James

 1. Title.
 Originally, like the other epistles of the NT, this one, being a letter, probably bore no title. One of the earliest manuscripts containing James, the Codex Sinaiticus, has no title at the beginning of the letter, but closes with the subscription, “Epistle of James.”
 Other early manuscripts bear the simple title in Greek, Iakōbou Epistolē (“Epistle of James”). Later manuscripts entitle this a general, or catholic, epistle, in the sense that it is addressed to the church at large rather than to any specific congregation or person.
 The epistle of James is referred to by Eusebius as the first of the seven epistles called “catholic,” which means “general,” or “universal” (Ecclesiastical History ii. 23). They were so called because they were addressed to the church in general, although this is altogether inappropriate when applied to 2 and 3 John, which are addressed to individuals. In all the early manuscripts the seven epistles from James to Jude were placed together after Acts, preceding the epistles of Paul. The order of the general epistles as they appear in our English Bible is the one usually observed in the principal manuscripts.

 2. Authorship.
 There is insufficient evidence in the epistle of James to warrant any definite conclusion as to the identity of its author. The NT has many references to men by the name of James. This name was very common among the Jews, for it represents the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew name Jacob. The frequent use of this name is illustrated in the list of the twelve apostles (Matt. 10:2, 3; Mark 3:16-19; Luke 6:14-16). One of these apostles was James the son of Zebedee and the brother of John. A second James was the son of Alphaeus. Another Biblical character by the name of James was the father of one of the Twelve, who is identified as Judas “of James,” that is, the son of James, rather than “the brother of James,” as in the KJV (Luke 6:16).
 It is reasonable to suppose that the author of the epistle of James is one of the persons by that name already mentioned in the Scripture record, rather than another James, entirely different from any otherwise known. The tone of the introduction in ch. 1:1 implies that the writer speaks as one well known to those whom he addresses, and that he speaks with recognized authority.
 Although according to the Gospel narratives all the Twelve were closely associated with the Lord, James, the son of Zebedee, was the more prominent of the two apostles by that name. Only a very few writers have ever attributed the epistle to him. But even this possibility seems ruled out by the early date of his death (A.D. 44), and by the additional fact that ch. 1:1 implies that there was only one James prominent in the church at the time the epistle was written, instead of two or more.
 The second apostle named James was the son of Alphaeus. He is clearly identified four times by the use of his father’s name (Matt. 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13). There has been much discussion as to whether this James is identical with “James the less” (Mark 15:40). If so, not only was his father named Alphaeus, but his mother was named Mary and he had a brother Joses (Matt. 27:56; Mark 15:47; 16:1; Luke 24:10). But elsewhere this Mary is called the wife of Cleophas (John 19:25). Although attempts have been made to equate Cleophas (or Clopas, Cleopas, Luke 24:18) with Alphaeus through the Aramaic Chalpai, equivalent to Alphaeus, such an identification remains doubtful. It seems best to conclude that the names, James the son of Alphaeus and James the less, do not describe the same man.
 Besides these individuals by the name of James, the Gospel writers refer to another James, the first named and thus presumably the eldest of the four brothers of Jesus (Matt. 13:55; Mark 6:3). Like James the less, he had a brother named Joses, and their mother (rather, stepmother; see on Matt. 12:46) was named Mary. But it seems highly improbable that the one James is to be identified with the other. A reference to Jesus’ mother as “Mary the mother of James and Joses” (Matt. 27:56) highly improbable.
 Elsewhere, James the brother of Jesus appears for certain only in Gal. 1:19, where Paul states that, on his first visit to Jerusalem after his conversion, of all the apostles he saw only Cephas (Peter) and “James the Lord’s brother.”
 Elsewhere in the NT, however, mention is made of a leader of the church called James, whose name is not qualified by any other identification. He first comes to prominence in the Acts after the death of James the son of Zebedee. After that there was evidently only one leader of sufficient prominence to be known as James, without further identification. Subsequent references to this James characterize him as an outstanding figure. When Peter was released from Herod’s prison he specified that report of his escape be made to James (Acts 12:17). James presided at the council of the church at Jerusalem and pronounced its decision (Acts 15:13, 19). Paul reported to James concerning his work (Acts 21:18). James gave authority to people to visit churches (Gal. 2:9). This may also be the James to whom Christ made a special postresurrection appearance (1 Cor. 15:7), perhaps to give him special instruction regarding his future responsibilities. Finally, Paul mentions him first as one of the three “pillars” of the early church (Gal. 2:9). All things considered, this James would seem to be the most likely person to have introduced himself to the church at large simply as “James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ” (James 1:1).
