Church and mission … connected

This is the paper I presented at the IMA Conference today. It is a bit long.

My approach for this paper is to first look at what the church is meant to be. With this understanding of the church, I want to share my own understanding of missions as it grew from my walk with God. From here I want to progress to an understanding of what missions is especially in today’s world. With this understanding of the church and missions I will then see how they can be integrated practically and in a meaningful manner.

WHAT IS THE CHURCH?

Jesus began His ministry with the message “Repent for the kingdom of God is at hand”. In Mark it reads – “Repent and believe in this good news.” The gospel was therefore the coming of God’s kingdom into the world. The church was the manifestation of this kingdom in the world.

The church is a community of people following the values and principles as laid down by Jesus Christ. They have been called out from the world to be a part of these communities. These values are summarised in the word of God by Jesus as “love God” and “love your neighbour” in Matthew22:37 and as “love your neighbour” by Paul in Gal 5:14 and Romans 13:8-10. These values are not activities which we do “in the church” but in life.

The outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the disciples in Acts 2 equipped them to proclaim the word of God according to Acts 2:17-18,

“And it shall come to pass in the last days,” says God, “that I will pour out of My Spirit on all flesh; your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your young men shall see visions, your old men shall dream dreams. And on My menservants and on My maidservants I will pour out My Spirit in those days and they shall prophesy.”

So they prophesied. Since the Holy Spirit was poured out upon all the members of the kingdom, the proclamation of the word of God becomes the God given commission to all the members of the church.

The message of the gospel was the arrival of the kingdom of God (Matthew 4:19) in our midst and this was the good news Jesus preached. This kingdom is where God rules and His values are followed. It is where the community of people who live by God’s values and principles are. They thus form a kingdom of priests as mentioned in Ex 19:5-6

“ Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be a special treasure to Me above all people, for all the earth is Mine, And you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.”

Israel was meant to be a kingdom of priests where all were representatives of Yahweh, but they did not live up to this and now the church is the new Israel who is meant to be the kingdom of priests.

The hall mark of this kingdom is right judgement and justice (Is 9:6-7).

“For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given, and the government shall be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of His government and peace there will be no end, upon the throne of David and over His kingdom, to order it and establish it with judgement and justice from that time forward , even forever. The zeal of the Lord will perform this.”

In an era where people were oppressed and justice was rare, they would form a community where mercy, compassion and justice would be the norm. This community is the good news. The good news is not a formula or road map to get to heaven. It is a commitment to a community and its members. Hence Jesus said that “they will know that you are my disciples because of the love you have for one another” John 13:35. Without that love for the community there is no evangelism and no witnessing. It is because of this, missions always begin with the church and ends with the church, and there is no mission apart from the church!!

The kingdom was the life of the people of God; the spoken word was the salvation of Jesus Christ on the cross. They always go together. Both together form the gospel.

Unfortunately today we have a popular gospel which has little to do with the Biblical understanding of the kingdom of God and presents it as a one way ticket to heaven. It is not a life commitment but an acceptance of what God has done for us. In fact when I first accepted Christ as my Saviour many of my close Christian friends told me to avoid the church and avoid theological studies as both would destroy my faith. Fortunately I disregarded them on both fronts.

We see the true gospel practised in the early church of Acts 1-4. Here they lived as a community which shared their resources so that no one was left hungry (Acts2:42-45).

“And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers. Then fear came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles. Now all who believed were together and had all things in common, and sold their possessions and goods and divided them among all, as anyone had need.”

And God added to this community through the teaching of the apostles and the fellowship amongst the people. The awe which was created amongst the people (Acts 2:43) “fear came upon every soul” was not just the signs and wonders but also the strange sight of people living for each other instead of for themselves. Of course signs and wonders played an important part in showing Jesus as the Son of God and the expected Messiah.

