For many years I have had an interest in Jewish Christianity in Jerusalem in general, and James in particular. In general, I am think that James, the brother of Jesus, was the key leader of the Christian Community in Jerusalem throughout the period covered by the book of Acts. I am always pleased when I read things that more or less state that James was the leader in Jerusalem, such as James Dunn in Beginning in Jerusalem, especially chapter 36, although he says things like this throughout the book.
I think a fair reading of the book of Acts will show that Twelve fade from the scene quickly. James the Apostle is killed in Acts 12 and not replaced. Peter sends a message to James the “goes elsewhere.” Peter drops out of site at that point in the narrative, except for a brief report at the Jerusalem council. Luke introduces James as a significant player in in Acts 12 and the major force behind the Jerusalem conference in Acts 15. John, the only other apostle mentioned in Acts also disappears from the book after Acts 8 (and he was silent anytime he was in the story anyway!)
What is remarkable to me is that James appears as a leader at the level of Peter and Paul as early as 1 Corinthians. In 1 Cor 15:7 Paul passes along the tradition that he received concerning the resurrection. Only three names of individuals are included, Peter, James and Paul. These are the three men to whom the Lord appeared, and at least in Peter and Paul’s case, they are commissioned to a particular ministry.
James appears as a leader in Jerusalem quite early, a point that is often missed. Gal 1:19 describes Paul’s visit to Jerusalem after his conversion. He met with no one except Peter and James, the Lord’s brother. It is possible that James the apostle and James the Lord’s brother are confused in the later traditions, but there seems to be strong evidence that the family of Jesus did not believe he was the Messiah before the resurrection. Gal 1:19 therefore can be understood as saying that within three to four years after the resurrection James not only became a believer in Jesus as Messiah, but he had already risen to some sort of leadership position in Jerusalem.
The book of James is therefore a window into an early form of Christianity, one that was comfortable with Judaism and perhaps did not see Christianity as separate from Judaism in quite the same way Paul does later in Ephesians 2 or Romans 9-11.
How would this observation change the way we read James?
I have to wonder what it would be like to be the brother of the messiah… talk about the “perfect firstborn.” Wouldn’t that be rough when you would try to tattle tell on Jesus! All joking aside, we see James step us a leader in the church, regardless of his past thinking on who Jesus truly was (by the way, where do we find this evidence/source that Jesus’ family didn’t believe that he was the messiah? Just curious, as i had never heard that before…) and become a major player in the early church, particularly in Jerusalem. Obviously James is very Jewish, and i do not believe that he would have made the distinction between Judaism and Christianity as the major difference in the two at this point was Jesus. Jesus’ role was in fulfilling the prophecy and law of Israel (bringing a new chapter in Judaism) and so he would not have seen Christianity as a new religion, but a continuation of what God was doing for Israel. If you follow this train of thought, it only makes sense for them to continue to follow the law, because they were not told otherwise until Acts 10 when Peter is given a vision from God (and possibly in Acts 9 at Paul’s conversion, but this idea is not stated there). All of this contributes to why James is so Jewish when we find him in Acts 15, when there was a large amount of leaders declaring that Gentiles had to follow the law (we find that James eventually sides we Paul, but it appears as if this was not his initial opinion). As a leader of large amounts of Jewish Christians, and a former (or not so former) follower of the Law, it only makes logical sense that James’ writings would be very Jewish in thoughts and actions. For example, the whole thought process behind James 2:14-26 (faith without works is dead) is very Jewish in thought, and not unlike the law in some regards. This should definitely be taken into account as we read through James and read about him in the New Testament. James is very applicable to us today, but we also need to remember that it comes from a very Jewish mind to Jewish believers. We should continue to read this great book of the faith, all the while remembering the context and author in order to glean as much as we can from the text.
The reader could go over the book of James with the idea of learning more about the difference between Judaism and early Christianity instead of just about Christianity itself. James may have been wanting to show everyone exactly why Judaism was not the answer and that Jesus was in fact the Messiah. He may have felt that since it took so long for him to be convinced that his own brother was the Messiah it seems understandable to assume that he assumed that it would be even harder for others to accept that Jesus was the Messiah as well.
From reading Jobes’ book, it seems that an even more important observation of James’ letter is its purpose. James is, in a basic sense, an ancient example of the way pastors teach their congregations in modern Christianity. As Jobes says, ” James is not teaching about Jesus, but is applying the teaching of Jesus as normative for the Christian life” (pg. 198). So, While it is important to understand the context of James’ belief in Christ, it seems more important to understand how he thought about the teachings of Christ. So, while James seems to be writing directly to the Jewish people, hence his statement of his letter being “to the twelve tribes scattered among the nations” (James 1:1), it is also important to see that James taught an ethical way of life that used Jesus’ teachings as their base. So, we ought to be reading James as sermon that works to apply the teachings of Jesus to how one ought to live life.
But there is a great possibility that Book of James wasn’t written by brother of Lord. Is it possible that someone from Jesus’s family would have so great greek? It definitely contains many rhetorical figures such as diatribe, hexameter etc. Then would be also outcomes different. But it’s just possibility 🙂
That is of course a possibility, but letters were not written in the same way they are today. No matter who wrote the letter, an amanuensis would have been used. An amanuensis could have a great deal of impact on how a letter was written. In addition, if James was an educated Jew (in Torah, in rabbinic methods, etc.), then he may have been aware of Greek rhetorical styles like diatribe, etc. Paul himself is an example of a highly educated Jew who knew Greco-Roman rhetorical styles and probably made use of several different amanuenses to write his letters to Hellenistic audiences. I think that the Letter is more like Jewish Wisdom in the tradition of Sirach, another book translated into a very good Greek style.
Since the letter does not claim that James is Jesus’ brother, it is not necessary to defend that tradition tenaciously. It is interesting that the Brother of Jesus figures so significantly in the book of Acts as a strong Jewish Christian voice in Jerusalem, and this letter is a strong Jewish Christian voice. At the lease, the Brother of Jesus has to be the front-running candidate for the author of this letter.