 The question remains, then, as to whether this James was the son of Alphaeus or the Lord’s brother. In favor of identifying him as the son of Alphaeus is the fact that it seems strange that one James should be mentioned by name among the Twelve (Acts 1:13, 14), only to disappear shortly from the record without notice even of his death, whereas another man of the same name appears prominently (Acts 12:17) without any word of introduction. On the other hand, certain evidences may be advanced for identifying this man with James the Lord’s brother. Paul’s reference to James, the leader of the church, in Gal. 2, coming as it does soon after his mention of James the Lord’s brother in Gal. 1, gives the impression—although it cannot be proved—that the two men are the same.
 Furthermore, Josephus’ story of the death of James, the Lord’s brother, implies that he was a leader in the church (Josephus Antiquities xx. 9. 1; cf. Vol. V, p. 71). Christian tradition, at least from the 2d century, identifies James, the leader of the church at Jerusalem, with the Lord’s brother (Hegesippus, quoted by Eusebius Ecclesiastical History ii. 23).
 Early Christian writers offer a maze of discrepancies, contradictions, and personal conclusions concerning the author of this epistle. Their errors are largely based on an incorrect identification of James “of Alphaeus” with James “of Joses,” and the unsupported conclusion that the James of Gal. 1:19 is identical with the James of Gal. 2:9.
 Josephus states that the death of James, “the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ,” took place after the death of Festus and before the arrival of his successor Albinus (A.D. 62), and that James was stoned (Antiquities xx. 9. 1). Taken at face value, this appears to be a factual record of the death of James “of Joses,” though Eusebius applies this to James “the Just,” leader of the church of Jerusalem (Ecclesiastical History ii. 23), and uses another quotation not found in any known text of Josephus.
 Eusebius states, further, that the divine books show James, who first received the episcopate of Jerusalem from Christ and the apostles, to be “a brother of Christ” (ibid. vii. 19), and gives the Bible as authority. He cites Paul as identifying James “the Just” as James “the brother of the Lord” (ibid. ii. 1), again assuming more than his source states.
 However, in another place Eusebius refers to James as one of the alleged brethren of the Saviour and implies that he was one of the Seventy. He identifies James as “brother of the Lord,” “child of Joseph,” and “the Just” (ibid.). He states that James was martyred immediately before the capture of Jerusalem (A.D. 70), and says that Simeon, son of Clopas and said by some to be a cousin of the Saviour, succeeded him to the “throne of the diocese” of Jerusalem (ibid. iii. 11). Thus he contradicts Josephus’ date for the death of James. He makes other references to Simeon as son of Clopas, and Jude as brother of Christ according to the flesh (ibid. iii. 19, 20, 22, 32). He cites Hegesippus to support his conclusions that Simeon was the son of Clopas, and that Clopas was the uncle of the Lord (ibid. iii. 32). He again cites Hegesippus as stating that Simeon was a cousin of James (ibid. iv. 22). He quotes the famous account of Hegesippus, of the life and death of James, though from the context this account is easily seen to be garbled and highly exaggerated (ibid. ii. 23).
 Eusebius quotes Clement as supporting his theory of two men named James, one “the Just,” beaten to death with a fuller’s club, and the other beheaded (ibid. ii. 1). The first he identifies as the Lord’s brother, though Clement does not say so. In the same passage he quotes Clement as stating, “Peter and James [of Zebedee] and John after the Ascension of the Saviour did not struggle for glory, because they had previously been given honour by the Saviour, but chose James the Just as bishop of Jerusalem.”
 The apocryphal Gospel According to the Hebrews, which states that James the Just had taken an oath not to eat bread from the time the Lord had drunk of the cup until he saw Him risen from the dead, evidently places him among the Twelve at the Lord’s Supper. Then Jesus’ appearance to him is recorded as follows: Jesus “took bread, and blessed it and brake it and gave it to James the Just, and said to him, ‘My brother, eat thy bread, for the Son of Man has risen from the dead.’” Use of the phrase “My brother” is construed to mean that this James was the Lord’s brother. Obviously, none of this non- Biblical material can be of much help in identifying the writer of this epistle.
 Perhaps the most serious problem involved in identifying the author of the epistle with the Lord’s brother is the fact that the language and the style of the epistle indicate that its author was a man of some competence in Greek literary composition. Not only is his vocabulary rich, but his style is consciously that of the Greek literary form known as the diatribe—a popular, ethical address. Nothing that is known of the Lord’s brother would indicate that he had the background for such a work—he was the son of a Galilean carpenter, and apparently thoroughly Jewish in culture. However, nothing conclusive can be said on this point, for the arguments involved are based more upon what is not known, than upon what is.
 In conclusion, it may be said that the authorship of James remains an unsettled question. Probably the author was one of the three principal men by the name of James mentioned elsewhere in the NT.

