The epistle and death of James the Just.

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

The epistle and death of James the Just.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

We are probably all familiar with Hegesippus' account of James' death apud Eusebius:

Eusebius, History of the Church 2.23.3-18:

3 The manner of the death of James has been already indicated by the abovementioned words of Clement, who records that he was thrown from the pinnacle of the temple and was beaten to death with a club. But Hegesippus, who lived immediately after the apostles, gives the most accurate account in the fifth book of his Memoirs. He writes as follows:

4 James, the brother of the Lord, succeeded to the government of the church in conjunction with the apostles. He has been called just [δίκαιος] by all from the times of the Lord to the present day, for there were many that bore the name of James. He was holy from the womb of his mother. 5 He drank no wine nor strong drink, nor did he eat flesh. No razor came upon his head; he did not anoint himself with oil, and he did not use the bath. 6 He alone was permitted to enter into the holy place; for he wore not woolen but linen garments. And he was in the habit of entering alone into the temple, and he was frequently found upon his knees begging forgiveness for the people, so that his knees became hard like those of a camel in consequence of his constantly bending them in his worship of God and asking forgiveness for the people. 7 Because of his exceeding great justice he was called the just [ὁ δίκαιος], and oblias, which in Greek signifies a bulwark of the people and justice, in accordance with what the prophets declare concerning him.

8 Now some of the seven sects, which existed among the people and which have been mentioned by me in the memoirs, asked him: What is the gate of Jesus? And he replied that it was the savior. 9 On account of these words some believed that Jesus is the Christ. But the sects mentioned above did not believe either in a resurrection or in the coming of one to give to every man according to his works. But as many as believed did so on account of James. 10 Therefore, when many even of the rulers believed, there was a commotion among the Jews and scribes and Pharisees, who said that there was danger that the whole people would be looking for Jesus as the Christ. Coming therefore in a body to James they said: We entreat you, restrain the people, for they have gone astray in regard to Jesus, as if he were the Christ. We entreat you to persuade all that have come to the feast of the Passover concerning Jesus; for we all have confidence in you. For we bear you witness, as do all the people, that you are just [δίκαιος] and that you do not respect persons. 11 Persuade, therefore, the multitude not to be led astray concerning Jesus. For the whole people, and all of us also, have confidence in you. Stand therefore upon the pinnacle of the temple, that from that high position you might be clearly seen, and that your words may be readily heard by all the people. For all the tribes, with the gentiles also, have come together on account of the Passover.

12 The aforesaid scribes and Pharisees therefore placed James upon the pinnacle of the temple and cried out to him and said: Just one [δίκαιε], in whom we ought all to have confidence, forasmuch as the people are led astray after Jesus, the crucified one, declare to us what the gate of Jesus is. 13 And he answered with a loud voice: Why do you ask me concerning Jesus, the son of man? He himself sits in heaven at the right hand of the great power, and is about to come upon the clouds of heaven! 14 And, when many were fully convinced and gloried in the testimony of James, and said: Hosanna to the son of David, these same scribes and Pharisees said again to one another: We have done badly in supplying such testimony to Jesus. But let us go up and throw him down, in order that they may be afraid to believe him. 15 And they cried out, saying: Oh, oh, the just one [ὁ δίκαιος] is also in error! And they fulfilled the scripture written in Isaiah: "Let us take away the just one [τὸν δίκαιον] because he is troublesome to us; therefore they shall eat the fruit of their works." 16 So they went up and threw down the just one [τὸν δίκαιον], and said to each other: Let us stone James the just [τὸν δίκαιον]. And they began to stone him, for he was not killed by the fall; but he turned and knelt down and said: I entreat you, Lord God our father, forgive them, for they know not what they do. 17 And while they were thus stoning him one of the priests of the sons of Rechab, the son of the Rechabites, who are mentioned by Jeremiah the prophet, cried out, saying: Cease! What are you doing? The just one [ὁ δίκαιος] is praying for you! 18 And one of them, one of the fullers, took the club with which he beat out clothes and struck the just one [τοῦ δικαίου] on the head. And thus he suffered martyrdom. And they buried him on the spot, by the temple, and his monument still remains by the temple. He became a true witness, both to Jews and Greeks, that Jesus is the Christ. And immediately Vespasian besieged them.

