Logos and Law in the Letter of James The Law of Nature the Law of Moses and the Law of Freedom Supplements to Novum Testamentum

LOGOS AND LAW IN THE LETTER OF JAMES The Law of Nature, the Law of Moses, and the Law of Freedom... Dibelius, James: A Commentary on the Epistle of James 11th ed., rev.. Jackson-McCab

L O G O S A N D L A W IN T H E L E T T E R O F J A M E S

SUPPLEMENTS T O

NOVUM TESTAMENTUM

E D I T O R I A L B O A R D

O K BARRETT, Durham - P BORGEN, Trondheim

J K ELLIOTT, Leeds - H J DEJONGE, Leiden

LOGOS AND LAW

IN THE LETTER OF JAMES

The Law of Nature, the Law of Moses,

and the Law of Freedom

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Jackson-McCabe, Matt A

Logos and law in the letter o f James : the law o f nature, the law o f Moses,

and the law o f freedom / by Matt A Jackson-McCabe

p c m — (Supplements to N o v u m Testamentum, ISSN

0167-9732 ;v 100)

Revision o f the author's thesis—University o f Chicago, 1998

Includes bibliographical references (p.) and index

ISBN 9004119949 (cloth : alk paper)

1 Law (Theology)—Biblical teaching 2 Bible N T James—Criticism,

interpretation, etc I Title II Series

BS2785.6.L34 J33 2000

227'.9106—dc21 00-050733

C I P

Die Deutsche Bibliothek - CIP-Einheitsaufhahme

Jackson-McCabe, Matt A.:

Logos and law in the letter o f James : the law o f nature, the law o f

Moses, and the law o f freedom / by Matt A Jackson-McCabe - Leiden ;

Boston; Koln : Brill, 2000

(Supplements to Novum testamentum ; Vol 100)

Zugl : Chicago, Univ., Diss., 1998

ISBN 90-04-11994-9

ISSN 0167-9732 ISBN 90 04 11994 9

© Copyright 2001 by Koninklijke Brill NV,Leiden, The Netherlands

All rights reserved No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in

a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic,

mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written

permission from the publisher

Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal

use is granted by Brill provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright

Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910

DanversMA 01923, USA

Fees are subject to change

For A J and Jeremy

I m p l a n t e d P r e c o n c e p t i o n s , H u m a n R e a s o n , a n d

Natural L a w 73

Natural L a w as ratio insita 75

Ratio insita as Xoyoq eiiymoq: T h e G r e e k S o u r c e

o f the De Legibus 81

Desire a n d the Gifts o f G o d in 4 : 1 - 6 201

Desire a n d the Gifts o f G o d in 1:13-18 2 0 6

A B B R E V I A T I O N S

A B A n c h o r Bible

Testament

B A G D W Bauer, W F Arndt, F W Gingrich, and F W Danker,

Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament

B D F F Blass, A D e b r u n n e r a n d R W Funk, A Greek Grammar

of the New Testament

B H T Beitrage zur historischen T h e o l o g i e

JJS Journal of Jewish Studies

J S N T S u p J o u r n a l for the Study o f the N e w Testament, S u p p l e m e n t

Series

K E K N T Kritisch-Exegetischer K o m m e n t a r iiber das N e u e Testament

L C L L o e b Classical Library

LSJ Liddell-Scott-Jones, Greek-English Lexicon

OTP J H Charlesworth (ed.), The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha

P V T G Pseudepigrapha Veteris Testamenti g r a e c e

SVF H v o n A r n i m (ed.), Stoicorum veterum Fragmenta

S V T P Studia in Veteris Testamenti p s e u d e p i g r a p h a

the New Testament

T U T e x t e u n d U n t e r s u c h u n g e n

Theologische ^eitschrift

ABBREVIATIONS xiii

W B C W o r d Biblical C o m m e n t a r y

W U N T Wissenschafdiche Untersuchungen z u m N e u e n T e s t m a m e n t

Concerning References to the Ancient Sources

W h e r e p o s s i b l e , a b b r e v i a t i o n s for ancient literature g i v e n in the Society o f Biblical Literature H a n d b o o k have b e e n followed F o r other

ancient works, the abbreviations list o f TDKT has b e e n used as a guide, though s o m e have b e e n slightly modified References to SVF are

to v o l u m e a n d entry n u m b e r unless explicitly identified otherwise

A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S

T h i s study is a revised version o f a dissertation submitted to the

D e p a r t m e n t o f N e w T e s t a m e n t a n d Early Christian Literature at the University o f C h i c a g o in D e c e m b e r , 1998 Its publication gives m e

an o p p o r t u n i t y to express, o n c e again, m y gratitude to m y teachers

H a n s D i e t e r Betz, A d e l a Y a r b r o Collins, Arthur J D r o g e , J o h n J Collins, a n d the late Arthur W H Adkins have p r o v i d e d n o t o n l y invaluable g u i d a n c e a n d e n c o u r a g e m e n t , but m o d e l s o f e x c e l l e n c e

in scholarship that I c a n o n l y h o p e to have a p p r o x i m a t e d in these pages

I w o u l d also like to thank D a v i d M o e s s n e r and the Editorial B o a r d

o f Supplements to Novum Testamentum for publishing this study I a m

especially grateful for the very insightful criticisms a n d suggestions

o f their a n o n y m o u s reviewers I h a v e f o l l o w e d t h e m w h e r e v e r p o s ­ sible, a n d the result is a substantially i m p r o v e d manuscript M a n y thanks are also d u e to Z e b a C r o o k , w h o p r o o f r e a d the entire m a n ­ uscript and, with the help o f N i c h o l a s Jesson a n d K e l l y Q u i n n , c o m ­ piled the indices T h e i r help was m a d e possible b y a g e n e r o u s grant

f r o m the Niagara University R e s e a r c h C o u n c i l , for w h i c h I a m m o s t grateful It goes without saying, o f course, that all remaining p r o b ­ lems are m y o w n responsibility

Finally, a n d always, I w o u l d like to thank A J for her patience

a n d constant e n c o u r a g e m e n t , a n d J e r e m y for giving his d a d d y per­ spective o n the w h o l e project T h e d e d i c a t i o n o f this study to t h e m

is a small s y m b o l o f their important role in its c o m p l e t i o n

I N T R O D U C T I O N

T h e Letter o f J a m e s ranks a m o n g the m o s t enigmatic w o r k s o f early Christian literature O n e searches critical scholarship in vain for any consensus o n fundamental questions regarding its p l a c e in e m e r g i n g Christianity R o u g h l y e q u a l n u m b e r s o f scholars argue that it r e p ­resents an authentic w o r k o f J a m e s , the b r o t h e r o f Jesus, as argue that it is p s e u d o n y m o u s ;1 that it w a s written in Palestine, as that it was written f r o m the diaspora; that it is t o b e i n c l u d e d a m o n g the earliest w o r k s o f the N e w T e s t a m e n t , as that it is a m o n g the latest

S o m e , m o r e o v e r , have a r g u e d that the Letter o f J a m e s has n o p l a c e

in early Christianity; that it was originally a Jewish w o r k o n l y

sub-s e q u e n d y "chrisub-stianized" b y the insub-sertion o f referencesub-s to Jesub-susub-s Chrisub-st,

w h o is in fact explicitly m e n t i o n e d o n l y twice (Jas 1:1; 2:1)

A s there is n o certain attestation o f J a m e s p r i o r to the third c e n ­tury,2 the historian is d e p e n d e n t a b o v e all o n e v i d e n c e internal t o the w o r k itself for locating it within early J u d a i s m o r Christianity

T h e e v i d e n c e , h o w e v e r , is frustratingly scanty T h e address o f the letter to "the twelve tribes w h o are in the d i a s p o r a " has suggested

to s o m e that it was c o m p o s e d in J e r u s a l e m , a n d thus n o later than

the m i d - 6 0 ' s C E H o w e v e r , the possibility that a p s e u d o n y m o u s

a u t h o r has assumed the guise o f J a m e s o f Jerusalem, a n d the fact that Jas 1:1 must in a n y case b e u n d e r s t o o d as a highly s y m b o l i c address,3 renders this supposition m o s t uncertain O t h e r elements o f the letter w h i c h have often b e e n taken as indications o f its p r o v e n a n c e , such as the author's g o o d G r e e k d i c t i o n o r the reference to the early

a n d late rains in Jas 5:7, must b e c o n s i d e r e d equally t e n u o u s 4

1 O v e r the history o f the discussion, one also finds, though less frequently, sugges­tions that the author is James the son o f Zebedee, or some otherwise unknown James

2 For references see M Dibelius, James: A Commentary on the Epistle of James (11th ed.,

rev H Greeven; Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988) 5 1 - 5 2 All references to Dibelius's commentary in the present work cite this edition, unless otherwise noted Throughout this study, I will refer to the letter and its author as "James." T h e latter is done only for the sake o f convenience and is not intended to convey my advocacy o f any particular theory o f authorship

3 See M A Jackson-McCabe, " A Letter to the Twelve Tribes in the Diaspora:

Wisdom and 'Apocalyptic' Eschatology in the Letter of James," SBLSP 35 (1996) 510-15

4 For a recent survey o f the various views regarding James's provenance see P H

S o m e w h a t m o r e p r o m i s i n g are indications o f the rhetorical situa­tion e n v i s i o n e d in the letter O f particular i m p o r t a n c e in this regard

is J a m e s ' s relation t o Paul T h i s issue, h o w e v e r , is quite c o n t r o v e r ­sial in its o w n right Interpreters argue variously that J a m e s ' s cri­tique o f the n o t i o n o f "faith w i t h o u t w o r k s " is a p o l e m i c against Paul himself; that it is a c o r r e c t i o n o f a " m i s u n d e r s t o o d " (by J a m e s )

o r " m i s u s e d " (by others) pauline idea; o r that it has n o c o n n e c t i o n

t o particularly pauline ideas at all R e s o l u t i o n o f this controversial

p l a c e within (or without) e m e r g i n g Christianity o n this basis is s o m e

b r o a d reconstruction o f the origins a n d d e v e l o p m e n t o f early Christian

t h o u g h t m o r e generally M o s t often in the history o f scholarship, such reconstructions have b e e n i m a g i n e d o n an essentialist p a r a d i g m Luther's w e l l - k n o w n assessment o f the Letter o f J a m e s a n d its p l a c e

in early Christianity is quite instructive in this respect J a m e s , a c c o r d ­ing to Luther, "is flatly against St Paul a n d all the rest o f Scripture

in ascribing justification to w o r k s " M o r e o v e r , t h o u g h its " p u r p o s e

is to teach Christians,"

in all this long teaching it does not once mention the Passion, the res­urrection, or the Spirit o f Christ He names Christ several times; how­ever he teaches nothing about him, but only speaks o f general faith

in G o d All the genuine sacred books agree in this, that all o f them

preach and inculcate [treiben] Christ But this James does nothing

more than drive to the law and to its works.5

I n short, the Letter o f J a m e s "has n o t h i n g o f the nature o f the gospel

a b o u t it."6 L u t h e r ultimately c o n c l u d e d , therefore, that J a m e s "is n o t the w o r k o f any a p o s t l e "7 I n d e e d , it is r e p o r t e d that o n at least o n e

o c c a s i o n L u t h e r anticipated the later critical theories o f the n o n Christian authorship o f the letter b y suggesting "that s o m e J e w w r o t e