 3. Historical Setting.
 A number of geographical allusions in this epistle suggest Palestine as the place of writing. It may be conjectured that the writer lived in a land blessed with oil, wine, and figs, that he was not far from the sea, that there were salt and bitter springs nearby, and that the land was exposed to drought, and rain was a matter of great importance.
 There is no certain method of determining the date of the epistle. As noted above, it seems to have been written when there was only one prominent James in the church, and hence after A.D. 44, when James the son of Zebedee was killed. The internal evidence points to an early date. There is no reference to any large group of Gentile Christians, or to any problems concerning Gentiles. The synagogue is still the church, yet Christianity is widespread (see Acts 2:9-11; 4:36; 9:2, 10, 14, 19, 26; 11:19, 20). The general tenor of the epistle is that Christianity is the culmination of all true Judaism.

 4. Theme.
 This epistle is one of practical Christianity, showing what results or works a genuine, living faith will produce in the life of a disciple. Emphasized throughout is the contrast between the manifestations, effects, or results of true religion and those of false religion. This homiletical epistle is filled with beautiful and striking illustrations. The style is simple and direct, with the thoughts in groups clearly marked from one another, rather than arranged in any evident plan. James writes freely out of the fullness of his heart, touching upon subjects as they are suggested to his mind. There are many allusions to the Sermon on the Mount, of which the following is a partial list.
 

Matt.	James	Matt.	James
5:3	2:5; 1:9	6:15	2:13
4	4:9	19	5:2
7, 9	2:13; 1:17	24	4:4
8	4:8	25	4:13~16
9	3:18	7:1	3:1; 4:11
11, 12	1:2; 5:10, 11	2	2:13
19	11:19~25; 2:10, 11	7, 11	1:5, 17
22	1:20	8	4:3
27	2:10, 11	12	2:8
33	5:12	16	3:12
48	1:4	21~26	1:22; 2:14; 5:7~9

 In this epistle there are many parallels to the writings of Paul (such as James 1:22; cf. Rom. 2:13), and to the writings of Peter (such as James 4:7; cf. 1 Peter 5:8, 9).

 5. Outline.

 I. Salutation, 1:1.

 II. Temptation, 1:2-18.
   A. The need of patience and wisdom, 1:2-8.
   B. Endurance under earthly affliction or under exaltation, 1:9-12.
   C. The source of temptation, 1:13-18.

 III. Evidences of True Religion, 1:19-27.
   A. Hearing rather than speaking, 1:19-22.
   B. Doing as well as hearing, 1:23-27.

 IV. Warnings Against Common Dangers in the Early Church, 2:1 to 5:6.
   A. Against respect of persons, 2:1-13.
   B. Against a mere profession of faith, 2:14-26.
      1. Faith without works is valueless, 2:14-20.
      2. Exaples of genuine faith that produced works, 2:21-26.
   C. Against sins of tongue, 3:1-18.
      1. Control of the tongue, especially in teaching, 3:1, 2.
      2. Illustrations of the proper and improper use of the tongue, 3:3-12.
      3. Exhortations to proper conduct, including the use of the tongue, 3:13-18.
   D. Against contention and strife among brethren, 4:1-17.
      1. The source of contention and self-seeking, 4:1-4.
      2. Exhortation to submit to God, 4:5-10.
      3. Exhortation against evilspeaking, 4:11, 12.
      4. Exhortation against presumptuous boasting, 4:13-17.
   E. Against fraudulent gain and wrong use of riches, 5:1-6.

 V. Concluding Exhortations, 5:7-20.
   A. Patience needed until Christ’s coming, 5:7-11.
   B. Proper conduct is needed at all times, 5:12, 13.
   C. Prayer is effectual in helping the sick, 5:14-18.
   D. Exhortation to work for others’ salvation, 5:19, 20.