05_Biblica_Aletti_Layout 1 01/04/14 12:04 Pagina 96 96 JEAN-NOËL ALETTI It is also important to note the progression of the examples-proofs that are furnished to illustrate and prove the defended thesis: vv. 15-16 an example presented followed by a statement as an eventuality of the thesis v. 19 a real, but negative, example followed by a statement in the present of the thesis vv. 21-25 two real, positive examples followed by a statement from the biblical past of the thesis In the first part, the example is presented as a fact relating to the future, in other words, as an eventuality (eva,n followed by the subjunc- tive, “if it happens that a brother or sister …”) and not as a fact already realized in order not to offend the believers whom James is addressing. In the second part, one passes from the eventual to the real because the examples refer to past biblical facts that are well-known. And even here the progression is perceptible because, from the negative example illustrating faith without works, one passes to those in whom faith is accompanied by good works: if the first is negative and very brief, the following two examples of Abraham (Genesis 22 and 15) and of Rahab (Jos 2,1-24) are positive and more developed in order to em- phasize the importance of good works for justification. Thus, the rhet- oric is in an ascending progression. Against the most representative commentaries which consider vv. 21-25 to be the third unit of the pas- sage (after vv. 14-17 and 18-20), the chreia indicates that these verses are inseparable from those that precede them, in particular from v. 18, which they illustrate and prove. In short, the pattern of the chreia is the best choice because it allows taking into account the different components of the argu- mentation, its organization and its progression. But why has James chosen this pattern in preference to others? 4. Why the Chreia as a Pattern of Argumentation? If James has chosen the chreia in order to present his thesis and its accompanying reasons, it is, first of all and without a doubt, be- cause this type of argumentation was taught in all the schools as a part of the elementary exercises, the progymnasmata, and, there- fore, was widely known. Thus, there was a greater chance that this pattern would be recognizable by those contemporaries for whom rhetorical formation was the norm.