-it w h o p r o b a b l y h e a r d a b o u t Christian p e o p l e but n e v e r e n c o u n ­tered a n y "

5 E T Bachman, ed., Luther's Works (Philadelphia: Muhlenberg, 1967) 35 396

INTRODUCTION 3

Since he heard that Christians place great weight on faith in Christ,

he thought, "Wait a moment! I'll oppose them and urge works alone." This he did He wrote not a word about the suffering and resurrec­tion o f Christ, although this is what all the aposties preached about.8

A s e m e r g e s quite clearly f r o m these remarks, Luther's evaluation o f

J a m e s a n d its p l a c e in early Christianity was d e t e r m i n e d in large

m e a s u r e b y t w o related assumptions: first, there was s o m e essential message, o r " g o s p e l , " that was c o m m o n to "all the apostles"; a n d

s e c o n d , this essential message underlies "all the genuine sacred b o o k s "

T h i s m o d e l for i m a g i n i n g Christian origins is at least as o l d as c o m ­

p e t i n g Christian claims o f originary o r t h o d o x y o v e r against diver­gent, d e c a d e n t heresy A s a h e r m e n e u t i c a l a p p r o a c h t o the N e w

T e s t a m e n t c a n o n , o n e sees a critical step in this direction already

in Irenaeus's v i e w that the " S o n o f G o d , " t h r o u g h M a t t h e w , M a r k ,

r e g a r d e d the c a n o n as irrelevant for the interpretation o f individual

d o c u m e n t s , "1 3 the influence o f this long-standing p a r a d i g m o n the

m o d e r n critical study o f Christian origins a n d the N e w T e s t a m e n t

8 This suggestion was reportedly made in the Summer or Fall o f 1542; see Luther's

Works 54 424

the titles "Gospel according t o " by H Y Gamble [The New Testament Canon: Its

Making and Meaning [Guides to Biblical Scholarship, N T Series; Philadelphia: Fortress,

1985] 35; cf 76)

1 0 See Gamble, New Testament Canon, 7 3 - 8 2

1 1 T h e appropriateness o f this model for the theologian is another matter, but one that need not be addressed for the purposes o f the present study

1 2 O n the problem o f using an essentialist (monothetic) paradigm for the classi­fication of historical phenomena, see the very important essay o f J Z Smith, "Fences

and Neighbors: Some Contours o f Early Judaism," Imagining Religion: From Babylon

to Jonestown (Chicago and London: University o f Chicago Press, 1982) 1-18 T h e

phrase "neither a theoretical basis nor an empirical warrant" is taken from p 4

The New Testament Canon, 80

should n o t b e underestimated In fact, t h o u g h perhaps n o t as o v e r d y

so, such an a p p r o a c h continues to i n f o r m critical scholarship o n the Letter o f J a m e s

T h i s is n o w h e r e m o r e evident than in the interpretation o f "the

i m p l a n t e d logos" (6 ejLtcpuxoq Xoyoq) w h i c h , a c c o r d i n g to the a u t h o r

o f J a m e s , "is able to save y o u r souls." " T h a t the gospel, if o b e y e d ,

is able to save a person's self [cf \|/u%f|]," writes o n e interpreter o f Jas 1:21, "is certainly a truism o f the N [ e w ] T f e s t a m e n t ] "1 4 T h i s assumption regarding the centrality o f "the g o s p e l " in early Christian

or, in this c o m m e n t a t o r ' s terms, " N e w T e s t a m e n t " soteriology m a n ­ ifests itself n o less definitively, if m o r e subtly, in the c o m p a r i s o n s

w h i c h various interpreters have formulated to illuminate the m e a n ­

ing o f James's "implanted logos'."15 A r n o l d M e y e r a n d M - E Boismard,

w h o argued for the non-Christian origin o f J a m e s as a w h o l e (so

M e y e r ) o r at least o f Jas 1:17-21 (so B o i s m a r d ) , a d d u c e d passages,

respectively, f r o m C i c e r o ' s De Legibus a n d the Apostolic Constitutions in support o f the thesis that the association o f " i m p l a n t e d logos" with a

perfect l a w in J a m e s results f r o m a d e p e n d e n c e o n the Stoic e q u a ­ tion o f h u m a n reason with natural law W i t h the rejection o f these scholars' m o r e general views regarding the non-Christian origin o f

J a m e s o r o f this passage, h o w e v e r , has c o m e a (usually tacit) rejec­

tion o f their interpretation o f its logos Regardless o f their views regard­ ing the p h i l o s o p h i c a l origin o f this expression, those scholars w h o do

identify J a m e s as a Christian w o r k have generally i g n o r e d the rele­

vant passages f r o m C i c e r o o r the Apostolic Constitutions, a n d e m p h a ­

sized, rather, the similarities b e t w e e n the language used in c o n n e c t i o n

with the logos in J a m e s a n d the treatment o f "the G o s p e l " elsewhere

in the N e w T e s t a m e n t T h u s , for e x a m p l e , M a r t i n Dibelius, w h o

r e a s o n e d f r o m J a m e s ' s description o f the " i m p l a n t e d logos" as that

" w h i c h is able to save y o u r souls" that, regardless o f the expression's

p h i l o s o p h i c a l p r o v e n a n c e , J a m e s ' s logos must b e interpreted as "the 'saving' word—hence, the gospel"1 ** I f J a m e s is a Christian w o r k , it is

evidendy reasoned, then the logos which, according to its author, "saves"

must b e that w h i c h is the unique possession o f Christians, the essence

o f Christianity; in a w o r d , "the G o s p e l " S u c h reasoning finds

par-1 4 P H Davids, The Epistle of James: A Commentary on the Greek Text ( N I G T C ;

Grand Rapids: Eerdman's, 1982) 95

1 5 For what follows, see the detailed discussion below in Chapter O n e

INTRODUCTION 5

ticularly vivid expression in M a r t i n K l e i n ' s recent interpretation o f

the Xoyoq aXrfieiaq o f Jas 1:18 " M i t B e z u g a u f G o t t , " K l e i n writes,

sind es vor allem zwei 'Worte', die so bezeichnet werden konnen: die

T o r a und die christliche Verkundigung Da es sich nun beim Jahobusbrief

um ein christliches Schreiben handelt, wird auch mit dem 'Wort der Wahrheit' in

O n e suspects that the "riddle o f J a m e s , " w h i c h has b e c o m e almost

p r o v e r b i a l since the publication o f M e y e r ' s Das Ratsel des Jacobusbriefes,

results as m u c h f r o m the i n a d e q u a c y o f the interpretive p a r a d i g m s

b r o u g h t to the w o r k as f r o m the ambiguities in the text itself; that

it is a c o n s e q u e n c e , particularly, o f treating the c a t e g o r y "Christian"

as t h o u g h it c o n n o t e d s o m e essential a n d static sine qua non W h a t e v e r

the case, it is the g u i d i n g assumption o f this study that neither the simple classification o f the Letter o f J a m e s as "Christian" n o r its

p r e s e n c e in the N e w T e s t a m e n t c a n o n p r o v i d e a sufficient basis o n

w h i c h t o formulate c o n c l u s i o n s regarding its understanding o f w h a t constitutes the " w o r d o f truth" o r the m e a n s for "salvation." In fact, while I d o classify J a m e s as a Christian w o r k , I will argue that it is

precisely c o m p a r i s o n with C i c e r o ' s De Legibus, the Apostolic Constitutions^

a n d o t h e r works w h o s e authors d r a w o n the Stoic t h e o r y o f natural

law, w h i c h best illuminates its correlation o f 6 euxpuxoq Xoyoq with a

law that is b o t h " p e r f e c t " a n d " o f f r e e d o m " T h e fabric o f J a m e s ' s

soteriological t h o u g h t has b e e n w o v e n f r o m Jewish, Christian and

G r e e k p h i l o s o p h i c a l discourse T h e d e m o n s t r a t i o n o f this c l a i m , the elucidation o f its significance for understanding the religious t h o u g h t

o f the Letter o f J a m e s m o r e b r o a d l y , a n d its implications for the his­torian's attempt to l o c a t e this w o r k within the early Christian m o v e ­

m e n t , will b e taken u p in the pages w h i c h follow

1 7 Martin Klein, "Ein vollkommenes Werk": Vollkommenheit, Gesetz und Gericht als the­

ologische Themen des Jakobusbriefes ( B W A N T 139; Stuttgart, etc.: Kohlhammer, 1995)

131, emphasis mine Klein considers the usual description o f this "proclamation"

as "the gospel" to be problematic inasmuch as the latter term most often refers specifically to Jesus's death and resurrection, which are scarcely mentioned in James

(ibid) Note at the same time, however, his comparison o f James's "law o f free­

dom"—precisely inasmuch as it is "identical" with the Xoyoq aXrfieiaq—with Pauline

concepts: "Es [sc the 'law o f freedom'] umgreift also auch die Funktionen, die bei Paulus das Evangelium v o n Jesus Christus und die G a b e des heiligen Geistes

innehaben" (ibid., 144)

C H A P T E R O N E

I M P L A N T E D LOGOS I N T H E I N T E R P R E T A T I O N

O F J A M E S

A m o n g the earliest extant interpretations o f "the i m p l a n t e d logos"

