So Much for Straw || A Blog about the Epistle of James

David Edgar, Has God not Chose the Poor? The Social Setting of the Epistle of James, Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 206 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001).

In this revision of his dissertation at the University of Dublin, Edgar applies rhetorical analysis to the Epistle of James, relying heavily on Wuellner, Theissen, and Bruce Malina.

Chapters 2 and 3 deal with the self-perception of the author and his depiction of his audience, with particular focus on the community’s treatment of the poor.  The poor, in Edgards view, are probably the “wandering radicals” of the early Jesus movement first envisioned by Theissen.  Rather than supporting the poor radicals, the young church instead is interesting in courting wealthy benefactors for its own personal gain.

Based on the assertion that the poor are early itinerants, Edgar suggests a date of authorship prior to the Jewish revolt in 66, but after 62, since, based on the letter’s excellent Greek, the work must be pseudonymous.

While the application of Theissen’s notions to the letter of James is interesting, it seems a bit to narrow as an exhaustive category.  In particular, it disregards in emphasis on the orphans and the widows in 1:27.  However, it is entirely possible that these wandering radicals are one of the marginalized groups with which James is concerned, but not the only group.

In chapters 4–6 Edgar applies rhetorical analysis to the text of James in a commentary-like fashion, making observations along the way.  While Edgar’s work blazes few new trails, his research is thorough and the application of rhetorical analysis to James deserves a look from anyone studying the letter.

William R. Baker, “Who’s your daddy? Gendered birth images in the soteriology of the Epistle of James (1:14-15, 18, 21),” EQ 79.3 (2007), 195–207.

In this article, Baker claims that the birth images in 1:14–15, 18, 21, provide a framework for understanding soteriology in James. “In salvation the father (God) conceives in his submissive wife (the unsaved person) the newborn child (the saved believer)” 196-97).

Baker first points to 14–15, where the birth allegory presents the opposite of salvation.  Drawing on the seductress of Proverbs 5 and 7, James tells a story of a seductress name Desire (which is, of course, feminine in the Greek) who beds the adulterous man. Their daughter is Sin (also feminine), who will herself beget Death.

These birth images, says Baker, derive from Philo who maintains the Platonic division of rational and irrational facets of the person. Desire and pleasure are both feminine aspects of man, and, like Eve, threaten the person’s ability to make rational decisions. Femininity, then, is evil.

The positive birth image is found in 18 and 21, wherein God implants his DNA into the submissive (feminine) will of the believer. Baker’s distinctions become a bit cloudy on this point when he claims that submission is a feminine act, opposed to masculine and therefore sinful self-assertion.  Femininity in 14–15, however, is portrayed as evil, so one wonders about the validity of masculine/feminine categories as determinants for salvation.

The “word of truth” in verse 18 is the implanted DNA—a metaphor he employs freely—found in every Christian.  Accepting the implanted word (21) is simply living in accordance with the divine DNA bestowed at the moment of conception between God and will.

In conclusion, Baker recommends reading the entire letter in light of the birth allegory of 1:13–14, 18, 21, with particular emphasis on viewing the Word as congenital to the believer and on the importance of continued submission to God’s will.  Applying the notion of gendered soteriology to the entire letter is, in my opinion, strenuous.  Additionally, I wonder about the validity of the DNA metaphor in light of Greco-Roman understandings of self-identity.

Peter Frick of Conrad Grebel University College at the University of Waterloo has reviewed Reading James With New Eyes, a volume I have previously discussed, in the Review of Biblical Literature. The review is available here.

Frick provides a summary of the essays while noting his reservations with new methodological approaches, namely that the methods lead the authors to different places with regard to James’ central focus. After 2 lengthy paragraphs criticizing the essays, he concludes with a two sentence conclusion espousing the timeliness of the work.

On a personal note, after taking midterms and grading midterms, spring break, and a minor family emergency, I am back in the blogging saddle.

To continue my discussion of Jacobean verbal icons, I would like to point to the possible relationship between the thought world of the author of James and the body of work known was the Testament of Job (TJob).

