James New Testament

The NT mentions James several times as being the (half) brother of Jesus (Mt. 13:55). Originally, he did not believe in Jesus (Jn. 7:5), and in fact, Mark tells us that he believed Jesus was insane (Mk. 3:21). However, after Jesus appeared to his brother in his resurrected state (1 Cor. 15:7), James became a radical follower of Christ. The book of James confronts pseudo-spirituality in religious circles, emphasizing the importance and value of love and good works. Toussaint states that the book of James is terribly difficult to teach—not so much because of the interpretive issues—but because it is so convicting!

Authorship

The author doesn’t identify himself beyond the simple name “James” (Jas. 1:1, Iakōbos). But which James is this? Four options are possible:

• James the son of Zebedee? This man was one of the twelve disciples (Mk. 1:19; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35; 14:33), and he was also one of Jesus’ closest disciples, along with Peter and John of Zebedee (his brother). However, James of Zebedee was killed by Herod in AD 44 (Acts 12:1-2). This seems far too early for him to have written this letter (though see below under “Date”).

• James the son of Alphaeus? This man was also one of the twelve disciples (Mt. 10:3; Acts 1:13; Mt. 27:56? Mk. 15:40? Lk. 24:10?). However, he seems to be too obscure of a figure. Since the author simply identifies himself as James, we would expect this person to be a major leader in the early church—not a relatively unknown person like James the son of Alphaeus.

• James the father of Judas (not Iscariot)? Again, this man is an obscure believer in the early church (Lk. 6:16; Acts 1:13), and he doesn’t seem nearly influential enough to be a good candidate for the author of this letter.

• James the half-brother of Jesus. Jesus’ contemporaries asked, “Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?” (Mt. 13:55) In our view, these two brothers—James and Judas—are the authors of the NT letters James and Jude.

The majority of commentators hold that James, the half-brother of Jesus, is the most likely candidate for being the author of this epistle. We hold this view for a few reasons:

First, the author needed to be a well-known leader in the early church. And indeed, James—the half-brother of Jesus—is mentioned more than any other James in the NT. Repeatedly, James stands out as a central leader in the early church (1 Cor. 15:7; Gal. 1:19; 2:9; Acts 1:14; 12:17; 15:13; 21:18). This would explain why the author has no need to explain who he is. He simply writes “James,” knowing that his audience would’ve known him.

Second, James focused his ministry on the Jewish population in Jerusalem. This would make sense of the Jewish nature of this letter, and why he would have such authority in writing to Jewish believers in the diaspora (Jas. 1:1).

Third, the language of the letter has similarities with James’ speech in Acts 15. In both instances, James uses a similar “greeting” (chairein, Jas. 1:1; Acts 15:23) and the same term “visiting” (episkeptomai; Jas. 1:27; Acts 15:14).

Who was James?

James turned from a skeptic into a dedicated follower of Jesus. He serves as an example of a profoundly transformed life. Originally, James didn’t believe in Jesus (Jn. 7:5). In fact, he initially believed Jesus was insane (Mk. 3:21). However, after Jesus rose from the dead and “appeared to James” (1 Cor. 15:7), we find that James gave his life to follow Christ.

God quickly called James to be a central leader in the early Christian movement. Early on, James huddled with the other Christians in Jerusalem before the birth of the Church (Acts 1:14). Yet, within a few years, he became one of the “apostles” (Gal. 1:19) and “pillars” of the early church (Gal. 2:9). Peter—one of the other central leaders of the early church—shows a lot of deference and respect to James (Acts 12:17; 15:13; 21:18). This shows how respected of a leader James was in the early church.

How could James be Jesus’ half-brother if Mary was a virgin?

Some people are shocked at the idea that Jesus had half-brothers. However, according to Scripture, Mary continued to have children after Jesus was born. To be sure, Mary was a virgin before she gave birth to Jesus (Mt. 1:23), but she only remained “a virgin until she gave birth” (Mt. 1:25). The idea that Mary remained a virgin is a Roman Catholic doctrine called the “perpetual virginity of Mary,” which we reject (see our earlier article “The Perpetual Virginity of Mary”).