Hence mission is not just an activity or a project which we indulge in but it is a life style which we lead. Mission is not just making people into a disciple of Christ but also incorporating them physically or spiritually in the community of believers. Some because of their life situation may not be able to physically participate in the activities of the church, but they will be spiritually present in the prayers of the community and in the life of the community. (I refer to people of other faiths who are in touch with individuals from the church, but because of persecution are unable to be a part of the church.)

When persecution broke out in Jerusalem in Acts, the members of the church were scattered into Samaria and Judea. Acts 8:1 specifically says that the apostles remained in Jerusalem. This scattered church took the gospel with them and spread the church all through the region.  Mission work was the work of the members of the church and the existence of the church meant mission took place.

There is a movement called the ‘missional church’ which deals with this whole issue of the church being a living organism which is centred on missions, and I have given a link to their website and an extract of their article in the Appendix for those who are interested in this concept of the church.

Acts 13 saw a change taking place with the sending of the first missionaries. With this we entered the missionary era. Yet these missionaries were sent by the church and were a part of the church, though we are not sure to what extant the financial support came from the church and to what extant they looked after themselves. It would appear from Acts of the Apostles and Paul’s epistles that Paul sustained himself by tent-making for a part of the time, and he received support from a few churches which he had planted, but Antioch is not mentioned as a church which sent him financial resources. The strategy he followed and the plans he made were his and not the church in Antioch. The church commissioned him and then released him with no strings attached.

These missionaries created communities wherever they went, of people who followed Jesus Christ and lived by His values and principles. Thus the kingdom was spread around the known world.

APPLICATION TO THE CHRISTIAN

The usual verse used to define our responsibility for missions in this world is Matthew 28:19f.

“Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you, and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”

I prefer the verses John 17:18 and 20:21 – “Even as the Father has sent me I send you.” We have been sent just like Jesus with the same commission. Jesus saw His mission encapsulated in the Nazarene manifesto (Luke 4:18-19) as a call to give freedom to those in bondage, respect and social justice to those who have never experienced it, through the formation of kingdom communities.

“The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He has anointed Me to preach the gospel to the poor. He has sent Me to heal the broken-hearted, to preach deliverance to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to preach the acceptable year of the LORD.”

The physical manifestation of these communities is the local churches, and this is where the gospel is lived and acted out.

Yet I cannot be schizophrenic and live a life of justice and righteousness in the church but another of pragmatism and worldly wisdom outside the church. My character is formed by the Spirit of God within me and the blessings of the kingdom flow through me even to those outside the church, and thus I become a witness and spokesperson of the kingdom in places far away from the church.

Ephesians 4 then makes sense as it makes the equipping of the members of the church for this role in the world outside the church, as the responsibility of the officials of the local church. Individuals are trained in the local church so that they can live the gospel in the world outside.

One of the difficulties created is that since we are called by Christ we do not look for a call from the church and tend to run independently. But we need to realise that even when God has called me I am ultimately sent by the church. David was anointed king by God (through Samuel) but made king by the people.

My Testimony

When I accepted Christ my first reaction was to resign from my profession and become a “Christian worker”. But my pastor advised against it and said that you needed to wait for a specific call. I then met with the verse II Cor 5:15 where it says “and He died for all, that those who live should not longer live for themselves. But for Him who died for them and rose again.” If I am not living for myself then why am I working? Does a “secular” profession have any place in the kingdom? What is the motivation for working, if it is not for one’s own benefit?

Unfortunately there is no theology of work taught in the church, and most members of the church are left with a vague feeling of guilt that they are not doing missions. They are second class citizens of a class structure with the “full time” workers on top and them bringing up the rear.

The first two answers I obtained for working were the obvious ones.

                1. To finance my ministry and the ministry of the church

                2. To obtain a platform for witness to people who never come to church

However this was not satisfactory as it gave no meaning to work itself, which was seen as an un-spiritual activity. So the tendency was to spend as little time as possible in this worldly activity and as much as one could in the church or in witnessing for Jesus.