(6 euxpuToq Xoyoq) d e s c r i b e d in the Letter o f J a m e s as that " w h i c h is

able to save y o u r souls" (Jas 1:21) is that o f an a n o n y m o u s G r e e k

e x e g e t e w h o s e e x p l a n a t i o n is p r e s e r v e d , w i t h s o m e m i n o r varia­tions, in the G r e e k c o m m e n t a r i e s attributed to O e c u m e n i u s a n d

T h e o p h y l a c t u s 1 T h e i m p l a n t e d logos, a c c o r d i n g to this interpreter, is

h u m a n reason: it is that w h i c h makes us "rational" (XoyiKoi) It is associated, m o r e o v e r , particularly with the general h u m a n ability to

distinguish "the better a n d the w o r s e " (xou feXxiovoq ral xou %£(povo<;).2

A quite similar interpretation, t h o u g h o n e at least n o t o b v i o u s l y

d e p e n d e n t u p o n that o f O e c u m e n i u s a n d T h e o p h y l a c t u s , is f o u n d

in the c o m m e n t a r y o f the 12th century Syriac exegete D i o n y s i u s b a r Salibi H e t o o e x p l a i n e d this phrase with reference to the h u m a n ability, " i m p l a n t e d " in o u r nature b y G o d , to m a k e ethical distinc­

tions: in natura enim inseruit Deus, ut amet bona et odio habeat mala 3 In

addition, Dionysius identified the i m p l a n t e d logos itself as "natural

l a w " {legem naturalem); the "perfect l a w o f f r e e d o m " o f Jas 1:25 is thus

1 It is difficult to date this interpretation in any precise way T h e Oecumenius

in question was bishop o f Thessaly in the 1 Oth century, and Theophylactus was an 11th century exegete; but M Dibelius, at least, expresses doubts regarding these attributions, and dates the commentaries (or at least their contents) to "the Ancient

Church," i.e., prior to the Middle Ages (James, 262) T h e accuracy o f these attri­

butions, in any case, matters littie for our purposes It is most doubtful that the interpretation o f Jas 1:21 which concerns us here was the original contribution o f either one, as both seem to have been above all collectors o f prior comments For the sake o f convenience I will refer to the compilers o f these commentaries simply

as Oecumenius and Theophylactus

2 Oecumenius: M P G 119 468; Theophylactus: M P G 125 1145

3 I Sedlacek, Dionysius bar Salibi in Apocalypsim, Actus et Epistulas Catholicas ( C S C O ,

Scriptores Syri 2 / 1 0 1 ; R o m e : de Luigi, 1910) 91; throughout this study I depend

on Sedlacek's Latin translation o f Dionysius's Syriac That the natura in question is

in fact human nature is clear from the prior paraphrase o f 1:21, excipite verbum tum naturae nostrae (ibid., 9 I f ) , as well as from his c o m m e n t on 1:25, quoted imme­

insi-a " l insi-a w w h i c h G o d f r o m the b e g i n n i n g p l insi-a c e d in h u m insi-a n n insi-a t u r e "

{legem quam Deus ab initio posuit naturae humanae)*

W h i l e it has generally b e e n agreed b y critical scholars that the author

o f J a m e s d o e s e q u a t e the i m p l a n t e d logos with the "perfect l a w o f

f r e e d o m , " a n d t h o u g h it has often b e e n n o t e d that his association

o f l a w a n d f r e e d o m finds p r e c e d e n t s particularly in the S t o i c s o u r c e s ,

the interpretation o f J a m e s ' s logos in light o f S t o i c c o n c e p t s o f h u m a n

r e a s o n a n d natural l a w as f o u n d in these a n c i e n t c o m m e n t a r i e s has

f o u n d f e w a d v o c a t e s 5 It has l o n g b e e n n o t e d that the t e r m euipuxo*;

d o e s n o t always c a r r y its usual c o n n o t a t i o n o f " i n n a t e " o r " i n b o r n " ;6

a n d the vast m a j o r i t y o f J a m e s ' s interpreters h a v e a r g u e d that the

c o n t e x t in w h i c h the t e r m is u s e d in this w o r k militates against r e a d ­

i n g it in this sense.7 T h i s , in turn, is t h o u g h t t o p r e c l u d e a n y sub­

stantive S t o i c influence o n J a m e s ' s use o f the p h r a s e euxpuToq Xoyoq

T h u s , w h e n m e n t i o n e d at all, the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f J a m e s ' s logos

offered in these a n c i e n t c o m m e n t a r i e s is v i e w e d as little m o r e than

an o d d relic o f past interpretation, a n d o n e that merits n o serious

c o n s i d e r a t i o n 8 M a r t i n D i b e l i u s , w h o s e interpretation o f this passage

4 Ibid

5 O n the use o f the term "natural law" in connection with Stoicism, see the opening remarks o f Chapter T w o O n the relation o f these early commentaries to the Stoic understanding o f human reason and natural law, see Chapter Three, under the heading "Early Interpretation o f James 1:21."

6 Note the analogous discussion o f the possibilities for translating this term b y those attempting to reconstruct Chrysippus's doctrine o f implanted preconceptions

the presence o f a cross reference for it, is not discussed in TDNT, which omits the promised entry o n the term cpuco; see TDJVT 2 537 T h e most extensive discussion

o f the term seems to be that o f H Heisen, Novae hypotheses interpretandae epistolae Jacobi

(Bremen: 1739), which is cited b y Hort, R o p e s and Adamson This work remains unavailable to m e

7 A notable exception is F J A Hort, The Epistle of St James: The Greek Text with Introduction, Commentary as far as Chapter IV, Verse 7, and Additional Notes ( L o n d o n :

MacMillan, 1909) 3 7 - 3 8 Hort argued that the author o f James would not have used the term euxpanoc;, the proper meaning o f which is "inborn" o r "congenital," to describe the "outward message o f the Gospel": "[h]e could never have used in that sense a w o r d which everyone w h o knew Greek would o f necessity understand in the opposite sense." A similar interpretation, though one argued more broadly from

the context o f James 1, is offered b y A T Cadoux, The Thought of St James (London:

Clarke & C o , 1944) 1 9 - 2 4 Neither author, however, emphasizes Stoic usage in particular T h o s e w h o argue for the Jewish authorship o f James have argued along similar lines; see o n this below

8 So J E Huther, Kritisch exegetisches Handbuch uber den Brief des Jakobus ( K E K N T ;

3d ed.; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1870) 84; cf the later edition o f the

M e y e r c o m m e n t a r y b y W Beyschlag, Der Brief des Jacobus ( K E K N T ; 6th ed.;

r e m a i n e d essentially u n c h a n g e d f r o m the p u b l i c a t i o n o f the first e d i ­tion o f his c o m m e n t a r y in 1921 to the final edition revised b y H e i n r i c h

G r e e v e n in 1 9 6 4 , formulates this p o s i t i o n with a d m i r a b l e c o n c i s i o n :

if euxp'OToq were to mean "innate, natural" here then in accordance with Stoic concepts one would have to think o f that portion o f the cosmic Reason which is innate in every human being.9 In fact, O e c ,

T h e o p h and Dionysius bar Salibi have interpreted it in just this way Yet it would hardly be said o f reason that it is able to save souls—

an expression which here quite clearly must be understood logically In addition, the transition to the theme "hearing and doing" [in Jas 1:22~25] precludes a reference to reason and demands

eschato-a reference to the word, indeed, the "seschato-aving" word—hence, the gospel.1 0

T h a t is t o say, w h i l e the Stoics w o u l d scarcely say that h u m a n rea­son c a n b e " h e a r d a n d d o n e "1 1 o r "save s o u l s , "1 2 such expressions are used o f "the G o s p e l " in the early Christian literature J a m e s ' s

dismissal b y F MuBner: "JUSTIN spricht v o n d e m ' d e m gesamten geschlecht eingepflantzten Logoskeim'; in der altkirchlichen Auslegung v o n Jak 1,21 wurde teilweise mit diesem Gedanken operiert, so v o n O K U M E N I U S , T H E O -

Menschen-P H Y L A C T und D I O N Y S I U S Dock daran denkt Jak sicher nicht" {Der Jakobusbrief [3d

ed.; H T K N T 1 3 / 1 ; Freiburg, etc.: Herder, 1975] 102 n 2, italics mine) Cf L T

Johnson, The Letter of James: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB

37a; N e w Y o r k , N Y : D o u b l e d a y , 1995) 2 0 2 : "Rather oddly, O e c u m e n i u s and Theophylact take it to mean the ability to discern between that which is better and that which is worse."

9 Dibelius refers at this point to A Bonhoffer, Epiktet und das Neue Testament

( R G W 10; GieBen: Topelmann, 1911) 97, o n which see immediately below

1 0 Dibeius, James, 113; cf the first edition o f this commentary, Der Brief des Jakobus ( K E K N T ; 7th ed.; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1921) 1 0 7 - 8 Cf the similar formulations o f the problem b y J B Adamson, The Epistle of James ( N I C N T ; Grand Rapids, M I : Eerdmans, 1976; repr 1984) 9 8 - 9 9 ; Davids, Epistle

of James, 95; R P Martin, James ( W B C 48; W a c o , T X : W o r d , 1988) 49; and most recently M Tsuji, Glaube zwischen Vollkommenheit und Verweltlichung Eine Untersuchung zur literarischen Gestalt und zur inhaltlichen Koharenz des Jakobusbriefes ( W U N T 2.93;

sis in this context b y Klein, w h o argues, in addition, that reading Jas 1:21 along

the lines o f Justin's adaptation o f the Stoic logos would make sense only "in eine Missionspredigt, aber nicht in die Gemeindeunterweisungen" (Ein vollkommenes Werk,

135) Justin and the author o f James, however, make quite different use o f this Stoic idea; cf the discussion o f Justin in Chapter Three with that o f James in Chapters

c o m m a n d to " r e c e i v e " the i m p l a n t e d logos is e v e n m o r e frequently

e m p h a s i z e d in this c o n n e c t i o n : such a c o m m a n d , it is argued, excludes

u n d e r s t a n d i n g this logos as s o m e t h i n g "innate"; a n d this is taken to

p r e c l u d e interpreting it a l o n g S t o i c l i n e s 1 3 M o r e o v e r , it has often

b e e n p o i n t e d o u t that the expression 8e%oum xov Xoyov ( c f Jas 1:21, 8e£aa0£ xov euxpuxov Xoyov) is f o u n d in a n u m b e r o f Christian w o r k s ,

typically with reference to "the G o s p e l "1 4 Finally, the reference in

Jas 1:18 to the fact that G o d " g a v e birth to us b y m e a n s o f a logos

o f truth (Xoyco dXriGeiaq)" has itself b e e n an i m p o r t a n t — a n d i n d e e d ,

for s o m e , d e c i s i v e — c o n s i d e r a t i o n in the interpretation o f Jas 1 : 2 1 :1 5

n o t o n l y is the p h r a s e A,6yo<; aXrfieiaq used in o t h e r Christian w o r k s

with explicit reference to "the G o s p e l " (cf C o l 1:5, E p h 1:13 a n d

2 T i m 2:15), b u t the verse as a w h o l e recalls the c o m m o n Christian

n o t i o n o f "re-birth" o r " n e w c r e a t i o n "1 6 In short, as A d o l f B o n h o f f e r

