James: Salvation by Works#

Introductory Issues#

The Letter of James is the least doctrinal and most practical book in the New Testament. We are dealing with a manual of Christian conduct that assumes a foundation of faith.

Authorship#

This letter bears the name of its author, James (Greek for the Hebrew name “Jacob”), a leader in the early Jerusalem church (Acts 15:12-21; 21:18; Galatians 2:9, 12) and usually considered to be a brother of Jesus, but only a half brother because of the virgin birth. It is possible, however, that James is an older stepbrother of Jesus by a conjectural marriage of Joseph preceding his marriage to Mary. This view, which excludes any blood relationship to Jesus, might better explain the failure of Jesus’ brothers to believe in him during his lifetime (Mark 3:21; John 7:2-8).

To maintain the doctrine of Mary’s perpetual virginity, the traditional Roman Catholic view is that “brother” means “cousin.” But the associations between Jesus and his brothers in Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3; and John 2:12; 7:2-10 imply a closer relation than that of cousins and probably also closer than that of stepbrothers. The view that the James who wrote this letter was Jesus’ half brother therefore remains the most probable.

Though not a believer in Jesus during his public ministry, James saw the risen Christ (1 Corinthians 15:7) and was among those who were awaiting the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 1:14). Therefore James (and the other brothers of Jesus) must have come to belief some time during the last stage of Jesus’ time on earth. Though James himself carefully practiced the Mosaic law (Acts 21:17-26; Galatians 2:12), at the Jerusalem Council he supported Paul’s position that Gentile converts should not have to keep the law (Acts 15:12-21; compare Galatians 2:1-10).

Jewishness#

The subject matter of James and its Jewish tone, especially its stress on God’s law, harmonize with what we know of James the Lord’s brother from Acts, Galatians, and other sources. Though often obscured by varying translations in English, there are also some significant verbal parallels between the Letter of James and the words of James in Acts 15, such as:

• the term “greeting” (Greek: chairein, used at the start of letters only in James 1:1 and Acts 15:23, the decree drafted under James’s leadership)

• the term “visit” (Greek: episkepsesthai, used in James 1:27 and Acts 15:14, the speech of James before the Jerusalem Council), and others (compare James 2:5, 7 with Acts 15:13, 17).

Those who regard the letter as a late first- or early second-century pseudonymous work maintain that a simple Galilean, such as James, could not have written its well-styled Greek. But this objection overestimates the literary quality of the Greek style in James and, more importantly, fails to consider the mounting evidence that Palestinian Jews knew and used Greek along with Aramaic and Hebrew.

Canonicity#

The Letter of James encountered some difficulty in gaining canonical status. Several factors explain the hesitancy of the early church:

1. the brevity of the letter

2. its dominantly practical rather than doctrinal character

3. the limitation of its address to Jewish Christians

An uncertainty about the identity of James in 1:1 (for several men by that name appear in the New Testament) also cast initial doubt on the letter’s canonicity.

The mistaken impression (voiced by Martin Luther among others) that the doctrine of works in James contradicts Paul’s doctrine of faith did not seriously disturb the early church so far as we can tell. When it came to be realized that the author was almost surely James the Lord’s brother, the final verdict proved favorable to canonicity.

Addressees#

James writes “to the twelve tribes in the Diaspora” (1:1). This designation may be taken metaphorically, as in 1 Peter 1:1 (see pages 525-26), for the predominantly Gentile church scattered throughout the Roman Empire. In James, however, the reference is more likely to Jewish Christians living outside palestine, as favored by a number of items:

• The specificity of reference to “the twelve tribes”

• The use in 2:2 of the Greek word for a synagogue, usually translated here in its untechnical sense of “assembly” The five quotations of and numerous allusions to the Old Testament

• Jewish idioms, such as “Lord of sabaoth [hosts]” (5:4) Stress on several permanent principles of the Jewish law (2:8-13; 4:11-12) and on monotheism (2:19)

• The omission of any polemic against idolatry, for idolatry did not characterize Jews of the first century and had not characterized them since the Babylonian exile but was commonly practiced by Gentiles

Date#

Josephus puts the martyrdom of James in A.D. 62; so the Letter of James must be dated earlier.2 Some scholars advance arguments for a date so early (A.D. 45-50) that the letter could be considered the first New Testament book to have been written.