In James 5:11, the author references Job as a model of perseverance: “Indeed we call blessed those who showed endurance. You have heard of the endurance of Job, and you have seen the purpose of the Lord, how the Lord is compassionate and merciful” (NRSV).

For the auditors of this text, the reference to the person of Job would have been understood in light of canonical Job, certainly, but possibly in light of the intertestamental Testament of Job as well. Questions remain about the writing’s date of compilation, but the story certainly existed in oral form before redaction, so a first century Jewish audience very well could have been familiar with it.

In the closing part of his letter, James speaks of faith and suffering, and he uses Job as a verbal icon that illustrates the purpose of the Lord, particularly with reference to compassion and mercy (πολύσπλαγχνός ἐστιν ὁ κύριος καὶ οἰκτίρμων).

In TJob, the theme of Job’s compassion and mercy recur throughout.  James, then, in his effort to promote the plight of the marginalized, namely the πτωχοι, elevates the person of Job as a verbal icon of perseverance amidst suffering that illustrates the compassion and mercy of God, all of which are traits the author desire’s to inspire in his auditors.

Verbal icons, then, provide the author with a means of communicating layers of meaning and rich significance unachievable through simple comparisons.

Here are a few examples of Job’s disposition toward the poor:

And I had three hundred and forty thousand nomadic asses, and of these I set aside five hundred, and the offspring of these I order to he sold and the proceeds to be given to the poor and the needy. For from all the lands the many came to meet me.6 For the four doors of my house were opened, each, being in charge of a watchman who had to see whether there were any people coming asking alms, and whether they would see me sitting at one of the door’s so that they could leave through the other and take whatever they needed. (3:5–9)

I also had three thousand five hundred yokes of oxen, and I selected of these five hundred and had them tend to the plowing. And with these I had done all the work in each field by those who would, take it in charge and the income of their crops I laid aside for the poor on their table. I also had fifty bakeries from which I sent [the bread] to the table for the poor. (10:5–6)

I therefore, rising early, would offer up sacrifices on their behalf in the following amounts: 300 doves, 50 goat’s kids, and 12 sheep. Everything over and above the prescribed ritual portion I would order to be considered superfluous and expended on the poor. (13:4–5)

So Much for Straw was mentioned on the February edition of The Biblioblog Top 50. Not actually on the list yet, but look out Ben Witherington!

Genre
Versput discusses the generic nature of the Letter of James (Donald J. Versput, “Genre and Story: The Community Setting of the Epistle of James,” CBQ, 62 (2000): 96–110), and concludes that the designation ἐν τη διασπορα (in the dispersion/Diaspora) actually denotes the intended audience, rather than serving as a metaphorical designation only.

He finds generic parallels in the letter of Jeremiah in Jeremiah 29 as well as in the 2 Apocalypse of Baruch 78–89.  He points out that the latter example was written explicitly to be read aloud to communities in dispersion in order to encourage and exhort them amidst trials (101). Encouragement and hope thematically bind these writings, including James, together.

Content

Once establishing his stance on genre, Versput move to content. After claiming that the concerns of the author represent neither typical Jewish wisdom themes nor Christian paraenetic motifs (104), Versput emphasizes the communal concerns of the author: speech, leadership, and charity (105).

Versput’s conclusion, following Bo Reicke, is that the content of the Epistle of James shows similarity to the writings of ancient associations (collegia, θίασοι,
σύνοδοι), and offers ancient writings to lend support for his thesis.

While the style of the examples is markedly dry and distant (“let him this” or “if someone that,” opposed to the “my dear brothers” of James), Versput’s claim is that the parallel is in content and not necessarily style.

Interestingly, the same year this article was published (2000), JBL also carried an article on voluntary associations: Richard S. Ascough, “The Thessalonian Christian Community as a Professional Voluntary Association,” JBL 119, no. 2 (Summer, 2000), which is also a helpful read for anyone exploring the role of these associations in the ancient world.

Jim Darlack at Old in the New has posted links to images of the Epistle of James in Codex Sinaiticus.