Going off of arenberg93’s reply, I also see the Messiah’s work as a continuation of God’s dealings with Israel. James, interpreting the events this way, would have focused on helping Gentiles accept this new revelation by bringing them into Judaism. In compliance to the Commission of Acts. 1:8, attempting to convert Gentiles to the “new Judaism” would only make sense.
We could view James as a more spiritually mature letter. Since the name of Jesus is mentioned only twice in the letter, it is possible that His Lordship is already assumed by the readership. Surely, if the people you are writing to are already firmly grounded in their understanding of the identity of Christ, you wouldn’t spend much time addressing the issue. Instead, you would focus more on making the work of Jesus applicable to the lives of your readers, much like modern preachers. This is in agreement with taczhompson.
“To listen to James… is to listen to Jesus” is one interpreter’s observation (Jobes, 197). Understanding that Jesus was brought up in all Semitic traditions and teachings, it should not surprise us to read statements in James that say, “faith without works is dead” (James 2:17). In fact, Jesus came “not to abolish the Law (works), but to fulfill the law” (Matt 5:17).
The book of James should challenge today’s Christians to demonstrate their faith through their good deeds. In fact, James may be the earliest writing of practical daily application of Christian doctrine and ethics (Jobes, 198). One of the most notable applications being that of the “royal law” – the ability to love one’s neighbor as oneself (Jobes, 195).
The book of James does not introduce many new ideas of ethics and morale living to Christianity. However, it should encourage and compel Christians to publicly live a holy and upright life. This shouldn’t be done to gain favoritism or personal edification, rather to honor God for the love He demonstrates to the World (James 2:26).
I feel that now knowing that James was a window into the early form of Christianity where Judaism and Christianity were more a like then they will ever be, that we can learn from it and compare or think about what it would have been like to almost be stuck in the middle of Judaism and Christianity. I think that now that we know this, we should really try to look at it in a point of view from that time period (which we should be doing anyways) and maybe we could get a better idea of what it was like being a Jewish-Christian at the time.
Reblogged this on Talmidimblogging.
I didn’t know most of this information about James, it is pretty significant to learning more about the book of James, and understanding that he took charge after Jesus’ death. Through reading chapter 6 of “Letter to the Church” a quote that really stood out to me was “James is not teaching about Jesus, but is applying the teaching of Jesus as a normative for the Christian life” (pg. 198). As wonderful as it is to learn about Jesus, it is just as important to learn how to apply what Jesus did to Christianity. I think that when we read James we need to read it as a teaching or a sermon that aims to guide us in the right direction as to how to apply the teachings of Jesus in our lives.
I have never really looked at or read the book of James either, so I do not know a lot about him or the book itself. I am looking forward to learning more about the events going on during that time along with the things that lead up to it. The book of James is written by James to the twelve tribes, so I think that it is a letter to them, that later turns into a bit of a sermon or teaching. I think that he is reminding the Jewish-Christians to have faith and trust in God. I think that by reading James and understanding that it is an early form of Christianity helps us to see just how Christianity started out, it’s origins, and how ideas and theology have changed throughout history.
Kayla, I agree with you when you said that you didn’t know a lot of the information about James prior to reading this chapter and blog post. It is interesting to see how knowing more about James changes the way that we read the book of James due to the context, background, and audience it was written for. I wonder how knowing more about different people in the Bible could help me better understand the stories and information that God has given me. In chapter 6 I learned that James is possibly the earliest Christian writings to have survived (Jobes, 198). James 1:1 begins by telling us a little bit about who James was. Jobes explains that this opening verse clearly defines that James is the author and he describes himself as a servant of the Lord (Jobes, 150). I also learned that the name James is only mentioned 42 times in the New Testament, but it refers to multiple men in Mark 3:18, Luke 16:16, Acts 12:2, etc. (Jobes, 151).
Have you read Rainbows, The Way of Salvation: The Role of Christian Obedience in Justification? Rainbow starts explaining that James was the leader of the church (ch 3). Eventually making the argument we shouldn’t so easily water down his statements about justification to Paul.
I read Rainbow’s book quite a few years ago and published a review in TJ in 2006. I agree with you (and Rainbow), it is difficult to dismiss Paul’s view of justification. Were there real tensions between James and Paul? I think there were…
https://www.academia.edu/4583622/Paul_A._Rainbow_The_Way_of_Salvation_The_Role_of_Christian_Obedience_in_Justification._Paternoster_Press_2005._TrinJ_27_2006_340-1
Regular updates to the countdown to the Day of the Lord by the sign of the Son of Man in Heaven at :
http://risen-from-the-dead.forumotion.com/
Seeing the Book of James as a description of what exactly was going on in a Jewish church recently after the resurrection, some qualities regarding this writing can be understood. However, when doing this, one has to be careful to read it understanding that the Book of James is still considered inerrant and that the difficult phrases written have their place even within Pauline theology. Jobes agrees with the majority of people who believe the book was written by James the Just, a significant leader in the Jerusalem church. (Pg. 152) One can see that James is a true Jew by beginning his letter by addressing the scattered tribes of Israel: the diaspora. His Christian teaching then would most likely be steeped in Jewish ideology. This can be compared to how a Canadian may view an American election as idiotic because of the way they were raised and the actions and emotions they are accustomed to. James 2 contains controversial verses surrounding one’s faith. He explains that faith and works are not separate of one another. Faith is dependent upon works, but not in the way most people would likely think. Works do not save as much as they provide evidence for someone’s faith. James writes as if he does not want the Jewish Christians to forget the works that they were so diligent in doing before they knew Christ. Belief in Christ does not mean you become lazy. It means that you become active in doing good because of what you believe. When James speaks of “the royal law” in chapter 1 and 4, Jobes writes that this law of love is characteristic of the true saving faith. (Pg. 175) This considered, one may possibly even state that real faith inspires one to love. This love is evidence of true faith! (John 13:34-35) Realizing that James came from a culture where deeds determined your spiritual standing between others God (or so they thought), readers can then understand that James is relating his Jewish upbringing to the truth he is now trying to facilitate and clarify within the Jewish churches.
