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

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


SUPPLEMENTS TO

NOVUM TESTAMENTUM
EDITORIAL BOARD

O K . BARRETT, Durham - P. BORGEN, Trondheim
J . K . ELLIOTT, Leeds - H J . DEJONGE, Leiden
A J. MALHERBE, N e w Haven
M . J J . MENKEN, Utrecht - J. SMIT SIBINGA, Amsterdam
Executive Editors
MM.

MITCHELL, Chicago & D.P. MOESSNER, Dubuque

V O L U M E C


LOGOS AND LAW
IN THE LETTER OF JAMES
The Law of Nature, the Law of Moses,
and the Law of Freedom

BY

M A T T A. J A C K S O N - M c C A B E

BRILL

LEIDEN • B O S T O N • K O L N
2001


This book is printed on acid-free paper.
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.
cm. — (Supplements to Novum Testamentum, ISSN 01679732 ;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
CIP

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
ISBN

0167-9732
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 itemsfor internal or personal
use is granted by Brill provided that
the appropriatefees are paid directly to The Copyright
Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910
DanversMA 01923, USA.
Fees are subject to change.
PRINTED IN THE NETHERLANDS


For A. J. and Jeremy



CONTENTS

Abbreviations

xi

Acknowledgments

xv

Introduction
I. I M P L A N T E D LOGOS

1
IN T H E

INTERPRETATION

OF JAMES

7

Jewish C o m p o s i t i o n and Stoic Logos

11

Christian C o m p o s i t i o n and Logos as G o s p e l

16

T h e Thesis o f a Superficial Stoic Influence

17

T h e Rejection o f Stoic Influence

L u d w i g ' s Wort als Gesetz
T h e P r o b l e m and the Thesis
II. L A W A S I M P L A N T E D LOGOS:

20
23
24

CICERO AND

THE STOICS O N NATURAL LAW

29

L a w as Logos

32

Natural L a w as C o s m i c Logos

34

Natural L a w as H u m a n R e a s o n

36

T h e Development o f Human Reason

40

T h e Stoic D o c t r i n e o f Implanted Preconceptions

43

T h e Problem

44

C i c e r o and S e n e c a o n the C o n c e p t o f the G o o d

53

okelcocK; a n d the Implanted Preconceptions

59

Epictetus o n Implanted C o n c e p t s

62

Excursus: Belief in the G o d s as ejjxpDxoc;

67

Conclusions

72

Natural L a w as "Implanted R e a s o n "
Implanted Preconceptions, H u m a n R e a s o n ,

73
and

Natural L a w

73

Natural L a w as ratio insita
Ratio insita as Xoyoq eiiymoq:
o f the De Legibus

75
T h e Greek Source
81


viii

CONTENTS

III. T H E L A W O F M O S E S , T H E T E A C H I N G

OF

JESUS, A N D N A T U R A L L A W

87

Philo o f Alexandria

89

Philo and the Stoics

89

T h e L a w o f Nature and the L a w o f M o s e s

91

T h e Sage as e|i\|n)%o<; vojioq

93

C o n c l u s i o n : Philo o n Natural L a w

95

4 Maccabees

95

H u m a n R e a s o n and Jewish L a w

98

H u m a n Nature and Jewish L a w

100

C o n c l u s i o n : T o r a h as Natural L a w in 4 Maccabees

103

T h e Apostolic Constitutions

105

T h e Question o f a Non-Christian Prayer Collection ....

106

T h e Implanted L a w and the L a w o f M o s e s

113

Implanted L a w as H u m a n R e a s o n

117

C o n c l u s i o n : Implanted L a w in the Apostolic
Constitutions

121

L a w and Logos as " I m p l a n t e d "

122

T h e Second Apology o f Justin M a r t y r

123

Methodius

127

Early Interpretation o f J a m e s 1:21

131

Conclusion
I V . T H E I M P L A N T E D LOGOS

132
AND THE LAW OF

FREEDOM

135

Implanted Logos and the Perfect L a w o f F r e e d o m

139

The Law o f Freedom

145

T h e Perfect L a w

152

The Royal Law

153

C o n c l u s i o n : J a m e s and the Stoics o n L a w

154

T h e L a w o f F r e e d o m and the T o r a h

154

Acts o f Partiality in 2 : 1 - 1 3
Partiality, L o v e o f N e i g h b o r , and the " W h o l e L a w "

157
....