The lack of any reference to the Judaizing controversy is said to imply a date before that controversy arose just prior to the Jerusalem Council of about A.D. 49; and the Jewish tone of this letter is said to imply a date before Christianity had expanded to include Gentiles.

A limitation of the address to Jewish Christians and the strongly Jewish outlook of James himself can account for both phenomena. We should therefore content ourselves with an indeterminate date before James’s martyrdom.

Allusions to Jesus’ Sayings#

Notably, James contains numerous allusions to sayings of Jesus recorded in the Gospels, especially material associated with the Sermon on the Mount. For example, the contrast in 1:22 between hearers and doers of the word recalls the parable of the wise person, who builds on a solid foundation by hearing and doing the words of Jesus, and the foolish person, who builds on the sand by hearing but failing to do his words (Matthew 7:24-27; Luke 6:47-49).

First Peter: Salvation and Suffering#

Introductory Issues#

Themes#

The audience to whom this letter was first directed were suffering persecution. The emphasis therefore falls on proper Christian conduct in the face of anti-Christian hostility and on the compensatory gift of salvation that will reach completion in the future.

Authorship#

The author identifies himself as Peter (1:1). This identification agrees remarkably with two phenomena:

1. A number of phrases in 1 Peter recall the phraseology of Peter’s sermons as recorded in Acts

2. allusions to Jesus’ sayings and deeds as recorded in the Gospels come from stories in which Peter played a special part or from sayings in which he would have taken a special interest.

Therefore, though some modern scholars have theorized that 1 Peter is a baptismal sermon or liturgy (1:3-4:11) transformed into a letter by the addition of 1:1-2 and 4:12-5:14 and hence probably non-Petrine, we should accept the letter’s own claim to have been written by the Apostle Peter, a claim supported by early church tradition.

Date#

After A.D. 63 Pontus, located in northern Asia Minor, ceased to exist as a client kingdom of Rome. Yet Peter lists Pontus first in the letter’s address (1:1). Furthermore, the element of persecution, which pervades the letter, suggests that Peter wrote it in A.D. 63 or a little earlier, that is, shortly before his martyrdom in Rome under Nero about A.D. 65.

The persecution lying behind 1 Peter seems not to have originated from an empire-wide ban on Christianity, for Peter still speaks of the government as a protector (2:13-17; 3:13). The empire-wide ban came later. The present persecution rather takes the forms of slanderous accusations, social ostracism, mob riots, and local police action.

Silvanus’s Role#

“I have written… through Silvanus” (5:12) has suggested to some that Silvanus acted as Peter’s amanuensis and polished the Greek style of this letter. Maybe so, but Peter may have had another amanuensis. The commendation of Silvanus as a “faithful brother,” and the contrast between a greeting from Mark (5:13) and the lack of one from Silvanus favor that “through Silvanus” means he carried the letter, needed a commendation to be welcomed by the addressees, and could greet them in person on arrival.

His name, a Latin one, sounds like the Aramaic “Silas” and probably refers to the Silas who accompanied Paul on his second missionary journey; for Paul mentions a “Silvanus” as his companion during that journey (2 Corinthians 1:19; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 2 Thessalonians 1:1), and Luke’s narrative of the same journey uses “Silas” (nine times in Acts 15:40-18:5). The similarity of Peter’s ethical exhortations to those in Pauline literature (for examples, see page 386) suggests that Peter is influenced by Paul’s letters, perhaps known to him through Silvanus, or that both apostles draw from a common stock of more or less stereotyped catechetical instruction—oral or written, prebaptismal or postbaptismal.