When I think about James my first thought was never, “that guy is a leader.” It was more appreciation that Jesus’s half-brother got the chance to add to God’s word. James brought a lot of truths to the churches. There is a lot in James about loving others. That is an important part of Christianity–growing up to me it was always called the “golden rule,” but James refers to it as the “royal rule,” (Jobes 185). James truly was a leader in setting the stage for what churches should be doing. I do not think that James should be looked over as much as it has been.
As I continue to learn and read about early Jewish Christianity, the more it seemingly becomes important to me in understanding the early Church and James is especially important in that Realm. Both P. Long and Jobes affirm that James was a highly influential leader within the early Church in Jerusalem before being martyred around AD 62 (Jobes, 151). P. Long stresses the early importance of James as a Church leader, mentioning how Paul in Galatians 1:19 only seeks to speak with Peter and James and 1 Corinthians 15:7 in which Paul states that he shared the revelation on resurrection with Peter and James.
P. Long concludes his blog by stating the context of Christianity when the book of James was written may have been comfortable with a Christianity that was not yet separated from Judaism and by asking the question how this changes the way we read the book of James. I would tend to answer in agreement with P. Long that James provides a unique window into early Christianty and thus also is less understood as counter to Pauline theology but rather helpful in understanding how Jews understood their obedience to the Law and faith in Jesus.
I agree with the statement that “The book of James in therefore a window into an early form of Christianity.” This is exactly how I always viewed the book. It is designed to incorporate what Christians behavior should look like in correlation with the devotion to God’s word. Although this book can be confusing to me at times, there is no question that the main theme is to live out what we have learned through Christ. James encourages his readers to live a live in which we are active with our relationship with God. Since James was wrote prior to the split between Judaism and Christianity, there is the need to understand that this book was written to Jews during this time period. I think that a reader should analyze James as guide to living a life in which God would approve. As all aspects of the Bible, it is important to understand who the book was intended for, what was going on during the time period, and how the book is presented. Like Jobes states, “To listen to James… is to listen to Jesus”. Therefore, the book reiterates what the message Jesus was teaching. Jesus was brought up in Jewish customs and traditions just as everyone else during this time. If the reader can take into consideration the background and previous context, they will be able to better interpret the message this is being presented in the book of James.
I always thought that the book of James was written after acts as a type of response to acts. It is so bewildering to think that James could have been one of the very first books written of the new testament. Jobes suggests that James could have been written as early as the mid40s “when James the just assumed leadership of the Jerusalem church” (159). James is a Jewish leader of the church of Jerusalem and also Jesus’s brother. James writes to the twelve tribes scattered around the nation, not only the ones living in the promise land (James 1:1). James is concerned with Christians and wants to encourage them in their faith and spiritual walk. Since James was likely the first book of the New Testament written, James addresses all Christians (early Christianity). While he was writing the book of James, he was understanding the new plan God had for both Jews and Gentiles. James is a great book for any Christian today to read. It is very applicable to our lives and struggles today. However, the book of James comes from a very Jewish background to primarily Jewish believers. It is important to remember who the author was and the context in which it was written.
It is interesting to learn about the multiple James in the New Testament. In understanding that the book of James was written by James, the brother of Jesus it can be understood the honor James wanted to show to Jesus. This means that once James understood and believed that Jesus was the Messiah, he wanted to preach about the Messiah, his brother, to everyone. An individual can be empowered when they are fighting for their family, especially their siblings if they trust and respect for what they are saying and supporting. Understanding that James did not believe that Jesus was the Messiah until after Jesus’ resurrection, James had some time of belief to make up, so to speak, and therefore was a “blazing fire of faith” in his ministry. That is why I believe that James was so quickly considered and placed into a leadership position. He was so vocal about his beliefs and was passionate, therefore intended to share the truth boldly. Because James was known, by most of the leaders of the church, before Jesus’ resurrection, that is why he needed to make himself known in James 1:1; or at least that is what Karen Jobes writes in “Letters to the Church” (Jobes, p. 185).
Whenever I preach on James I give the fact that James was the brother of Jesus and that he was a main leader in the Jewish-Christian community so it is nice to see someone else also feel so strongly about that fact. Also, now that I know about the story of your professor and how he reacted to you it makes reading the first paragraph of this post hilarious. James has always been one of my favorite books of the Bible for reasons that most other people like James as well because it is very practical. Practicality and application from a text are very important to me. When James is extremely blunt as he is, it creates a very easy to understand the text. While he was not a believer during Jesus’ earthly ministry he rose to leadership soon after the resurrection and his conversion. James had a particular righteous Jewishness about it. He addresses the letter to Jews (James 1:1).
If Judaism is still a good thing then what changes with Jesus Christ? If Jews are “saved” because they are the people of God then was God’s plan of redemption necessary for the world. Was Jesus’ death necessary for Jews? Jesus clearly states that He is the only way to salvation (John 14:6). If this is the case then Jews must at least look to Jesus as savior. Being a part of God’s people is not enough. It is for this reason that Jesus came and why salvation is a gift for all people. If James is okay with Judaism staying the same then the belief that Jesus is the Messiah is the only other thing they need to do. Clearly it is the only thing they need to do because that is what grants salvation. The difficult thing about this new covenant is that the old covenant was ingrained into the Jews. This is why James’ writing is influenced heavily on works because of faith. The keeping of the Law was another way to glorify God. If you were saved your faith was shown in your devotion.
I agree with Professor Long that James has a significant effect on the church and Jewish Christians. James played an important role with the Jerusalem conference. At the Jerusalem conference, Peter and Paul were arguing whether or not Gentile believers should follow Jewish law that included circumcision. It was James who found a solution. His solution was to “abstain from things polluted by idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what has been strangled, and from blood” (Acts 15:20). It is at the Jerusalem conference that it is revealed that James was held in the same esteem as Peter and Paul. James continues to have influence through his book, James. In this book, it is revealed that Christianity is similar to Judaism except its focus on Jesus and not on the Law.