T h e Argument o f 2:8-11
T h e L a w o f F r e e d o m and the T o r a h
Implanted Logos in Light o f the T o r a h and J u d g m e n t
V . LOGOS

A N D DESIRE

H u m a n Desire and the Logos o f T r u t h

A c q u i r i n g " G o o d Gifts"

165
169
176

....

186
193
196
200


CONTENTS

ix

Desire and the Gifts o f G o d in 4 : 1 - 6

201

Desire and the Gifts o f G o d in 1:13-18

206

T h e T w o W a y s and the W a n d e r i n g

Children

of G o d
Xoyoq akrfiziaq

208
and Euxpmoq Xoyoq

Conclusion

214
215

Logos and Erga

216

Enduring T e m p t a t i o n

221

oXoK^ripoq

223

xekeioq
EV jir|8evi

224
tauto^evoi

7teipaouo<; in J a m e s

230
231

Birth b y Logos

233

Logos and Desire as " T w o W a y s "

238

Conclusion

241

Bibliography

255

I n d e x o f A n c i e n t Literature

265

I n d e x o f M o d e r n Authors

279

ABBREVIATIONS

AB

A n c h o r Bible

ABD

Anchor Bible Dictionary

AJP

American Journal of Philology

ANF

The Ante-Nicene Fathers

ANRW

Aufstieg und Medergang der rbmischen Welt

APOT

R . H . Charles (ed.), Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old

ATR

Anglican Theological Review

BA

Biblical Archaeologist

BAGD

W . Bauer, W . F. Arndt, F. W . Gingrich, and F. W . Danker,

BDF

F. Blass, A . D e b r u n n e r and R . W . Funk, A Greek Grammar

Testament

Greek-English Lexicon of the New
of the New

Testament

Testament

BHT

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

Bib

Biblica

BJS

B r o w n J u d a i c Studies

BWANT

Beitrage zur Wissenschaft v o m Alten und Neuen Testament

BZNW

Beihefte zur

CBQ

Catholic Biblical Quarterly

CNT

C o m m e n t a i r e du N o u v e a u T e s t a m e n t

CSCO

C o r p u s scriptorum christianorum

Ebib

Etudes bibliques

Q(W

orientalium

FB

Forschung zur Bibel

GCS

D i e Griechischen christlichen

HNT

Handbuch z u m Neuen Testament

HR

History of Religions

Schriftsteller

HTKNT

Herders theologischer K o m m e n t a r z u m N e u e n Testament

HTR

Harvard Theological Review

HUCA

Hebrew Union College Annual

HUT

Hermeneutische

IBC

Interpretation: A Bible C o m m e n t a r y

Untersuchungen

zur T h e o l o g i e

Preaching
ICC

International Critical

JBL

Journal of Biblical Literature

Commentary

for T e a c h i n g

and


Xll

ABBREVIATIONS

JJS

Journal of Jewish Studies

JR
JSJ
JSNTSup

Journal of Religion
Journal for the Study of Judaism
Journal for the Study o f the N e w Testament, Supplement
Series

KEKNT

Kritisch-Exegetischer K o m m e n t a r iiber das Neue Testament

LCL

L o e b Classical Library

LSJ

Liddell-Scott-Jones, Greek-English Lexicon

MGWJ

Monatsschrift fur Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums

MNTC

Moffatt N e w Testament C o m m e n t a r y

MPG

J. P. M i g n e (ed.), Patrologjtae cursus completus. Series Graeca

NHMS

N a g H a m m a d i a n d M a n i c h a e a n Studies

NICNT

T h e N e w International Commentary o n the N e w Testament

NIGTC

T h e N e w International

NovT

Novum Testamentum

G r e e k Testament C o m m e n t a r y

NovTSup

N o v u m Testamentum,

NRSV

N e w Revised Standard V e r s i o n

Supplements

NTD

D a s N e u e Testament Deutsch

NTS

New Testament Studies

OTKNT

Okumenischer Taschenbuchkommentar z u m Neuen
Testament

OTP

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

PVTG

Pseudepigrapha Veteris Testamenti graece

RAC

Reallexikon fiir Antike und Christentum

RB

Revue biblique

RevScRel

Revue des sciences religieuses

R G W

Religionsgeschichdiche V e r s u c h e u n d V o r a r b e i t e n

RivistB

Rivista biblica

SB

Sources bibliques

SBLSP

Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers

SBS

Stuttgarter Bibelstudien

SO

Symbolae osloenses

ST

Studia Theologica

SVF

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

SVTP

Studia in Veteris Testamenti

TDJVT

G . Kittel a n d G . Friedrich (eds.), Theological Dictionary of
the New Testament