Roman Origin#

Peter writes from “Babylon” (5:13), but almost certainly not the city by that name in Mesopotamia—rather, Rome. For Mesopotamian Babylon had lost almost all its inhabitants by the beginning of the Christian era, and “Babylon” occurs as a symbolic name for Rome in Revelation 17:4-6, 9, 18 inasmuch as Rome was the ruling city in the New Testament period (verse 18), the city of seven hills (whereas Mesopotamian Babylon was situated on a plain, its ruins still visible today [verse 9]), and the persecutor of the church (verse 6).

Extrabiblical references to Rome as “Babylon” also suggest that Peter is using a well-known designation, and the early church fathers understood “Babylon” as a reference to Rome. Tradition knows of no church in Mesopotamian Babylon or of Peter’s ever going there, but tradition does indicate that Peter died in Rome. When John Mark’s presence in Rome during Paul’s imprisonment there (Colossians 4:10) is connected with his presence with Peter at the writing of 1 Peter (1 Peter 5:13), another formidable argument for the Roman origin of this letter appears.

Addressees#

At first glance the phrases “exiles of the Dispersion” (1:1), “among the Gentiles” (2:12), and “the Gentiles” (as a third party, 4:3) seem to imply that the original addressees were Jewish Christians. But a reference to their idolatry prior to conversion (4:3), whereas Jews of the first century did not practice idolatry, plus “passions of your former ignorance” and “futile way of life” (1:14, 18; compare Ephesians 4:17, where similar phraseology applies to Gentiles), clearly indicate the predominantly Gentile background of the intended audience. This conclusion is confirmed by 2:10: “Once you were not a people [this could hardly be said of the Jews, God’s covenant nation], but now you are the people of God.

Just as Peter uses the term “Babylon” figuratively for Rome, then, he also uses the term “Gentiles” figuratively for non-Christians and the phrase “exiles of the Dispersion” for Gentile Christians scattered throughout the world. Because the church has for the time being displaced Israel, Jewish designations can apply to the predominantly Gentile church.

Second Peter: In Defense of Orthodoxy#

Introductory Issues#

Theme#

Heretical teachers who peddled false doctrine and practiced immorality were beginning to make serious inroads into the church. Second Peter polemicizes against them, particularly against their denial of Jesus’ return, and affirms the true knowledge of Christian belief to counter their heretical teaching.

Authenticity and Canonicity#

Widespread doubt exists among modern scholars that the Apostle Peter wrote this letter. The early church exhibited some hesitancy in accepting it into the canon. This hesitancy can be explained by the comparative brevity of the letter, however; and such brevity may have curtailed its distribution and limited people’s acquaintance with it. The early church did finally accept it as a genuine and canonical writing of Peter.

The style of 2 Peter differs from that of 1 Peter. But a difference in amanuenses may provide the reason. Remarkable similarities of phraseology between 2 Peter and 1 Peter and the Petrine speeches in Acts point to a common source, the Apostle Peter.

Relation to Jude#

It is also argued that 2 Peter borrows from Jude, especially in description of false teachers, and that a man of Peter’s apostolic stature would not have borrowed from a comparatively insignificant writer, such as Jude. But we may question the last part of this argument, for literary history is filled with examples of prominent writers who borrowed from obscure ones.

Furthermore, a number of scholars have argued the reverse: that Jude wrote his letter later and borrowed from 2 Peter. It is also possible that their similar phraseology comes from a common source unknown to us.

Allusion to Paul’s Letters#

In further objection to Petrine authorship, the reference to Paul’s letters in 2 Peter 3:15-16 is said to imply that all of them had been written, collected, and published; yet these things could have happened only after the martyrdoms of Peter and Paul, for Paul was writing up to the very end of his life. But the reference to his letters need imply the existence of only those letters he had written up to the time that Peter wrote his second letter. Peter’s knowledge of them probably came from his travels, from the circulation of Paul’s letters, and from Silvanus (or Silas), who was both Paul’s missionary companion and Peter’s helper (1 Peter 5:12).

