LESSON 1: JAMES, THE LORD’S BROTHER Welcome to our new study. We are at the beginning of another new quarter and our new study for these next 13 weeks will be focused on the writings of James, the blood half brother of Jesus. This week, we will start knowing about who is James and we will also touch on the overall context of his epistle to “the twelve tribes scattered abroad.” Although James was called an apostle (Gal. 1:19), he never left Jerusalem, he stayed with the Jewish Christians in Jerusalem and remained as the leader of the Christian church in the city. Like his brother Jesus who was murdered in A.D. 31, James was also martyred in A.D. 62 in Jerusalem for his faith in his Lord at around the same time when Paul was martyred in Rome. JAMES AND JESUS (THURSDAY LESSON) James was a late believer in his brother Jesus as the Messiah. He apparently was only converted after he witnessed the resurrection of his Brother. To miss out on the fact that he was living with the Messiah and the Creator and God of the universe for some 30 years must have affected James profoundly. How could he have missed out on that one special privilege of believing that the One who he was living with in one roof, the One he ate with, played with, worked with, his very own brother, was actually the Creator and Sustainer of the universe? But once he became a believer in his Brother as the Messiah, James became a virtual replacement of his Brother. Early Christians looked to him as the leader of the church and his voice during the Jerusalem Council was given the most preponderant weight simply because James was the brother of Jesus. As usual, we welcome all insights, comments and questions pertinent to our topic this week. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ SUNDAY: JAMES, THE BROTHER OF JESUS Presented by Dr. Manny Sansano (Star Crossed) INTRODUCTION: At one time in the past back in our home country, the Philippines, when I traveled by plane from Manila to General Santos City with a stopover in Cebu, I knew that it was still somewhere in the Visayas after taking off from Cebu, when I happened to spot a group of islands through the window, where I was seating. The islands formed like a crescent of which one tail end looks bigger by having more islands in it, while the other end looks smaller by having less islands in it. It was awesome. I have never seen a group of islands like that. And I saw it while in the air. The waters seen from the sky are clean and blue. The trees looked healthy and verdant (green), and I could still see that in the eyes of my mind. The color of the beaches around the crescent of that group of islands was white. I have no idea if those islands were inhabited by humans since they seemed to be isolated from the nearest mainland. But one thing that remains in my mind is that the islands were “edenic” (“delightful region”) and so beautiful. Family members are just like that group of beautiful islands that seem to be moving in one same direction as in a shape of a crescent. They share the same kinds of food, same names, same middle names, same parents, same grandparents and great grandparents, same cousins, same aunts and uncles, same life blood running in their veins, same house, neighborhood, and environment, and same roots and friends. And they are beautiful to look at from the outside, but just like that same crescent of islands, no matter what they would do in life to make ends meet, they could never met to form a family circle, and why? It’s because of the mystery of hatred and feud that develops from what Adventist Minister-Attorney-Theologian Willy Sumagaysay says (in Monday’s lesson) as “the familiarity that breeds contempt” (thanks to that expression). Feud and hatred from familiarity that generates and perpetuates and eternalizes contempt can happen in any form relationship like the relationship among siblings, spouses, boyfriends-girlfriends, workmates, colleagues, church mates, and friends all alike. The very own earthly family of Jesus was not immune to that same familiarity that results to contempt, feud, and hatred, and that is very clear from the Bible as we would see, because our Sunday’s lesson would touch on this matter in addition to who James is after his conversion. Our lesson for this quarter is focused on the Epistle of James, and our Sunday’s lesson, being the very first part of the first lesson for the entire last (4th) quarter, deals on the identity of James, the author of the epistle himself in connection with his relationship with Jesus. On the identity of James, we will talk about first on the “meaning” of his name, and then on his “qualifications,” and also on his “relationship” with Jesus in terms of their “biological” connections with one another of which as we would see the story of the group of islands would fit. 1. THE “MEANING OF THE NAME “JAMES” Before you would feel uncomfortable with what I am going to say about the name “James” or the name “Jacob,” please read through it until the end of this section, and see for yourself. I have some friends, who are given these names by their parents, and what I’m going to say about these names has nothing to do with the choice of their parents. The English name of “James” as mentioned in James 1:1 comes from the Greek name “Iakóbos.” The short form of this name, also in Greek, as found in Matthew 1:2, etc, is “Iakób.” Although these two Greek names are translated differently into English as “James” and “Jacob” respectively, they originated from the same Hebrew name “Yaaqob” - the name given to “Jacob” in Genesis 25:26, the son of Isaac, the first person in the Bible to be given by such name. This name occurs in Latin as “Iacomus,” which is a variant of “Iacobus.” James has 28 variant forms, and as you can check online these are the following forms: Diego, Diogo, Giacomo, Hamish, Iago, Jacob, Jacques, Jago, Jagu, Jaime, Jaimey, Jaimie, Jamey, Jame, Jameson, Jamie, Jamison, Jascha, Jayme, Jaymes, Jaymie, Jem, Jemmy, Jim, Jimbo, Jimmie, Jimmy and Seamus. Now, as I have noted I have friends that bear these names, and their names may have nothing to do with their parents’ choices. Let’s backtrack a little bit into the story of the original name “Yaaqob,” and we’ll try to find out from the Scripture if there’s something we can get from this name. In Hebrew, the proper noun “Yaaqob” is akin to the ordinary noun “aqeb” (they share the same consonants), meaning “heel,” “footprint,” or “hind part.” Since Hebrew is a verbal language, these nouns (“Yaacob” and “aqeb”) originated as a verb, and they come from the verb “aqab.” Before looking at the meanings of “aqab” as a verb, we should know first that it is also used an adverb with the meaning of “craftily.” Now what does the verb “aqab” mean? As a verb it means “to follow at the heel,” and figuratively “to assail insidiously,” “to