However Col 1:16 says that all power structures that exist have been created by Christ and for Christ.

“For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him.”

 This means that all the business structures we see have been created by God and for God. Romans 13: says that all authorities are God’s servants and rule on behalf of God.

“Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God.”

Now we may see them rebelling against God, but when we work there we bring them back into submission to God. That means all work is spiritual and there is no such thing as un-spiritual work though in accordance with Romans 9:21f some of these professions may have been created for destruction and we need to stay away from them.

“Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honour and another for dishonour? What if God wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction.”

The point I want to make is that all professions are a calling from God and is a spiritual activity. Mission takes place here in the market place where I interact with the people who are outside the kingdom of God. Thus mission becomes my life style and work style and not an extra-curricular activity in my spare time.

In the work place I bring the purposes of God to the work, and see that the organisation that I am working in fulfils the purpose for which God set it up. This purpose is linked usually to the economy of God enabling mankind to sustain themselves by providing needed services to them. So every profession is a service provided to mankind for their survival. In other words all professions are a ministry to mankind.

At first I struggled with the issue as to why God would require the professions to exist in His economy. One insight was given to me by Peter Drucker who said that the Malthusian famine never occurred because of continuous increase in the productivity of land. This increase was achieved through technological breakthroughs in a variety of sciences. Psalm 104:10-14 says that God is the provider of food for all creation.

“He sends the springs into the valleys, which flow among the hills. They give drink to every beast of the field; the wild donkeys quench their thirst. By them the birds of the heavens have their habitation; they sing among the branches. He waters the hills from His upper chambers, the earth is satisfied with the fruit of Your works. He causes the grass to grow for the cattle, and vegetation for the service of man, that he may bring forth food from the earth.”

God does this today by scientific developments and discoveries. So every profession was created by God and every organisation was created by God to serve mankind and enable him to survive in this world. So in my profession I am fulfilling the purposes of God and I make the organisation fulfil the purpose of God by my presence.

In doing the work I practise the values of the kingdom and my colleagues and my employees experience the justice of God and the righteousness of God in the work place.

The link between mission and the church then becomes the equipping done by the church as indicated in Ephesians ch. 4. There is no control that the church has on this activity in the marketplace. It cannot have any control. The only role they have is in equipping the member effectively so that his response to every situation becomes a presentation of the gospel.

WHAT IS MISSION?

I see mission as having two parts. One is basic. It is the life of the Christian. Everything he does takes the gospel out into the world as his life is a reflection of the love of Christ. He carries the justice of God and His righteousness with him wherever he goes.

The second is the assembling of like minded people into a project where mission becomes a project. This is secondary but an equally important aspect of missions. However, this should not be to salve one’s conscience for not doing the first, but should be an outcome of one doing the first.

The first takes place because of the teaching and disciple forming process of the church, though this can be supplemented by the work of professional groups like ETFI, ENFI, FCCI etc. The second often takes place through para-church structures, though it also happens through projects of the church.

PARA-CHURCH GROUPS

Profession specific groups

With the roles in the world becoming more complex and issues becoming profession specific, there has been a growth in para-church organisations focused on specific professions and groups of people. Such are EU amongst students, ETFI, ENFI, FCCI, God@work etc. These groups help their members to be an effective disciple of Christ in their professions. These organisations do not come under any church, but their members are from churches and carry the teaching of their churches with them. The influence or the control the church has on these organisations is through their members who are present in these organisations.

For example, even though education was greatly influenced by the church, today the church has little teaching on the purpose of education. So the teacher, if he or she is looking for guidance as to why God created schools and colleges, they find little or no teaching in the church. So they turn to groups like ETFI who have spent their time and energy in finding out answers to such questions, and so enable their members to be trustworthy stewards of God in this area.