The description of Paul as “our beloved brother” (2 Peter 3:15) is what an apostolic contemporary and equal would write, not what a later pseudonymous author would write about an ecclesiastical hero of a bygone generation. Despite modern doubt, then, we may accept the final verdict of the early church that shortly after the Apostle Peter wrote his first letter and shortly before his martyrdom about A.D. 65, he wrote this second letter which bears his name.

Jude: Danger! False Teachers!#

Introductory Issues#

Theme#

Like 2 Peter, the Letter of Jude polemicizes against false teachers who have penetrated the church — in greater numbers, it would appear, than at the time 2 Peter was written. The particular heresies receive no detailed description or rebuttal, but the heretics themselves draw vehement castigation.

Authorship#

The author of this letter identifies himself as Jude, “a brother of James” (verse 1). He is probably not referring to the Apostle James of the well-known trio, Peter, James, and John. Herod Agrippa I martyred the Apostle James at an early date (Acts 12:1-2).

The writer refers instead to James the leader of the church in Jerusalem (Acts 15:12-21; 21:18; Galatians 1:18-2:13) and the half brother of Jesus. Thus Jude too is a half brother of Jesus but modestly describes himself as “a servant of Jesus Christ” (verse 1).

The date of this letter is uncertain, but it is late enough for heretics to have made serious inroads into the church.

First John: Fatherly Instruction to “Dear Children”#

Introductory Issues#

Theme#

For early Christians, heresy in the church posed the problem of distinguishing orthodoxy from heterodoxy, faithful ministers of the word from false teachers. The Letter of 1 John formulates several criteria for testing the Christian profession of teachers and of yourself.

Literary Form, Address, and Purpose#

Written probably toward the end of the first century by the Apostle John, 1 John has no introduction, author’s greetings, or concluding salutations. Yet the statements, “I am writing” (2:1) and “These things I have written to you” (2:26), show that originally 1 John was not an oral sermon, but a written composition. It might have been a general tract for the whole church. But the affectionate “my dear children,” by which the writer repeatedly addresses his audience, implies a limited circle of Christians with whom he is closely acquainted.

It is also possible that 1 John represents a western Asiatic letter form that lacked an opening address and a closing greeting. John clearly states his purpose in writing to strengthen the addressees’ knowledge, joy, and assurance in the Christian faith (1:3-4; 5:13) over against false teaching (2:1-29; 4:1-21).

Antignostic Polemic#

Cerinthianism#

The heresy of Gnosticism was probably growing in Christendom by the time John wrote. According to early tradition, John hurriedly left a public bath in Ephesus when he heard that the Gnostic leader Cerinthus had entered (Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3.34). Building on the notion that matter is inherently evil, Cerinthus distinguished between an immaterial, divine Christ-spirit and a human Jesus with a physical body, and said that the Christ-spirit came on the human Jesus right after Jesus’ baptism and left just before the crucifixion.

Against this Cerinthian doctrine John stresses that it was the one person “Jesus Christ” who was crucified: “This is the one who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ; not by water only [baptism], but by the water and by the blood [which flowed from his pierced side]” (5:6; John 19:34).

Docetism#

Working on the same presupposition that anything material and physical must necessarily be evil, other Gnostics tried to avoid the incarnation and bodily death of Jesus Christ by saying that he only seemed to be human (so-called docetism, from the Greek verb dokein, “to seem”). Therefore John emphasizes the reality of the incarnation: “What we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we observed and our hands felt … and we have seen” (1:1-2). Ironically from the modern standpoint, the first christological heresy attacked the humanity of Jesus rather than his deity.

Criteria of True Christian Profession#

To accomplish the purpose of strengthening his audience by combating heresy with truth, John discusses three criteria for determining genuine Christian profession:

1. righteous living

2. love for other believers

3. belief in Jesus as the incarnate Christ.

Just as the criterion of belief in Jesus as the incarnate Christ is directed against the christological errors of Gnostics, so also is the criterion of righteous conduct directed against the moral laxity of Gnostics and the criterion of love toward fellow Christians directed against the haughty exclusivism of Gnostics.