circumvent,” or “to overreach.” It is also used to mean “to deal craftily,” “to restrain,” “to supplant,” or “to take.” The naming of “Jacob” in Genesis 25:26 is interesting as we know. It is based on the meaning of the verb “achaz” (synonym of “aqab”) found in this text, because that’s what “Jacob” did as he was coming out, that is, he was “seizing,” “grasping,” “taking hold of,” or “taking possession of” (meaning of “achaz”) his brother’s “heel.” Let us take a look at Genesis 25:26. It goes this way, “After this, his brother came out, with his hand grasping Esau’s heel; so he was named Jacob” (NIV). While that’s from the NIV and that’s fine, literally it reads this way, “And after this, his brother came out, and his hand is taking hold of Esau’s heel, and his name was called Jacob.” The verb “achaz” (“to seize,” “to take hold,” etc) is an active participle in the original, and it should be translated into English as a verb with an “ing” at the end of it, and thus, “seizing,” “taking hold of,” etc. I have mentioned that the verb “achaz” is synonymous to the verb “aqab,” and now where can we find in the Old Testament that this verb is saying the same thing as the verb “achaz.” Just take it easy, and we will get there. Let’s read Hosea 12:3. It says, “In the womb he grasped his brother’s heel” (NIV). The verb “grasped” here is “aqab” in the original. The NIV translated it as “grasped” and that’s fine. Literally, however, it means “to grab by the heel.” In English bibles (take a look at the NIV) the word “heel” is separated in translation from “grasped,” and that’s natural when it comes to translation. In Hebrew, however, the word “heel” does not occur separately from the verb “grasped,” because there’s no word for “heel” in the Hebrew text. The word “heel” is a part of the verb “grasped” or “aqab” and it means “to grab by the heel.” But in English we can only translate this verb by splitting some words apart. In Genesis 25:26 we only know that Jacob “is grabbing” (active participle) the heel of his brother as he was coming out. However, Hosea 12:3 provides additional details not given in Genesis 25:26. We are told in Hosea 12:3 that Jacob had already been “grabbing” the heel of his brother even when they were still in their mother’s womb. Please, don’t ask me if that is scientific. The Bible sometimes is using what is called “phenomenological language,” and not necessarily “scientific language.” His elder brother Esau came out ahead of him, and by the time Jacob was coming out, his hand was seen to be sticking out first (“phenomenological”) and it was “holding on to” or “grabbing” (active participle) his brother’s heel. And it is assumed then in Hosea 12:3 that it had been the case since they were still in their mother’s womb. That is “phenomenological language.” If you have some medical backgrounds, I’ll leave to you the “scientific” part of it. Figuratively speaking, in real life that’s what Jacob had been doing to his elder brother Esau. He had been dealing with his brother “craftily.” He was “assailing” him “insidiously” (treacherously) by exploiting his weaknesses, and by “circumventing” his brother’s situation on his favor. In essence he was a “supplanter,” and that’s what the proper noun “Yaaqob” or “Jacob” means - “supplanter” or “he who supplants” (“grabber of someone’s heel,” or “heel-catcher”). In today’s lingo means “Jacob” or “James” could mean “con artist” (“confidence artist”), which is in Filipino (Tagalog) language, “tuso” or “manloloko?” Some parents have named their children “Jacob” or “James,” not according to the history of the names, but based on the transformed or godly character of “Jacob” and “James.” It’s just like naming a child David (rapist and murderer) or “Caleb” (“dog”) based on the godly character of the bearers of the name. My name is “Emmanuel” and we know of its meaning as “God is with us,” but don’t be too quick, because depending upon the context it could also mean “God is against us.” Since our parents’ choice was meant our best interest, sometimes their choice of our names has nothing to do with the history of such names, but with the good character of someone, whether biblical of non-biblical, bearing that name. Now, James’ parents, knowing what “Jacob” meant in Hebrew, since they were Hebrews, I have no clue why they have named him that way. What I know, however, is that, the name “James” from the Greek name “Iakóbos” occurs 42 times in the New Testament as the name of other 5 persons aside from him. That’s the meaning of “James” in the original based on the story of the birth of Jacob in Genesis 25:26. Let’s go to who James was as a person. 2. THE “QUALIFICATIONS” OF “JAMES” In the New Testament, while there are only two people that bear the name of “Iakób” or “Jacob,” namely the patriarch, son of Isaac (Matthew 1:2; etc), and the father of Joseph (Matthew 1:15), there are six people, as I have just mentioned, that are named “Iakóbos” or “James” in the NT. Our Sunday’s lesson mentioned only four (and that’s fine; not a big deal), but according to the lexicon there are six people in the NT that bear that name, namely: # 1. The son of Zebedee, brother of John, member of the Twelve, Matthew 4:21; etc. # 2. The son of Alphaeus, Matthew 10:3; etc, who is perhaps identical with # 3. The son of Mary Matthew 27:56; etc, who is called in Mark 15:40 as James the small or the younger. # 4. The father of an apostle named Judas, Luke 6:16; etc. # 5. The tax collector is called James (instead of Levi) in Mark 2:14. And lastly, # 6. James, the Lord’s (“half”) brother, Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3; 1 Corinthians 15:7; Galatians 1:19; 2:9, 12; Acts 12:17; 15:13; 21:18; James 1:1. Our lesson notes that of the ones named “James” in the New Testament, only the brother of Jesus lived long enough to become the leader of the early church. Now, who was James as a person? In the first part of James 1:1, James introduced himself as nothing more than a “servant,” a word that comes from the Greek noun “doulos.” Now, what is the meaning of the word “servant” from “doulos?” Depending upon how we look at it, it could mean the literal slave (Luke 7:2; etc) or the figurative slave (Matthew 20:27; etc). A common “slave” was someone possessed as a property of his master without any ownership rights of one’s own. Figuratively, it is used as a title of status or rank, because that’s how this word is used in the Septuagint (LXX) - the Greek translation of the Old Testament during the inter-testamental period. In the LXX, Moses is called a “servant” (“doulos”) in Deuteronomy 34:5; etc; and also David in 2 Samuel 7:5; etc; and also the prophets in Jeremiah 7:25; 44:4; and Amos 3:7. It is thought that this nuance of highest dignity from that time was carried over into the NT times, because it is used for believers that