The same is true of engineering or the government where I have worked, or a multitude of other professions. In the back office and software industry there are a variety of issues which challenge a Christian and the church is ill-equipped to provide the support and so a plethora of para-church groups have grown to meet these needs.

Just as the church does not participate directly in mission in the market place, but influences the same through their members who work in the market place, so also in these organisations the church does not participate directly but influences the same through their members. These organisations are also not mission organisations as such, but assist the church in the equipping of their members for their role in the market place.

Mission specific groups

In a complicated world there are hundreds of issues plaguing mankind. In dealing with these issues, it is neither efficient nor practical for each church to have their own mechanism to deal with them. So it becomes more effective to form a group drawn from all churches to address these concerns. Most often these groups are formed by members of different churches who have a common burden to deal with specific issues. These can be issues of hunger, orphans, AIDS, people groups who have not been addressed, raising missionaries, etc. Such organisations include the Gideons International, Cassette ministry, IEM etc. Many are small and generally unknown, more a ministry of a family or a small group of people living in a locality. Others are city wide or state wide and yet others are national and even international.

The National and City-wide organisations are able to make better use of resources by combining into one large organisation rather than having many small organisations. On the other hand many of the small family organisations are able to focus on small specific areas and take the influence of the gospel to areas which may be missed by larger organisations. It is difficult for churches to be involved in all the problems in a locality, but it is much easier for individual members to be involved in specific problems of localities.

These mission organisations do not come under the control of the churches and the influence that the church has on them are through their members who are working in these organisations. Because of their lack of control over these organisations the relationships between churches and para-church organisations have traditionally been bad. Some churches openly say that para-church groups should not exist. They accuse them of robbing the money belonging to the church etc. Others are more broad minded and encourage the para-church organisations openly. What is a Biblical position?

A. My profession. If my profession is a ministry and a calling from God as indicated in Colossians 1:16 and Romans 13:1f, then these are in effect para-church organisations. They are organisations that fulfil the purposes of God but are not directly controlled by the church. It would appear to have Biblical sanction and therefore para-church organisations of this nature cannot be ruled out from the Bible.
B. Once we accept the sanctity of professions like teaching and nursing or governance as roles where we are called by God, the formation of organisations like ETFI, ENFI, God@work etc. cannot be refused since these are profession specific. Our understanding of mission and the life of the believer needs to provide for such structures to exist.
C. Finally, if the above two are valid, I see no problem in organisations dealing with specific issues like AIDS, mission to Maltos etc. also existing to meet the demands of missions.

CONCEPTS FROM SERVANT LEADERSHIP

Jesus in Matthew 20:25-26 says

“You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who are great exercise authority over them. Yet it shall not be so among you; but whosoever desires to become great among you, let him be your servant.”

The leadership and the authority that Jesus wants us to exercise in the kingdom is that of a servant. A servant aims to help the master fulfil his dreams and desires and does not impose his dreams and desires on the master. The slave or servant has no will of his own except for the will of his master.

I ask the question – should the congregation help the pastor fulfil his vision or should the pastor help the congregation members fulfil their visions? It is the latter that makes the church powerful and involves the church in the practical mission of its members. By helping his members fulfil their individual visions for the kingdom of God, the pastor’s vision is fulfilled. The sales managers vision is fulfilled by helping each of his salespersons fulfil their visions!!

This simple principle is hard for many pastors to accept. I know how unpopular I became with the pastors’ spouses in two churches for teaching this principle. J

When we are looking at the leadership which the church needs to give to missions, let us keep this principle of servant leadership at the back of our minds. It is not a leadership of dominance or authority but one achieved through being a servant.

How does this work?

1. By the leader helping his people to understand the vision of God and the heart of God

2. By the leader helping the people to draw up their plans to fulfil the vision of God
3. It is like an ideal father helping his child to understand God’s purposes in his life and equipping him to fulfil that, but at no time imposing his own desires and will on the child.

RELATION BETWEEN THE CHURCH AND THE MISSION ORGANISATIONS

So how should the church relate with these organisations?

