, and every time they are mentioned it is in contradistinction to the apostles, has no basis in fact. They are never mentioned in a way to make it possible to believe that they were apostles. Evidently sentiment had much to do in influencing some Protestants to deny that they were brothers of Jesus.

We count it settled that James, Judas, Joses, and Simon, mentioned in Mark 6:3 as brothers of Jesus, were really his brothers. This brings us to another question: Did James, this brother of Jesus, write this letter? It could never have been James, the son of Zebedee, because we have an account of his death in Acts 12. All of the arguments go to show that the author of this book is James, the half-brother of Jesus.

Having settled as to who wrote the letter, we want to get an idea of the writer, and shall now form a connected Bible history of the man. We will take Dr. Broadus’ Harmony of the Gospels and follow it as far as it goes.

1. John 2:12 (Harmony, p. 20), reads: "After this we went down to Capernaum, he, and his mother, and his brethren and his disciples; and there they abode not many days." Here the names of the brothers are not given, but it shows that this family of children follow that mother and go around after Jesus. That is just after Jesus worked his first miracle. In the working of the first miracle it speaks only of Jesus and his mother being present, but undoubtedly his brothers were there then. That is to say, that when he left to go to that wedding, his mother and brothers went with him, and from that wedding they went and sojourned all together a little while in Capernaum. Jesus gets an invitation to a wedding, and in order to get Jesus they invite his mother and the more obscure members of the family.

2. Matthew 12:46-47, with Mark 3:31-32, with Luke 8:19 (Harmony, p. 59). Let us see Matthew 12:46-47: "While he was yet speaking to the multitudes, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, seeking to speak to him. And one said -unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, seeking to speak to thee." Then Mark: "And there come his mother and his brethren; and, standing without, they gent unto him, calling him. And a multitude was sitting about him; and they say unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren without seek for thee." Luke says: "And there came to him his mother and brethren, and they could not come at him for the crowd." It must be clearly stated as to what the object was. Here Jesus was teaching, and he was so very busy that he did not stop to eat. The report of that comes to his mother and these half-brothers of his, and they come there to arrest him, just exactly as we would get out a writ of lunacy for any man that will work so continuously without stopping to eat. It is important to see the relation of these brothers to Jesus as it ’is presented in the scripture. It is on that occasion that he says, resenting the interference with his work by his family, "Who is my mother and my brethren?" And waving his hand to his disciples he says, "These are my brothers. Whosoever doeth the will of my Father, the same is my mother, my brother, and my sister," placing discipleship and obedience far above any fleshly relation to him. As later he was going to the cross a woman cried out, "Blessed is the mother that bore thee," and he said, "Yea, rather blessed is she that doeth the word of God."

3. Matthew 13:55 with Mark 6:3 (Harmony, p. 70): This is the second time that Jesus comes to Nazareth, and coming into his own country he taught them in their synagogue, insomuch that they were astonished and said, "Whence hath this man wisdom, and these mighty works? Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother called Mary?" Notice what Jesus said about that: "A prophet is not without honor, save in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house." So we see that up to this time he was without honor with his own kin.

4. John 7:3 (Harmony, p. 3): "Depart hence, and go into Judea, that thy disciples also may behold thy works which thou doest. For no man doeth anything in secret, and himself seeketh to be known openly. If thou doest these things, manifest thyself to the world. For even his brethren did not believe on him. Jesus therefore saith unto them, My time is not yet come; but your time is always ready. . . . I go not up yet unto this feast." That was not a very great while before his crucifixion, and shows the attitude of his family toward him so far.

5. 1 Corinthians 15:7 (Harmony, p. 229): After he arose from the dead he appeared unto his brother James. So far as the Bible teaching goes, up to the time after the resurrection when Jesus appeared to James, the very man that wrote this letter, he had not been a Christian. Hence he could not have been one of the twelve apostles.

6. Acts 1:14. When he ascended into heaven, the angel said to those who were looking at his up-going, "Why stand ye looking into heaven?" Then it is said that they went back to the upper room, Mary and his brethren. There, doubtless with the crowd, they received the baptism of the Holy Spirit. There were 120, including the brothers.

7. Galatians 1:19 with Acts 9:27. That is Paul’s first visit to Jerusalem. He says, "When I made that first visit to see Peter, I saw him, but did not see any other of the apostles, but I did see James, the brother of our Lord." He did not say that James was an apostle. Dr. Broadus and Dr. Schaff both say that the Greek and also the margin in the revision do not imply that James was an apostle; it says, "I saw no other apostle but Peter, but I saw James."

8. Acts 12:17. Peter escaped from prison and told the crowd that was praying in the house of John Mark’s mother to go and tell James that he had escaped, indicating that by this time James occupied a position of authority. In other words he was pastor of the first church at Jerusalem. The apostles were not pastors; they had general work to do.

9. Acts 15, with which compare Galatians 2:9. That is the time that the great conference was held at Jerusalem concerning Paul’s work as to whether the Gentiles were to be received into the kingdom of God without becoming Jews. James presided over that meeting, as the pastor of the Jerusalem church, because the man who made the trouble came from his church, and the first church at Antioch had referred this question to the church where the trouble had originated. James makes a speech on that occasion, as well as Peter, Paul and others, and James is unquestionably the author of the letter which was adopted by the church.

10. Galatians 2:12. That is after the whole matter had been settled by that conference; Paul says that, at Antioch when certain ones came from James, Peter and Barnabas began to dissimulate; they had heretofore been eating with the Gentiles.

11. 1 Corinthians 9:5. That shows he was a married man.