What does extra-biblical history tell us about James?

Early Christian sources imply that James was a very devout man. Hegesippus (2^nd century AD) wrote this regarding James:

He was holy from his mother’s womb; and he drank no wine nor strong drink, nor did he eat flesh. No razor came upon his head; he did not anoint himself with oil, and he did not use the bath. He alone was permitted to enter into the holy place; for he wore not woolen but linen garments. And he was in the habit of entering alone into the temple, and was frequently found upon his knees begging forgiveness for the people, so that his knees became hard like those of a camel, in consequence of his constantly bending them in his worship of God, and asking forgiveness for the people.

Surely, this account is historically embellished, and this may even contain “legendary” material drawn from the Ebionites. The great church historian Philip Shaff states that this “is an overdrawn picture from the middle of the second century, colored by Judaizing traits which may have been derived from the Ascents of James, and other Apocryphal sources. He turns James into a Jewish priest and Nazarite saint.” At the same time, the historical core of this citation presumes that James was a dedicated leader for Jesus.

How was James martyred for his faith?

We hold to the martyrdom of James on solid historical grounds. Flavius Josephus (AD 37-100) was a Jewish Pharisee and military commander before he was captured by the Romans in AD 70. After being taken prisoner, Josephus began working as the court historian for Emperor Vespasian. Regarding James, Josephus writes,

[The high priest Ananus] assembled the Sanhedrin of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned. But as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens… they disliked what was done… for that what he had already done was not to be justified.

Josephus confirms that James was the brother of Jesus (Gal. 1:19). And he tells us the fate of James: He died as a faithful follower of Jesus. Regarding this first passage, Van Voorst writes, “The overwhelming majority of scholars holds that the words ‘the brother of Jesus called Christ’ are authentic, as is the entire passage in which it is found.”

Later Christian authors state that the religious leaders “demanded of him a denial of the faith in Christ in the presence of all the people.” After James continued to confess Jesus as Lord, the religious leaders threw him from the pinnacle of the Temple, stoned him, and beat him to death with a club.

Canonicity of James

Some theologians throughout history have questioned the canonicity of James. Martin Luther wrote that James “mangles the Scriptures and thereby opposes Paul and all Scripture” (Luther’s Works, 35:397). At one point, Luther even called James’ letter “an epistle of straw” (Luther’s Works, 35:362). At the same time, Moo qualifies Luther’s statements about the book of James:

While Luther obviously had difficulties with James and came close to giving the letter a secondary status, his criticism should not be overdrawn. He did not exclude James from the canon and, it has been estimated, cites over half the verses of James as authoritative in his writings.

In fact, Luther wrote, “I cannot include him among the chief books, though I would not prevent anyone from including or extolling him as he pleases, for there are otherwise many good sayings in him” (Luther’s Works, 35:397). Calvin did not agree with Luther’s criticism, fully accepting James’ letter. There are good reasons to accept the canonicity of James:

First, allusions and citations to the book may have occurred very early. Moo writes, “The Shepherd of Hermas (early or middle second century) has the greatest number of parallels to James. In the section of that book called the ‘Mandates’, several of James’ characteristic themes are found… It is also possible that 1 Clement (AD 95) and the Epistle of Barnabas (written sometime between ad 70 and 132) show dependence on James, but this is not certain.”

Second, Clement of Alexandria (AD 215) apparently wrote a commentary on James, but it didn’t survive. Moo writes, “Clement, head of the important catechetical school in Alexandria, is said to have written a commentary on James, but no such commentary has ever been discovered, and Clement never shows dependence on James in his extant writings.”