1 3 So Huther, Kritisch exegetisches Handbuch, 84; Adamson, Epistle of James, 98f, and esp idem, James: The Man and his Message (Grand Rapids, M I : Eerdmans, 1989) 397; Davids, Epistle of James, 95; Martin, James, 49 Cf further J B Mayor, The Epistle

of St James: The Greek Text with Introduction, Notes, Comments and Further Studies in the Epistle of St James (3d ed.; L o n d o n : MacMillan, 1913; repr Classical Commentary Library; Grand Rapids, M I : Zondervan, 1954) 68; Ropes, St James, 172; J Chaine, LEpitre de Saint Jacques (2d ed.; EBib; Paris: Gabalda, 1927) 29f; J Moffatt, The General Epistles: James, Peter and Judas ( M N T C ; London: H o d d e r and Stoughton, 1928) 25; J Marty, LEpitre de Jacques Etude critique (Paris: Alcan, 1935) 53; Johnson, Letter

of James, 202; P Perkins, First and Second Peter, James, and Jude (IBC; Louisville: J o h n

(4th ed; Die Heilige Schrift des Neuen Testamentes 9; Bonn: Hanstein, 1932) 2 4 - 2 5 ;

Chaine, LEpitre de Jacques, 30; MuBner, Der Jakobusbrief 102; J Cantinat, Les Epitres

de Saint Jacques et de Saint Jude (SB; Paris: Gabalda, 1973) 104; Adamson, Epistle of James, 99 and n 10; Johnson, Letter of James, 202 Dibelius rejected this particular

line o f argument: given his literary assessment o f James, he felt that "one cannot

rely upon such evidence from other sayings" (James, 113, n 30) H e in any event inter­ preted both the Xoyoq d^r|9e{a<; and the enqnnoq Xoyoc, with reference to "the gospel."

1 6 It is to b e noted, though, that the interpretation o f Jas 1:18 remains contro­

versial A variety o f authors doubt whether it refers to a new creation at all; see

F Spitta (Der Brief des Jakobus [Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1896) 4 5 - 4 7 ; Hort, The Epistle of St James, 3 1 - 3 5 ; G H Rendall, The Epistle of James and Judaic Christianity (Cambridge: At the University Press, 1927) 6 3 - 6 5 ; C - M Edsman,

"Schopferwille und Geburt Jac I 18 Eine Studie zur altchristlichen Kosmologie,"

%NW 38 (1939) 1 1 - 4 4 (though cf idem, "Schopfung und Wiedergeburt: Nochmals Jac 1:18," Spiritus et Veritas [Eutin: Ozolin, 1953] 43-55); L E Elliott-Binns, "James

11

p u t it in his Epiktet und das Neue Testament, t h o u g h the a p p e a r a n c e o f

the t e r m euxpuxcx; in Jas 1:21 m i g h t r e m i n d o n e o f the S t o i c sources,

it is used in J a m e s "in e i n e m g a n z ungriechischen u n d in e i n e m gegengesetzten Sinn als b e i d e n Stoikern." F o r " [ w ] a h r e n d er hier [sc f o r the S t o i c s ] g e r a d e die naturliche, a l l g e m e i n m e n s c h l i c h e geistige Ausstattung bedeutet, versteht J a k o b u s eine b e s t i m m t e , historisch in Jesus aufgetretene L e h r e , die ubernaturliche, geoffenbarte

ent-W a h r h e i t des E v a n g e l i u m s ! "1 7

J E W I S H COMPOSITION A N D S T O I C LOGOS

T h e r e h a v e b e e n t w o notable e x c e p t i o n s to this general rule o f dis­

allowing substantive Stoic influence o n James's c o n c e p t o f logos A r n o l d

M e y e r , in 1 9 3 0 , a n d M E B o i s m a r d , in 1 9 5 7 , e a c h a r g u e d that

J a m e s ' s reference to 6 e u x p u i o q Xoyoq is to b e u n d e r s t o o d in light o f

the e q u a t i o n o f h u m a n reason a n d natural l a w m a d e b y ancient

G r e e k p h i l o s o p h e r s It is interesting, a n d likely indicative o f the sta­tus o f the early c o m m e n t a r i e s in critical scholarship o n J a m e s , that neither a u t h o r cites O e c u m e n i u s , T h e o p h y l a c t u s , o r D i o n y s i u s b a r Salibi in this c o n t e x t In fact, there are n o indications that Bois­

m a r d was at all influenced b y the earlier w o r k o f M e y e r It is all the m o r e striking, then, that in b o t h cases, this interpretation o f

J a m e s ' s logos is a c c o m p a n i e d b y d o u b t s regarding the classification

o f J a m e s — o r at least o f a h y p o t h e s i z e d source b e h i n d Jas 1 : 1 7 - 2 1 —

as a Christian w o r k 1 8

the L a w , " Studia Evangelica II (ed F L Cross; T U 87; Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1964) 486; H Frankemolle, Der Brief des Jakobus (2 vols.; O T K N T 17; Giitersloh: Giitersloher; Wiirzburg: Echter Verlag, 1994) 1 2 9 7 - 3 0 5 ; Tsuji, Glaube, 6 8 - 6 9

17 Epiktet und das Neue Testament, 97 Bonhoffer referred particularly to the Stoic

doctrine o f implanted preconceptions (ejxtp'OTOi 7tpoA,f|\|/ei<;) in this connection Inter­estingly, when discussing in another context the controversial problem o f Chry-sippus's understanding o f this doctrine, Bonhoffer argued that the term e j i q w E o q

could only mean "inborn." See idem, Epictet und die Stoa: Untersuchungen zur stoischen Philosophie (Stuttgart: Enke 1890; repr Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt: Friedrich Frommann

Verlag [Gunther H o l z b o o g ] , 1968) 192f, and further Chapter T w o , under the head­ing " T h e Implanted Preconceptions and H u m a n Reason."

1 8 Spitta also argued that James's logos was innate in connection with his argu­

ment for the non-Christian origin o f James H e did not, however, emphasize Stoic

influence in this connection See Der Brief des Jakobus, 4 9 - 5 2 Different again is

L Massebieau, "L'Epitre de Jacques: est-elle l'oeuvre d'un Chretien?" RHR 32 (1895)

2 4 9 - 8 3 While arguing that James was not originally a Christian composition,

Massebieau nonetheless interpreted the "implanting" o f logos in James as part o f a

In line with his b r o a d e r thesis that a J e w i s h Grundschrift underlies

o u r p r e s e n t Letter o f J a m e s , M e y e r a r g u e d that the " l a w o f free­

d o m " m e n t i o n e d in Jas 1:25 and 2:12 is n o n e other than "das A T l i c h e

G e s e t z "1 9 P o i n t i n g out that J a m e s ' s association o f l a w a n d "free­

d o m , " as well as its d e s c r i p t i o n as " p e r f e c t " a n d " r o y a l , " c o u l d b e

u n d e r s t o o d apart f r o m any peculiarly Christian ideas simply in terms

o f a m e r g e r o f J e w i s h a n d G r e e k p h i l o s o p h i c a l t h o u g h t ,2 0 M e y e r

a r g u e d that the e q u a t i o n o f the "law o f f r e e d o m " w i t h i m p l a n t e d

logos in J a m e s 1 is also to b e u n d e r s t o o d in this light G r e e k p h i l o s o ­

phers, and particularly the Stoics, he observed, h a d l o n g since identified true l a w w i t h 6p66<; Aoyoq, "right r e a s o n " C i c e r o , in fact, h a d defined

l a w as ratio summa insita in natura, a n d "therefore Aoyoq euxpuxo*;."21

C i t i n g 4 Maccabees a n d the writings o f P h i l o , he p o i n t e d out that it

was n o t u n c o m m o n for J e w i s h authors o f this p e r i o d to v i e w the

T o r a h in light o f the S t o i c t h e o r y o f law S u c h authors, he a r g u e d ,

i m a g i n e d that it was the J e w i s h p e o p l e in particular w h o h a d b e e n entrusted with natural l a w 2 2 In a c o n t e x t such as this, then, a p h i l o -

1 9 A Meyer, Das Ratsel des Jacobusbriefes ( B Z N W 10; GieBen: Topelmann, 1930)

156; cf 1 4 9 - 5 0 M e y e r apparently follows Dibelius's analysis o f Jas 2 : 8 - 1 2 , which

is the key passage for identifying James's law According to Dibelius, James under­stands the love c o m m a n d not as "the chief c o m m a n d m e n t , " but as "one c o m ­

mandment alongside others" (Der Brief des Jakobus [1921] 133; James, 142); cf Ratsel,

1 4 9 - 5 0 Dibelius himself, however, had argued that James's use o f the phrase "law

of freedom" was "a clear indication that in his ritual and moral injunctions the author does not have the Mosaic Law in mind at all" (James, 18; Der Brief des Jakobus [1921] 16), but rather "the gospel" conceived as a new Christian law (James, 119; Der Brief des Jakobus [1921] 112-13) M e y e r (Ratsel, 151f n 7), though, rightiy pointed

out the tension between Dibelius's view that the love c o m m a n d in James is "one

c o m m a n d alongside others" rather than "the chief commandment," and his subse­quent remark that James's law "is a Christian law, and consequently it is not obeyed

by being ever so careful in tiny matters, but rather by fulfilling the great c o m ­

mandment o f love"; cf Dibelius, James, 142 with 144 (= Der Brief des Jakobus [1921]

