Outlining the Epistle of James presents a formidable challenge due to its intricate web of seemingly unrelated themes and shifting emphases. Nevertheless, the structure of the Epistle plays a crucial role in unearthing its intended message. However, the search for one reasonable structure seems an unending task today. It remains a complex maze as there is no consensus on the structure of James. Even though many recognize that unity of structure exists in the Epistle in some form, there is hardly a consensus on which prominent theme unifies the overall discourse. A thorough comprehension of the Epistle necessitates a meticulous analysis of its themes and their interrelationships at the macrostructure level and how this is manifested at the microstructure level. Therefore, this paper will use discourse analysis to assess the structure of the Epistle of James to convey its overall message.
This paper contributes to the existing conversation concerning the structural analysis of James in general and its implication in understanding the overall message of the Epistle through careful interaction with major proponents of the linguistic approach to the structure of James (e.g., Varner, “James,” in Discourse Analysis of the New Testament Writings, ed. Todd A. Scacewater”; Taylor, “A Text linguistic Investigation into the Discourse Structure of James”; Cargal, “Restoring the Diaspora: Discursive Structure and Purpose in the Epistle of James”; Tollefson, “The Epistle of James as a Dialectical Discourse”; Johnson, “The Letter of James” The Anchor Bible). This study will take an eclectic approach to examine the various discourse features employed by James to indicate his recursive style drafted in the first chapter. It will then identify James 3:13–4:4–10, which highlights “wisdom from above” as the linguistic prominence or discourse peak that unifies the entire discourse.
While there may be discrepancies among different DA proposals when applied to a specific NT book, this paper will illustrate how the DA approach, despite its limitations, has the potential to transcend mere structural analysis and contribute to the theological nuances of the letter. By providing a comprehensive framework, this approach enhances our interpretation of the epistle and offers a deeper understanding of its contents and literary merit.