I like that you mentioned that perhaps James does not see Christianity and Judaism as so different when compared to other writers such as Paul. Maybe this is due to the fact that James was the leader of the Jerusalem church, as both you and Jobes have mentioned, and therefore he had closer ties with the Jews compared to someone like Paul who was born a Roman. Another idea that I have pondered is that maybe James was somewhat of an original Messianic Jew which in many ways bridges the gap between Judaism and Christianity, in my opinion. This thought, however, was challenged as I read further in Jobes being reminded that James speaks nothing of the second coming of Christ making my connection to Messianic Judaism a little fuzzy. This is much more consistent with traditional Judaism.
James does, however, seem to use Jesus (although only used twice in James 1:1 and 2:1), Lord, and God interchangeably so as to show their relationship alluding perhaps to the idea of the Trinity (I may be getting a little ahead of myself a little). Both times Jesus is brought up, He is described as “Lord” (Ch. 6). James also mentions that there is only one God, something that all Jews held to be true and strongly believed in. Finally, James says there is only one judge, pointing to the statement made earlier that there is only one God (4:12), BUT later James says the Lord (at this point synonymous with Jesus because of 1:1 and 2:1) is the judge. All of this considered, it seems as though James definitely has strong Jewish roots and beliefs not common of writers like Paul, especially when it comes to the distinction between Christianity and Judaism, but he does seem to be edging toward a slight amalgamation of the two.
It is amazing how quickly the Spirit of God can work in believers’ lives. James was a brother of Jesus, someone who did not believe in the truth that Jesus was giving to people (John 7:5). If he truly is that author of James, he would have had a turnaround, much like Saul or the centurion at the cross (Matt. 27:54). James differs from many followers of Jesus after the resurrection because he actually saw Jesus after he was resurrected, which likely could have been what helped him to believe. And then, he would have become a prominent leader within the church in four years (Long, 70).
James does not just rise up to be a leader, but one of the main pillars for first century Christians (Gal. 2:9). His decisions held a lot of weight to them, bringing him to a similar level as Paul and Peter. This can be seen in the Antioch Incident. Both the Judaizers and Paul and Peter present what had happened and the debate about Gentile conversion. We see that James is the one that makes an ultimate decision on the issue, showing the extent of his authority within the lives of Christians.
James is a pretty straightforward guy, and I being a pretty straightforward person enjoy that. I think that because he did not see much difference between Judaism and Christianity it made him be that way. He spoke to an audience that needed to be told how it was when it was. Due to that, we have the book of James. James was a servant of Christ and brought more people to be in a relationship with him. Whether there needed to be a difference with it being Jews or not, I do not know. If Jews were called to be the “saved” was there a point to Jesus dying on the cross? We are to believe in the Lord Jesus and you shall be saved (Acts 16:31). This is true, but if Jews thought that they were good people and obeyed the laws then they were saved, how do you change that mindset, without being direct and not see a difference between Judaism and Christianity? Taking what I know, I enjoy reading the book of James and I think that it is a very helpful book even if he was known for not seeing a difference in Christianity and Judaism.
In Letters to the Church, it says: “James is not teaching about Jesus, but is applying the teaching of Jesus as a normative for the Christian life.” Thinking of this, it is important to know the teaching of Jesus, what Jesus taught and why he taught it, but I think the bigger question is, how do I apply this to my life? James allows Christians to apply Jesus’ teachings into every day, Christian lives. As Christians, it is important to do as Jesus did, to show others the way of Jesus’ teachings. James shows us what Christians should be like and act like according to God’s word.
James, the author of the book of James, was one of the brothers of Jesus Christ and a key leader within the Jewish community (Matt. 13:55; Mark 6:3). James’ name is always listed first amongst the list of Jesus’ brothers. This could be due to James being the oldest of all the brothers. For clarity, this James is not one of the two James that were a part of the twelve disciples. Although he is not one of the twelve disciples, he did interact with the disciples. After Paul’s conversion on the road to Damascus (Acts 9-11), disciple Peter and Jesus’ brother James first meet Paul in Jerusalem (Gal 1:19).
There seems to be strong evidence that James did not become a believer in his brother’s divinity until after the resurrection. Thus, he did not join the Christian movement until after the death and resurrection of his brother, ex qualifying him from being a disciple. He did find his places within the community in leadership roles. James is seen as a major force behind the Jerusalem council (Acts 12; 15), and seen as a leader in 1 Corinthians, a leader on the level of Peter and Paul.
Knowing that James was not a believer before the resurrection puts things into a different perspective, in the sense of when Christianity truly began. Christianity truly becomes alive and active after the resurrection of Jesus Christ, something that is not normally thought of in today’s age. Being born in an age long after Christ walked the earth, this is not a concept we are familiar with thinking of. Thus, this gives a different perspective when reading the book James, as one can view him as a newer believer.
I see James as a pretty straightforward guy. I think he did not see a difference between Judaism and Christianity that made him that way. He tells his audience what needs to be told and how it is going to get done. James was a servant to Christ by bringing more people to have a relationship with him. It did not matter whether they were Jews or not. We believe Jesus was the one who died on the cross by giving us a chance to pay for our debts, to be saved and be forgiven. The Jews thought the people were doing the right thing by obeying the law and following the rules thinking they are saved and have nothing to worry about. They were wrong. The Jews know what they want is justice to be done. I do get that James is a believer in Jesus as the Messiah, and had the leadership position in Jerusalem, but what I do not get is why most of the Jews think they should not follow James? Is it because of jealousy or they think that he is wrong? People would do anything to get things done their way. What James was doing was allowing Christians to apply Jesus’ teachings. James wants the Christians to love the people and be like God’s word.