TSK

Theologische Studien und Kritiken

TU

Texte und

Untersuchungen

Theologische ^eitschrift

pseudepigrapha


xiii

ABBREVIATIONS

WBC

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

WTJ

Westminster Theological Journal

WUNT

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

ZKT

Zeitschrift fur katholische Theologie

ZKW

Zeitschrift fur die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft

Concerning References to the Ancient Sources
W h e r e possible, abbreviations

for ancient literature given in

the

Society o f Biblical Literature H a n d b o o k have b e e n followed. For other
ancient works, the abbreviations list o f TDKT

has b e e n used as a

guide, though some have been slightly modified. References to SVF are
to v o l u m e and entry n u m b e r unless explicitly identified otherwise.



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

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 Testament and 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 opportunity to express, o n c e again, m y gratitude to m y teachers.
H a n s Dieter 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, and the late Arthur W . H . Adkins have p r o v i d e d not only
invaluable guidance and e n c o u r a g e m e n t , but m o d e l s o f excellence

in scholarship that I c a n only 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 and suggestions
o f their a n o n y m o u s reviewers. I have followed them wherever p o s ­
sible, a n d the result is a substantially i m p r o v e d manuscript.

Many

thanks are also due to Z e b a C r o o k , w h o proofread the entire m a n ­
uscript and, with the help o f Nicholas Jesson and 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 generous grant
from the Niagara University Research C o u n c i l , for w h i c h I a m most
grateful. It goes without saying, o f course, that all remaining p r o b ­
lems are m y o w n responsibility.
Finally, and always, I w o u l d like to thank A . J. for her patience
and constant e n c o u r a g e m e n t , and 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 dedication o f this study to them
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 .



INTRODUCTION

T h e Letter o f J a m e s ranks a m o n g the most enigmatic works o f early
Christian literature. O n e searches critical scholarship in vain for any
consensus o n fundamental questions regarding its place in e m e r g i n g
Christianity. R o u g h l y equal n u m b e r s

o f scholars argue that it rep­

resents an authentic w o r k o f J a m e s , the brother
that it is p s e u d o n y m o u s ;

1

o f Jesus, as argue

that it was written in Palestine, as that it

was written f r o m the diaspora; that it is to b e included a m o n g the
earliest works 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 argued that the Letter o f J a m e s has n o place
in early Christianity; that it was originally a Jewish w o r k o n l y subsequendy "christianized" b y the insertion o f references to Jesus Christ,
w h o is in fact explicitly m e n t i o n e d only twice (Jas

1:1; 2:1).

A s there is n o certain attestation o f J a m e s prior 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 to

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 diaspora" has

suggested

to s o m e that it was c o m p o s e d in Jerusalem, 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

pseudonymous

author has assumed the guise o f J a m e s o f Jerusalem, a n d the
that Jas
address,

fact

1:1 must in any case b e u n d e r s t o o d as a highly s y m b o l i c
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 provenance,
such as the author's g o o d G r e e k diction o r the reference to the early
a n d late rains in Jas 5:7, must b e considered equally

1

tenuous.

4

Over the history o f the discussion, one also finds, though less frequently, sugges­
tions that the author is James the son o f Zebedee, or some otherwise unknown James.
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.
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.
For a recent survey o f the various views regarding James's provenance see P. H .
Davids, " T h e Epistle of James in Modern Discussion," ANRW 2.25.5 (1988) 3622-25.
2

3

4


2

INTRODUCTION

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 situa­
tion envisioned in the letter. O f particular i m p o r t a n c e in this regard
is James's relation to 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 James's
tique o f the n o t i o n o f "faith without w o r k s " is a p o l e m i c

cri­

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 James)
o r "misused" (by others) pauline idea; o r that it has n o c o n n e c t i o n
to particularly pauline ideas at all. R e s o l u t i o n o f this controversial
p r o b l e m d e p e n d s largely o n o n e ' s reconstruction o f James's v i e w o f
"faith" a n d " w o r k s , " a n d its relation to his interest in law (cf. 1:25;
2:8-12; 4:11-12).
Ultimately, then, o n e w h o wishes to locate the Letter o f J a m e s
within ancient J u d a i s m o r Christianity has little m o r e to w o r k with
than his o r her reconstruction o f its religious thought. O f course, the
first a n d m o s t basic requirement o f any attempt to define James's
place 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 and development o f early Christian
thought 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 place
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 "purpose
is to teach

Christians,"

in all this long teaching it does not once mention the Passion, the res­

urrection, or the Spirit o f Christ. He names Christ several times; how­
ever 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

In short, the Letter o f J a m e s "has nothing o f the nature o f the gospel
a b o u t it."