Firstly the church needs to recognise that these are organisations created by God to further His mission in this world. His mission includes social justice, healing physically, emotionally and spiritually, economic deliverance from bondage, and of course deliverance from spiritual bondage the greatest bondage of all.

Secondly the church needs to recognise that these organisations give their members an opportunity to be involved with avenues of God’s mission which may not be available in his or her church, but where God has laid a burden in his or her heart.

Thirdly the church needs to recognise that these organisations are doing what they themselves are unable to do.

Recognising that these organisations have been created by God for His purposes, the local church needs to see how they can assist these organisations to fulfil their objectives. One of the primary responses the church can make is to commission and send their members to work with these organisations. Just as Paul was sent as a missionary without any strings being attached by the church at Antioch, in the same manner we should send our members to work with these organisations and bring the blessings obtained to the church.

The church needs to recognise their members who are so involved with these groups and honour them for their sacrifice of time and energy just as much as they recognise those who volunteer with the church.

The local church needs to give their members who are involved with these groups time to share with the church what their experiences have been and how these groups are functioning.

Participating in these para-church groups is as much a part of the Christian life as is volunteering in the church and being an active member of the church, just as Paul was an active member of the Antioch church and also its missionary sent to Asia and Europe.

NATIONAL INTEGRATION OF CHURCH AND MISSION.

I do not believe that we can have a structural integration of mission and church if we understand mission as primarily the life style of the members of the church, the profession of their members and the mutual association of Christians according to interests.

However we have loose collaborations, where individuals are members of multiple organisations, and these members form the links between the different organisations. This becomes especially true when each individual is seen as sent by his church to his organisation of interest or call. The integration of church and mission then comes about through these individuals who report back to the church what is happening in the para-church group or organisation. For this to happen there needs to be a strong relationship between these individuals and their churches. The stronger the bond between the individual and his church the stronger the integration between the church and mission; the weaker the bond the weaker the integration.

For instance, when I worked in the government, my church had no say in what the government does. But my problems at work would be shared in the church and strategies discussed and committed to God in prayer. Through these discussions, the church influences what happens in the government.

The late Rev. Stubbs was an effective practitioner of this. His members were all seen as evangelists, and every member of the church went out and witnessed for Christ in their professions making it the fastest growing church in Hyderabad. It is recognising that your members do ministry outside the church that makes a church effective.

SUGGESTION 1

My suggestion is for each pastor to have a database of church members indicating the professions and para-church they are involved in apart from what they do for the church. They should have them report back in suitable forums as to what has been happening and give guidance and teaching to them to help them perform effectively. This way an informal “connection” between the church and the field or missions will be maintained.

Obviously this will only work where there is a strong bond between the pastor and the church members. Also this will only work where we have a structure similar to Exodus 18:25 where there are leaders at different levels – over 10, over 50, over 100, and over 1000. That means in a church of the size where I worship we would have 80 elders looking after 80 cell groups of 10 members each!! These 80 would form 16 groups of 5 leaders each group representing 50 people and having a head. These 16 heads would form 8 groups of two each for mutual support and these 16 would report to the Pastor.

Then it would be the 80 cell group leaders who would mentor their members in their association with para-church groups and also in their professions. They would hear feedback and pray and give advice.

This way there could be a good level of interaction and confidence building between the members of the church, and the church hierarchy could know what is happening in the life and ministry of all its members.

Also the church instead of controlling the lives of their members, needs to see what God is doing in their lives, what is the hand of God on them, and commission them to the area where God has taken them and not necessarily where the church would like to send them!

SUGGESTIONS 2

Para-church organisations can also take leadership in including churches in their brain-storming sessions, especially the churches of their members, so that the churches know what is happening and can contribute their inputs to the mission. So YFC should invite the pastors of their volunteers to either be there or send a representative to planning meetings and brainstorming sessions. They need to see their volunteers as members of churches who are willingly sent to work with them.