133 and 135) T h e problem o f the relationship o f the "law o f freedom" to the

T o r a h on the one hand, and to the love c o m m a n d on the other, is treated in detail

in Chapter Four

20 Ratsel, 1 5 0 - 5 5

21 Ibid., 156, with reference to Cicero, De Leg 1.18 M e y e r also refers in this con­

nection to Justin's use o f the term euxpvTCx; to describe the "seed" o f reason (Xoyoq)

which is implanted in all human beings, but does not make the significance o f the

passage for the interpretation o f James explicit (Ratsel, 156 n 7)

2 2 Cf Meyer, Ratsel, 158: "Gott hat in diesen Menschen [sc Israel] eine andere

vollkommene Natur erzeugt, daB sie recht leben und handeln konnen—wurde Philo sagen." It is, however, most doubtful that Philo thought the Jewish people were o f

a different "nature" than others; for Philo, rather, Israel's distinction resides pri­marily in the sages o f its history, and in the fact that Moses—the epitome o f the

s o p h i c a l t e r m like Euxpuxoc; A,6yo<; w o u l d h a v e taken o n the m o r e spe­

c i a l i z e d sense o f the J e w i s h n a t i o n a l l a w 2 3 Jas 1:18, therefore, w h e r e

it is said that G o d " g a v e birth to us b y m e a n s o f a logos o f truth,"

is t o b e interpreted m e t a p h o r i c a l l y with reference t o the fact that

G o d , b y g i v i n g Israel this law, b e s t o w e d u p o n t h e m a " u n i q u e dis­

t i n c t i o n b e f o r e all his o t h e r creatures": " A l l o t h e r creatures are chil­

d r e n o f G o d t h r o u g h the c r e a t i o n ; Israel is the first fruits t h r o u g h the l a w "2 4

A little m o r e than a q u a r t e r o f a c e n t u r y later, a n d a p p a r e n t l y

i n d e p e n d e n t l y o f M e y e r , an a n a l o g o u s line o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n w a s

a d v a n c e d b y M - E B o i s m a r d 2 5 A r g u i n g that the o f t - n o t e d similari­ties b e t w e e n 1 Peter a n d the Letter o f J a m e s are t o b e e x p l a i n e d in terms o f their c o m m o n d e p e n d e n c e o n an a n c i e n t baptismal l i t u r g y ,2 6

sage—left his people a written expression o f natural law See further on Philo's understanding o f natural law below, Chapter Three

2 3 Ibid., 157

2 4 See Ratsel 157-59: "Es handelt sich also auch 1.18 u m eine Zeugung durch

das Gesetz; das ist ein bildlicher Ausdriick dafur, daB Gott den zwolf Stammen durch das Gesetz einen einzigartigen V o r z u g vor all seinen andern Geschopfen geschenkt h a t Alle anderen Geschopfe sind Kinder Gottes durch die Schopfung, Israel ist Erstling durch das Gesetz."

2 5 M.-E Boismard, "Une liturgie baptismale dans la Prima Petri: II.—Son Influence

sur l'Epitre de Jacques," RB 64 (1957) 161-83 Boismard does not cite Meyer's study, and in fact seems entirely unaware o f the relevant passage from Cicero's De Legibus

2 6 T h e "liturgy" upon which these—and several other N T works—are under­stood b y Boismard to depend is not so much a written text as "un certain scheme

c o m m u n " which was "sujet a de nombreuses variations O n ne peut done ler d'une liturgie baptismale chretienne primitive, mais d'un certain n o m b r e de

par-formes paralleles de cette liturgie, qui auront influence / Petr., Jac Paul o u Jean"

("Une liturgie," 180) Boismard's account o f the relationship between 1 Peter and James is in fact quite complex H e argues, for example, that 1 Pet 1:6-9 (and R o m 5:3-5) depends "more or less directly" on Jas 1:12—which is to say, upon the source which is supposed to underlie this verse—while Jas 1:2-4, on the other hand, depends o n 1 Pet 1:6-7 (and R o m 5:3-5); see "Une liturgie," 1 6 2 - 6 7 This source analysis is in any case less than persuasive Boismard's literary understanding o f James

as a collection o f disparate and merely artificially linked materials, while not u n c o m ­

m o n , is highly questionable Regardless, his interest in establishing literary links between James and 1 Peter often leads him to overlook the argumentative struc­ture o f particular units o f the former; cf., e.g., his treatment o f Jas 1:19-20 ("Une liturgie," 170) with the analysis o f these verses presented below in Chapter Four

T h e several similarities between James and 1 Peter are indeed intriguing, but they admit o f a number o f possible explanations, none o f which, at least thus far, has been persuasively argued to the exclusion o f the others At any rate, it is more the relation o f the thought o f these two works than their literary relationship that

is o f concern in the present study See further on the former issue below, Chapter

Four, under the heading "Implanted Logos in light o f the T o r a h and Judgment."

B o i s m a r d identified "the primitive ' c o r e ' " o f that p o r t i o n o f it sup­

p o s e d l y f o u n d in Jas 1:17—21 a n d 1 Pet 1:22—2:2 as a divine birth

" p a r l'effet d e la P a r o l e d e D i e u "2 7 N o n e t h e l e s s , B o i s m a r d felt that

an "essential t h e o l o g i c a l difference w h i c h separates 1 Peter f r o m

J a m e s " w a s e v i d e n t in these w o r k s ' d i v e r g e n t c o n c e p t i o n s o f this

" w o r d "2 8 W h i l e that o f 1 P e t e r is q u i t e c l e a r l y "la p r e d i c a t i o n

e v a n g e l i q u e , " in J a m e s it is the l a w — i n d e e d , the M o s a i c l a w rather than a n e w Christian o n e 2 9 N o t i n g "the p h i l o s o p h i c a l t o n e o f the entire f r a g m e n t " o f Jas 1 : 1 7 - 2 1 ,3 0 B o i s m a r d , like M e y e r , a r g u e d that

the association o f the l a w o f M o s e s with the i m p l a n t e d logos reflects

"the t h e m e s o f J e w i s h p r o p a g a n d a " w h i c h , in d e p e n d e n c e o n S t o i c

t h o u g h t , " e m p h a s i z e d the links b e t w e e n M o s a i c l a w a n d the l a w o f

h u m a n r e a s o n "

[TJhese were not two different laws, but one and the same law expressed

in two successive forms, in the form o f natural law first, the Xoyoc, xoq, then in the form o f Mosaic law, the Xoyoq ypanxoq 3]

euxpu-In s u p p o r t o f this v i e w , B o i s m a r d cited a passage f r o m the Apostolic

Constitutions w h e r e such a distinction b e t w e e n an euxpuxoc; a n d a ypambq

v6\ioq is in fact e v i d e n t :3 2

O Almighty G o d , eternal one,

Master o f the whole universe,

Creator and President o f everything,

27 Ibid., 168

28 Ibid, 172

29 Ibid., 1 7 0 - 7 1 Boismard's identification o f the law o f freedom as the Mosaic

law is based primarily o n his understanding o f Jas 2 : 8 - 1 1 H e does not, however, present a detailed analysis o f this passage, but apparently depends o n the exposi­

tion o f F Spitta; note the repeated references to the former in ibid., 171 Note that

Boismard suggests that Jas 2:1-13 also depends to some degree o n the primitive baptismal ritual; curiously, though, the question o f the "law o f freedom" [cf 1:25

and 2:12!] is not explicitly raised in this connection; see ibid., 175-77

3 0 Citing Jas 1:17, where the author refers to the unchangeableness o f G o d ; cf

Boismard's reference to the similar idea found in the Apostolic Constitutions, o n which

see below and esp note 33

3 1 Boismard, " U n e liturgie," 172: " c e n'etaient pas deux lois differentes, mais une seule et m e m e loi exprimee sous deux formes successives, sous forme de loi naturelle

d'abord, le Xoyoq e^moq, puis sous forme de Loi mosaique, le Xoyoq ypowrcoq."

3 2 Note that the e\iq>mo<; V6\LO<; o f the Apostolic Constitutions, though specifically as found in AC 8.12 (which Boismard does not mention), had already been correlated with Oecumenius's interpretation o f Jas 1:21 by Huther (Kritisch exegetisches Handbuch, 84), and echoed in a later edition o f the Meyer commentary by Beyschlag (Der Brief des Jacobus, 83) Both commentators, however, mentioned this passage only to dis­

3 3 AC 8.9.8 I cite the translation o f D R Darnell, "Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers,"

OTP 2.689 (Prayer 11), w h o however underlines the words "through Christ" as a

later Christian insertion; cf Boismard's French translation in "Une liturgie," 172

n 1 Boismard also cites in this connection AC 8.15.7ff, where G o d is described as

"the one w h o does not admit change; the one w h o by nature is unchangeable"

(trans Darnell; cf Jas 1:17), as well as 7.26.3, where it is said that G o d "implante

(KaxzymevGaq) la loi dans nos ames." Curiously, however, he does not refer to the

long prayer at 8.12.6-27, which gives the fullest account o f this law and its rela­

tion to the law o f Moses See further on these prayers below, Chapter Three

3 4 See immediately below, with note 36

3 5 " U n e liturgie," 172: "Dans Jac, il n'est pas question de renaissance; c'est le

peuple juif qui a ete enfante une fois pour toutes lorsque Dieu lui a donne la Loi,

cette Loi qui n'etait elle-meme que {'expression ecrite de la loi inscrite dans la

nature m e m e de l'homme Par la, le peuple juif etait bien les «premices des

crea-tures» de Dieu (1,18)." Note that on this interpretation, the Xoyoq aXrfieiaq must be

taken with reference to the written law given to the Jewish people in particular (the

vojioq ypanxoq) rather than to the e\i(pmoq Xoyoq which is given to all humanity

36 Ibid., 172 and n 1 There seems to b e a certain equivocation o n the question

o f the source, however, as he later describes it as "juive ou fortement judaisante"

("Une liturgie," 175) Cf his appraisal o f James itself: "c'est un ecrit

judeo-chre-tien, emane d'un auteur, ou d'un milieu de pensee, pour qui la Loi mosaique restait

the one who showed forth man as a (micro-)cosm o f

the cosmos through Christ,

and who gave an implanted and written law (vouov

e u x p m o v K O C I y p o u r c o v ) to him,

so that he might live lawfully as a rational being

(©<; tayiicov) , 3 3

Q u i t e unlike 1 Peter, therefore, w h e r e "it is a q u e s t i o n o f a rebirth

b y the W o r d o f G o d c o n t a i n e d in the a p o s t o l i c k e r y g m a , " in Jas

