What do you think?
The New International Commentary on the New Testament
The Epistle of James
Adamson's work on the Book of James is part of The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Prepared by some of the world's leading scholars, the series provides an exposition of the New Testament that is thorough and fully abreast of modern scholarship yet faithful to the Scripture as the infallible Word of God.
240 pages, Hardcover
First published May 31, 1976
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review
October 1, 2024
A PRESBYTERIAN MINISTER COMMENTS ON THE “FAITH/WORKS” QUESTION, AS WELL AS MANY OTHERS
Presbyterian minister James Adamson wrote in the Preface to this 1976 commentary, "One of the chief aims of this book is to combat what I consider a fatal error made ... in far too many modern commentaries on James: his Epistle is generally regarded as completely lacking any cohesion in thought or design... This point will receive attention in due course. The vindication of its structure will be seen to strengthen our belief in the date and authorship of the Epistle... James thus takes us back to the technique of the Old Testament and the synagogue, comforting the afflicted in the Hebrew manner with a prediction of the fall of their enemies and oppressors..."
He outlines, "The Epistle of James comes from the center and head of the Christianity of its day, and speaks with all the pastoral authority of its source. It is necessary, however, to recognize not only that pastoral quality... With few exceptions... there is nothing in the Epistle of James that is not thoroughly applicable and relevant to today. The one important exception is the intense apocalyptic expectancy of an almost imminent end to the present world. The author… definitely assumes that his days are the last days, and that the ‘first generation’ of Christians, the Apostolic Age, is also to be the last.” (Pg. 21)
He observes, “The belief of some that the parousia is a hidden cataclysmic event in the invisible spiritual world is clearly not that of James… James shows no fear of delay, or anxiety about the interim state of the dead. If, in fact, he mistimed the Second Advent, we must adapt ourselves, and his teaching, to the delay; but on his relation to the truth we must remember how much of messianic prophecy James had seen fulfilled, in the birth and resurrection of Christ.” (Pg. 27)
He says of chapter 4, “Verses 1-6 apostrophize the rich, not as Christians but as a class, with ruthless condemnation… [James] is by no means the only biblical writer on worldly wealth, but we do not think any approaches him in the persistence, passion, and vehemence of his campaign against the sins of the rich. This should not seem strange to those of us who believe that the author of this Epistle was actually James, the Lord’s brother; he would have good cause for his attitude to the wicked among the rich, knowing, as he must have known, the part money had in securing the trial and condemnation of Jesus.
"In conclusion, James notably and consistently condemns not a few of the sins of the rich, including injustice amounting to social oppression… there is no defect in James’s theory or practice of Christianity that would justify any critic in representing James unfairly as merely aware of the of the rich being possessed by their riches, or otherwise indifferent to the poor.” (Pg. 31)
He discusses the issue of faith/works at length: “The Epistle of James has long been prejudiced by the stigma of Luther’s condemnation… We must therefore consider what the doctrine of James on faith and works really is. Faith, in order and importance, is the first consideration of this Epistle… he emphasizes that true Christian faith must find expression in Christian conduct, and conduct that is to have Christian quality must be rooted in Christian faith, for example, in Christian wisdom, endurance, or prayer; the thought of firm an unwavering faith animates the whole of the Epistle of James. Faith is paramount: why then do both James and Paul insist on works? The obvious answer is, ‘Who wouldn’t?’
"But for the Jew… ‘law’ primarily meant ‘command,’ and ‘faith’ meant ‘loyal obedience.’ … James maintains that a faith not followed by a genuine effort to live up to itself is itself not genuine. (He is not here concerned with abnormal cases like deathbed conversions.) In v. 14, ‘Can faith save a man?’ means ‘faith without works’ … So in 2:21 ‘by works’ indisputably does not mean ‘by works alone, without faith,’ as the next verse explicitly says, ‘Do you see that faith shared in his works, and by his works faith was consummated?’ So in 2:26, ‘Faith without works is dead’ certainly does not mean that works without faith are effective for salvation… For James faith is no less important than it is for Paul…” (Pg. 35-36)
He notes that after giving the example of Abraham, “For his next, very different, example of vital faith James selects Rahab. The contrast is deliberate and provocative, carefully designed for maximum effect… Any attempt to soften the contrast by suggesting, for example, that she was an innkeeper and not a prostitute should be rejected… this typical heathen Gentile (Canaanite) woman (not man) proselyte, once prostitute, by her conduct and example offered even more compelling proof that faith expresses itself in works…
"The point James effectively makes is that by itself her ‘faith,’ like Abraham’s, was worthless apart from deeds, for both were necessary… Rahab’s faith was consummated and vindicated by her deeds; so she was shown to be righteous… she presents a striking contrast to formal religion … whether practiced by monotheists or others… By his choice of Abraham and Rahab, therefore, James shows not only that the acid test of faith is works but also that this principle has universal application, embracing both patriarch and prostitute.” (Pg. 133-134)
He argues, “Before the end of the eighth century the Church in the West transformed the use of the holy oil into ‘extreme unction’… not intended to be therapeutic but sacramental, administered by a priest to the dying by way of remission of sins. It may well have been intended to remedy abuses … and to concentrate attention on the spiritual aspects of the patient’s danger and of the rite… Unction for the dying seems first to be mentioned in connection with the Gnostics… We may conclude, therefore, that the rite of extreme unction has no obvious connection with the practice first described in Jas. 5;14 ff, which was intended to heal the sick man, not to prepare him for his last journey.” (Pg. 205)
This is a solidly conservative, pastorally-focused commentary that will be of great interest to anyone studying the book of James.