6

Luther ultimately c o n c l u d e d , therefore, that J a m e s "is n o t
7

the w o r k o f any apostle." I n d e e d , it is reported that o n at least o n e
o c c a s i o n Luther

anticipated

the later critical theories o f the

non-

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 heard a b o u t Christian

p e o p l e but never e n c o u n ­

tered any."

5

6

7

E. T . Bachman, ed., Luther's Works (Philadelphia: Muhlenberg, 1967) 35. 396.
Ibid., 35. 362.
Ibid., 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 resurrec­
tion of Christ, although this is what all the aposties preached about.
8

A s emerges quite clearly from these remarks, Luther's evaluation o f
James

a n d its place in early Christianity was d e t e r m i n e d in large

measure 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
second, this essential message underlies "all the genuine sacred b o o k s . "

T h i s m o d e l for imagining Christian origins is at least as o l d as c o m ­
peting Christian

claims o f originary o r t h o d o x y o v e r against diver­

gent, d e c a d e n t heresy. A s a hermeneutical

a p p r o a c h to 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 , " through M a t t h e w , M a r k ,
Luke and J o h n ,

"has

g i v e n us the

Gospel under four

aspects."

9

I n d e e d , the assumption that a single such essence—often, as with
Irenaeus a n d Luther, spoken o f in terms o f "the G o s p e l " — u n d e r l i e s
e a c h o f the various writings o f the N e w T e s t a m e n t is reflected in
the very formulation a n d arrangement o f the c a n o n itself.

10

S u c h an essentialist a p p r o a c h to early Christianity is, at least for
the historian, quite p r o b l e m a t i c .

11

Simply put, the historian has "nei­

ther a theoretical basis n o r an empirical warrant" for assuming the
persistence o f any given trait, o v e r time, w h i c h might b e taken to
constitute the "essence" o f Christianity.

12

A n d while historical criti­

cism, as H a r r y G a m b l e has rightly observed, "has traditionally dis­
r e g a r d e d the c a n o n as irrelevant for the interpretation
documents,"

13

o f individual

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.
A. H. 3.11.8. This approach to the gospels is correlated with the later use o f
the titles "Gospel according to" 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).
See Gamble, New Testament Canon, 73-82.
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.
O n the problem o f using an essentialist (monothetic) paradigm for the classi­
fication of historical phenomena, see the very important essay of 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.
9

10

11

12

13


4

INTRODUCTION

should n o t b e underestimated. In fact, though perhaps not as o v e r d y

so, such an a p p r o a c h continues to inform critical scholarship o n the
Letter o f J a m e s .
This is n o w h e r e m o r e evident than in the interpretation
implanted logos" (6

ejLtcpuxoq

o f "the

Xoyoq) w h i c h , a c c o r d i n g to the

author

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 ] . "

14

This

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 ­
15

ing o f James's "implanted logos'."

A r n o l d M e y e r and 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 Boismard), a d d u c e d passages,

respectively, from C i c e r o ' s De Legibus and the Apostolic Constitutions in
support o f the thesis that the association o f "implanted logos" with a
perfect law in J a m e s results from a d e p e n d e n c e o n the Stoic equa­
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 philosophical 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 from C i c e r o o r the Apostolic Constitutions, and e m p h a ­
sized, rather, the similarities between the language used in c o n n e c t i o n
with the logos in J a m e s and the treatment o f "the G o s p e l " elsewhere
in the N e w Testament. T h u s , for e x a m p l e , Martin Dibelius, w h o
reasoned from James's description o f the "implanted logos" as that
" w h i c h is able to save y o u r souls" that, regardless o f the expression's
philosophical p r o v e n a n c e , James's logos must b e interpreted as "the
1

'saving' word—hence, the gospel" ** If 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 . " Such reasoning finds par-