James is called "the just one" so many times in this passage, especially as his death nears, that it almost gets boring to read for that reason alone, despite it being a fairly colorful incident otherwise. The quotation from Isaiah is actually a composite:

Wisdom of Solomon 2.12: 12 "Let us lie in wait for the just one [τὸν δίκαιον], because he is inconvenient to us and opposes our actions; he reproaches us for sins against the law and accuses us of sins against our training."

Isaiah 3.10: Say to the just one(s) [τὸν δίκαιον, OG] that it will go well with them, for they will eat the fruit of their actions.

But all of this talk of "the just one" reminds me of the following:

James 5.1-6: 1 Come now, you rich, weep and howl for your miseries which are coming upon you. 2 Your riches have rotted and your garments have become moth-eaten. 3 Your gold and your silver have rusted; and their rust will be a witness against you and will consume your flesh like fire. It is in the last days that you have stored up your treasure! 4 Behold, the pay of the laborers who mowed your fields, and which has been withheld by you, cries out against you; and the outcry of those who did the harvesting has reached the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth. 5 You have lived luxuriously on the earth and led a life of wanton pleasure; you have fattened your hearts in a day of slaughter. 6 You have condemned and put to death the just one [τὸν δίκαιον]; he does not resist you.

Verse 6 sounds like a pretty good description, honestly, of the death of James. I have nearly always been of the opinion (not well formed, but distinct) that the epistle of James is pseudonymous, and this verse strikes me as the author's homage to its namesake: speaking in his name to condemn the very sorts of people who supposedly put him to death.

Just a stray thought.

Ben.
Last edited by Ben C. Smith on Sun Aug 16, 2020 3:41 pm, edited 2 times in total.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
User avatar
Ken Olson
Posts: 1341
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 9:26 am

Re: The epistle and death of James the Just.

Post by Ken Olson »

Ben C. Smith wrote: Sat Aug 08, 2020 6:22 pm I have nearly always been of the opinion (not well formed, but distinct) that the epistle of James is pseudonymous, and this verse strikes me as the author's homage to its namesake: speaking in his name to condemn the very sorts of people who supposedly put him to death.
Ben,

Is there enough evidence to conclude that the epistle is pseudonymous when the author has said only that his name is James (the 11th most common Jewish name in Tal Ilan’s list IIRC) and made so little effort to claim that he’s the particular James that was Jesus’ sibling? It seems to me that a pseudonymous writer would likely try to establish his claimed identity (and its authority) more clearly. I’ve even seen this turned into a lame argument for authorship by Jesus’ brother - only THE James could have called himself only (I almost said ‘just’) James without further identification.

I have similar reservations about calling Hebrews, Luke-Acts, and John pseudonymous, as some have suggested on the grounds that they mean to be taken as written by Paul, a companion of Paul, and a disciple of Jesus, but in those cases they don’t actually claim a particular name.

(Yes, I realize your post was meant only to provide some possible grounding for a tentative hypothesis).

Best,

Ken
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: The epistle and death of James the Just.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Ken Olson wrote: Sun Aug 09, 2020 2:21 amIs there enough evidence to conclude that the epistle is pseudonymous when the author has said only that his name is James (the 11th most common Jewish name in Tal Ilan’s list IIRC) and made so little effort to claim that he’s the particular James that was Jesus’ sibling? It seems to me that a pseudonymous writer would likely try to establish his claimed identity (and its authority) more clearly. I’ve even seen this turned into a lame argument for authorship by Jesus’ brother - only THE James could have called himself only (I almost said ‘just’) James without further identification.
The epistle may be by some random guy named James. But that is not the impression I get from it. First, Galatians 2 sets up a contrast between Paul and James regarding the law, and the epistle of James seems to track Paul's epistle to the Romans, differing only on their contrasting interpretations of faith versus works (by the latter of which Paul means the "works of the law"); the basic stance of the epistle vis-à-vis Pauline thought feels to me like it was erected upon an understanding of the clash between James and Cephas (on the one hand) and Paul (on the other) in Galatians 2. Second, the author of Acts seems to me to be tracking both the Pauline and some of the Catholic epistles in order to flesh out some of its character speeches and profiles, thus appearing to take the author of our epistle to be the James. Third, the epistle of James is written to "the twelve tribes of the dispersion," and I do not take this reference to be metaphorical; rather, it looks like it is contrasting itself with Paul's mission to the gentiles.