Presbyterian minister James Adamson wrote in the Preface to this 1976 commentary, "One of the chief aims of this book is to combat what I consider a fatal error made ... in far too many modern commentaries on James: his Epistle is generally regarded as completely lacking any cohesion in thought or design... This point will receive attention in due course. The vindication of its structure will be seen to strengthen our belief in the date and authorship of the Epistle... James thus takes us back to the technique of the Old Testament and the synagogue, comforting the afflicted in the Hebrew manner with a prediction of the fall of their enemies and oppressors..."
He outlines, "The Epistle of James comes from the center and head of the Christianity of its day, and speaks with all the pastoral authority of its source. It is necessary, however, to recognize not only that pastoral quality... With few exceptions... there is nothing in the Epistle of James that is not thoroughly applicable and relevant to today. The one important exception is the intense apocalyptic expectancy of an almost imminent end to the present world. The author… definitely assumes that his days are the last days, and that the ‘first generation’ of Christians, the Apostolic Age, is also to be the last.” (Pg. 21)
He observes, “The belief of some that the parousia is a hidden cataclysmic event in the invisible spiritual world is clearly not that of James… James shows no fear of delay, or anxiety about the interim state of the dead. If, in fact, he mistimed the Second Advent, we must adapt ourselves, and his teaching, to the delay; but on his relation to the truth we must remember how much of messianic prophecy James had seen fulfilled, in the birth and resurrection of Christ.” (Pg. 27)
He says of chapter 4, “Verses 1-6 apostrophize the rich, not as Christians but as a class, with ruthless condemnation… [James] is by no means the only biblical writer on worldly wealth, but we do not think any approaches him in the persistence, passion, and vehemence of his campaign against the sins of the rich. This should not seem strange to those of us who believe that the author of this Epistle was actually James, the Lord’s brother; he would have good cause for his attitude to the wicked among the rich, knowing, as he must have known, the part money had in securing the trial and condemnation of Jesus.
"In conclusion, James notably and consistently condemns not a few of the sins of the rich, including injustice amounting to social oppression… there is no defect in James’s theory or practice of Christianity that would justify any critic in representing James unfairly as merely aware of the of the rich being possessed by their riches, or otherwise indifferent to the poor.” (Pg. 31)
He discusses the issue of faith/works at length: “The Epistle of James has long been prejudiced by the stigma of Luther’s condemnation… We must therefore consider what the doctrine of James on faith and works really is. Faith, in order and importance, is the first consideration of this Epistle… he emphasizes that true Christian faith must find expression in Christian conduct, and conduct that is to have Christian quality must be rooted in Christian faith, for example, in Christian wisdom, endurance, or prayer; the thought of firm an unwavering faith animates the whole of the Epistle of James. Faith is paramount: why then do both James and Paul insist on works? The obvious answer is, ‘Who wouldn’t?’
"But for the Jew… ‘law’ primarily meant ‘command,’ and ‘faith’ meant ‘loyal obedience.’ … James maintains that a faith not followed by a genuine effort to live up to itself is itself not genuine. (He is not here concerned with abnormal cases like deathbed conversions.) In v. 14, ‘Can faith save a man?’ means ‘faith without works’ … So in 2:21 ‘by works’ indisputably does not mean ‘by works alone, without faith,’ as the next verse explicitly says, ‘Do you see that faith shared in his works, and by his works faith was consummated?’ So in 2:26, ‘Faith without works is dead’ certainly does not mean that works without faith are effective for salvation… For James faith is no less important than it is for Paul…” (Pg. 35-36)
He notes that after giving the example of Abraham, “For his next, very different, example of vital faith James selects Rahab. The contrast is deliberate and provocative, carefully designed for maximum effect… Any attempt to soften the contrast by suggesting, for example, that she was an innkeeper and not a prostitute should be rejected… this typical heathen Gentile (Canaanite) woman (not man) proselyte, once prostitute, by her conduct and example offered even more compelling proof that faith expresses itself in works…
"The point James effectively makes is that by itself her ‘faith,’ like Abraham’s, was worthless apart from deeds, for both were necessary… Rahab’s faith was consummated and vindicated by her deeds; so she was shown to be righteous… she presents a striking contrast to formal religion … whether practiced by monotheists or others… By his choice of Abraham and Rahab, therefore, James shows not only that the acid test of faith is works but also that this principle has universal application, embracing both patriarch and prostitute.” (Pg. 133-134)
He argues, “Before the end of the eighth century the Church in the West transformed the use of the holy oil into ‘extreme unction’… not intended to be therapeutic but sacramental, administered by a priest to the dying by way of remission of sins. It may well have been intended to remedy abuses … and to concentrate attention on the spiritual aspects of the patient’s danger and of the rite… Unction for the dying seems first to be mentioned in connection with the Gnostics… We may conclude, therefore, that the rite of extreme unction has no obvious connection with the practice first described in Jas. 5;14 ff, which was intended to heal the sick man, not to prepare him for his last journey.” (Pg. 205)
This is a solidly conservative, pastorally-focused commentary that will be of great interest to anyone studying the book of James.
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review