were willing to live under Christ’s authority as His devoted followers. Paul always introduced himself as a “servant” (“doulos”). For instance, he said, “Paul, a servant (“doulos”) of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God” (Romans 1:2, NIV). The word “servant” (“doulos”), therefore, must be seen in positive perspectives even if it should mean that we “belong” to Christ as His own “possessions,” because actually that’s what we are. The nuance of “possession” is another nuance of the word “servant” (“doulos”) according to context, because that’s what James meant when he said that he is “a servant of [“belonging to”] God and of [“belonging to”] the Lord Jesus Christ” (James 1:1a, NIV). Aside from being a “servant” there is another qualification that James had. He is an excellent writer in Greek. His Greek (vocabularies, grammar, syntax, etc) is excellent. This is why our lesson is saying that, “His letter is among the best examples of literary Greek in the New Testament.” What does that mean? That means as our lesson says, “As a carpenter’s son (Matt. 13:55), James would have had more educational opportunities than would a common peasant.” That’s James as an educated man. Now, let’s look at him as a family of Jesus. 3. “JESUS” AS THE “FAMILY” OF “JAMES” As a brother of Jesus, how is James related to the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ? This is from our lesson, and it says, “Because his name appears first in the list of Jesus’ brothers, James was probably the oldest son. However, the fact that Jesus entrusted the care of His mother to John, the beloved disciple (John 19:26, 27), suggests that His brothers were not Mary’s own children but the sons of Joseph by a previous marriage.” Taking this information at face value, James must be an older half-brother of Jesus being one of “the sons of Joseph by a previous marriage.” That’s a piece of information, but what about relationships? Now, we’re asking a sensitive question. Do you want to be interrogated in terms of your relationship with your family members? The Scripture happens to be bold and clear in terms of the family relationships of Jesus and his half-brothers. There are two incidences that we would like to see, and we want to see James as a part of it. The first one is in Mark 3:21, and it says, “When his family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, ‘He is out of his mind’” (NIV). Jesus was thought of being “out of his mind” and that means they thought of Him as being “crazy.” The words “out of his mind” comes from the Greek word “existémi,” whose range of meanings include “I am astonished,” “I am amazed,” “I am mad,” “I lost my senses,” and “I am out of my mind.” One thing in life I have experienced doing is that of being a medical interpreter. It’s fun. And also it is educational, because aside from meeting a lot of medical people, I also meet a lot of different kinds of people, and I learned many things from their stories. One time I was translating for a certain middle-aged female patient, and the young female doctor told the patient to see a “mental health care” provider. That was pretty straightforward. How would you feel if your primary care provider would tell you that? Unless you are really out of your mind, you would be shocked. The patient, off course, got mad, and she asked her doctor if she (doctor) thought of her as being “crazy” (that is, “insane”). The doctor did not reply to that question directly, but she indirectly said that that’s what thought she (patient) needed, “a mental health care” provider. And as an interpreter that’s a kind of situation, where my skill as a conduit of pretty tough information is needed by such kind of patients. The patient, off course, was obviously not “crazy” or “insane.” She was not out of her mind, and the doctor knows that, but she was required to see a “mental health care” provider, because such specialist provides some care also for the emotional problems of people. Right here in Mark 3:21, His brothers (and we want to see James as a part of that) thought of Jesus as being “out of His mind” (“crazy,” “insane”), someone that needs to see a psychiatrist in today’s culture and reality. But was Jesus really “out of His mind?” Off course, no. He was not “crazy.” He was not “insane.” It goes to show that the accusations of His brothers must be reflective of how very dysfunctional their family was. The word “existémi” (“out of one’s mind”) occurs 17 times in the NT, and most of its usages are in the sense of being “amazed” or “astonished.” I have found another instance, wherein it is used just like in Mark 3:21. It’s in 2 Corinthians 5:13, and it says, “If we are ‘out of our mind,’ as some say, it is for God; if we are in our right mind, it is for you” (NIV). Another thing from Mark 3:21 is, His brothers “went to take charge of him” (NIV). The words “take charge of” are soft words, and off course, that’s understandable, because that’s what the NIV is all about, a dynamic translation of the Bible. In the original, the verb is very strong. It comes from the verb “krateó,” whose range of meanings include “I lay hold of,” “I obtain,” “I am strong,” “I am mighty,” “I rule,” “I am master,” “I prevail,” “I obtain,” “I take hold of,” “I hold,” and “I hold fast.” It also means “to place under one’s grasp (seize hold of, put under control).” Since context determines what the word means, it is most likely a picture of someone like a criminal, who is being seized and put under control. The text, however, does not say whether His family did that to Him or not, but that was their intention as they “went out,” because of their preconception or shall we say hateful accusations that Jesus was “out of His mind.” The fact that His family hated Him a lot is seen in John 7:2-5, and right here as we can read His brothers urged Jesus to go down to Judah from Galilee with the expectation that His enemies would kill Him there. His brothers knew that Jesus was avoiding to unnecessarily endanger His life, and that’s the reason why He preferred to stay in Galilee (v 1). But take a look at what His brothers said to Him beginning v 3, “Jesus’ brothers said to him, ‘Leave Galilee and go to Judea, so that your disciples there may see the works you do. 4No one who wants to become a public figure acts in secret. Since you are doing these things, show yourself to the world’” (NIV). And a part of the reasons why they did this to Him is, “For even his own brothers did not believe in him” (v 5, NIV). Now, we have seen that His very own family disliked Him to an extent that they want Him to be killed. What kind of family is that? Today we call that situation as family feud, and many families are in that kind of sad and awful situation. Our Sunday’s lesson is just an introduction to the person of James the author of the book of James. The