James 1.1 and 2.1.

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: James 1.1 and 2.1.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

John2 wrote: Wed Mar 21, 2018 6:34 pm Let's put the shoe on the other foot. Why doesn't the Letter of James mention Paul by name? Why doesn't the Recognitions of Clement mention Paul? Because they are biased against him.
My questions are not principally about texts which fail to mention James. My questions are about texts which mention him but do not connect his two most distinctive characteristics: he was a brother of Jesus, and he was a leader of the church. If a text openly connects James with only one of those characteristics, how can we know that its author knew of the other?
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: James 1.1 and 2.1.

Post by John2 »

Okay, I know that you assume this (and more: you also argue it), but did the evangelists? If so, what is the evidence?
Well, off the top of my head, Acts 1:12-14 comes to mind.
Then the apostles returned to Jerusalem from the hill called the Mount of Olives, a Sabbath day’s walk from the city. When they arrived, they went upstairs to the room where they were staying. Those present were Peter, John, James and Andrew; Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew; James son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot, and Judas son of James. They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: James 1.1 and 2.1.

Post by John2 »

My questions are not principally about texts which fail to mention James. My questions are about texts which mention him but do not connect his two most distinctive characteristics: he was a brother of Jesus, and he was a leader of the church. If a text openly connects James with only one of those characteristics, how can we know that its author knew of the other?
How can we know that the Letter of James or the Recognitions of Clement know Paul? Because what they do say sounds like the Paul we know from other sources.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: James 1.1 and 2.1.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

John2 wrote: Wed Mar 21, 2018 6:54 pm
My questions are not principally about texts which fail to mention James. My questions are about texts which mention him but do not connect his two most distinctive characteristics: he was a brother of Jesus, and he was a leader of the church. If a text openly connects James with only one of those characteristics, how can we know that its author knew of the other?
How can we know that the Letter of James or the Recognitions of Clement know Paul? Because what they do say sounds like the Paul we know from other sources.
Again, I am not sure how this answers my questions. I am not speaking of texts which fail to mention James or the brothers of Jesus. I am speaking of texts which mention him (or them) yet fail either to state that he is a believer or to state that he is a brother of Jesus. I do not see how sideways references to Paul are analogous to this.
John2 wrote: Wed Mar 21, 2018 6:51 pm
Okay, I know that you assume this (and more: you also argue it), but did the evangelists? If so, what is the evidence?
Well, off the top of my head, Acts 1:12-14 comes to mind.
Then the apostles returned to Jerusalem from the hill called the Mount of Olives, a Sabbath day’s walk from the city. When they arrived, they went upstairs to the room where they were staying. Those present were Peter, John, James and Andrew; Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew; James son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot, and Judas son of James. They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.
Yes, I listed Luke-Acts as an example of a text which affirms that the brothers of Jesus are believers However, neither Luke nor Acts states or implies that James was one of those brothers:
Ben C. Smith wrote: Wed Mar 21, 2018 5:21 pmSome texts (Matthew, Mark, John) seem almost deliberate in leaving the reader with the impression that the brothers of Jesus did not believe in him; others (Luke, Acts, James, Jude) either insist or imply that James was a believer, but never identify him as a brother of Jesus.
Did Luke know that James was Jesus' brother? If so, how do we know this?
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: James 1.1 and 2.1.

Post by John2 »

Did Luke know that James was Jesus' brother? If so, how do we know this?
Because he seems to know Paul (or his letters) and Paul (in my view) knows that James is Jesus' (i.e., the "Lord's") brother. He also knows Mark (as does the Greek Matthew) and Mark says that one of Jesus' brother was named James.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
User avatar
Ken Olson
Posts: 1277
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 9:26 am

Re: James 1.1 and 2.1.

Post by Ken Olson »

Ben Smith wrote:
My thesis will be that the epistle originally lacked any reference at all to Jesus and that its author was not a Christian by my definition (see below), but was rather a putative member of the kind of sectarian Jewish group from which Christianity originally emerged.
James strikes me as a thoroughly Gentile document. It is true that there is a considerable overlap between Judaism and Christianity, particularly in this period, so many feature of Christianity were also features of Judaism and could be explained as such. But where in the Epistle of James are those peculiarly Jewish beliefs or practices that were not also believed or practiced by Gentile Christians?