James, who was the brother of Jesus, was known to be a key leader in the Christian Jewish community. James is seen to be a major character in Acts 12, when there is confusion going on with the twelve disciples. James is also seen as a major power behind making things happen for the Jerusalem Conference which takes place in Acts 15. in 1 Corinthians, James is made out to be of the same high leadership as Peter and Paul. Personally, I admire Paul higher than most characters in the Bible, so having James be compared to Paul is extraordinary to me.
I find it fascinating that James became a believer in Jesus as the Messiah. When you think about Jesus and James being brothers, James was putting faith in his brother as the one who came to save the world! I cannot imagine being James in this situation. I have two brothers and growing up we used to bicker and argue a lot. One of the three of us were constantly attempting to antagonize the other ones. It was almost like it was some sort of game. I cannot imagine what it would be like to grow up with a brother who was literally perfect. Did they just not argue? I wonder if James ever tried to start an argument with Jesus. Growing up my older brother was perceived as the perfect child, definitely in my eyes and as what appeared to be in my parents eyes. I remember being jealous of this. After reading these things about James it makes me feel motivated that he took the path of putting faith in his brother rather than being filled with jealousy.
It is interesting that James does not precede his message with a greeting about how it was written by James the brother of Jesus, but simply James. I think that you are correct in believing that he was simply just that well known, but I also like to think that he was a little humble and didn’t use his family as a brag. I think that your observation at the end shows a lot about early Christianity and its tolerance to the old Jewish Law. Obviously Jewish Christians were uncomfortable with Gentile Christians not following the Law and Gentile Christians were unsure if they had to follow the Law. It is very clear in this book that Christianity is still pretty new and that affects how you read it because you can understand what the original readers were going through and what confusions they may have had. You can tell that this book is being written and sent out to help Jewish Christians in particular and how they need to supplement their faith with good works and help the poor and needy in their community. This also helps us understand the way we read the book of James because it gives us a really good look at who the readers were and what they may have been hearing around them, they may have been hearing from the Apostle Paul and how all they needed was salvation, James reminds them that works are necessary too.
This observation would give James more authority in my opinion. If we see and can read that the writer was in the “higher-ups” and often met with Jesus himself, his accounts are likely to be more reliable than others who had never met with him. Nothing in the bible is unreliable, however the direct quotes of Christ and other messages that are spoken of are much easier for an unbeliever to understand if they are historically proven to be from someone who has been known to have been with the person physically. If someone never is with someone and they make claims of certain happenings it (I would assume) would be much harder for an unbeliever to grasp onto. The importance of James for Christians today can be understood as an “ethical basis for Christian living, especially the role of the Old Testament” (370). In James because we see the apostles coming to understand the relationship between the new covenant and the old, it is safe to say that as believers we cannot ignore any bit of this letter (370). Despite this letter being a slight bit controversial to what Old Testament believers and what people in today’s world would say, it is incredibly influential and should not be taken lightly. With observing who wrote the book and what the book itself is overall about, it should influence how we read this book because we should take more time to dive in and truly understand its meaning. As with any scripture, it is important to fully understand the depth of each verse and passage you are reading to understand the instruction. It is very interesting that Jesus’ brother is so important to the book of Acts but this does not mean that it was Jesus’ brother James who wrote it rather the apostle James.
It is incredible how, within 3 to 4 years, James transitions from a traditional Jew skeptical of Jesus’ claims to a leader in the Jerusalem church with a high Christology. This quick transition, along with the fact that James got the Jerusalem church to trust him extremely quickly, would be satisfactorily explained by a post-resurrection appearance of Jesus to James. It also makes sense why the believers in Jerusalem would trust him, because he was a good temple-worshipping Jew as they were, before meeting the resurrected Jesus. Like Paul, he could be all things to all people in Jerusalem.
This makes sense with the purpose of James’ letter, as he incorporates Jewish elements (Jobes mentions covenant faithfulness, obedience to the royal law, judgment in the eschaton, and learning wisdom through obedience to God, among others) with his new high Christology. He also provides new understandings of these Jewish elements in the light of Jesus’ ministry (covenant faithfulness is through obeying the royal law of Jesus, judgement is handled by Jesus rather than the Father, and that wisdom is found through Christ). James is a sort of “middle ground” between Judaism and Christianity (not in the sense that he offers a “third path”, but rather in the sense that he offers a means of transition). James’ teachings of wisdom almost provide a neat transition to John’s teachings of Christ being the word and wisdom of God, through which all things were created.
On an unrelated note, it is interesting that Jesus appeared to two men knowledgeable in the Jewish tradition, who then have radical, life-changing meetings with the resurrected Jesus before starting a ministry in the face of death – James in Jerusalem and Paul throughout the Ancient Near East. I can’t help but be curious why Paul wrote so many things which ended up in the canonical scriptures whereas James has very little. Did James just not write often, or was there another reason?
I would have to reiterate the point of various comments above, when I think of being the brother of Jesus, I think of how difficult that would be. It is inspiring to me that James, brother of Jesus, I suppose half-brother that is, humbly approaches the teachings of Jesus and exhort them as well. In all transparency I grew up with a close to perfect sister and could find myself slave to bitterness and lacking any gentleness or support. Jobes refers back to James’ leadership in the church in Acts 12 and 15, which points to the fact that James came to his own as a teacher and a leader by his brother’s example. I would also agree that James’ purpose and mission is very inspiring. The introduction to James highlights that purpose to be providing wisdom that clarifies the teaching of other leaders such as Paul and other apostles. James, writing to an audience of Jews newly converted to Christianity does seem to lack canonical support. Keeping this audience in mind I find it so interesting that he chose to write this way, absent of much canonical support, as we know that canonical scripture was of importance to the Jewish people.
