James ...

[Secret Alias]

In that list above 'Imma' isn't a proper name. It means 'Mommy' in Aramaic.

[Stephan Huller]

And neither Mara nor Martha are names either. Lady (f of "Lord") or mistress. Perhaps it can be argued that Martha became a name in the fourth century

[MrMacSon]

How relevant are Robert Eisenman's works?

His books are useful for tracing some of the James references in early writings, but I don't buy his thesis that James was the Teacher of Righteousness.

Cheers. That's what I would have thought: unless the Dead Seas Scrolls can be shown to be later than currently thought, as it now seems James the Just may be a narrative that arose later, in the 2nd century? (Acts etc). Or later?

So, Peter's point in the next post becomes more interesting and relevant

Edit: I should note that both Hegesippus and Hippolytus use details from 1 and 2 Apoc James in their descriptions of James the Just.

Interesting. Show us?

BTW, how we judge Gospel of Thomas might make a difference. (e.g., if we think James 'the Just' is late tradition, then Gospel of Thomas is late?)

Gospel of Thomas 12
"The disciples said to Jesus: We know that you will depart from us; who is it who will be great over us? Jesus said to them: Wherever you have come, you will go to James the Just, for whose sake heaven and earth came into being."

(I also have occasion here to mention the hypothesis that 'Hegesippus' and Papias were the same person and wrote in the 140s AD.)

also we have, from wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James,_br ... _apocrypha

The Apocryphon of James, the sole copy of which was found in the Nag Hammadi library and which may have been written in Egypt in the 3rd century,[31] recounts a post-resurrection appearance of the risen Christ to James and Peter that James is said to have recorded in Hebrew. In the dialogue, Peter speaks twice (3:12; 9:1) but misunderstands Jesus. Only James is addressed by name (6:20), and James is the more dominant of the two.

The Gospel of James (or "Infancy Gospel of James"), a work of the 2nd century, also presents itself as written by James – a sign that his authorship would lend authority – and so do several tractates in the codices found at Nag Hammadi.

and

Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 275 – 339) reports the tradition that James the Just was the son of Joseph's brother Clopas and therefore was of the "brethren" (which he interprets as "cousin") of Jesus described in the New Testament.

This is echoed by Jerome (c. 342 – 419) in De Viris Illustribus (On Illustrious Men) – James is said to be the son of another Mary, wife of Clopas and the "sister" of Mary, the mother of Jesus – in the following manner:

James, who is called the brother of the Lord, surnamed the Just, the son of Joseph by another wife, as some think, but, as appears to me, the son of Mary, sister of the mother of our Lord of whom John makes mention in his book...

Jerome refers to the scene of the crucifixion in John 19:25, where three women named Mary – Mary, the mother of Jesus, Mary of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene – are said to be witnesses. John also mentions the "sister" of the mother of Jesus, often identified with Mary of Clopas due to grammar. Mary "of Clopas" is often interpreted as Mary, "wife of Clopas". Mary of Nazareth and Mary of Clopas also need not be literally sisters, in light of the usage of the said words in Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic.
. . . < snip > . . .
Jerome's opinion suggests an identification of James the Just with the Apostle James, son of Alphaeus; Clopas and Alphaeus are thought to be different Greek renderings of the Aramaic name Halpai.[36] Despite this, some biblical scholars tend to distinguish them; this is also not Roman Catholic dogma, though a traditional teaching.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James,_br ... er_of_Mary

The fact that Eusebius and Jerome are, in the early 4th C, espousing more information than appears to be previously available suggests they embellished the narrative?


and, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James,_br ... e_of_James re The Epistle of James:

The Epistle of James has been traditionally attributed to James the Just since 253,[50][51] although it is now common for scholars to disagree on its authorship.[52]


50 Peter H. Davids, The Epistle of James: A Commentary on the Greek Text (Eerdmans, 1982). ISBN 978-0-8028-2388-5

51 Craig A. Evans, The Bible Knowledge Commentary: John's Gospel, Hebrews-Revelation, page 260 (Cook Communication Ministries, 2005). ISBN 0-7814-4228-1

52 McCartney, Dan G. (2009-11-01). James. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Baker Academic. ISBN 978-0-8010-2676-8.