Second and Third John: Fatherly Instruction to Christians#

Introductory Issues#

Canonicity and Authorship#

The attestation of 2 and 3 John in patristic writings is somewhat weak, doubtless because of the brevity of these letters. But the earliest church fathers exhibited no doubt that the Apostle John wrote them.

In both letters John identifies himself as “the elder,” not in the sense of an officer in a local church, but in the sense of an elder statesman of the church at large, that is, an apostle (compare 1 Peter 5:1). The term stands in contrast with John’s favorite designation of his audience, “my dear children.”

Themes, Purpose, and Address#

2 John#

The themes of Christian love and truth dominate 2 John. The purpose is to warn against showing hospitality to any false teacher (“Do not take him into your house and do not say hello to him,” verse 10). The addressees are “the elect [‘chosen’] lady and her children” (verse 1).

The addressees are “the elect [‘chosen’] lady and her children” (verse 1). Some interpreters consider them to be personal acquaintances of the apostle or even treat the words “elect” and “lady” as proper names of a woman, giving “Electa” or “Kyria” or both. But “elect” can hardly be a proper name, for the lady’s sister is also “elect” (verse 13). Two sisters would not have the same name. It is far more likely that “the elect lady” personifies a local church and that “her children” represent the individual members of that church, for the lady and her children are beloved by “all who know the truth” (verse 1).

These data, plus the warning against false teachers and the command to love one another, are more appropriate to a church than to a family (compare 1 John). Where the church was located we do not know.

3 John#

Third John focuses on an ecclesiastical dispute. The place where the recipient lives remains unknown, but it is most likely the region around Ephesus.

John sends the letter to Gaius:

• To commend Gaius for his hospitality to “the brothers” (probably itinerant teachers sent by John)

• To rebuke Diotrephes, a self-assertive leader in the church, for his lack of hospitality toward “the brothers,” for his dictatorial ways, and for his opposition to the apostolic authority of John

• To recommend Demetrius, who probably carries the letter

John indicates that he has written another letter to the whole church to which Gaius belongs (verse 9). This other letter may be 2 John, the circular 1 John, or a letter that has since been lost. Verse 10 contains the threat of a personal visit by John for a direct confrontation with Diotrephes.

Summary#

Named after their authors, the letters of James, Peter, John, and Jude lack specific addresses for the most part and are therefore called “catholic” in the sense of “general.” James and Jude were written by half brothers of Jesus.

James, addressed to Jewish Christians of the Diaspora, contains little doctrine but much practical instruction on proper behavior in church meetings and in everyday life. Of particular note are James’s comments on the necessity of demonstrating faith by good works and on controlling the tongue, that is, your speech.

First Peter portrays Gentile Christians as a new Diaspora suffering persecution but assured of salvation and urged to live in such a way as to expose the injustice of their persecution. In other words, imitate Christ in his righteous living, and you will enjoy a vindication like his. Peter writes from Rome, which he symbolically calls “Babylon,” and uses Silvanus as his letter-carrier.

Second Peter and Jude team up to attack heresy and defend orthodoxy in much the same language and with emphasis on the immorality of false teachers. It remains a question whether 2 Peter borrowed from Jude, vice versa, or both borrowed from a common source. And the authorship of 2 Peter by the Apostle Peter is often denied, though there are reasons to doubt the arguments for such a denial. Whereas the heretics attacked in 2 Peter denied the second coming of Jesus, those who are attacked in 1 John denied the incarnation in the one person Jesus Christ.

They were Gnostics, against whose heresy, moral laxity, and exclusivism John pits the correct Christology, righteous conduct, and mutual love of true Christians.

Second John warns a local church against extending hospitality to heretics, and 3 John commends a man named Gaius for extending hospitality to true ministers of the gospel. Third John also condemns a man named Diotrephes for refusing them hospitality and recommends John’s envoy and probable carrier of the ministers of the gospel. Third John also condemns a man named Diotrephes for refusing them hospitality and recommends John’s envoy and probable carrier of the letter, a man named Demetrius.