James is a book I turn to often, quite possibly one of my favorites. While it is remarkable that James appears to be a leader in step/rank, maybe importance is a better word, to Peter and Paul, it comes as no surprise to me that he is held is such high regard because of the impact and sheer insight that his words bring about. James’ written word leaves even the most seasoned believers into contemplation. And this is in regard to a small passage of the words he chose to write down, I can’t imagine all of the wisdom and truth he provided to those he led each and every day.
In closing, when I ponder the idea that in three years time it is recorded that James became a believer and teacher, I wonder about the nature and closeness in relationship between Jesus and his brother. Was James gathering wisdom and teachings that are not recorded? Maybe this brings reason for the quick establishment and growth of James’ name/ministry.
James is easily one of my favorite books in the Bible. For years I have admired this book and the many amazing theological truths and teachings it contains. It amazes me that you can study books like this in the Bible for years and still find amazing new takeaways- examining the context of James, when it was written, who it was written more, and the reception of the text at the time it was written, is no exception. Right off the bat at the beginning of this book, we can observe through the way James presents himself that He is extraordinarily humble- he was the brother of Jesus but did not go flaunting around this very significant familial status. I think it is so easy to overlook the significance the James in the overall context of the New Testament. As mentioned in the blog post, he was a major player in the second half of the book of Acts. I do think it is also quite interesting that James did not see Christianity as separate from Judaism in the same way Paul does- this is just one of the many differences to be found between James and Paul- both have amazing truths and teachings to offer us.
This is a very thought-provoking question because I really enjoy the book of James because James is the brother of Jesus and for James to have faith in his brother as the Messiah is wild to me, I say this because I have siblings and if out of nowhere, they were like I am the Messiah you have to believe me it would be a very hard pill to swallow. That why I really like what P.Long says stating “seems to be strong evidence that the family of Jesus did not believe he was the Messiah before the resurrection” (P.Long). I too would be very skeptical if my siblings were to say something like this, however, after seeing my sibling resurrect from the dead, I immediately would have the utmost regret for thinking he is not the messiah. More importantly James took leadership in the church after about three to four years after his brother’s resurrection, so that makes me feel as if James really followed his brother Jesus and supported every teaching that Jesus did. To answer the question at the end of this blog post I really will have to re-read James on a more personal level and try to see that James was in fact the brother of Jesus and see if I can notice anything different in regard to tone and meaning behind what James now teaches about Jesus Christ his brother. The thing that is resonating with me is how James says that by faith alone is bogus there needs to be acts of work; I think of this as a direct correlation to his brother Jesus because He did in fact perform great miracles and acts of selflessness such as healing lepers and blind people. Thus, James saw that firsthand and is stringent when it comes to works because just saying that you believe is not enough because James has seen perfectness and it was in the form of a human Jesus Christ.
Thank you for your observation and reflection on this, Professor Long. Your look at James, the brother of Jesus, as the main leader of the early Christian community in Jerusalem is very interesting and gives us a unique perspective on how the early years of the Christian community developed. The emphasis on the leadership of James, especially in contrast to the relatively rapid decline of the Twelve described in the book of Acts, reflects a major and important change in the hierarchy of the early Christian community. The fact that James is mentioned alongside Peter and Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:7, where they all share the resurrection tradition, really highlights the prominence of James in the early Christian story. This early recognition of James’ leadership, as seen in Galatians 1:19, is more indicative of his rapid ascent to prominence in Jerusalem shortly after the resurrection. This finding does have implications for the interpretation of the Epistle of James. If that is viewed as an assimilation into past Christianity with which Judaism was comfortable, and Christianity may not be seen as distinct from Judaism as Paul later described in Ephesians 2 or Romans 9-11, prompts a rethinking of James’ theological and cultural context ‘ teaching. Understanding James as a leader who emerged in the early years after the revival challenged me personally to read his paper in a community that looked at his identity among emerging Jews and Christians beyond how I had been raised in my life in all cases. This perspective invites a different exploration of the text, acknowledging the complex interactions between Jewish traditions and Christian beliefs.
Long presents a subtle exploration of James, the brother of Jesus, and his leadership role in the early Christian community in Jerusalem. Long’s interest in Jewish Christianity, particularly focused on James, is evident throughout the post. The central argument posits James as a key figure in the Christian community in Jerusalem during the period covered by the book of Acts. The post references James Dunn’s work, “Beginning in Jerusalem,” to support this assertion, emphasizing the importance of recognizing James as a leader alongside Peter and Paul. An examination of the book of Acts is provided, suggesting that the Twelve apostles quickly fade from prominence, with James the Apostle being killed and not replaced. The diminishing roles of Peter and John in the narrative are highlighted, contrasting with the enduring significance of James. The author sees James as a major force in key events, such as Acts 12 and the Jerusalem conference in Acts 15. The post goes further to look at the remarkable inclusion of James alongside Peter and Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:7, within the resurrection tradition. This early mention suggests that James held a leadership position from the outset of Christianity. The attention turns to Galatians 1:19, where Paul’s visit to Jerusalem after his conversion is discussed. The exclusivity of Paul’s meeting with Peter and James, the Lord’s brother, is interpreted as evidence of James’ rapid rise to a leadership position within three to four years after the resurrection. The significance of the book of James is then explored as a valuable window into an early form of Christianity. The post suggests that this early Christian perspective, as reflected in the book of James, was comfortable with Judaism and perhaps did not perceive Christianity as entirely separate from Judaism, in contrast to Paul’s later writings in Ephesians 2 or Romans 9-11.
