THE PURPOSE OF AFFLICTION: AN EARLY CATECHISM?

Phillip Carrington (along with many others) has pointed out an interesting parallel in the writings of early church leaders as diverse as Peter, Paul and James.

I Peter 1:6-7a                                        Romans 5:3-4                      James 1:2-3

You r                                                    We boast                               Count it all joy

though grieved for a little                                                                  when you fall into

through various temptations                in our afflictions                   various temptations

                                                             knowing that                         knowing that

that the testing of your faith                                                              the testing of your faith

                                                             affliction works patience      works patience

                                                             and patience testing

Another verbal parallel is present in these passages, although not appearing in the same order:

I Peter 1:7b                                          Romans 5:2

result in praise, glory and honor         hope of the glory

Stibbs and Walls remarks on these correspondences: “If the resemblances are accidental, the coincidences are remarkable: if there is literary dependence, the borrowing has been of a most complex type. But if Peter, Paul and James were all weaving their thoughts round a common apostolic pattern of exhortation for believers [a sort of catechism], then both the resemblances and the differences are explained.

I decided to see what other Bible scholars had to say regarding this very unusual verbal agreement between three diverse Scripture authors.

Agreement between Paul and Peter

“Because of Christ, Christians eagerly anticipate the time when they will share Christ's glory, in contrast with their falling short of it now. In that sense He is 'the hope of glory.'” (Witmer) He cites New Testament passages such as I Peter 5:1 for this same idea.

By departing somewhat from the specific verses mentioned above, one can see another correspondence in that zao (“living”) is found in I Peter 1:3 “in the sense found in Rom. 5:5.” (Goppelt)

Agreement between James and Peter

Blue points out that “'trials of many kinds' (peirasmois...poikilois) were also referred to by Peter, who used the same Greek words, though in reverse order (I Peter 1:6)...The testing here (James 1:3) refers more to 'approval' than to 'proving.' The word (dokimion) appears only here and in I Peter 1:7.” However, as Davids notes, the two authors utilize that word in different ways.

Goppelt remarks that the plural “trials” is found in the NT here and in a related passage, Jas.1:2; and in Lk. 22:28; Acts 20:19; II Pet 2:9.”

“Circumstances that tempt people to sin vary widely and are rarely specified. Instead James 1:2 speaks of experiencing 'many kinds of temptations',” and I Peter 1:6 talks of suffering grief 'in many kinds of temptations...' Both passages use peirasmos because they have in mind any number of situations, including persecution, that can tempt a person to sin against God and perhaps fall from faith.” (W.R. Baker)

L.T. Johnson comments on “produce endurance” in James 1:3: “This is James' only use of katergazesthai...although he uses ergazesthai in 1:20 and 2:9...The most striking parallel is provided by Rom 5:3” which utilizes the same Greek word.

Going a little further on in James 1 (verse 18), one also encounters a reference to the new birth, as in I Peter 1:3. Similarly, “undefiled” appears in I Peter 1:4 and James 1:27, indicating a common source behind the start of I Peter and all of James 1.

The refiner's fire in James 1:3 “implies that there is something genuine that will survive the refining process, an idea which I Pet 1:7 also shows to be latent in the terminology: James already assumes that the Christian will pass the test.”

Agreement between James and Paul

Writing on James 1:3, Ward states, “The outcome is steadfastness, the quality of 'staying put' – under 'the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune'. Cf. Rom. 5:3.”

Relationship between the Three Passages

With the above parallels in mind, Verhey relates all three passages to a common tradition. And Davids compares the statements and concludes that they are similar “in both form and content.”

On the other hand are those who stress the differences between the three. For example, Johnson states that the resemblance between the three passages “is more apparent than real. Between James and I Peter there is mainly the sharing of the phrases 'various trials'...and 'provenness of faith'...within the general context of suffering. But the internal connections are entirely different. In Romans, in contrast, we also find the structure of the sorites [i.e. series] as in James, but with a different set of verbal correspondences: the 'accomplishing of endurance' and the 'proven endurance.”

