Henry Krabbendam - James - World Evangelical Alliance

(Jam. 1:19ff) and substantiated in the Royal Law of Freedom (Jam. 2:1ff), is
now particularized in a very concrete way.
Not so incidentally, it corresponds with the total range of trials Christians
have faced, do face and ever will face. We can expect to run into riches
as well as poverty, when we meet up with “the outside world” (“the brothers”
and “the future”). We can expect to experience riches as well as poverty,
when we look at “ourselves” (“the rich” and “the poor”). We can expect to
encounter riches as well as poverty (of all sorts), when we come face to face
with the “circumstances” (“the good” and “the bad”). James’ persistent question
is, “How did we, do we, and will we do in these three spheres? How did
we, do we, and will we (1) interact with people, with whom we incessantly
rub elbows, and with opportunities that ever beckon (Jam. 4:11-17). How did
we, do we, and will we (2) map out our own conduct that invariably broadcasts
who we are, in “up” as well as in “down” situations (Jam. 5:1-11). And
how did we, do we, and will we (3) respond to the avalanche of events that
we face every day (Jam. 5:12-18)?” Across the board, he leaves us with little
doubt about the specifics of actual Gospel holiness. This is why this fourth
section is the crowning piece of James’ Epistle. As such, it fully corresponds
with the grand objective of God’s saving activity, namely Practical Godliness.
Of course, it is difficult, if not impossible, to demonstrate that one’s
Outline is always right on. This is also the case here. Some commentators
read James 4:1-17 as a rhetorical unit, and divide it in three thematic sections,
James 1-10, 11-12 and 13-17 (Moo). Others see a break between James 4:10
and James 4:11 but end the unit that starts at James 4:11 with James 5:6
(Johnson). I also notice a decisive break at James 4:11 but terminate this new
section at James 4:17, and regard James 5:1-12 as the next unit. In the wider
parameters of James 4:10-5:18, James 5:13-18, then, is the final unit, prior to
the conclusion of the whole letter in James 5:19-20. At this point I do not repeat
my arguments for this division. But I do wish both to underscore that in
my estimation the author embarks upon a brand-new segment or part with
James 4:11, and to advance one additional argument for this position. Some
commentators call the shift from James 4:10 to James 4:11 “dramatic” (Johnson),
others “more tactical, from the pejorative to the personal, from the rhetorical
stigmatizing of ‘adulteresses’ to a reasoned argument with ‘brothers’
(Laws), even if allegedly “a disputatious tone is retained” (Brosend, 117).
However, everyone appears to agree that there is something going on in the
transition between James 4:10 and James 4:11. I fully concur. The intensely
personal, narrowly focused, approach of James 3:1-4:10 turns into the more
strategic, even if no less applicatory, global survey of James 4:11-5:18. This
comports “perfectly” with the shift from the implementation to the range of
practical godliness. This supports my proposed division!
696