Contextual Insight, Recognizing James as a key leader provides crucial contextual insight into the dynamics of the early Christian community. The book of James can be read against the backdrop of James’ unique position, offering a lens through which we can understand the challenges, priorities, and influences that shaped the community. Emphasis on Good Works, James is known for emphasizing the importance of good works as a sign of genuine faith. Understanding James’ leadership role could lead to an interpretation that sees his emphasis on good works as a practical response to the cultural and social context of the Jerusalem community. It may reflect efforts to maintain a distinct identity within Judaism while embracing the teachings of Jesus. Relation to Judaism, Given the argument that early Jewish Christianity, particularly in Jerusalem, might not have seen itself as entirely separate from Judaism, the book of James could be seen as a bridge between these two faith traditions. James’ leadership in a context comfortable with Judaism might shape the themes and messages in the letter, potentially highlighting continuity rather than stark divergence. Response to Challenges, If James was indeed a leader facing challenges in preserving the identity of the Christian community within a predominantly Jewish environment, elements in the letter, such as addressing partiality and showing faith through deeds, may be seen as responses to specific challenges faced by the community. Early Christian Theology, James’ early inclusion alongside Peter and Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:7 suggests that his influence on early Christian theology was substantial. This could influence how we perceive the theological nuances in the book of James, recognizing it as a product of an influential leader whose perspectives may have contributed to the broader theological discussions of the time. In conclusion, the detailed response emphasizes that recognizing James’ leadership role in early Jerusalem Christianity can significantly enrich our understanding of the book of James. It prompts a reevaluation of the context, themes, and theological nuances, offering a more nuanced and historically grounded interpretation of this biblical text.
Much like every other book of the Bible we must understand the context of the time, and the context of the time was an attempted “coexistence” between Judaism and Christianity. Through very general doctrine Judaism and Christianity are the same, but only the next layer of doctrine does the religions do not fuse. With very little physical doctrine around the New Testament, and what little content the Jerusalem church had did have a likely chance to be skewed in some way. But with the book of James in particular, James is pulling from many of Jesus’ teachings from the Sermon on the Mount. James reestablishes critical doctrine, like loving others, salvation, judgement, future events, etc…. Even though authors are contested, if James was the leader of the church in Jerusalem, then of course early Christianity was comfortable with Judaism. Jerusalem was the heart of Judaism so Christianity would have needed to coexist with Judaism in order to effectively reach the Jewish population. There are many examples of churches today that slightly conform to their environment to reach the people in that environment. If that means sacrificing a little bit of doctrine to get more people into the church, then they will do it. For the church in Jerusalem, misunderstanding and a heavy influence of Judaism effected their doctrine. To observe James correctly we can read and comprehend, then see what Paul later confronted the Church in Jerusalem in later doctrine and make our distinction from there.
One key insight that can be taken when examining the book of James given the relationship between Judaism and Christianity at the time is the fundamental nature of the teachings present in James. From a theological standpoint the epistle of James approaches many teachings through the perspective a jew rather than gentile. This approach creates teachings that fit in with much of what we see in the old testament as a result. For this reason, James can in some ways be seen as a great bridge from Judaism to Christianity. Its also important to note that as stated in the post, James was the brother of Jesus and also not a disciple despite being a very prominent person in the church as well as someone very close to Jesus. James’ leadership role within the church and the insights he gave us as a result help to make a more nuanced view about Christianity vs. Judaism. These two are not necessarily pitted against each other. James is the great example of how Jewish culture and the teachings of traditional Judaism influence the founding of the early Christian church tremendously. When examining James with an enhanced perspective, we can gain insight regarding the social, ethical, and moral concerns of not only James but more broadly, or the church in Jerusalem of the time.
The dating of the book of James can be a debatable topic, as is the case with some historical information. What makes James a hot debate between scholars is because of the different views on which James actually wrote the book as there are quite a few Jameses in the Bible. With that being said, The dating of the book of James highly depends on one’s belief in the authorship of the book as they all died at different times. In terms of Jams the Just, who may be Jesus’ half-brother and the leader of the Jerusalem church, we would go back to 62AD, which was about the time he was killed. According to Jobes (2014), this would mean the book was written between AD 33 and 62 which was the time between Jesus’ death and James’ death (page 158). This would suggest that the book was written even before the other New Testament books, including the Gospels. If James is seen as reflecting an early form of Christianity closely connected with Judaism, it may influence our interpretation of the letter. We might view James as emphasizing continuity with Jewish traditions and ethical teachings rather than a distinct break from Judaism. This could in turn highlight the diverse theological developments within the early Christian church. Some passages in James could be interpreted in a way that aligns with an early Christian community comfortable with Jewish traditions. For example, James 2:14-26 emphasizes the importance of faith accompanied by works, aligning with a focus on ethical ways of living which was popular with most Jewish teachings.
Based on the information from the last paragraph we can see that Long’s answer to the question of the significance of James is that the book is a window into an early form of Christianity. It is also pointed out that this is a form of Christianity that is separate from Judaism but not quite as much as what Paul teaches later on in Ephesians and Romans. From our discussion in class, we know that James was traditionally a Jew, so once he became a believer he was a Christian who still followed Jewish tradition and laws. We also know that James is a key factor in making things happen with the Jerusalem conference in Acts 15. James also played an important role in helping the Jewish Christian Community understand all of the problems that they were running into with incorporating Christ into their faith. At this point, Christianity was obviously very new so James was able to fulfill the role of explaining what this would look like to the Jewish Christian Community. It is also important to note that James did not see Christianity as separate from Judaism but it was rather an extension or a future movement to the direction of their faith.
I never deeply considered the author James as a brother of Christ, and I didn’t realize how important his leadership in Jerusalem was. Every time trying to put myself in James’ place, it must have been quite the experience to realize that your own brother is the expected Messiah. Studying more about the context of James, when understanding his Jewish background it helps make more sense of the importance he places in obeying the law. “James takes very seriously Jesus’ declaration that he has not come to abolish the Law and the prophets but to fulfill them. Therefore, James does not repudiate the law of Moses as the basis for the moral life that please God, but like the evangelist Mathew, James argues for ‘the continuing value of a prophecy interpreted law’ in the lives of the Christians to whom he writes” (Jobes, 2011, p.196). At the same time, I really liked the way that Jobes explains in his chapter, the importance to understand what law James is talking about, the royal law, the two most important commandments. “Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments” (Mathew 22: 37-40, NIV).When considering those commandments, it makes sense that James is not placing law above grace to gain salvation. But as mentioned before, although he doest seem to make a lot of difference between Judaism and Christianism, he does understand the progress of the revelation of God in Christ. And understand this concept of progress revelation through Christ and understand the royal law that James emphasizes in his letter. It helps us to reconcile the law and grace and help us better understand the whole letter. So, we should definitely take into consideration those aspects about the context and the intent of the author in order to gain the best of the letter. And understand that the focus is not a good work, but a faith that produces transformation.