Ideally just like Philip and Paul went back to the church at Jerusalem to discuss issues which arose in their ministries, para-church groups needs to go back to the CHURCH. But today that is a problem – which church? There are a 1000 churches and no one body bringing them together. You have NCC, EFI, and other groupings so whom do they go back to? So they have generally ignored all and found their own way. Hence my suggestion that they at least get the ‘minders’ of the churches from where their members come from to be a part of the referral process.

Unfortunately the cohesion within most churches is so weak that neither of these suggestions seem to be practical. In my own church, no department knows what the other is doing and there is little cooperation between them. How much less will be there in interaction with a para-church group with which some of their members are involved? Without the active effort of the Pastor of the church this will not happen. I must say in defence of my pastor that the situation is much better today than it used to be.

THE CONTROL FREEDOM DIVIDE

Supporters of centralised planning insist that centralisation reduces waste, duplication and coordinates efforts better. The extreme of centralised planning were the communist statist regimes which were disasters. In their desire for missions to begin and end with the church we should not duplicate these statist regimes.

The free market or laissez-faire systems were the other extreme where it was argued that local people know best the problems in their areas and so they should be the decision makers. Unfortunately this has also not worked well with the weak being the biggest sufferers. The argument of the free market is that the weak should die. That is not the gospel or Christianity. We should not let missions become a free for all where each does what he wishes.

So my suggestion is that we try and retain the best of both worlds. Let the mission organisations have their freedom, but let them recognise that they are a part of the church and see how they can link with the churches of their members meaningfully. In the same way the churches need to see how they can link without interfering with the organisations of their members.

ABERRATIONS

There are many aberrations to this ideal scenario that I have drawn. Many para-church members do not actively participate in their churches, and the para-church organisation becomes their church. In fact I have seen that the head of many para-church organisations have little involvement with their own local church.

This is unfortunate. We need to recognise that our primary fellowship is the church. It is here that we live the gospel. The para-church groups are our projects and should be seen as secondary to our church membership. This applies also to those working in para-church organisations.

The other extreme is where the church discourages their members from participating in para-church groups saying that they have to be active only in the church. It is impossible to involve the whole church into the activities of the church as there will be too many cooks. Hence for effective spiritual growth of its members it is essential that the members get involved in para-church groups.

My church used to give Rs 50000 a month to a mission organisation. When the bishop (several years back) heard of this he asked for this to be stopped and the money to be diverted to home missions. The argument was ‘when the church was having a need, money should not be sent outside’. The only result was people stopped giving and now neither home mission nor the mission organisation gets any money.

We need to recognise that God owns all of creation and there is no shortage of resources. We need to raise resources and not squabble over resources.

These aberrations come from thinking that God cannot provide resources for us and making us stingy and tight fisted instead of being generous.

See this website on the missional church

http://www.friendofmissional.org/

Matthew 25:31-46 Who is Jesus' brethren and are who are being judged?

Matthew 25:31-32 draws the context of the judgement scene clearly. When Jesus comes with his angels He would gather the nations and separate those who are a part of the kingdom from those who are not.

The difficulty with this scenario is that the basis of judgement is vs 35 and 36 a persons response to the need of the people around him. These people are referred to as the “brethren” of Christ. The difficulties which immediately arise are:-

1. It is a gospel of works if mankind is judged as per this criterion

2. Why are the poor and hungry the brethren of Christ? Does it mean that the rich are not?

If we see the context of the parable, we see the following:-

a. It is the third of a series of judgement parables, the first being the wise and foolish virgins, the second the parable of the talents and then this.

b. It is preceded by the Olivet Discourse which is addressed to the disciples and followed by the Last Supper.

In the context of the location of the parable in the gospel narrative, it appears to be addressed to the disciples and appear to be a warning to them not to presume on their special relationship with God but their life needs to reflect their faith ala James.