None of this is proof, obviously, and if a person is not convinced, that is understandable. But it is the hypothesis that I am working with, at least for now.
I have similar reservations about calling Hebrews, Luke-Acts, and John pseudonymous, as some have suggested on the grounds that they mean to be taken as written by Paul, a companion of Paul, and a disciple of Jesus, but in those cases they don’t actually claim a particular name.
I would not call any of those texts pseudonymous; they are anonymous (though Hebrews would be something of a special case if Hebrews 13.22-25 is meant to make us think, wrongly, that the author was in the Pauline circle; this is a notion I have seen, and I have no current opinion on it). The epistle of James is not; and it is pseudonymous if and only if its author was not named James. (For the sake of clarity, I tend to be pretty picky about this terminology, and never seek to misuse it.)
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
davidmartin
Posts: 1611
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: The epistle and death of James the Just.

Post by davidmartin »

Ben this is off topic, but i didn't want to start a new topic
In the synoptics at the crucifixion the women watch from 'far off' - why?
Is it possible that the site of the crucifixion was quite far outside the city walls, and being passover they could only walk as far as permitted on a Sabbath to witness it? eg the mount of olives
I couldn't find out if this sabbath distance limit would apply on passover, probably not but just wanted to check
just thought maybe this could have been a device to keep anyone who lived in Jerusalem away from causing trouble but near enough to witness it
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: The epistle and death of James the Just.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

davidmartin wrote: Tue Aug 11, 2020 1:42 pm Ben this is off topic, but i didn't want to start a new topic
In the synoptics at the crucifixion the women watch from 'far off' - why?
Is it possible that the site of the crucifixion was quite far outside the city walls, and being passover they could only walk as far as permitted on a Sabbath to witness it? eg the mount of olives
I guess this seems doubtful to me. A Sabbath day's journey was, according to the Talmud (Eruvin 51a, for instance), 2000 cubits = less than a mile, but more than half a mile, far enough to allow for Bethphage, for example, to be within range of Jerusalem. Why would they crucify people sentenced in Jerusalem any further away than that?

Whether the restriction would apply to the purported time of the crucifixion seems to be a complicated matter.

But for me the explanation for the women standing at a distance is very simple. Many of the details of the passion were constructed from scripture, and I think this one is no exception:

Psalm 38.11 (37.12 OG): My friends and my neighbors stand aloof from my plague; and those near me [οἱ ἔγγιστά μου] stand afar off [ἀπὸ μακρόθεν].

Mark 15.40: 40 There were also some women looking on from afar [ἀπὸ μακρόθεν], among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the Less and Joses, and Salome. 41 When He was in Galilee, they used to follow Him [ἠκολούθουν αὐτῷ] and minister to Him; and there were many other women who came up with Him to Jerusalem.

Or possibly Psalm 88.8, but I think 38.11 is the more likely.

ETA: The entirety of Psalm 38 (37 OG) sounds a bit like Jesus speaking from the cross, an impression not lost on Augustine.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
davidmartin
Posts: 1611
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: The epistle and death of James the Just.

Post by davidmartin »

Thanks for replying Ben
I too thought it was a bit far but in Acts it says
Acts 1:12: "Then they returned to Jerusalem from the Mount called Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a Sabbath day's journey."

This then would put it in range of the mount which is one of the suggested sites
I don't know why Acts says this because when i checked it seemed less than 2000 cubits but on the other hand, maybe this was the rule at the time and the markers were at the foot of the mount... perhaps they measured it differently because the temple was there. Maybe Acts has it right

The psalm is kind of vague, and says "I am troubled by my sin" in it, problematic

As to whether the restriction would apply, yes i couldn't find out, and gave up
It seemed at least possible though... and a new angle worth exploring
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: The epistle and death of James the Just.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

davidmartin wrote: Wed Aug 12, 2020 12:54 amThe psalm is kind of vague, and says "I am troubled by my sin" in it, problematic
Virtually all of the psalms, not to mention all of the other passages from the law and the prophets, are problematic when applied to Jesus. Yet... they were often applied to Jesus. Isaiah 7.14 is famously applied to Jesus, and yet its context is not very apt for that application.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
davidmartin
Posts: 1611
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: The epistle and death of James the Just.