[see the main wikipedia page for the epistle of James - excerpts in next post ... ]
.

[MrMacSon]

from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistle_of_James

In Christianity, the Epistle of James (Ancient Greek: Ἰάκωβος Iakōbos), usually referred to simply as James, is a letter (epistle) in the New Testament. The earliest extant manuscripts of James usually date to the mid-to-late third century.[1]


Authorship

From the middle of the 3rd century, patristic authors cited the Epistle as written by James the Just, a relation of Jesus and first Bishop of Jerusalem.[4]


Many scholars consider the epistle to be written in the late 1st or early 2nd centuries. Among the reasons for this are:[12]

[*] the author introduces himself merely as "a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ", without invoking any special family relationship to Jesus.
[*] the cultured Greek language of the Epistle, it is contended, could not have been written by a Jerusalemite Jew. Some scholars argue for a primitive version of the letter composed by James and then later polished by another writer.[13]
[*] the epistle was only gradually accepted into the canon of the New Testament.
[*] some see parallels between James and 1 Peter, 1 Clement, and the Shepherd of Hermas and take this to reflect the socio-economic situation Christians were dealing with in the late 1st or early 2nd century. It thus could have been written anywhere in the Empire where Christians spoke Greek. There are some scholars who argued for Syria.[13][/color]


Canonicity

The Epistle was first explicitly referred to and quoted by Origen of Alexandria, and possibly a bit earlier by Irenaeus of Lyons[29] as well as Clement of Alexandria in a lost work, according to Eusebius; although it was not mentioned by Tertullian, who was writing at the end of the Second Century.[28] It is also absent from the Muratorian fragment, the earliest known list of New Testament books.

The Epistle of James was included among the twenty-seven New Testament books first listed by Athanasius of Alexandria in his Thirty-Ninth Festal Epistle (AD 367)[30] and was confirmed as a canonical epistle of the New Testament by a series of councils in the Fourth Century. Today, virtually all denominations of Christianity consider this book to be a canonical epistle of the New Testament.


1 McCartney, Dan G (2009). Robert W Yarbrough and Robert H Stein, ed. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament: James.

• • Grand Rapids: Baker Academic. ISBN 0801026768.

4 Camerlynck, Achille. "Epistle of St James". The Catholic Encyclopedia. Retrieved 16 May 2012.

12 "Epistle of James". Early Christian Writings. Retrieved 16 May 2012.

13 John Barton and John Muddiman, ed. (2001). The Oxford Bible Commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 1256. ISBN 0198755007.

28 Wells, George Albert (1971). The Jesus of Early Christians. London: Pemberton. p. 152. ISBN 0301710147.

29 Davis, Glenn (2010). "Irenaeus of Lyons". The Development of the Canon of the New Testament. Retrieved 16 May 2012.

30 Griggs, C Wilfred (1991). Early Egyptian Christianity (2nd ed.). Leiden: Brill Academic Publisher. p. 173. ISBN 9004094075.

[Peter Kirby]

In that list above 'Imma' isn't a proper name. It means 'Mommy' in Aramaic.

And neither Mara nor Martha are names either. Lady (f of "Lord") or mistress. Perhaps it can be argued that Martha became a name in the fourth century

I'm not sure if I should trust you or the authors of this lexicon of Jewish names in antiquity, but I find your reasoning here insufficient either way.

[MrMacSon]

Issues of Doctrine support the epistle of James being later (also from Epistle_of_James)

Doctrine

Justification

The letter contains the following famous passage concerning salvation and justification:

James 2

• 14What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? 15If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, 16and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? 17So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.
  
  18But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. 19You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder! 20Do you want to be shown, you foolish person, that faith apart from works is useless? 21Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar? 22You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works; 23and the Scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness”—and he was called a friend of God. 24You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. 25And in the same way was not also Rahab the prostitute justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way? 26For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead.