The Book of James is more significant than one would think. While this is James the brother of Jesus writing it, and depending on how you date the book, is even more important. However, this being said, probably one of the more important topics to talk on is James 2:26. In it, James states, “For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead” (James 2:26, ESV). I believe there are a few ways to take this verse, and as to why the Book of James is important. When I first read this passage, it admittedly frightened me, but looking back now, and in a different light, I am noticing several things. First is the date in which the Book of James was written, looking at the context in their era, so to speak.
Secondly, if one does not have faith in that Jesus Christ died for their sins, and then rose again to complete God’s Plan, were they truly Christian? One can say you are Christian, and go to church on Sunday, but if you truly do not put this into practice, along with believing in Jesus Christ as your Savior, then what?
Ultimately, however, as Christians, we know we are doing good works, because God has a plan for us in the end, it may be different from someone else, but we are all called down a different point and path in life.
I never put too much thought into the book of James as a newer christian but I think it’s really interesting that James did not believe his brother Jesus was the messiah until after his resurrection because of their mother knowing what she knows about her son Jesus. I think with the context we know about the story of James that as a Jew he had his beliefs on the law that would make believing his brother was the son of God difficult. What’s cool is that James was one part of the start of early christianity because after Jesus’s resurrection he believed his brother was who he claimed to be. That’s where Judaism and christianity start to break off from each other. This just shows how significant Jesus rising from the dead was because it gave people like James in the bible the proof they needed to start believing that Jesus was who he said he was and that’s why after his resurrection James devoted his life to the early church and helped shape it into what it is today. James used what he learned from Jesus to help grow the church which I think is a really cool and inspiring thing about James from not believing his brother to helping grow his brother’s church.
The book of James shows us importance in a different way than maybe what most books in the Bible show. In the last paragraph of Long’s blog post he states that “the book of James is therefore a window into an early form of christianity”. I agree with this statement, as the early christian communities were challenged in many different ways. We see in the book of James that he emphasizes ethics in the communities. In the ESV study Bible we see the ethics and morals being brought up in James 1:22-25 stating “Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says. Anyone who listens to the word but does not do what it says is like someone who looks at his face in a mirror and, after looking at himself, goes away and immediately forgets what he looks like”. This shows us the morals and ethics we should live by. Not just understanding or preaching the word of God but actually acting it out. This is how these early christian communities tried to live. In the Book “Letters to the Church” by Jobes, She states that “to listen to James is to listen to Jesus”(197). This passage really stuck with me as I believe it’s not just on the top layer through James that we can actually engage in this but, with more understanding and examination and a bit of deeper understanding, we can see this coming true. As Jesus is in James, and James is in Jesus, Showing us the importance of this epistle.
The book of James was written by Jesus’ half brother, and it is also as important as other Bible books. James was the servant of God, and he mentioned a very good point of faith. James believed that if believers believed that they were God’s people, then their lives should be fruitful. James against a hypocritical believer, like someone who says one thing but does another. James believed that faith had practical meaning, that having faith had an impact on every area of our lives, and that having faith inspired us to actively engage in the lives of others.
The book of James encourages believers to act like God’s people, and our faith must be shown in our actions. According to James, a faith that does not result in real changes in one’s life is meaningless. In James 2:17, it says, “In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.” James wanted believers to care more about the heart than their outward appearance because God looked at the heart. When we see rich people, we think God blesses them more than poor people. We value and care for rich people’s money too much. In Matthew 6:19–21, we can see that we must store up for ourselves treasures in heaven, and where our treasure is, there our heart will also be. Poor people might not have money, but they are rich in faith, and their treasures in heaven cannot be stolen by thieves. James believed that our faith could be dead if it did not work. Only faith can save us, and if we accept and believe the words of God, then it is faith too. James stated that our faith must be a living faith, and a living faith is when we keep following and acting on it for what we believe. For example, if we believe that Jesus told us to love others, then we should love others in real life.
What first occurs to me is that recognising James as a significant part of the foundation of the church imposes on us the impetus to forsake the understanding of the book and message of James as contrary to the teachings of Paul. As has been duly noted in the article, the narrative of Acts highlights Peter and Paul as well as James, with the former two being called unto specific parts of the mission of the foundation of the church. I believe it important to hold to the Ephesians 2-3 understanding of the church as both Jews and Gentiles, while also clinging to Jesus’ instructions to the apostles in Acts 1, “[Y]ou will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8b, NIV). In this we recognise the significance of James’ leadership as a chief forerunner for the sake of the gospel of Jesus Christ. His message echoes much of what Jesus taught: selfless service, devotion to God in the face of persecution, wisdom from God rather than trust in man, the brokenness of man in contrast with the holiness of God, and my personal favourite: the parallel between the parable of the sower and the faith and works discourse. The last one is my favourite because both Jesus and James teach that what we believe is made evident in our actions, whether we know it or not. Put differently, we ought to examine our actions in order to understand and either affirm or confront and correct what we believe.
I think it is a good observation that James, who was the brother of Jesus, emerged as a key leader significantly impacts our understanding of the book of James and what it has to offer us. It is important to note what being the brother of Jesus could possibly be like. I think he was very humble in the way he approached all of this. James took his calling and went about it. I feel like James portrays a Christianity that was deeply rooted in Jewish heritage. When we read James in the light of what we know about James, the book offers us insights of early Christianity. I think that it also offers us the opportunity to read the book of James to see the diversity in early Christianity. It also gives us the opportunity to know who the readers were and what was going on in their lives around them. The book of James offered the people another insight into their own relationship with Christ.