1:18 "it is n o t a q u e s t i o n o f r e b i r t h " at all M u c h like M e y e r , rather,

B o i s m a r d a r g u e d that for J a m e s (or at least J a m e s ' s s o u r c e )3 4

it is the Jewish people who have been born once and for all when

G o d gave them the law, that law which was itself only the written

expression o f the law inscribed in the very nature o f the human being

That way, the Jewish people were indeed the "first fruits o f the crea­

tures" o f G o d 3 5

Perhaps influenced b y his a c c e p t a n c e o f G o o d e n o u g h ' s t h e o r y regard­

ing the n o n - C h r i s t i a n J e w i s h o r i g i n o f the prayers f r o m the Apostolic

Constitutions, B o i s m a r d c o n c l u d e d that t h o u g h J a m e s itself is a J e w i s h

Christian w o r k , the s o u r c e w h i c h underlies Jas 1:17—21 is likely "a

p r e - C h r i s t i a n f o r m o f the b a p t i s m a l l i t u r g y "3 6

CHRISTIAN COMPOSITION AND LOGOS AS GOSPEL

T h e analyses o f J a m e s ' s " i m p l a n t e d logos" offered b y M e y e r a n d

B o i s m a r d h a v e h a d little discernible i m p a c t o n subsequent scholar­ship T h e vast majority o f J a m e s ' s interpreters h a v e rejected these scholars' respective theses regarding the n o n - C h r i s t i a n origin o f the letter as a w h o l e o r o f this passage in particular A n d this affirmation

o f the Christian origin o f J a m e s has resulted in a wholesale rejec­

tion o f their interpretation o f its logos T o b e sure, the earlier argu­

ments regarding the " u n - S t o i c " language used in c o n n e c t i o n with

J a m e s ' s logos are r e p e a t e d l y c i t e d H o w e v e r , w h a t B o i s m a r d a n d

M e y e r h a d , in effect, suggested, was a m o r e sophisticated m o d e l for

a p p r e h e n d i n g the m e a n i n g o f logos in J a m e s : a m o d e l that allows for

traditions o f diverse origins to b e simultaneously at w o r k in the text;

a m o d e l that allows for the possibility o f a creative fusion o f Jewish

a n d G r e e k p h i l o s o p h i c a l traditions O n e finds little o r n o t h i n g in the

w a y o f attempts to r e c k o n with this m o d e l b y subsequent scholars

w h o posit a Christian origin for J a m e s T h e possibility that an anal­

o g o u s fusion m i g h t b e at w o r k i f J a m e s is a Christian c o m p o s i t i o n has simply n o t b e e n c o n s i d e r e d C o n s e q u e n t l y , the relevant passages

f r o m C i c e r o a n d the Apostolic Constitutions a d d u c e d b y M e y e r a n d

B o i s m a r d — m u c h like the interpretations offered in the ancient c o m ­mentaries—are rarely e v e n m e n t i o n e d b y subsequent interpreters, let

a l o n e seriously e x a m i n e d as potentially relevant for clarifying J a m e s ' s

c o n c e p t o f logos 31

3 7 Works published subsequent to the appearance o f these studies that neglect to

mention the relevant passages from Cicero's De Legibus and (in the case o f those published after Boismard's study) the Apostolic Constitutions in connection with the interpretation o f Jas 1:21 include M Meinertz and W Vrede, Die katholischen Briefe, 25; Cadoux, The Thought of St James, 19-24; F Hauck, Die Briefe des Jakobus, Petrus,

Judas und Johannes (6th ed.; N T D 10; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1953)

12; E C Blackman, The Epistle of James: Introduction and Commentary (Torch Bible Commentaries; London: S C M , 1957) 6 2 - 6 4 ; L Simon, Une ethique de la Sagesse:

Commentaire de lEpitre de Jacques (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1961) 9 6 - 1 0 0 ; J Schneider, Die Brief des Jakobus, Petrus, Judas und Johannes: Die katholischen Briefe (9th ed.; N T D

10; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1961) 12; B Reicke, The Epistles of James,

Peter, and Jude: Introduction, Translation and Notes (AB 37; Garden City, N Y : Doubleday,

1964) 19-25; Dibelius, James, 112-14; E M Sidebottom, James, Jude and 2 Peter

(Century Bible, N e w Edition; Greenwood, S C : Attic, 1967) 3 4 - 3 5 ; W Schrage,

"Der Jakobusbrief," in H Balz and W Schrage, Die "Katholischen" Briefe: Die Briefe

des Jakobus, Petrus, Johannes und Judas (11th ed.; N T D 10; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck

& Ruprecht, 1973) 2 1 - 2 2 ; MuBner, Der Jakobusbrief, 9 8 - 1 0 3 ; Adamson, Epistle of

James, 8 1 - 8 2 , 9 8 - 1 0 0 ; idem, James: The Man and his Message, 3 9 7 - 9 9 , 4 1 1 - 1 5 ; Laws,

The Thesis of a Superficial Stoic Influence

A t m o s t , o n e finds in such studies the suggestion that the use o f the phrase euxpuioq Xoyoq in J a m e s represents an entirely superficial e m p l o y ­

m e n t o f p h i l o s o p h i c a l l a n g u a g e to c o u c h a patently Christian n o t i o n

D i b e l i u s , for e x a m p l e , w o n d e r e d a l o u d " w h e t h e r this usage e m p l o y e d

b y J a [ m e ] s is n o t s o m e w h a t i n f l u e n c e d b y p h i l o s o p h i c a l c o n c e p t s

Epistle of James, 8 1 - 8 5 ; Davids, Epistle of James, 95; Felder, " W i s d o m , Law and Social

C o n c e r n , " 7 2 - 7 4 ; W Popkes, Adressaten, Situation und Form des Jakobusbriefes (SBS

1 2 5 / 1 2 6 ; Stuttgart: Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1986) 1 3 6 - 5 6 , esp 1 4 6 - 5 1 ;

Martin, James, 49; Frankemolle, Der Brief des Jakobus, 1.329-35; Perkins, First and Second Peter, James, and Jude, 1 0 3 - 5 ; Johnson, The Letter of James, 202.; Tsuji, Glaube,

1 0 8 - 1 5

There are some minor exceptions Whereas in the first edition o f R Leconte's brief commentary on James, published before the appearance o f Boismard's essay,

the e|j,(pa)Toq Xoyoq was interpreted with reference to Jas 1:18 as "la Parole de Salut

qui a procure la regeneration du fidele," in the second edition, citing Boismard and

several passages from the Apostolic Constitutions, he comments "or pour le judaisme

hellenistique, la Loi contenue dans l'Ecriture passait pour etre inscrite dans la nature

m e m e de l ' h o m m e " T h e implications o f this revision for Leconte's understanding

o f James's logos are not altogether clear, however, as he continues to interpret Jas 1:18 with reference to a "new birth." Cf Les Epitres Catholiques de Saint Jacques, Saint Jude et Saint Pierre (Paris: Les Editions du Cerf, 1953) 30 and note d, with Les Epitres Catholiques (2d ed., 1961) 3 4 - 3 5 and note f

J Cantinat's Les Epitres de Saint Jacques et de Saint Jude similarly interacts explic­ itly with Boismard's interpretation o f James's logos Oddly, however, the Apostolic Constitutions (and Cicero's De Legibus) receive no mention; see Les Epitres, 9 5 - 9 7 and 102-106 Cf in this respect R Fabris, Legge delta Liberta in Giacomo (Supplementi all

RivistB 8; Brescia: Paideia, 1977), on which see below

R B W a r d cited Meyer's thesis (though not, explicitly, De Leg 1.18) in c o n n e c ­

tion with Dibelius's suggestion that James's phrase ejKp'O'cog Xoyoq may have been

influenced by Stoic language, but rejects the idea While citing Justin's similar phrase

as the "closest apparent parallel," and noting in addition AC 8.12.8, as well as pas­

sages from Procopius o f Gaza and Methodius (on the latter o f which see below, Chapter Three), W a r d dismisses their explanatory utility for James In fact, W a r d ultimately concludes that " n o satisfactory linguistic parallels are available" which clarify the meaning o f James's e n q r u x o c ; Xbyoq See " T h e C o m m u n a l C o n c e r n o f the

Epistle o f James" (Ph.D diss., Harvard University, 1966] 1 2 7 - 3 4 , as well as the

"Summary" at the beginning o f his study

Cicero, De Leg 1.18, is mentioned in connection with Jas 1:21 by Windisch (Die katholischen Briefe, 11), as well as by V o u g a (LEpitre de Saint Jacques, 63) and Klein (Ein vollkommenes Werk, 135 n 90) Klein also refers in this connection to AC 7.33.3,

where the author speaks o f e| j , ( p i ) T o q yv&oiq, but not to those passages from this work

which treat the e| j , ( p \ ) T o q v o j i o q (ibid., n 91) Klein in any case considers Deuteronomy

30, not the Stoic sources, to be the model behind James's notion o f an ejoxp-uxoc;

Xoyoq, even while conceding that the latter does reflect—albeit entirely superficially— Stoic terminology (ibid., 136-37) N o n e o f these authors in any case discusses the

passages in question at length, as each rejects the idea that substantive Stoic influence

regarding 'seminal r e a s o n ' (Xoyoq amp^iaxiKoq)" ; 38 b u t the question was for h i m in a n y case o f n o real c o n s e q u e n c e for the interpreta­tion o f the letter G i v e n his literary assessment o f J a m e s as a "trea­sury" o f earlier traditions linked o n l y superficially to o n e a n o t h e r ,3 9

n o t o n l y d i d he c o n c l u d e that it, in any event, "has no 'theology'" b u t

h e posited in a d d i t i o n that, in the case o f such paraenetic c o l l e c ­

tions, "it is not always possible to deduce from adopted concepts the intellec­

the possible S t o i c p r o v e n a n c e o f this term was n o t e v e n particularly

significant for the interpretation o f the phrase in its immediate c o n ­

text: " [ e ] v e n i f 'the i m p l a n t e d w o r d ' (ejKpuToq Xoyoq) in 1:21 should

actually p r o v e to b e an e c h o o f S t o i c t e r m i n o l o g y , " he w r o t e , "the expression as J a [ m e ] s used it h a d o b v i o u s l y already b e e n given a

n e w m e a n i n g b y the C h r i s t i a n s "4 1 C i t i n g several Christian texts

w h i c h use the term e^moq with n o connotations o f something "innate,"