This passage has been cited in Christian theological debates, especially regarding the doctrine of justification. Gaius Marius Victorinus (4th century) associated James's teaching on works with the heretical Symmachian sect, followers of Symmachus the Ebionite, and openly questioned whether James's teachings were heretical.


Anointing of the Sick

James's epistle is also the chief Biblical text for the Anointing of the Sick.

James 5

• 14Is anyone among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. 15And the prayer of faith will save the one who is sick, and the Lord will raise him up. And if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven.

G. A. Wells suggested this passage was evidence of late authorship of the epistle, on the grounds that the healing of the sick being done through an official body of presbyters (elders) indicated a considerable development of ecclesiastical organisation, "whereas in Paul's day to heal and work miracles pertained to believers indiscriminately (I Corinthians, XII:9)."[28]

28 Wells, George Albert (1971). The Jesus of Early Christians. London: Pemberton. p. 152. ISBN 0301710147.
.

[Tenorikuma]

Well, I'm going by notes I wrote quite a while ago.

1. According to Hegesippus, James quotes Jesus, "I beseech Thee, Lord God our Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do," while he is being stoned. This detail is from 1 Apoc James (Codex Tchacos).

2. Hippolytus seems to repeat a corrupted version of the tradition in 2 Apoc James, which has James passing on his teachings to the priest Mareim. (The priest Mareim receives secret teachings from James and witnesses his stoning.) Hippolytus says that according to the Naassenes, James passed on his teachings to "Mariamne".

[Tenorikuma]

Regarding the one Gospel of Thomas logion that refers to James the Just, I have no idea how to date it. I think it's generally agreed that Thomas is later than the Synoptic Gospels, and some logia are later than others.

Depending on the dating, either Thomas or 2 Apoc James is probably the earliest text in which "Just" appears as the surname of someone named James. In fact, chronologically, it seems to be a surname for James first used by Gnostics and later adopted by catholic writers.

(But let's not forget about the existence of a person named "Jesus Justus" mentioned by Paul.)

[DCHindley]

In that list above 'Imma' isn't a proper name. It means 'Mommy' in Aramaic.

And neither Mara nor Martha are names either. Lady (f of "Lord") or mistress. Perhaps it can be argued that Martha became a name in the fourth century

I'm not sure if I should trust you or the authors of this lexicon of Jewish names in antiquity, but I find your reasoning here insufficient either way.

You know, Secret Huller is right on both accounts.

Imma: In the Talmudic tractates Berakoth 40a & Sanhedrin 70b, it is stated that when a child is weaned, “it learns to say abba [daddy] and imma [mommy]”. This would be in Aramaic, or else the citation would be to the Hebrew Mishnah rather than the Aramaic Gemara of the Talmud.

Mara/Maria: The Aramaic word for "lord" is Mar. I think Stephen Alias is implying this woman "belongs to her Lord" (i.e., is her lord's concubine). I don't think this will have anything to do with Jesus, but just the fact that in antiquity, so many young girls were slave girls of their masters, or perhaps it is an allusion to Abishag, the slave girl who "ministered" to an old king David, laying with him on cold nights to help "keep him warm".

DCH

[DCHindley]

Well, I'm going by notes I wrote quite a while ago.

1. According to Hegesippus, James quotes Jesus, "I beseech Thee, Lord God our Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do," while he is being stoned. This detail is from 1 Apoc James (Codex Tchacos).

2. Hippolytus seems to repeat a corrupted version of the tradition in 2 Apoc James, which has James passing on his teachings to the priest Mareim. (The priest Mareim receives secret teachings from James and witnesses his stoning.) Hippolytus says that according to the Naassenes, James passed on his teachings to "Mariamne".

Couldn't the direction of influence be from NT books or Hegesippus to the Gnostic books? The other possibility would be the authors of Hegesippus and the two Apocalypses of James drawing from common traditions.

DCH