succeeding lessons would tell us more about James and Jesus. And I know we can’t wait to read that. Meanwhile, let us summarize what we’ve got. SUMMARY: In ancient times names have direct connections to the bearer of the names. One scholar that I read said that in biblical times, with some exceptions, children were not named until they were old enough for their parents to know of their character, and they were named according to the observations of their parents. If that happened to James, I have no idea. What we know from the Bible is that the brothers of Jesus were hostile to him. Like “Jacob” (in Genesis 25:26), they too were “heel-grabbers.” They would take advantage of the circumstances to manipulate their “little” half-brother Jesus to the extent that they wished him killed by His enemies. After his conversion, however, James changed, and he became a pillar of the early church. In terms of education, we know that he had that privilege as evident in his writings. In closing, I’d like to touch on family relationships based on the family of James and Jesus. And I’d like to anchor it upon the question asked in our lesson. It says, “What do these texts [Mark 3:21; John 7:2-5] tell us about how Jesus had been perceived by His own family? What lessons can we draw from them for ourselves, if indeed at times we find ourselves misunderstood by those whom we love?” As we know Jesus had been perceived negatively by His family, the very ones He loved, and what lessons we can get out of it? One main lesson is to be just loving to your loved ones, and you can add more reasons from your own perspectives. It had been said that families are just like a group of beautiful islands. They are awesome to look at, but just like that same group of islands, no matter what they’d do they’d never met, and why? It’s because of the mystery of feud and hatred that began from that familiarity that breed contempt as Attorney-Theologian Willy Sumagaysay noted. Feud and hatred can happen to any forms relationships – siblings and friends within and outside of the church, etc. The family of Jesus was not immune to that familiarity that breeds contempt, and thanks God that James had come to understand the mission of His half-brother Jesus Christ, where finally he was able to accept the status of Jesus as the Savior of mankind, and also of his status as being “a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ” (James 1:1, NIV). +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ MONDAY: JAMES, THE BELIEVER Presented by Atty. Willy Sumagaysay Among the few appellations used to identify the writer of the Book of James, the more prominent ones are “James, the Brother of Jesus” and “James, the Just”. A 3rd century source says that the same person was also known as “James, the Bishop of Bishops.” Our topic for study for Monday, Sept. 29, 2014, of this week’s lesson refers to him as “James, the Believer.” Why so? ■ James and his brothers were not believers in Jesus to begin with– The answer to the question why in this study the author of the Book of James is called James, the Believer, is that AT FIRST James did not believe in Jesus as the Messiah, but later on HE DID! From the start and for years to come, the fact that Jesus was the Messiah or that He was the Son of God would not fully sink into James mind. However, after Jesus resurrection, when He appeared to His disciples and then to James (1 Cor. 15:7), this man finally understood who his half-brother Jesus really was! And he became a believer. In John 7:1-5, we are informed that for one reason or another, Jesus brothers – to include James – did not believe in Him: “After these things Jesus walked in Galilee; for He did not want to walk in Judea, because the Jews sought to kill Him. Now the Jews’ Feast of Tabernacles was at hand. His brothers therefore said to Him, ‘Depart from here and go into Judea, that Your disciples also may see the works that You are doing. For no one does anything in secret while he himself seeks to be known openly. If You do these things, show Yourself to the world.’ FOR EVEN HIS BROTHERS DID NOT BELIEVE IN HIM.” (Uppercasing supplied). By the way, Jesus also had sisters as stated in Matt. 13:56 and Mark 6:3, but there is no express declaration, only a presumption, that they too did not believe in Jesus. We ask, Why did Jesus brothers not believe in Him? Had they not seen the miracles He did? Did they not know Him, like some other persons did? It is proposed that it would understandably be very difficult for those who grew up with Jesus from boyhood to manhood, like His own siblings did, to think of Him as the Messiah. Perhaps they were blinded by familiarity which, people say, “breeds contempt. Many others outside of Jesus’ family who were “familiar” with Jesus did not think either that He was the Messiah (Matt. 13:54-58). Jesus suffered what other prophets suffered, i.e., they were unknown as prophets to their own people, and not recognized or believed as such, because they appeared simply as one of their common peers (Matt. 13:57; John 4:44). One other probable explanation why Jesus’ brothers did not believe in Him was perhaps because of their preconceptions of Him. Many Jews had wrong conceptions concerning the kingdom of God (John 6:15) and Jesus’ brothers too had their incorrect notion about Him and His mission (John 7:2-4). It is easy for people to reject someone who does not live up to their expectations. ■ Jesus’ resurrection changed how James perceived Jesus– For James, it was Jesus resurrection and His special appearance to him that put him on a different path of life. Our study guide describes the impact of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearance on James which transformed him, thus: “Jesus appeared to many after His resurrection . . . Then he appeared to over five hundred people at one time. James, apparently, wasnt at this meeting with the five hundred; Jesus appeared to him separately, and that appearance must have been special, because it is specifically noted. Whatever happened at that meeting, the Bible doesnt say. It must have made a big impact on him, though, for James did become a faithful follower of Jesus and an influential leader in the church.” From that moment of Jesus’ special revelation of His person to James and onward, James gave himself entirely to God and soon became an important figure in the early church. In Gal. 2:9, James is identified as one of the pillars of the church in Jerusalem. In Acts 15:13, he is seen to be an honored spokesman for the same Jerusalem church. Then in Acts 21:18, we learn that James was still in Jerusalem when Paul visited for the last time, hence we find that presumably he continued as one of the leaders of the early church. James’ role in the early church was so important that Peter told others to report to James of his miraculous release from prison (Acts:12:17; Galatians:1:19). Further, as a pillar and apparently the overseeing pastor of the Jerusalem church (Acts:15:13-21), we see him making the final declaration on issues with the Gentile believers during an early ministerial council. From our study guide, we note how this person was regarded among the leaders of the early church: “James appears to have been held in high esteem for many decades after the death of the apostles. In fact, so many legends developed about his piety that he is remembered as ‘James the Just.’ Thus, despite starting out in great doubt about Jesus, James ended up being a spiritual giant in the early church.” ■ Lessons for us, from this study on James– What caused James journey from doubt to faith and to become farther down the road a prominent figure in the early church? It was undoubtedly the resurrection of Jesus from the dead which James learned when Jesus showed Himself to him. The resurrection shattered whatever blinders that hindered him from believing in Jesus, such as familiarity and preconceptions, probably. For some, it takes overwhelming empirical evidence to persuade them to become believers. In the Gospel of John, a gospel designed to create faith in Jesus, John also tells of those who at the beginning lacked faith in Jesus, from even His own Jewish nation (John 1:11) and from among His disciples (John 6:66). Eventually though, they came to believe in Jesus (Acts 1:14) because of some compelling evidence, signs or miracles, told in the Book of John. Unbelief is not bad after all, if it changes to belief in the end, for one reason or another. Other important lessons for us to learn from an examination of the biography of James, other than and flowing from his having turned around from being a skeptic to a believer in Jesus by virtue of the overwhelming power of the Risen Christ which he witnessed, might be: 1) James’ speech at the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15:13-21 reveals his reliance on the written Word of God, the Scriptures, as guide for sorting things out; 2) As a half-brother of Jesus, it is worthy to note that he never used that relationship as reason to assume authority in the early church, and it is submitted that this reveals his humility because he portrayed himself instead as a gracious servant on his role as a pillar or leader; and 3) James could also be lauded for his desire for peace within the church as Chair of the Jerusalem Council, for his understanding of the link between grace and the law, and for his care for Gentile believers, although he himself ministered almost exclusively to Jewish Christians. May our study of the Book of James this quarter (October to December) lead us to the many wisdom found therein to encourage us to grow in faith in our walk with the Lord. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ TUESDAY: JAMES AND THE GOSPEL Presented by Dr. Nem Tambalque Our lesson today talks about a person and the gospel. The person is James whom we have now identified as the brother of Jesus and a believer in Him. The gospel, of course, is all about our salvation centered in a Person – Jesus. We notice that James never mentions in his epistle other theological topics such as the cross, resurrection and even important themes that deal with ecclesiology. How can an epistle which does not talk about these themes, which are basic to salvation, be part of the NT? Lets not make a conclusion too fast about this epistle. From the very start James says, “Brethren count it all joy when you fall into various trials, knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience” (1:2, 3). James addresses fellow believers who may have engaged in the work of spreading the gospel and may have met considerable difficulty in their experience. His comforting words, “count it all joy,” favor, with all cost, what the spreading of the gospel may bring. The trials of separation, rejection and even severe persecution are considered significant points of development that would ultimately end up to the flourishing of faith and faith to enduring patience. Hence, James is much a supporter of the work of the gospel encouraging people who may have been engaged in this type of work during or even after his time (Acts 11:19). Another gospel-related passage James has included in his brief epistle reads this way: “Has God not chosen the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him?” (2:5). Inspired by the Spirit, this question is said with noble intention. The chosen-ness of “the poor of this world” in this verse is illustrative. It illustrates deep and rich trust in God; it is expressive of faith that lasts whatever happens in ones life. Everything can be given up except the trusting faith. This touches total dependence on God which, one time, James Brother, Jesus, made mention: “Blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Matt 5:3). This beatitude teaches total dependence on God. This first beatitude (which sounds similar to James 2:5) exhorts every individual to willingly and humbly acknowledge his or her spiritual poverty and exchange it with the richness of Gods grace (James 4:6; Eph 1:7). When Gods grace is experienced trusting relationship develops until an individual become “rich in faith.” To be “rich in faith,” one cannot be outside of grace. So, the “poor” who are willing to exchange their spiritual poverty with Gods rich grace, will be “rich in faith” and are promised “heirs of the kingdom” in the language of James, or “theirs is the kingdom of heaven” in the language of his Brother, Jesus. Somewhere in the middle of his epistle, James emphasizes that faith goes together harmoniously with works. “Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? And the Scripture was fulfilled which says Abraham believed and it was counted to him for righteousness, And he was called the friend of God” (James 2: 22, 23). How does faith in this two verses function? Ill be brief in this introductory part of this quarters lesson because there are more on saving faith ahead of us. For now, let me say that genuine faith is evidenced with good works, because, as stated, “faith was working together with his works.” The example given is Abrahams faith [or believe from the same root word in Greek] which is accompanied with loving obedience to Gods words. So, if work is absent, how can one prove the genuineness of his faith? Would simply believing the right thing prove enough? This is, for sure, insufficient! Remember Paul is vehement in his argument against attempting to obtain salvation by works in Romans and Galatians? His arguments are theological while James arguments here focus on the ethical side of the issue. This is the reason why John the Baptist includes care and concern for the marginalized in the community along with his call for