14

P. H . Davids, The Epistle of James: A Commentary on the Greek Text ( N I G T C ;
Grand Rapids: Eerdman's, 1982) 95.
For what follows, see the detailed discussion below in Chapter O n e .
Dibelius, James, 113 (emphasis mine).
15

16


INTRODUCTION

5

ticularly vivid expression in M a r t i n Klein'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
Tora und die christliche Verkundigung. Da es sich nun beim Jahobusbrief
um ein christliches Schreiben handelt, wird auch mit dem 'Wort der Wahrheit' in
irgendeiner Form die christlische Verkundigung gemeint sein}
1

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

proverbial 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

paradigms

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 category "Christian"
as t h o u g h it c o n n o t e d s o m e essential and static sine qua non. W h a t e v e r
the case, it is the guiding 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

presence 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 to formulate conclusions regarding its understanding o f what
constitutes the " w o r d o f truth" o r the means 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 other works w h o s e authors d r a w o n the Stoic theory 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 "perfect" 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 thought

has b e e n w o v e n f r o m Jewish,

Christian and

G r e e k philosophical discourse. T h e demonstration o f this claim, the
elucidation o f its significance for understanding the religious thought
o f the Letter o f J a m e s m o r e b r o a d l y , and its implications for the his­

torian's attempt to locate this w o r k within the early Christian m o v e ­
ment, will b e taken u p in the pages w h i c h

17

follow.

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 Gabe des heiligen Geistes
innehaben" (ibid., 144).



CHAPTER ONE
I M P L A N T E D LOGOS

IN T H E

INTERPRETATION

OF JAMES

A m o n g the

earliest extant interpretations o f "the

implanted logos"

(6 euxpuToq Xoyoq) described 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

Greek

exegete 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 , with s o m e m i n o r

varia­

tions, in the

Greek

Theophylactus.

1

c o m m e n t a r i e s attributed to O e c u m e n i u s

and

T h e implanted 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 and the w o r s e " (xou feXxiovoq ral xou %£(povo<;).
A quite similar interpretation, t h o u g h o n e at least n o t
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

2

obviously

and 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 Dionysius bar
Salibi. H e t o o explained

this phrase with reference

to the

human

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
3

tions: in natura enim inseruit Deus, ut amet bona et odio habeat mala.
addition, Dionysius identified

the

implanted logos itself as

l a w " {legem naturalem); the "perfect law o f f r e e d o m " o f Jas

1

In

"natural

1:25 is thus

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.
Oecumenius: M P G 119. 468; Theophylactus: M P G 125. 1145.
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 insitum naturae nostrae (ibid., 9 I f ) , as well as from his comment on 1:25, quoted imme­
diately below.
2

3


CHAPTER ONE

8

a

"law which G o d from

the

b e g i n n i n g p l a c e d in h u m a n

nature"

{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 equate
freedom,"

and

the i m p l a n t e d

logos with the

"perfect l a w o f

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 Stoic sources,
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
reason a n d natural l a w as f o u n d in these ancient c o m m e n t a r i e s
found few advocates.

5

has

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 carry 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 " ;
a n d the vast majority

o f J a m e s ' s interpreters h a v e a r g u e d

that

6

the

c o n t e x t in w h i c h the t e r m is used in this w o r k militates against read­
i n g it in this sense.

7

T h i s , in turn, is t h o u g h t

to p r e c l u d e a n y sub­

stantive Stoic influence o n J a m e s ' s use o f the phrase euxpuToq Xoyoq.
Thus,

when

mentioned

at

all, the

interpretation

o f James's

logos

offered in these ancient 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
consideration.

4

8

serious

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

Ibid.
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."
Note the analogous discussion o f the possibilities for translating this term by
those attempting to reconstruct Chrysippus's doctrine o f implanted preconceptions
(e|i,qn)T0i 7cpoX,r|\|/ei<;), on which see below, Chapter T w o . T h e term euxp-DToq, despite
the presence o f a cross reference for it, is not discussed in TDNT, which omits the
promised entry on 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, Ropes and Adamson. This work remains
unavailable to me.
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 (London:
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" or "congenital," to
describe the "outward message o f the Gospel": "[h]e could never have used in that
sense a word 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 of 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. Those w h o argue for the Jewish authorship o f James have argued along
similar lines; see on this below.
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 commentary b y W . Beyschlag, Der Brief des Jacobus ( K E K N T ; 6th ed.;

Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1897) 83. See more recently the summary
5

6

7

8