At least some scholars want to make James 1:9-11 a new thought, completely unrelated to anything in James 1:1-8. Why James introduces this new thought isn’t said, but, in any case, I believe their argument is untenable. For example, they conclude the brother of low degree (verse-9), i.e. a brother in Christ, is poor in this world’s goods, and the rich man (verse-10), also thought to be a brother in Christ, rejoices in the loss of his goods, but this doesn’t make sense. A poor man isn’t righteous because he is poor in this world’s goods, nor is a rich man unrighteous, because he is rich in this world’s goods. The Scriptures conclude both to be unrighteous (Psalm 62:9).
Nevertheless, some scholars conclude that the story Jesus told in Luke 16:19-31 was a parable that supports their argument in James 1:9-11, but Luke never says Jesus offered his listeners a parable. The story in Luke makes the poor man out to be righteous simply because he is poor, and the rich man is unrighteous simply because he is rich, and in the afterlife, their worldly positions are exchanged. Yet, this is not only logically untrue, it is not true according to the Scriptures. In reality, Jesus was quoting a Jewish myth similar to what the Sadducees offered him in Matthew 22:23-28. He was not offering a parable about the truth.[1]
James is not speaking of a person who is poor in this world’s goods in James 1:9. Rather, he is speaking of a humble person, someone who is of a poor and contrite spirit (Isaiah 66:2; Matthew 5:3). This one could be either rich or poor in this world’s goods. It is his spirit that matters, not his lack of possessions that makes him of low degree (James 1:9), and James tells him to rejoice in his exalted position in Christ, who is seated at the right hand of the Father (Acts 2:33; Romans 8:34; cp. Ephesians 2:6).
In contrast to the above, James paints the picture of the rich man who is without Christ (James 1:10). This man doesn’t necessarily have to be rich in this world’s goods. Instead, it is a matter of the man’s spirit. If he is rich in himself, i.e. boasts in his flesh, the man is without Christ. He is not a believer, as some suppose. Consider what must be done in order cause the text to make him a believer. First, he must rejoice or boast in the fact that he is humble! Wouldn’t it be ridiculous to believe a man could be humble, if he brags about how humble he is? Yet, this is the position scholars would have to take given James’ real point. On the other hand, the text could be made to say the rich man rejoices in the fact that he has lost his wealth during the persecution of believers in Christ. Now, I can believe that one would accept the fact that he has lost his wealth unjustly, and even that he rejoices in that he is counted worthy to suffer for the name of Christ (cp. Acts 5:40-41), but why would he rejoice simply in the fact that he has lost all or most of his worldly wealth, which he could have used for the sake of the poorer brethren and to help advance the Gospel (cp. Acts 4:33-37)? Secondly, if this is a brother, he must also rejoice in the fact that he “will fade away in his ways” (James 1:11). Under what circumstances would anyone rejoice in that?
It is easier to believe James is speaking of his spirit and the word rich points to the flesh. It is true that the physically rich are powerful people, and many of them use their power to enhance their wealth or to further their goals at the expense of those who either oppose them or who are in their way. Nevertheless, their success requires the good will of folks who aren’t rich but covet the rewards of the rich for doing their pleasure. Both are rich in the flesh in the spiritual sense, and both would be willing to harm (persecute) folks with a different point of view or who outwardly oppose the goals of the rich and powerful. Seen in this context, puts James 1:9-11 in a logical progression of James 1:1-8, rather than introducing a new thought, as many scholars believe to be the case. Instead of James 1:9-11 introducing a new idea, the rich of verses 10 & 11 are the ones who are behind the “diverse temptations” of James 1:2. These are they who are trying the faith of the believing community (James 1:3).
James tells us that the rich man fades away in his ways (James 1:11), just as does the flower of the grass in the heat of the sun. This has to do with the Lord’s coming judgment, which fell upon the Jews in 70 AD (Revelation 18:3, 15, 19). At the time of James’ letter the acceptable thing to do was to oppose and persecute believers in Christ. This is why Nero blamed them for starting the fire that consumed about a third of Rome.[2] The Bible speaks of it as the air of things, and the rich and powerful rule the air (Ephesians 2:2). Elsewhere it is being a gazingstock (Hebrews 10:33) by people simply waiting for an opportunity to blame, criticize or in some manner hurt the believer. Imagine how this must have been like. Wherever the believer went, people were waiting to do him or her harm, physically or emotionally. It was in the air, and one could cut it with a knife, so to speak. This is what was judged in 70 AD,[3] and this is what the Apostles promised would end at the Lord’s coming (James 1:2-4; 5:7), and the rejoicing is done by believers of low degree. They rejoice in the fact that the judgment of the rich brings freedom to them.
__________________________________________________
[1] I have four studies on Luke 16:18-31 each showing Jesus was quoting Jewish myth, but each study looks at the text from a slightly different perspective: The Rich Man and Resurrection; Is Experience Better Evidence for Truth; Luke and Egyptian Folklore; and Is Abraham in Hades?
[2] In its infancy the Church was considered a sect of the Jews (Acts 25:19; cp. Acts 19:34). The fact that Nero understood there was a difference between Judaism and Christianity shows that he was informed by close Jewish associates who were enemies of the Gospel. The fact that the high priest of the Jews assumed he had the authority to judge the affairs of the disciples and persecute them emphasizes the fact that, during the first century AD, Judaism and Christianity were considered the same religion with differing points-of-view.
[3] See my previous study in the Apocalypse: The Seventh Bowl and the Air.
Smoodock's Blog 