Dibelius suggested that J a m e s , as with his c o m m a n d to " r e c e i v e " this

w o r d , was " p r o b a b l y following an existing Christian usage"; a n d this, already, h a d re-defined the (possibly) S t o i c expression in a m a n n e r

w h o l l y at o d d s with its original m e a n i n g 4 2 In short, e v e n if the phrase

euxpuxoq Xoyoq is to b e c o n s i d e r e d o n e w h i c h has "a technical usage

in the ' w o r l d ' , " it is at m o s t o n e " w h o s e actual m e a n i n g is either

n o t u n d e r s t o o d o r o n l y half-understood b y J a [ m e ] s "4 3

Interpreted a l o n g these lines, the question o f the origins o f this expression is p u r e l y a c a d e m i c T h u s , strikingly, the possible S t o i c

d e r i v a t i o n o f the p h r a s e Euxpuxoq Xoyoq is n o t e v e n m e n t i o n e d b y

Finally, the £(xcpt)To<; VOJLIOC; o f the Apostolic Constitutions is also mentioned in con­ nection with Jas 1:21 b y M Ludwig (Wort als Gesetz: Eine Untersuchung zum Verstandnis

von "Wort" und "Gesetz" in israelitisch-jruhjudischen und neutestamentlichen Schriften Gleichzeitig ein Beitrag zur Theologie des Jakobusbriefes [Europaische Hochschulschriften 2 3 / 5 0 2 ;

Frankfurt am Main, etc.: Peter Lang, 1994] 164) T h e issue o f Stoic influence, how­ever, is not raised in this connection See further on Ludwig below

3 8 Dibelius, James, 114 (= Der Brief des Jakobus [1921] 108), referring to C Clemen,

Primitive Christianity and its Non-Jewish Sources (Edinburgh: Clark, 1912) 54—despite,

apparently, Bonhoffer's rejection o f Clemen's suggestion in Epiket und das Neue

Testament Cf Dibelius's reference to the relevant passage from Bonhoffer in James,

113 n 29 (= Der Brief des Jakobus [1921] 107 n 2)

3 9 See Dibelius, James, 1—11 T h e view is summed up well o n p 3 (with empha­

sis removed): "we may designate the 'Letter' o f James as paraenesis By paraenesis

we mean a text which strings together admonitions o f general ethical content."

Eph 17:2

Ibid., 35 (= Der Brief des Jakobus [1921] 34)

IMPLANTED LOGOS IN JAMES 19

Dibelius w h e n h e then p r o c e e d s to argue that the phrase " l a w o f

f r e e d o m " — w h i c h the a u t h o r equates with 6 £uxpuTo<; A,6yo<;—must b e

u n d e r s t o o d in light o f S t o i c c o n c e p t s 4 4

T h e n o t i o n that J a m e s (or his "tradition") has taken a Stoic phrase, drained it o f its philosophical significance, a n d filled it with an entirely

n e w m e a n i n g has b e e n a d v o c a t e d in various forms b y a handful o f

s c h o l a r s 4 5 G i v e n this a p p r o a c h , it is n o t surprising that, e v e n a m o n g these authors, the passages cited b y M e y e r a n d B o i s m a r d are rele­gated t o footnotes a n d parentheses, i f m e n t i o n e d at all.4 6 Referring

inter alia to C i c e r o ' s summa ratio insita in natura, Justin's euxpuxov cni£p|j,a xov Xoyov, a n d the £uxpuxo<; yvcoau; o f the Apostolic Constitutions, b u t

e m p h a s i z i n g that the a u t h o r o f J a m e s describes his e\i<pmoq Xoyoq as

that w h i c h "saves souls," K l e i n , for e x a m p l e , puts it this w a y : " S o

m a g m a n z w a r in der Wortwahl stoischphilosophischen EinfluB k o n

-statieren, in der Sache ist die V o r s t e l l u n g v o m Xoyoq cncepuxmKoq fur

das Verstandnis d e r Stelle [Jas 1:21] a b e r w e n i g hilfreich."4 7 T h a t

is t o say, given the divergences b e t w e e n the language used in c o n ­

n e c t i o n with the euxprnoq Xoyoq in the Letter o f J a m e s a n d that f o u n d

in the Stoic sources, o n e is dealing at m o s t with a superficial c o n ­

n e c t i o n existing sheerly at the t e r m i n o l o g i c a l level A n y further c o m ­

parison between J a m e s and those works that are substantively influenced

b y Stoicism, therefore, w o u l d n o t p r o v e illuminating Regardless o f

the p r o v e n a n c e o f the phrase, J a m e s ' s use o f it is in any event " g a n z

ungriechisch u n d u n s t o i s c h "4 8 T h u s e v e n w h e n inclined to see Stoic influence in J a m e s ' s c o n c e p t o f a "law o f f r e e d o m , " such scholars, like Dibelius b e f o r e t h e m , d o n o t correlate this with J a m e s ' s e q u a ­

tion o f the " l a w o f f r e e d o m " with Euxpuxo*; Xoyoq.4 9

4 4 See Dibelius's excursus o n " T h e Perfect Law o f Freedom" in James, 116-20

4 5 Windisch, Die katholischen Briefe, 11; Laws, Epistle of James, 8 3 - 8 4 ; V o u g a , LEpitre

de Saint Jacques, 63; Felder, "Wisdom, Law and Social Concern," 73-74; Frankemolle, Der Brief des Jakobus, 1 329; Tsuji, Glaube, 108 n 58; cf Marty, LEpitre de Jacques,

53; Cantinat, Les Epitres, 96 and 104-5 See further the comment o f R Fabris men­

tioned below in note 84

4 6 Note that neither Cicero nor the Apostolic Constitutions is even mentioned in this

connection b y Dibelius-Greeven, Laws, Frankemolle or Tsuji

4 7 Klein, Ein vollkommenes Werk, 135; emphasis mine Klein, in fact, identifies

Deuteronomy 30 as the "Schlussel" for interpreting Jas 1:21, suggesting that the author o f James simply couches a deuteronomistic notion in philosophical language;

see Ein vollkommenes Werk, 136-37

4 8 So Frankemolle, Der Brief des Jakobus, 1 329; cf Bonhoffer, Epictet und das Neuen

Testament, 97

4 9 So, particularly strikingly, Klein, Ein vollkommenes Werk, 152: " S o diirfte die

Rede v o m Ax5yo<; e^micx; letzlich ihren Ursprung in der deuteronomistischen Theologie

The Rejection of Stoic Influence

M o r e often o n e finds interpreters dispensing with the S t o i c e v i d e n c e

altogether In this case, J a m e s ' s n o t i o n o f a " s a v i n g " euxpuToq Xoyoq

is e x p l a i n e d b y c o m p a r i s o n with the use o f p l a n t i n g i m a g e r y in early Christian missionary c o n t e x t s , as f o r e x a m p l e in 1 C o r 3 : 6 - 8 (cf

( p u x e u c o ) 5 0 a n d , a b o v e all, in the s y n o p t i c p a r a b l e o f the s o w e r ( M a r k

4 : 3 - 2 0 pars.; cf G7Ee{pco) 51 A l o n g these lines, o n e also finds c o m p a r i s o n s

with 1 Peter's d e s c r i p t i o n o f "the w o r d (pfj(ia) w h i c h was a n n o u n c e d

to y o u as the g o s p e l " as an i m p e r i s h a b l e " s e e d " (cnropd), o r with the

use o f seed imagery in 1 J o h n 5 2 In a m a n n e r reminiscent o f B o i s m a r d ,

in fact, s o m e h a v e a r g u e d that a c o m m o n tradition underlies Jas 1:18, 21 a n d 1 Pet 1:22-2:2—a tradition associated, p e r h a p s , with

b a p t i s m 5 3 H e r e , t h o u g h , the tradition is c o n s i d e r e d t o b e a Christian

o n e , a n d B o i s m a r d ' s d e t e c t i o n o f a difference b e t w e e n 1 Peter a n d

J a m e s has generally b e e n d i s r e g a r d e d 5 4 I n d e e d , M u B n e r c o n s i d e r s

the s u p p o s e d b a p t i s m a l Sitz im Leben o f Jas 1:18, 21 itself t o b e d e c i ­

sive f o r the interpretation o f b o t h the Xoyoq aXi\Qeiaq a n d 6 Euxprnoq

Xoyoq as " d [ i e ] u r a p o s t o l i s c h e n Paradosis," that is, as "the G o s p e l "5 5

des Alten Testaments haben, wahrend die Spur des vojioq ekevftepiaq eher zu schem Denken, besonders zu d e m der Stoa fuhrt"; cf ibid., 136-37 Cf also V o u g a , UEpitre de Saint Jacques, 6 5 - 6 6

griechi-5 0 It should be pointed out in this connection that the term ejaxp-utoq derives not

does not o f itself preclude comparison o f Jas 1:21 with 1 C o r 3:6-8

5 1 Beyschlag, Der Brief des Jacobus, 83; Mayor, Epistle of St James, 6 8 - 6 9 ; Meinertz and Vrede, Die katholischen Briefe, 25; Hauck, Die Briefe, 12; Reicke, The Epistles of James, Peter, and Jude, 2 1 ; MuBner, Der Jakobusbriefe, 102 and n 2; Adamson, Epistle

of James, 8 1 ; Davids, Epistle of James, 95; Martin, James, 49; cf Cantinat, Les Epitres,

105 See also F Manns, " U n e tradition liturgique," 8 7 - 8 9 , w h o locates the roots

o f this terminology, as well as the "seed" imagery o f 1 J o h n and 1 Peter, in Jewish

liturgical usage; cf in this respect Fabris, Legge, o n w h o m see below

5 2 1 Pet 1:22-25 (cf 1 Pet 1:23: Xoyov ^wvioq Beou Kai nevovxoq); 1 J o h n 3:9

See Beyschlag, Der Brief des Jacobus, 83; Moffatt, The General Epistles, 24; Manns,

"Une tradition liturgique," 89; cf Hauck, Die Briefe, 11; also Cantinat, Les Epitres, 105

5 3 See esp Popkes, Adressaten, 136-56; MuBner, Der Jakobusbrief, 9 5 - 9 7 and 101-3; Schrage, "Der Jakobusbrief," 21; Adamson, James: The Man and His Message, 397;