It is true that the opening of the letter addresses the twelve tribes in the dispersion and some of taken this to mean that James is addressing Jews. But as Sophie Laws observes, there hadn’t been twelve tribes since the Assyrian destruction of the northern kingdom in 721 BCE and Christians considered themselves the true or spiritual Israel. 1 Peter is similarly addressed to “the exiles of the dispersion.”

There is nothing in the letter about circumcision, dietary requirements, Sabbath keeping or observing holidays. There is no concern about the temple, sacrifice, or Jerusalem, nor with the land promised to the patriarchs and Moses. Why does the lack of (developed) Christian theology merit more attention than the lack of Jewish beliefs and practices?

James 2.21 does refer to Abraham as “our father,” but this had been spiritualized by Paul in Galatians 3, and there is no further concern about genetic descent. There is no concern about the lineage of the priesthood, nor, for that matter, with the priesthood at all.

The “royal law” in 2.8 is “love your neighbor as yourself.” That, and the rest of the laws discussed are moral laws, there seems to be no concern about ritual and purity laws.

The issue James wants to dispute in 2.14 is whether one can be saved by faith alone apart from works. The people holding that position do sound like they hold a particular interpretation of Paul. But if James is a Jewish sectarian, why is that paramount among the disputes he needs to address? Isn’t he concerned with whether one should build a fence around the law or what renders vessels impure or who can serve as high priest or whether those who have nocturnal emissions ought to be punished? Why is the faith alone issue the only one that needs to be addressed in James’ community?

Do the people James addresses have to separate from others, either Gentiles or Jews, who don’t practice correctly? And what about the sick in 4.13? Do any of their illnesses render them ritually impure so that they can’t partake in the religious activities in their community? And should we take it simply as understood that if they are healed they are also cleansed?

What kind of first century sectarian Jewish group is so thoroughly unconcerned with the ritual or purity aspects of Judaism, or, if this is a function of genre, what kind of Jewish literature do you think James resembles?
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: James 1.1 and 2.1.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

John2 wrote: Wed Mar 21, 2018 7:15 pm
Did Luke know that James was Jesus' brother? If so, how do we know this?
Because he seems to know Paul (or his letters) and Paul (in my view) knows that James is Jesus' (i.e., the "Lord's") brother. He also knows Mark (as does the Greek Matthew) and Mark says that one of Jesus' brother was named James.
Okay, this is a decent answer. Thanks. We do not know directly from his own pen, but we know (or think we do) from which texts we suspect he knows.

Would you answer my question about Matthew and Mark in the same way? Is it that they know Paul, too? What about John?

A parallel question for you is whether you think that Mary the mother of James and Joses, in Mark 15.40, 47; 16.1, is Jesus' mother.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: James 1.1 and 2.1.

Post by John2 »

Ken wrote (and this is all I have time to respond to, internet time-wise):
What kind of first century sectarian Jewish group is so thoroughly unconcerned with the ritual or purity aspects of Judaism, or, if this is a function of genre, what kind of Jewish literature do you think James resembles?
Since the Letter of James is addressed to the Diaspora the rules of ritual cleanness do not apply to them. And I think James (and 1 Peter and Jude) resemble the Dead Sea Scrolls.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: James 1.1 and 2.1.

Post by John2 »

Ben wrote:
Would you answer my question about Matthew and Mark in the same way? Is it that they know Paul, too? What about John?

A parallel question for you is whether you think that Mary the mother of James and Joses, in Mark 15.40, 47; 16.1, is Jesus' mother.
I don't have time to respond to this adequately and will get back to you tomorrow. Thanks for the discussion. It's been awhile since we've had one like this.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: James 1.1 and 2.1.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

John2 wrote: Wed Mar 21, 2018 7:23 pm Ben wrote:
Would you answer my question about Matthew and Mark in the same way? Is it that they know Paul, too? What about John?

A parallel question for you is whether you think that Mary the mother of James and Joses, in Mark 15.40, 47; 16.1, is Jesus' mother.
I don't have time to respond to this adequately and will get back to you tomorrow. Thanks for the discussion. It's been awhile since we've had one like this.
Likewise. :)
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Post Reply