repentance. He calls this as “fruits worthy of repentance” and he “who does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire” (see Luke 3:8-17). Similarly, James whole point is on the “good fruit of faith” demonstrated in the life of the believer. Towards the end of his epistle, James includes the “prayer of faith” (5:15). He speaks of an act of faith for healing. Here, prayer is an expression of trust to God to whom one addresses his prayer, specially if that prayer is in behalf of others who are in need and suffering. James Brother said one time, “Your Father knows the thing you have need before you ask Him” (Matt 6:8), and yet James doesnt miss the importance of prayer ask in faith. Later, in the remaining weeks of the quarter, we will see the grandeur of the epistle in relation to other theological themes taught in the Bible. Thus, if anyone finds that James doesnt sound so theological in this epistle, it is because his major concern is more on the practical side of the way a believer in Jesus ought to live. God bless everyone and happy Sabbath. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ WEDNESDAY: TO THE TWELVE TRIBES SCATTERED ABROAD Presented by Dr. Diego Sausa As James, the brother of Jesus, writes his epistles, he addresses his audience this way: “James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.” The question is does this statement refer to the Christian Jews only or to all Christians, namely, both Christian Jews and Christian Gentiles? The answer would be found in the direct (James’ own concept of “twelve tribes’) and the wider context of the entire Scripture (the entire NT concept of the twelve tribes). DIRECT CONTEXT OF “TWELVE TRIBES” James concept of the twelve tribes can be gleaned from his declaration during the Jerusalem Council which he chaired that tackled the issue about the Gentile Christians, he says in Acts 15:13-21: “And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me: Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written. After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things. Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath day.” In other words, James himself considered the Christian Gentiles as a people who were called by God’s name just as Israel was called by God’s name. James’ direct context therefore for the “twelve tribes scattered abroad” is that he means all Christians are scattered abroad. WIDER CONTEXT OF THE NT CONCEPT OF “THE TWELVE TRIBES” Peter who was a close associate of James the brother of Jesus also expresses this concept on the twelve tribes of Israel, he says: “But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light; Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.” It is interesting to note that Peter himself addresses the Gentiles exactly as God addressed Israel in Deuteronomy 14:2, namely, as God’s “royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar people.” In other words, the NT concept of Israel or “the twelve tribes” refers to all Christians consisting of both Jews and Gentiles. PAUL AND THE ISRAEL OF GOD Paul’s concluding statement in Galatians 6:16 sums up his whole argument in his letter to the Galatians and gives us the nutshell of his core message, but this statement has generated some divergence among scholars. Those in the Dispensationalist camp (who believe that God’s soteriological plan for Israel is different from that of the Christian church) use this text to support their view. The NKJV, KJV, NASB, ESV translate Paul’s statement like this: “And as many as walk according to this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, AND upon the Israel of God” (NKJV, the other cited versions above give similar translation, emphasis in caps mine). If one believes in Dispensationalism, he may see that Paul is giving his final benediction for the Galatian Christians that is, those who “walk according to this rule,” peace and mercy will be upon them, “AND upon the Israel of God.” What is implied by this Dispensationalist interpretation is that God will bless Gentile Christians with peace and mercy, and also the (ethnic) Israel of God. The problem with this dichotomous interpretation of Paul’s concluding statement is, nowhere in the entire epistle to the Galatians does Paul teach that God treats ethnic Israel as a separate entity from the Gentile Christians. In fact to the contrary, Paul teaches that Gentile Christians and ethnic Israel are one and the same through Christ’s merits without any distinction, that is, both Gentiles and Jews are children of Abraham, heirs to the promise (of eternal life) because of their faith in the merits of Christ’s vicarious faithfulness and not because of ethnicity nor because of compliance to any ritual or law. Right at the heart of his epistle to the Galatians in chapter 3, Paul gives us the meat of his message, that is, no amount of human accomplishment or obedience to any law or ritual, and no ethnic entitlement, can qualify a person to become a “seed” of Abraham and thus become an heir to the promise of eternal life except by faith alone in the vicarious faithfulness of Jesus. THE NT CONCEPT OF ABRAHAM’S SEED Paul says, “Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham. And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, ‘In you shall all the nations be blessed. So then, those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.’ For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse….”(Gal. 3:7-10, ESV). After arguing that not by any merit of man’s obedience but only by faith in the vicarious faithfulness of Jesus can a man be saved as promised to Abraham (Gal. 3:10-25), Paul clinches his argument by saying, “For in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many as you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise” (Gal. 3:26-29). This powerful argument of Paul teaches us that the true Israel of God is composed, not by those who belong to a certain ethnic group, and not by those who have accomplished or obeyed a certain ritual or law, but by those who have faith in the merits of the faithfulness of Christ. In the eyes of God according to Paul, there is no such thing as ethnic Israel of God on one side and God’s Christian church on another side. God’s salvation for all mankind is the same, and the method is the same, according to Paul, “If you are Christ’s [that is if you keep on having faith in the merits of Christ’s vicarious faithfulness], then you are Abraham’s seed, heirs according to the promise [of eternal life].” This is the “rule” (Greek: “kanon”), the only standard that Paul is talking about in Galatians 6:16 by which a man can have shalom (peace, blessings, grace, mercy, salvation), that is by faith alone in the merits of Christ’s vicarious death and vicarious life. Properly interpreting Paul’s statement in Galatians 6:16 in