CORNELL 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 GIFT OF 
 
 Alfred C. Barnes 
 
Date Due 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 PRINTED rN 
 
 U. a. A. 
 
 (Sr 
 
 NO. 23233 
 
 Cornell University Library 
 BS2785 .M47 
 
 olin 
 
 3 1924 029 294 836 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of this book is in 
 the Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029294836 
 
EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
M^f^m. 
 
THE 
 
 EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 THE GREEK TEXT 
 
 WITH 
 
 INTRODUCTION NOTES AND COMMENTS 
 
 BY 
 
 JOSEPH B. MAYOR, M.A. Camb., Litt.D. Dtjbl. 
 
 EMERITUS PROFESSOR OF KING'S COLLEGE, LOKDON 
 SOMETIME FELLOW OF ST. JOHN'S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE 
 
 Hontron 
 MACMILLAN AND CO. 
 
 AND NEW YORK 
 1892 
 
 All Rights Meserved. 
 
3ji/&, /V.7TT*me5, C?r€eK iF'l^L. 
 
 JE 5'0^ 
 
 
 E.OHARD CLAV AND SOSS, LIMITED 
 LOKDON AMD BUKOAY 
 
 ^^^- ■' .--.t 
 
 ^^^-v.-^^ J""""^ 3>3 
 
^ 
 
 YIKO REVERENDO 
 F. J. A. HOET, S.T.P. 
 
 SACRI TEXTUS AD PRISTINAM EORMAM REVOCANDI 
 
 DILIGENTISSIMO PERITISSIMOQUE AUCTORI 
 
 HAEC QUALIACUMQUE STUDIA 
 
 QUAE TJTINAM DIFEICILLIMAE EPISTULAE LECTORIBUS 
 
 BPLBNDIDIOREM LUCEM EDITIONIS HORTIANAE lAM DUDUM DESIDBRANTIBU8 
 
 ALIQUID SALTEM LUCIS AFFERRE POSSINT 
 
 A VETEEE AMICO ET CONDISCIPULO 
 
 ©jKtcantur 
 
In writing my Preface I hring to a close a work which has for 
 some years teen my chief occupation, and which has indeed heen 
 seldom out of my thoughts since the time when, as an undergraduate, 
 I first made acquaintance with Coleridge's Aids to Reflection, and 
 was led in consequence to study with some care the Hvistle of St. 
 James, to which reference is made in the earlier Aphorisms of that 
 book. 
 
 In the Introduction I have stated my reasons for believing this 
 Hpistle to ie the earliest of the books of the New Testament, written 
 probably in the fifth decade of the Christian era by one who had 
 heen brought up with Jesus from his childhood and whose teaching 
 is in many points identical with the actual words of our lord as 
 recoo'ded in the Synoptic Gospels. If I am not mistaken, it pi-esents 
 to us a picture of pre-Pauline Christianity, which is not only 
 interesting historically, but is likely to be of special value in an age 
 of religious doubt and anxiety like the present. Amongst those 
 to whom the formulas of later Christianity have lost or are losing 
 their significance, there must be many who will find a message suited 
 to them in the language of this, the least technical of all the Hpistles, 
 many who will appreciate the strong practical sense and earnest 
 philanthropy of St. James, and take to heart his warnings against 
 
unreal professions of whatever kind. In its plain positive teaching 
 his Epistle affords a common platform for Christians of every degree 
 of attainment, from which they may advance again with neiv hope 
 to such further developments of the faith, as it may he given to 
 each from above to receive and to profit by. 
 
 The eighth and ninth Chapters of the Introduction deal with the 
 Grammar and Style of the Epistle, and, in some degree, with those 
 of the New Testament writers generally. As a corollary to these, 
 I have, in the tenth Chapter, pointed out some objections to the 
 hypothesis which has been lately revived amongst us, that the 
 Greek is a translation from an Aramaic original. 
 