This post is a couple of years old, but since one of my goals is to aggregate good online info for research on James, I think it’s still timely. After all, we are talking about a document that’s 1600 years old, so what’s a couple of years, anyway?

In his insightful work on the Sermon on the Mount (Reading The Sermon On The Mount: Character Formation And Decision Making In Matthew 5-7), Charles Talbert claims that the teachings of Christ in Matthew 5–7 serve as verbal icons that allow the auditor to “see” into the will of God. Talbert remarks

“Like the painted icon, the verbal icon provides a window into divine reality, making possible the perception of the spiritual world. In the Sermon on the Mount the words of Jesus function as verbal icons enabling the disciples to see into the divine reality of God’s unconditional will. Character is then shaped as the disciple comes to see differently” (72).

In light of Talbert’s exposition (which he supports with examples from Greco-Roman literature), I wonder if James’ use of examples functions in a similar manner.  From what I can tell, the there are 4 uses of verbal icons in James that are similar to those found in Matthew: Abraham - 2:20–23; Rahab - 2:25;  The Prophets - 5:10; Elijah - 5:17–18.

James does use other examples, like the rudder and the bit, but the verbal icon typically involves the use of a prominent personality held in regard by the community.  Talbert mentions Xenophon, Memorabilia, 4.1.1, in which he speaks the disciple’s of Socrates imagining him in his absence, primarily as an aide to virtuous living. Seneca, Epistles, 52.7 and 11.8–10 encourages his audience to look to the great philosophers of old for guidance, and to hear them speak through books (Talbert, 40). The presence of a a virtuous person was thought to impart the ability to live rightly onto the disciples. Talbert offers the words of Plutarch: “great is his craving all but to merge his own identity in that of a good man” (Virt. prof. 84D) (Talbert, 40).

The four verbal icons in James stand apart from other examples, such as a rudder, because they offer a living breathing vision of ideal reality.  Faith in action looks like Abraham and Rahab. Patience in suffering looks like the Prophets. Righteous prayer looks like Elijah. These familiar characters provide not only. James never exhorts his audience to be like the verbal icons.

Rather they function similar to the icons in Matthew. Through them, “one sees the divine will and in the contemplation thereof is changed. . . . This type of language functions to form moral character” (Talbert 91). Whatever the specific intent of James, it is clear that some sort of behavior modification is at least one desired outcome and the use of verbal icons supports James’ goal of transformation.

Certainly this is only a brief incursion into a potential area of exploration, but James’ extensive use of the Jesus tradition in Matthew seems to warrant the exploration of parallel approaches to teaching. Any thoughts are welcome.

For another blog with info on James, click over to ΑΓΑΠΗΣΕΙΣ. While the author (who appears anonymous) covers much more than the Epistle of James, you might want to bookmark the site for future reference.  The author offers lots of information on New Testament Greek and translation that you might also find interesting.

The following is a list of ways in which one may understand the relationship between James and Paul. Number 8 is Mitchell’s unique contribution. Punctuation and emphasis all hers.

1. James and Paul were completely independent and any allegorical overlaps are mere coincidence.
2. James and Paul both reflect “Hellenistic Judaism” or “first generation Jewish [Christianity]” (without direct connection to one another).
3. Paul knew the Epistle of James and wrote against it in his letter(s), especially Galatians (and/or Romans).
4. James did not know Paul’s letters but had heard something (accurate) about Paul.
5. James did not know Paul’s letters but had heard something (inaccurate) about Paul.
6. James depends on the Pauline letters (especially Galatians, perhaps Romans) and writes against them because he understands how radical Paul’s teaching on justification was and wishes to combat it.
7. James depends on the Pauline letters (especially Galatians, perhaps Romans) and writes against them, but ‘misunderstands’ Paul’s true teaching on justification to combat it.
8. The author of the Letter of James knows some collection of Paul’s letters, and writes from within Paulinism (rather than in opposition to Paul), creating a compromise document which has as one of its purposes reconciling ‘Paul with Paul’ and ‘Paul with the Pillars.’