Post by davidmartin »

Ben C. Smith wrote: Wed Aug 12, 2020 5:41 am
davidmartin wrote: Wed Aug 12, 2020 12:54 amThe psalm is kind of vague, and says "I am troubled by my sin" in it, problematic
Virtually all of the psalms, not to mention all of the other passages from the law and the prophets, are problematic when applied to Jesus. Yet... they were often applied to Jesus. Isaiah 7.14 is famously applied to Jesus, and yet its context is not very apt for that application.
Some are more successful than others huh?
Have you noticed any difference to Paul's applications of OT quotes to Jesus compared to the others... the one that really gets me is his usage of the word 'seed' in Galatians, where he says the singular usage of Abraham's seed means it refers to one person. Is it just me or is this really amazing
Even I know that seed is a Jewish expression for descendants and you'd think ex-pharisee Paul would have known this?
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: The epistle and death of James the Just.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

davidmartin wrote: Wed Aug 12, 2020 12:49 pm
Ben C. Smith wrote: Wed Aug 12, 2020 5:41 am
davidmartin wrote: Wed Aug 12, 2020 12:54 amThe psalm is kind of vague, and says "I am troubled by my sin" in it, problematic
Virtually all of the psalms, not to mention all of the other passages from the law and the prophets, are problematic when applied to Jesus. Yet... they were often applied to Jesus. Isaiah 7.14 is famously applied to Jesus, and yet its context is not very apt for that application.
Some are more successful than others huh?
Have you noticed any difference to Paul's applications of OT quotes to Jesus compared to the others... the one that really gets me is his usage of the word 'seed' in Galatians, where he says the singular usage of Abraham's seed means it refers to one person. Is it just me or is this really amazing
Even I know that seed is a Jewish expression for descendants and you'd think ex-pharisee Paul would have known this?
Oh, I think that whoever wrote that knew very well what "seed" means in that kind of context. It is just a warped prooftext. The rabbinical materials are full of that kind of verse twisting, to the point where sometimes it virtually has to be just humor; some of it is just silly punning.

I think Paul himself indulges in a kind of humor at least once:

2 Corinthians 13.1: 1 This is the third time I am coming to you. "Every word shall be confirmed by the mouth of two or three witnesses" (= Deuteronomy 19.15).

I suspect the author knows that he himself cannot count for "two or three witnesses" just by visiting more than once.

ETA: I doubt the seriousness of the context in Galatians supports humor as an explanation for the "seed" interpretation; in that case, I think the author is claiming special interpretive talents, the ability to get at what is really meant in scripture. He is hoping the Galatians do not call his bluff; also, he is desperate, since he is losing them.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
davidmartin
Posts: 1611
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: The epistle and death of James the Just.

Post by davidmartin »

This is the third time I am coming to you. "Every word shall be confirmed by the mouth of two or three witnesses" (= Deuteronomy 19.15)
Never saw that before, good one

You know what, I'm not convinced this is humour here i think he really believes it
It could be Paul simply believes his own exegesis and has the capacity to convince himself he's always correct even if he changes his mind

I was reading Galatians again and it strikes me maybe Paul's original gospel had a 100% heavenly Christ. God sends 'his son' into those who have faith which sets them free of the law. This 'son' never walked on earth or died or did anything
There's a chunk of Galatians that reads like that, that's why Christians are the 'seed of Abraham' not Christ, as Christ never was human he can't have a 'seed'.
"His son by the slave woman was born according to the flesh, but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a divine promise"
His opponents are believers in the earthly Christ (the son by the slave woman) vs his heavenly Christ (which explains his vision of Jesus which is not physical)

So maybe what happens is Paul's original gospel didn't take off so he ended up doing a 180 and accepting the earthly Jesus together with the atonement
Obviously this is all just a theory..
Post Reply