accordance with the meat of his message to the Galatians and in accordance with the context of the whole epistle, Paul’s Greek in the text should be rendered “Peace and mercy to all who follow this rule, EVEN [kai] to the [true] Israel of God” (NIV, see also Amp Bible for similar translation). The NIV and the Amplified Bible scholars have rightly translated the Greek word “kai” into the English word “even” instead of “and” in accordance with the context of Paul in his epistle to the Galatians. In other words, Paul is not introducing a new idea here as if suddenly contradicting himself by pronouncing blessings to those who have faith in Christ on the one hand and also blessings to the [ethnic] Israel of God on the other. Instead, what he was saying was that God will bless with shalom (peace, salvation, grace) and mercy “all who walk according to this rule [all who walk according to this rule of salvation by faith alone in the merits of the faithfulness of Christ], EVEN [that is, namely] the Israel of God.” While the Greek word “kai” can be interpreted either way, that is, “and” or “even” and an absolute decision as to which English equivalent should be used cannot be made from just reading the verse itself (Gal. 6:16), however the basic principle of literal exegesis applies which virtually all the other major translators have ignored. That basic hermeneutical principle as rightfully cited by the late astute scholar, Hans K. LaRondelle, is, “Whenever the grammatical syntax is inconclusive, the historical context may illuminate the particular meaning of a term. The historical background of this epistle indicates that Paul is vehemently rejecting any different status or claim of the Jewish Christians [Judaizers] beside or above that of Gentile Christians before God. Baptized Jews and Gentiles are all one in Christ, are ‘all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.’ Consequently, ‘there is neither Jew nor Greek’ in Christ….If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise’….How could language state it any more conclusively and unambiguously?” (The Israel of God in Prophecy, p. 108). ALL CHRISTIANS AS “ISRAEL OF GOD” Paul summarizes in Galatians 6:16 his whole point in the entire epistle. Starting from Galatians 6:15 Paul already gives us a hint as to how to interpret Galatians 6:16, he says “Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything; what counts is a new creation.” In other words, Paul is reiterating his previous point that ethnicity or compliance to any law or ritual means anything to God. So verse 16 must follow this flow of conclusion. So in verse 16 Paul concludes, “Peace and mercy to all who follow this rule [that is, peace and mercy to all who follow the rule o f salvation not by ethnicity or by works but by faith alone in the vicarious faithfulness of Christ], even to [that is, peace and mercy to those who follow this rule, who are even called] the [true] Israel of God.” Paul does not describe two groups who would receive peace and mercy from God. The “all who follow this rule” group is “even” the same group who is called “the Israel of God.” The whole book of Galatians therefore, is aptly capped by Paul with his synoptical point in Galatians 6:16: Peace and mercy will be bestowed to those who follow the rule of righteousness by faith alone in the merits of Christ, who are even called by the name the Israel of God. THE TWELVE TRIBES OF ISRAEL AND THE 144,000 IN REVELATION Who will compose the 144,000, the survivors of the great tribulation and triumphant redeemed saints described by John in Revelation 7:1-8 and 14:1-5? And who are the victorious great multitude described by John in Revelation 7:9-14? These are quiescent but resurgent questions in the church for a long time. Even in the days of the pioneers this was a hot topic but knowledge on the subject was apparently limited. Even church pioneer E. G. White admitted she had no light on the subject,1 although she was quite confident that earnest students of the Bible “will in a short time know[about the subject] without question.”2 John in his vision, recorded in Revelation 7:1-8,sees four angels ready to destroy the earth in the final judgment, but then an angel stops them saying, “‘Do not harm the land or the sea or the trees until we put a seal on the foreheads of the servants of our God.’ Then I [John] heard the number of those who were sealed: 144,000 from all the tribes of Israel” (Rev.7:3-4, NIV, italics mine). Then John hears the names of the twelve tribes of Israel comprising the saved with numbering exactly 12,000 people from each tribe. After hearingthis, John looks and sees something else, he says, “After this I looked and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands” (Rev. 7:9-10, italics mine). Then in his vision John is told by one of the elders that this great multitude standing before God’s throne in front of Christ are those who “have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb” (7:14). So who are these two groups of saved people, namely the 144,000 from the 12 tribes of Israel and the great multitude? Should the number 144,000 be taken literally, that is, 12,000 coming out from each of the 12 tribes of Israel? If so, then major difficulties will occur. One major difficulty is coming up with 12,000 pure-blooded representatives of each of the twelve tribes. It is impossible because the majority of the pure blooded 12 tribes of Israel which was part of the Northern Kingdom of Israel was already effectively obliterated by the Assyrians through assimilation by making the northern Israelites intermarry with the Gentiles after the Assyrians conquered the Northern Kingdom in 722 B.C.. It is true that there were a few members of the 12 tribes who escaped to the Southern Kingdom of Judah, but the problem is, no pure blooded member of any tribe could possibly exist because of intermarriage among the 12 tribes. C. Mervyn Maxwell rightly points out that“already by the time of Jesus the twelve tribes were largely amalgamated….Almost every Jew was a ‘son of David.’”3 And when John wrote the book of Revelation in around A.D. 90, any record of who belonged to which tribe had been already destroyed with the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in A.D. 70.4 The difficulties disappear when the number 144,000 is perceived as symbolic, that is, the twelve tribes are symbolic of God’s people worldwide. Afterall, the book of Revelation is apocalyptic, that is, as a norm, things described should be considered symbolic unless the context demands that they should be treated as literal. Indeed James addresses all the believers in Christ as “the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad”(James 1:1). And Paul tells us that we are Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise if we are in Christ”(Gal. 3:29). The