H o p p e , Der theologische Hintergrund des Jakobusbriefes (2d ed.; FB 28; Wurzburg: Echter, 1985) 94 See also Fabris, Legge, o n which see immediately below Others are more reticent regarding the baptismal connection; see in this respect Davids, Epistle of James, 93; also Laws, Epistle of James, 18-20

5 4 Boismard's study is often overlooked altogether Note, however, the works o f Cantinat and Leconte discussed above in note 37, and the study o f Fabris discussed immediately below

5 5 MuBner, Der Jakobusbrief, 95f, 102 Note that neither the Apostolic Constitutions nor

21

It is this line o f interpretation w h i c h is a d v a n c e d in R i n a l d o Fabris's

Legge della Libertd in Giacomo Fabris's intensive study o f the issue p r e ­

sents b y far the m o s t direct a n d sustained challenge to the inter­pretation o f M e y e r a n d B o i s m a r d to date W i t h an eye b o t h to these scholars a n d t o those, like Dibelius, w h o find Stoic influence b e h i n d

J a m e s ' s association o f l a w a n d f r e e d o m , Fabris formulates the p r o b ­

l e m in terms o f a c h o i c e b e t w e e n interpreting J a m e s in light o f an

"ambiente b i b l i c o , g i u d a i c o " o r an "ambiente g r e c o - e l l e n i s t i c o , "5 6 a n d finds decisively in favor o f the f o r m e r H e c o n c e d e s , o f c o u r s e , that

o n e d o e s see analogies in the G r e e k , a n d particularly S t o i c , sources

b o t h for J a m e s ' s e q u a t i o n o f law with euxpuToq Xoyoq a n d for the var­

ious epithets given t o the l a w in J a m e s 5 7 T h e c r u x o f his a r g u m e n t ,

t h o u g h , is that the context in w h i c h such phrases are used in J a m e s

is "tipicamente b i b l i c o e g i u d a i c o , " a n d that o n e must therefore l o o k exclusively to Jewish literature for the ultimate source a n d m e a n i n g

o f such e x p r e s s i o n s 5 8

T h e phrase euipuioq AxSyoq is o f particular interest to Fabris since it

d o m i n a t e s the i m m e d i a t e c o n t e x t in w h i c h the "perfect l a w w h i c h

is o f f r e e d o m " is first m e n t i o n e d , that is, Jas 1 : 1 9 ~ 2 7 5 9 I n d e e d , h e considers the interpretation o f this phrase to b e the decisive factor

in d e t e r m i n i n g the significance o f the expression " l a w o f f r e e d o m " for J a m e s 6 0 Fabris observes that the f o r m e r phrase was r e a d in line with Stoic c o n c e p t s already in the c o m m e n t a r i e s o f O e c u m e n i u s a n d

T h e o p h y l a c t u s Against such an interpretation, h o w e v e r , h e argues that o n l y limited analogies to J a m e s ' s phrase are f o u n d in the G r e e k literature; there are n o expressions precisely parallel t o it.6 1 W h i l e

5 6 See Legge, 13, 31 and passim Note that throughout Fabris's study, the expres­

sion "biblico," which is used in opposition to "greco," "ellenistico" and "stoico," includes not only the Jewish scriptures, but the N e w Testament as well; see, e.g., his treatment o f the phrase AxSyoq &Aj|9e{a<;, on which see immediately below This peculiar dichotomy effectively excludes the possibility o f hellenistic influence o n any works later included within the Christian canon

57 Ibid., 3 3 - 4 8

5 8 See esp his ch 3, "II contesto della «legge di liberta»: il suo carattere biblico

e guidaico" (Legge, 5 3 - 8 1 ) , noting particularly the concluding comments on p 8 1

5 9 Ibid., 5 5 - 5 9

6 0 Ibid., 113: "Infatti il Xoyoq, che ha il potere di salvare le anime 1,21 e la

«legge perfetta» Percio la comprensione di questa formula di lac 1,21 e decisiva per chiarire il significato della «legge della liberta»." Cf ibid., 27: "Si deve notare

che questa esspressione di G i a c o m o 1,21 e decisiva per tutti gli autori, assieme

all'altra A,6yo<; aX^deiaq, di lac 1,18, per determinare la natura e il significato della

«legge della liberta»."

v e r y strictly speaking accurate, this c l a i m is nonetheless quite mis­leading i n a s m u c h as Fabris curiously neglects to m e n t i o n , here o r elsewhere in his lengthy m o n o g r a p h , C i c e r o ' s definition o f l a w in

terms o f ratio insita, the euxpuTog v6uo<; o f the Apostolic Constitutions, o r

with b o t h M e y e r a n d B o i s m a r d 6 2 I n d e e d , the similar phrases t o

w h i c h h e refers in this c o n n e c t i o n are, apparently, o n l y the Stoic

expressions £v8id0£xo<; ^6yo<; a n d 6p06<; Xoyoq 63

As m e n t i o n e d a b o v e , Fabris argues in any case that it is the c o n ­text in w h i c h the phrase is used in J a m e s w h i c h is decisive: the treat­

m e n t o f the euxpuToq A,6yo<; in J a m e s is " b i b l i c o e g i u d a i c o , " n o t G r e e k

or S t o i c 6 4 T h e usual observations a n d arguments are m a d e in this

c o n n e c t i o n : the ascription o f "saving" p o w e r to this logos is particu­

larly reminiscent o f early Christian literature;6 5 the t h e m e o f "hear­ing a n d d o i n g " is typical o f J e w i s h a n d Christian w o r k s ;6 6 the euxpUToq

Xoyoq is to b e identified with the Xoyoq afo^dziaq o f 1:18, w h i c h is

itself u n d e r s t o o d n o t o n l y t o refer " d e c i s a m e n t e a d un c o n t e s t o b i b

-l i c o - g i u d a i c o , "6 7 but to b e a clear reference to "the g o s p e l " ;6 8 Jas 1:18 a n d 1:21, w h i c h are "perfectly parallel" to 1 Peter l:22ff, reflect ancient baptismal paraenesis.6 9 T h e r e f o r e , Fabris c o n c l u d e s , o n e must

attempt in the first p l a c e t o l o c a t e p r e c e d e n t s for the phrase

f o u n d in J e r e m i a h ' s e x p e c t a t i o n that G o d w o u l d p l a c e his l a w within the h u m a n heart in the e s c ha t olo gical e r a 7 1 M o r e specifically, Fabris

formula Twyoq £\i(pmoq, c o m e in lac 1,21, dove essa rivela un caraterre stereotipo e

fisso"; see further 4 3 f and 46

6 2 See Legge, 42~44; cf 26f, as well as his extensive interaction with Boismard's

Col 1:5; Eph 1:13 and 2 T i m 2:15

6 8 See the discussion o f Jas 1:18 in Legge, 1 3 4 - 4 2 , esp 138-40

5 8 - 5 9

the formulaic expression e\i(pmoq Xoyoq] e inserita, e indispensabile esaminare in

quale misura questo concetto della «parola impiantata» trova un riscontro in l'ambiente."

already been adduced in this connection by a number o f other authors; for a list

see Legge, 24 n 46, and note in addition Cantinat, Les Epitres, 105

23

argues that J a m e s ' s euxp^xoq Xoyoq is the l a w o f l o v e as the internal­

i z e d "messianic l a w " ; the equivalent, in essence, o f w h a t Paul c o n ­ceives in terms o f the h o l y spirit.7 2

LUDWIG'S WORT ALS GESETZ

M a r t i n a L u d w i g ' s recent Wort als Gesetz represents a n o t h e r sustained

attempt t o interpret the Letter o f J a m e s as a Christian w o r k , a n d

its logos without recourse to G r e e k p h i l o s o p h i c a l sources A t the same

time, this study differs significantly f r o m those discussed a b o v e in that its fundamental a i m is in fact to overturn the usual " g o s p e l "

interpretation o f J a m e s ' s logos It is L u d w i g ' s c o n t e n t i o n that J a m e s ' s

e q u a t i o n o f l a w a n d logos is r o o t e d in a J e w i s h " n o m i s t i c w o r d the­

o l o g y " w h i c h first surfaces in works o f the d e u t e r o n o m i s t i c s c h o o l

Primarily o n the basis o f this thesis, L u d w i g argues that J a m e s ' s logos

is n o t "the G o s p e l , " b u t the T o r a h 7 3

I f there is p r o m i s e in L u d w i g ' s ability t o c o n c e i v e o f J a m e s as a Christian w o r k without i m m e d i a t e l y c o n c l u d i n g that "the G o s p e l " must b e its central soteriological c a t e g o r y ,7 4 the f o r m w h i c h her argu­

m e n t takes, unfortunately, is less than persuasive.7 5 A m o n g the c h i e f

p r o b l e m s is the a p p a r e n t formulation o f the question in terms o f a strict d i c h o t o m y b e t w e e n "Jewish" a n d "Hellenistic" p r e c e d e n t s for

J a m e s ' s c o n c e p t o f logos G i v e n the overall a i m o f L u d w i g ' s study,

her use o f these categories as mutually exclusive is less explicit than with Fabris F o r e x a m p l e , her emphasis o n the Jewish p r e c e d e n t s

for J a m e s ' s use o f expressions like 8 e x o u m xov XoyovJ 6 " h e a r i n g

7 2 See Legge, 1 3 3 - 8 1 Cf with respect to this latter comparison Klein, Ein voll­ kommenes Werk, 158-59; further J A Kirk, " T h e Meaning o f W i s d o m in James: Examination o f a Hypothesis," NTS 16 (1969-70) 2 4 - 3 8

7 3 See, e.g., the summary o f the argument as found in Wort als Gesetz, 169:

"Bestimmte Formulierungen aus Jak 1,12-25 sind zufriedenstellend aus nomistischer Tradition zu erklaren Danach scheint es mir erwiesen, daB der Jak

judisch-in 1.18.21-23 mit Xoyoq nicht das Evangelium, die christliche Lehre o.a

bezeich-net, sondern das jiidische Gesetz." Interpretation o f Jas 2:8-11 is presented as being

o f secondary importance: it is discussed along with other relevant passages found outside o f James 1 only in order to provide "ein vollstandigeres Bild der judisch

gepragten Theologie des Jak" (ibid., 171; cf 171-75)

7 4 See in this connection also Tsuji, Glaube, 108-115, w h o relies in large meas­

ure on Ludwig

7 5 See my review in JBL 115 (1996) 3 7 2 - 7 5 I have drawn freely o n portions o f

this review for what follows