Third, Origen identified the author as “James the apostle.” He was also the first to cite James as Scripture. Moo writes, “Clement’s successor in Alexandria, Origen, is the first to refer to the letter of James by name. He cites the letter as Scripture (Select. in Ps. 30:6) and attributes the letter to James, ‘the apostle’ (Commentary on John, frag. 126).”

Fourth, Eusebius (AD 339) believed the letter was written by James—Jesus’ half-brother—and cited the book as canonical. Moo writes, “Eusebius (d. ad 339) uses James frequently in his writings and apparently accords it canonical status. However, he also includes it among the ‘disputed books’ (antilegomena), signifying that he was aware of some Christians who questioned its scriptural authority (H.E. III. 25.3; II.23.25).”

Fifth, James might have been resisted by some Christians because of its Jewish content. The epistle of James is a resolutely Jewish book—even being addressed to the “twelve tribes” in the dispersion. Of course, the first-century apostolic church was honest about its tensions between Jewish and Gentile Christians. It’s quite possible that these racial tensions spilled into the second and third century churches, where anti-Semitism was so common. Could this have led to some Gentile fellowships being overly skeptical of the letter? At the very least, this letter would’ve been unpalatable to later Gentile readers. Historian Gregg Allison writes, “Its Jewish-Christian address… and flavor rendered it less attractive to the largely Gentile churches.”

Conclusion. Craig Blomberg writes, “Early church tradition (e.g., Origen, Jerome, Augustine, and the Council of Carthage) strongly supports the identification of the author of this book with James, the (half-) brother of Jesus.” Michael Kruger summarizes the evidence as follows:

[James] appears to have influenced a number of other early Christian writings, such as 1 Clement and the Shepherd of Hermas. In addition, James is cited by Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria wrote a commentary on it which is now lost, and it was recognized as canonical Scripture by Origen, who cites it frequently and refers to it as from ‘James, the brother of the Lord.’ Eusebius acknowledges that some had doubts about it, but counts it among the canonical books ‘known to most,’ and the letter is fully received by Jerome, Augustine, and the councils of Hippo and Carthage. Moreover… we possess several early manuscripts of James: P20, P23, P100 are all third century and suggest that the book was known and used by early Christians.

Moo concludes, “To be sure, James’ status was not immediately recognized. But it is important to stress that James was not rejected, but neglected.” He states that it might have been neglected for two reasons: (1) the apostolic origin of the letter, because James signs the letter as a “servant” rather than an “apostle,” and (2) the destination of the letter to the Jerusalem churches, which quickly disappeared after the Jewish War in AD 70. As a result, the letter might not have circulated as fast. Moo comments, “It may be significant in this regard that Origen makes reference to James only after coming into contact with the church in Palestine.”

Date

The letter must date before AD 62. This is because James died in AD 62. Josephus records that the Roman governor Albinus was reigning when James died. Since Albinus only had a short reign between AD 61-62, we can date the death of James to this time. This means that the letter must’ve been written before this time.

The letter contains no controversy between Jewish and Gentile Christians. This is quite astounding when we know from Acts that this was a major problem in the early church. This could imply that the letter dates before the Jerusalem Council of AD 49 (cf. Acts 15:1), though this isn’t conclusive.

Critical scholars reject this argument because they hold that James was refuting Paul’s doctrine of justification by faith alone (compare Jas. 2:14-26; Gal. 3:5ff). Since Galatians dates to ~AD 48, this would mean that James must’ve wrote after this time. Yet, this skeptical argument is specious, and it denies the clear teaching of Scripture that James concurred with Paul’s gospel (Gal. 2:6-9). While James used the same expressions that Paul does to refer to “justification by faith,” he was most likely responding to a distorted version of Paul’s teaching—not to Paul himself. Indeed, Paul states that legalists twisted his teaching on grace (Rom. 3:8), and surely these legalists shared this distorted view with James (Gal. 2:9; Acts 15:24).