geographic distribution of the twelve tribes is implicitly revealed in the first few verses of Revelation 7. The impending end-time divine judgment is universal (i.e., “four corners of the earth,” Rev. 7:1), but before the four angels could implement God’s worldwide judgment, God’s messenger (angel) from the east (symbolic of Jesus) tells them with a loud voice not to destroy the earth until the 144,000 are sealed (7:3). In other words, Christ stops the worldwide destruction of the earth until His own people from around the world are secured from that final worldwide destruction. R. H. Charles aptly writes, “the sealing must be co-extensive with the peril, and must,therefore, embrace the entire Christian community, alike Jewish and Gentile.”5 In other words, since the destruction is worldwide, the geographic constituency of the 144,000 must also be worldwide since they are to be saved from that worldwide destruction. The group 144,000, therefore, is not exclusively Palestinian or any other group but symbolic of the totality of the saved from all over the world. The next question is, if the geographical constituency of the twelve tribes is not literally from the twelve tribes of Israel but rather symbolic of the worldwide company of the saved, what about the quantity, the number 144,000? Will there be exactly only 144,000 people from all over the world who will be saved? Does God fix a quota of the saints who will be saved and stop working in the hearts of men once that quota is reached? “We are accustomed to thinking of God as extending His grace to everyone freely and accepting all who choose to respond. Knowing this, and knowing human nature, we are amazed that precisely 12,000, no more and no less,would respond from each of the twelve tribes. Nothing like this has happened before.”6 In the apocalyptic books of Daniel and Revelation,numbers 3, 4, and 12 are used as symbols of completeness, universality and perfection. If the geographic constituency of the 12 tribes is symbolic of the totality of God’s people worldwide, then the numeric constituency of the saved numbering 144,000 must also be symbolic. Jewish scholar Jacques B. Doukhan explains: Their number 144,000,composed of 12x12, is symbolic. The number 12 represents the number of the covenant between God and His people (4,number of the earth, x3, number of God)….Each tribe consists of 12000 people. As for the number 1000, which multiplies 12,it symbolizes…also the tribe. In Hebrew,the word elef (thousand) stands for the tribe, the crowd, the clan, or even the regiment. The number 12,000 thus depicts the tribe inits totality.7 We therefore concur with Hans K. LaRondelle that “the true Israel of God is not limited to 144,000 literal Jews, but is symbolic of the totality of spiritual Israel among the human race.”8 The next question is, if both the geographic and numeric constituencies of the 144,000 are symbolic of the multicultural, multinational people of God who have gone through great tribulation on earth, how is it related to the multicultural, multinational innumerable great multitude that John saw celebrating victory over tribulation with Jesus Christ in heaven (Rev.7:9-14)? When one reads the apocalyptic chapters of the book of Daniel and the apocalyptic book of Revelation, he will notice that the authors are carried from the scenes of great tribulation on earth that the saints would undergo to the scenes of ultimate victorious celebration in heaven. Leslie Hardinge describes this pattern of movement of events from earth to heaven as the “hinge.”9 It reminds the reader that the tribulation of the saints is not the finale of the story, but rather, the victory of the saints in heaven is. Revelation 7 shows this pattern. Verses 1 to 8 (described as the 144,000) portray God’s people going through sealing in the final judgment, while verses 9 to 17 show God’s triumphant people (described as the great multitude) in heaven. These two scenes revealed to John portray God’s people’s sequential progress in salvation history from earthly tribulation to victorious celebration in heaven with Christ. The first scene on earth “represents the church militant, the second scene the church triumphant.”10 The number 144,000 that John heard symbolic of the multicultural,multinational saints going through sealing in the final judgment on earth (Rev.7:1-8), are, therefore, the same as the innumerable multicultural,multinational great multitude that John saw when he turned to look, celebrating victory in heaven. It is important to note that John did not seethe 144,000, he heard the number. But when he turned to look, he saw a multiracial, multinational innumerable multitude. This pattern of hearing andseeing in the book of Revelation is perspicaciously explained by LaRondelle: The pattern of hearing and then turning to see, was used by John in Revelation 1:12,13. What John heard is then further clarified by what he actually sees. Another instance is found in Revelation 5. He hears an elder declare: “See the Lion of the tribe of Judah…has triumphed” (5:5). But when he looks to see the Lion, he saw a Lamb, “looking as if it had been slain” (5:6). What John saw was a clarification of what he had first only heard.11 In other words, the symbolic group 144,000 that John heard, which represented the totality of God’s people here on earth, is the same group that John saw when he turned and looked that was celebrating victory in heaven. The church militant on earth is the same church triumphant in heaven. We, therefore,concur with Doukhan when he concludes that “The 144,000 depict Israel marching as a whole. It is the ‘all Israel’dreamed by Paul (Rom. 11:26), the ‘complete’ number of the saved, as alluded to in the fifth seal (Rev. 6:11). Also it is the great multitude, multicultural and multinational survivors of the oppression (Rev. 7:14; cf. 6:9,11).”12 Everyone then who is saved through the blood of the Lamb from Adam until the last generation, belongs to the group 144,000 which is the great multitude, the totality of the saved in heaven. _____________________ 1 C. D. Crisler, Letter to E. E. Andross, Dec.8, 1914. 2 SM, book 1, 175. 3 C. Mervyn Maxwell, God Cares 2 (Boise, ID: Pacific Press Pub. Assn., 1985), 212. 4 Jacques B. Doukhan, Secrets of Revelation (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Pub. Assn., 2002), 71. 5 Quoted in Hans K. LaRondelle, How to Understand the End-Time Prophecies ofthe Bible(Sarasota, FL: FirstImpressions, 1997), 149, author’s italics cancelled. 6 Maxwell, 212. 7 Doukhan, 71. 8 LaRondelle, 149. 9 Leslie Hardinge, Jesus Is My Judge (Harrisburg, PA: Review and Herald Pub. Assn.), see author’s examples in pp. 128, 150,and 172 among others. 10 LaRondelle, 148. 11 Ibid., 149. 12 Doukhan, 72.
Posted on: Thu, 02 Oct 2014 17:13:04 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015