One of the crucial concerns that the New Testament letter writers shared was that church gatherings would be characterised by unity. For Paul, a significant aspect of this was the wiping out of ethnic divisions between Jew and Gentile, for James, the focus was on divisions based on class and wealth.
A look at the text (Read James 2:1-7)
James instructs the believers as brothers and tells them that there shouldn’t be favouritism among them. Literally, the word is about “paying attention to someone’s face. Blomberg and Kamell identify this as a probable Semitism.[1] This is one of the ways that they are to live out their faith in Jesus, acknowledged here as the Lord of glory. There are not many direct references to Jesus in the letter but where he is mentioned he is given high status and is presented as the motivation for their godly and faithful living (2:1).[2]
The specific example of discrimination that James identifies is when two different people come into the gathering. They are described in terms of their dress, one identified by his luxurious clothing and jewellery as rich. The other is poor and dressed in filthy, smelly rags (2:2). The implication seems to be that this is a real rather than hypothetical example. James pictures the rich man welcomed, waited on and given a seat of honour, whilst the poor man is expected to stand around and listen. Blomberg and Kammel draw a link between the “hasty speech” of chapter 1 and the “hasty judgement” of chapter 2.[3] Both may have been allowed into the gathering but only one is truly welcome. They have shown favouritism (2:3-4). This faulty judgement is sinful and an example of evil thoughts.
James identifies three reasons why this is foolish and lacks wisdom. First, they have failed to recognise how God sees the poor. He says that these are the ones God has chosen, materially poor but spiritually wealthy because they are heirs to God’s kingdom. So, the church are dishonouring the very people God honours. “The messianic community thus steals the honour God has granted the poor.”(2:5). [4] Secondly, whilst they seek to honour the rich but these are the very people who are exploiting and taking advantage of them (2:6). Thirdly, it has been the rich and powerful who have dishonoured God and blasphemed Jesus. They are not real friends. So, the church have picked sides, they have joined with those who have shown themselves to be the enemies of God and his people “They have made the church into a tool of persecution(2:7). [5]
Digging Deeper
James is here following themes found both in Jesus’ and Paul’s teaching. Jesus declared in the Sermon on the Mount that the poor were heirs to God’s kingdom and blessed.[6] Paul reminds the Corinthians, also stricken with rivalry and partiality that God had chosen the weak and foolish not the strong, powerful and rich for his glory.[7]
Some people talk about the Gospel having a bias to the poor. It’s important to note that the Gospel is for all parts of society. Rich people do follow Jesus and find salvation. Poverty does not make you right with God. However, there was and is a tendency to assume that wealth was a mark of God’s favour. James challenges this assumption. Poor people who through their poverty have learnt to depend on Christ alone are blessed.
A look at ourselves
Too often we see the same examples of partiality in the church today. Of course, we wouldn’t exclude people from our churches based on class, gender or race but we can still put barriers up which exclude and make it clear that people are not welcome. This can happen in the wider church, especially when we see a mission focused on reaching students, graduates and suburbs rather than inner cities and estates. We also need to watch that these attitudes don’t take root leading to the same barriers in our own local church.
[1] Blomberg & Kamell, James, 106. Davids also notes that the phrase isn’t found in Greek texts outside of Scripture and so appears to be a word coined by the early Christians to interpret a Hebraic concept. Davids, The Epistle of James, 105.
[2] “It is interesting to note that this is the second and last mention of Jesus Christ in this entire epistle., which has led to speculation that these references (1:1; 2:1) were added later in an effort to make an otherwise entirely Jewish epistle somewhat ‘Christian.’ As we have observed however James was well verses in Jesus’ teachings; indeed, the whole epistle is heavily dependent upon them, so such theories fail to convince.” Blomberg & Kamell, James, 107.
[3] Blomberg & Kamell, James, 109.
[4] McKnight, The Letter of James, 196.
[5] Davids, The Epistle of James, 112.
[6] Matthew 5:3.
[7] 1 Corinthians 1:26-31.
Faithroots 