12. Acts 21:18. That is on the occasion of Paul’s last visit. James is still the pastor.

13. The last reference, except the letter itself, Jude, Judges 1:1: "Jude, . . . brother of James." Here then are thirteen references which put clearly before us the author of this letter. He was an intense Jew, very much devoted to the law and to the customs of his people. That he never did become such a Christian as Paul and others we shall see as we study his epistle.

We have found the writer of this letter to be James, the son of Joseph and Mary, and half-brother of our Lord. And we have studied his history in the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles, up to the time that he writes this letter. Now for some further questions.

1. To whom does he write this letter? The answer is: Not to the Gentiles anywhere, not to Jews of any kind in the Holy Land, not to Christian Jews in the Holy Land, but to Christian Jews of the dispersion. As verse I says, "James, . . . to the twelve tribes which are of the dispersion." That brings up the old question of the "lost ten tribes." And this context shows that James does not consider that they were lost. The Old Testament shows that the ten tribes who were transported to Assyria, and most of whom never returned, were not lost. A great many of them came back, and the continuity of the tribes was kept up, which can be proved by many scriptural references, in both the Old and New Testaments. The Greek word, diaspora, "the dispersion," needs to be understood. The word, "dispersion," occurs a number of times in the Bible, and it means that a large class of Jews, who at different times were carried away into several captivities, or who went away for purposes of commerce, or trade, and settled in foreign countries, losing in the long lapse of time their mother tongue, and speaking only the tongues of the people where they lived, losing a great many of the scriptural customs of the people who lived in the Holy Land, yet maintained their nationality. These people came up to the great feasts. They were there on the day of Pentecost, when James received the baptism of the Holy Spirit; they were there from the banks of the Euphrates and the Tigris, from Mesopotamia, which means "between the rivers"; from all places in Asia Minor; from Southern Greece and Rome and Northern Africa. And they remained there until they were first dispersed by the persecution of Saul of Tarsus and the persecution mentioned in Acts 12. As they bad gone away, James writes to-them. They had been there together in that great meeting, very probably, on the day of Pentecost. The first deportation of these people was when the ten tribes were carried into captivity, then later the Jews in Judea were carried away, still later Alexander established a great number at Alexandria, in Northern Egypt, at the mouth of the Nile, and Pompey carried a great number of them into captivity to Rome. In Egypt they received special privileges. A temple was built there, and an immense part of the influence on the thought of the world comes from the Alexandrian Jews. I am explaining now to whom this letter was written, and what was the occasion of the writing. These people had been there and had been through this long persecution; now they were scattered to their several homes, and James is writing to them.

2. When did he write it? He could not have written it after A.D. 62, for he was killed at that time, as is told by Josephus. He did not write it after A.D. 50, because there is an absence of reference in it to later controversies. So that my opinion of the time is somewhere about A.D. 45, corresponding in date with the incidents mentioned in Acts 12. There was then a great persecution raging. James, the son of Zebedee, was killed, and Peter was imprisoned. The members of the church were scattered abroad. James was the head, or pastor of that church. There were probably 100,000 members in it. We can see the concern he would feel when these people were all driven abroad. The reasons for this early date are not merely the appropriateness of the occasion, which has just been stated, but it is evident from this letter itself that the line of demarcation between Christians and Jews was very slight. The Christians were still meeting in the synagogues. Later, they separated from the Jews at the synagogues, and either rented houses of worship, built them houses, or met in private homes.

3. Why did he write this letter, or what was his object? Three reasons, from the letter itself, evidently influenced him more than all others put together. The first one is that these dispersed Jews were suffering severe trials and persecution, and he wanted to show them how to receive and to bear these trials. In the second place, a great many Jews had accepted Christ intellectually, but were not regenerated. Just like the devil, they believed in God, and so James says, "Thou believest there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe and tremble." It was this barren faith that was not influencing many of their lives for good. And then a characteristic of them at home and abroad was that they were a very "fussy" people, regular "Kilkenny cats," fighting in their synagogues at every meeting, and eight years later destroying the nation by their fighting in the streets of Jerusalem against one another. He is writing to these suffering people, some of them holding on to Christ with a spirit of nominal faith, to show them that the true faith endures suffering and is fruitful in life.

QUESTIONS

1. What is the meaning of antilegomena, and what are the antilegomena epistles?

2. What did Luther call the epistle of James, and why?

3. Is there any just ground for questioning the authenticity of this letter?

4. How did catholikos come to be used in this title, and when?

5. What did it mean originally?

6. What did it come to mean later?

7. Who wrote this letter?

8. What three theories concerning the relation to our Lord sustained by the children named in Mark 6:3?

9. What is included in each of these theories?

10. In general terms, how do Protestants, Greek Catholics, and Roman Catholics align themselves on these theories?

11. What is the object of the Catholic theory?

12. What was the "infallible" bull respecting this?

13. What caused some Protestants to deny that those named in Mark were brothers of our Lord?

14. Where may we find the clearest and strongest presentation of each theory?

15. Why could it not have been James, the son of Zebedee, who wrote this letter?

16. In the Protestant theory, meet the objections based on John 19:26-27?

17. Observing the order of time in citing passages, trace the New Testament history of the James named in Mark 6:3.

18. From this history show how it was impossible for him to be one of the twelve.

19. Who, then, was the author of this letter?

20.What was his character, reputation, and death, according to Josephus?

21. What his acquired position among Jerusalem Christians?

22. What his position both as a Jew and a Christian?

23. To whom was this letter written?

24. What old question does verse I bring up?

25. What was James’s position on that question?

26. What is the meaning of the Greek word diaspora?

27. What is the difference between the Jews of the dispersion and of Palestine?

28. On what occasions did they assemble at Jerusalem?

29. What were the great deportations of the Jews?

30. What is the occasion of this letter?

31. When did he write it?

32. What is the proof?

33. Why did he write this letter?