Davids says, “James is verbally closer to I Peter, but his thought is closer to Paul's in that both he and Paul valued the virtues produced by the trying circumstances rather than the test itself, which Peer values (perhaps because it produces a heavenly reward).”

Before reviewing all the similarities and differences, McKnight notes that “some leading scholars today think there is no connection between these texts.”

The Original Source(s) of these Teachings

The above brings us to the important issue of how this complex relationship between the three teachings arose in the first place. And Bible scholars are not at all shy in attempting to answer this question, as you can see below:

In terms of Romans 5:3-4, several commentators merely express the opinion that Paul's own experiences of suffering form the basis of this writing, but they do not attempt to explain the correspondences between this text and the other two in question. An historical background is also proposed by Reasoner for I Peter 1:6-7, which he connects with the fire in Rome and AD 64 and subsequent persecution.

Schnabel feels that Paul's chain reasoning form in Romans 5:3-5 derives from early Jewish wisdom texts. The same would presumably apply to the series in James 1:2-4.

Verhey relates all three passages to a common tradition: “The traditional elements utilized in I Peter [such as that concerning joy in suffering] include what Selwyn called an early Christian 'holiness code'...”

“James draws from a wide assortment of Jewish tradition material – the Old Testament legal corpus..., Jesus' sayings and wisdom literature...The faithful are exhorted in Sirach 2:1 [an apocryphal Jewish book] in much the same way that James admonishes his audience (Jas. 1:2,12).” (Charles)

Johnson cautions us that “James' voice in these verses cannot without loss be reduced to the common chorus of Greco-Roman philosophy or Christian paraenetic [teaching] tradition.” By contrast, Adamson goes to great length to mention the parallels between the James passage and apocryphal Jewish and Greco-Roman thought.

Kistemaker mentions all three texts, noting that “James repeats the thought Jesus expresses in the last beatitude (Matt. 5:11-12).” Elaborating on this thought, Davids says that both look on sufferings as an external trial, neither sees suffering as something to be sought, and both see an eschatological benefit in the suffering.”

Goppelt: In commenting on I Peter 1:6-7, he says, “This interpretation of suffering appropriates primarily an Old Testament-Jewish and primitive Christian wisdom tradition that was already shaped within the same conceptual connections. Jas. 1:2f has such close affinities to I Peter 1:6f – in a different way from Rom. 5:24, which is similar in content – that one must assume that a common primitive Christian tradition is behind them...A direct precursor of this primitive Christian tradition is Wis. 3:5f., though this Christian tradition does not appropriate the idea of education...A more distant background to this interpretation is in Ps. 65(66):10 LXX [Septuagint]: God's people are tested as silver.”

Davids concludes: “The best explanation of both the similarities and the differences among these passages is that all three employ a common traditional form circulating in the early church. Each has modified the form to bring out his own emphases. This form, which probably stems originally from some saying of Jesus (e.g. Mt. 5:11-12) may have circulated as part of a Christian baptismal instruction, having been taken over from Judaism.” Thus, he comes back to the basic understanding of Carrington, Stubbs and Walls which started this discussion.

Kasemann, in writing about Romans 5:3-5 says, “Obviously there is no dependence on James. Both passages and also I Pet 1:6f are linked by a common horatory tradition...which develops the theme of T. Jos. 10:1 [another apocryphal writing]...It may have its origin in the days of the Maccabean persecution.”

Remarking on the 'boasting in affliction' theme in this same Pauline passage, Fitzmyer states, “In making this claim Paul is modifying slightly his Jewish heritage, for the upright Jew also sensed the value to suffering...(Ts. Sol. 3:4)...Cf. Jas. 1:2-4 for a similar sapiential list of qualities; I Pet 1:6-7.”

Conclusion

Despite the seeming disagreement between some of the above opinions, there is nonetheless consensus that (1) no one of these three passages served as the primary source for the other two and (2) all three teach the benefits of suffering in a believer's life and demonstrate that this is an idea that is not at all foreign to Jewish thought over the centuries. Therefore there is probably no need to argue whether the commonality between these NT texts derives from OT teachings and examples, inter-testamental Jewish writings both included and excluded from the OT Apocrypha, Christ's beatitude, or an early Christian catechism.