Zane Hodges dates the letter “as early as the middle or late 30s.” He does so for a number of reasons. First, James never mentions the Gentiles in his letter, which would point to a very early date. Citing J.A.T. Robinson’s work, Hodges argues that this could imply that there were only Jewish believers in Jesus during this time. Second, the “diaspora” of James 1:1 could refer to the scattering of believers after the persecution of the church in Acts 8, which dates only 1-3 years after the resurrection. Third, James’ statement “let not many of you become teachers” could fit with an early date, where the apostles were doing most of the teaching (Jas. 3:1).

Donald Burdick dates the letter sometime between AD 45 and 50. In addition to the arguments listed above, he notes that the letter mentions nothing about the Judaizers, and it refers to believers meeting in the “assembly” (synagōgē), which may imply an early Christian use of synagogues or at least a similarity in their practices.

Douglas Moo favors a date sometime between AD 45 and 48 for a few reasons. For one, James’ reference to justification by faith shows that he heard (second hand) the preaching of Paul. James does not contradict Paul, but he does contradict the way Paul’s teachings were twisted. When Paul and James met at the Council of Jerusalem in AD 49, this definitely would’ve reconciled this distortion. Moreover, a massive famine occurred in Judea around AD 46, this would confirm the main theme of the rich and the poor in James (Acts 11:28). This is somewhat speculative because the poor exist in every church. However, this generally confirms an early date.

Kurt Richardson dates the letter the latest: “perhaps sometime in the decade after AD 50.” He rejects the notion that James and Paul are at odds with one another, and he briefly lists several lines of evidence that place the letter early (e.g. similarity with the Sermon on the Mount, simple church structure, lack of church conflicts, etc.).

Conclusion. Many of these arguments are compelling to show an early date for the letter, but in our estimation, none give a decisive date. We should be content to say that the letter is very early, but exactly how early, we do not know.

Audience

James was primarily writing to Jewish believers in Jesus. For one, James addresses his letter “to the twelve tribes who are dispersed abroad” (Jas. 1:1). Paul uses the same expression (“twelve tribes”) to refer to Jewish believers (Acts 26:7; c.f. Mt. 19:28). Second, James mentions nothing about Jewish and Gentile tensions. This implies that these believers were most likely all Jewish. Third, James uses the term “assembly” (synagōgē) to describe the early Christian meetings (Jas. 2:2). This doesn’t require us to believe that James’ readers met in synagogues. Rather, it implies that their meetings were similar to Jewish gatherings in some respect. Fourth, while James only quotes the OT five times, he alludes to it throughout his letter (e.g. compare Jas. 2:19 with Deut. 6:4). This implies that his audience was well-versed in the OT. Since James primarily served the Jerusalem church (Gal. 2:9), it makes sense to read such a thoroughly Jewish letter here.

James’ audience must have been suffering persecution (Jas. 1:2-4, 12), primarily from the rich (Christians?) in Jerusalem. The rich were refusing to pay them fair wages (Jas. 5:4-6) and unfairly taking them to court (Jas. 2:6). James seems to be worried that this church would compromise with the temptation of wealth (Jas. 4:4), instead of being faithful to Christ. There was a real danger of having jealousy filling their hearts (Jas. 3:14), rather than being content with their relationship with Christ. This is surely why James tells his readers not to show deference to the rich because of their money (Jas. 2:1-4).

Structure and Organization of James

Luther wrote that James was “throwing things together… chaotically.” Dibelius argued that the genre of James was that of paraenesis—a string of exhortations without any clear structure or contextual flow of thought. Moo claims that “this viewpoint has been dominant in commentaries on James for decades.” While Moo disagrees with Dibelius, he holds that any clear outline to the letter is not possible to put into a “logically developed structure without imposing artificial and sometimes misleading headings on the material.”

On the other hand, others claim that there is thoughtful structure to this letter. As you read through James, try to piece together the thought process and how his concepts connect with one another as he develops his thoughts.