Then the warning to the disciples is:-

 1. Foolish virgins – they need to be Spirit filled and alert

2. Talents – they need to invest their material resources in the things of God and be active in the ministry

3. Goats and Sheep – they need to reflect the love of God to mankind, and to show generosity to the needy.

 This then is not a gospel of works but the same as James that you faith is seen in your life style.

 If we accept this interpretation then the brethren become the believers as Jesus defines it in Matthew 12:48-49.

 The only difficulty with this interpretation is that the setting of the parable as the judgement scene of the nations appears misleading or irrelevant.

 Any ideas?

The Structure of the Epistle of James

Does James’ epistle have a coherent structure that helps us interpret the epistle? Mark Taylor in his Ph.D dissertation surveys the existing studies on this subject and summarises his conclusion as follows:-

According to Taylor, all proposals thus far have four things in common.

First, they all deviate from Dibelius and insist that James is not a hodge-podge of ethical practices penned down without any noticeable coherence, any definable continuity, or any theological objective, which would prevent any contextual interpretation.

Second, while there is no “scholarly consensus regarding the details of the structure of James” ... “there is a growing sense that the text of James is a literary, coherent whole ... with its catchwords, theme expansion and recapitulation, ... bears the marks of intentionality (and displays) even a sequential progression at points.” To identify the structure of James, therefore, would be immensely helpful in grasping and applying its message.

Third, “many (scholars) are convinced that Chapter 1 holds the key to the letter’s structure,” since it “functions to introduce the letter’s major themes that are subsequently expanded in the letter body.”

Fourth, they are virtually all persuaded that “major blocks, such as James 2:1-13, 2:14-16, 3:1-12, and 4:1-10, and smaller units like James 1:2-4, 3:13-18, and 5:1-6 exhibit a discernible structure and a sustained treatment of a unified topic.” This justifies the conclusion that the letter is a more or less “coherent literary whole,” even if the question remains, “how the units in James relate to one another in order to accomplish James’ purpose for writing.” The latter calls for “a convincing analysis,” which takes “the surface syntactical structure in the text itself” seriously,” “demonstrates how the major themes of perfection, law, judgment, speech and action in James work together,” and “how by way of quotation (explicit and implicit) and allusion ... James appropriates the ‘law’ in the light of the teaching of Jesus.” The bottom line is that on each of the four counts the study of James has made a good deal of progress, even if much eludes us as yet, and a finished product is not in sight!

I have generally taken the third of the positions mentioned, that chapter 1 is the key to the somewhat loose structure of the epistle of James. The Greek word “peirasmos” is translated as trials, tests and temptation and can mean any of these or all of them. Chapter one puts forward a thesis that trials or tests of ones faith makes one grow (1:2) in his spirituality but can also destroy a person if his response to the test is incorrect (1:13-14). This does not make the test bad, but our response bad (1:17), just as sin does not make the Law bad but shows our inner nature to be sinful (Rom 7:7-8).

After making this premise James then begins to illustrate what the wrong responses are to different kinds of tests. This is which takes most modern readers by surprise as they on reading the word “trials” assume some disaster or extremely difficult situation. But that is not what James means. Rather it is how you handle day to day situations like

a. James 2:1-13 – how do you respond when a rich and powerful man meets with you! (This passage has a small digression for those who feel that James is nit-picking with peccadilloes – a small sin has the same end as a large sin!)

b. James 3:1-12 – how do you conduct yourself in your day to day speech.

c. James 4:1-6 How do you deal with conflict or how do you desire with the petty wants of our natural self.

Each of the passages have a digression at the end. James 2 ends with James 2:14-26 on works being a result and proof of faith. James 3 ends with James 3:13-17 on the wisdom of humility which comes from God and controls our speech. James 4 ends with James 4:7-17 calling for repentance and turn to trust in God.

James 5 is a closing exhortation again using the theme of faith.