 As regards the Text I have been almost entirely dependent on the 
 labours of others, especially those of Tischendorf Bishop Westcott and 
 Dr. Hort. In the very rare cases in which I have ventured to depart 
 from a reading of WH., I have carefully explained my reasons for 
 doing so in the Notes. The comparison of three Latin Versions of the 
 Epistle, and the collations of the Codex Patiriensis and Codex 
 Bobiensis will, I hope, be found useful by those who are interested in 
 teoatual criticism. 
 
 In the Notes it has been my aim, treating the hook like any other 
 ancient writing, to ascertain the precise meaning of each sentence, 
 phrase, and word, as it was intended by the writer, and understood 
 by those to whom his Epistle was addressed. The names of previous 
 annotators, to whom I am indebted, will he found in the eleventh 
 Chapter of the Introduction. In the Comments which follow I have 
 in the first place viewed the Epistle more as a whole, tracing the 
 general connexion of ideas and illustrating and discussing the wider 
 questions involved: and, in the second place, regarding it as an 
 integral portion of the canonical Scriptures, which are recognized 
 by all Christians as authoritative in matters of faith, I have to 
 some small extent endeavoured to show in what sense its teaching is 
 
to he understood hy us now, and how it is to he applied to the 
 circumstances of modern life. 
 
 It only remains for me to acknowledge with hearty thanks the 
 assistant I have received from friends who have looked through 
 portions of the proof-sheets, especially to Dr. U. A. Abbott {A), 
 the Rev. G. H. Gwilliam {G.E.G.) Prof. Sanday (S) and Dr. Charles 
 Taylor, Master of St. John's College, Cambridge (C.T.), whose 
 initials are appended to notes communicated by them. 
 
 October 24, 1892. 
 
ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA 
 
 Introduction 
 
 P. xxxix. — Add the following to note (2) after 'priests': 'Eusebius {H.E. 
 ii. 23) brings the death into connexion with Paul's journey to Rome. In 
 Chron. Euseb. the date is 63 a,d.' 
 
 P. xl. 1. 10. — For aol read /iol. 
 
 P. xUi.^Add to note (1) : Meleager in his epitaph on himself (Anth. Pal, 
 vii. 417) calls it the Syrian Athens, Trarpa 8e ^e rixTtt Ardis iv 'Aa-irvpiois 
 vaiofievrj Ta^apots. 
 
 P. lii. — On Clement c. 38, add after epyois ayaSois : 'cf. above c. 30.' 
 
 P. Ixiii. — ib. iv. p. 613, after ayaSois add : ' see above Clem. E. i. 38.' 
 
 P. Ixiv. — Add to quotations from Origen, Comm. in Prov. (Mai Nov. Bihl. 
 vir. 51) 6 'IaKa)/3o« (fyrjoiv, aXX^Xois i^ayyiXKcre ra napairraiiaTa Vjimv ottojj 
 laBfiTC. 
 
 P. Ixxxiv. — Under Luke, add xx. 46, 47 irpoirexeTe diro tS>v ypamuiTiav t&v 
 fleXon-ffli/ Trfpiirarelv iv o-To\a^s Kal (jjiXovvTcav. ..TrpcoroKadeSpias iv 
 Tats a- way ay als... 01 KOrecrBiovaiv Tas olnias tS>v xV P ^^ '"^'- '"' P" ^'' "' ^ <■ 
 liaKpa It poaevxovTai.' ovtoi Xij p,'^ ovt ai it e pitr a-ore pov Kpip.a: 
 James i. 27, ii. 2, iii. 1. 
 
 P. xciL — Under 1 Corinthians, add xiv. 33 (speaking of disorderly meetings) 
 ov yap eariv dKaraaTacr ias 6 Qeos, aXKa el pijvri s : James iii. 16, 17, oirov 
 ^\os Kal ipiSla, cKei aKar aaratr ia...r] Se avioBev o'otjila elprjviKij. 
 
 P. cliv. (rf).— For i. 36 read i. 26. 
 
 P. civ. — Under ia-Ola, add Gen. iii. 14, 15, xliii. 6, Exod. xii. 8, Ezek. xxv. 
 4. See below p. cbcxxv. 
 
 P. clxi., last line but one. — Insert : In James ii. 19 eh «otiv 6 Beos, the 
 presence of the article shows that e'r is predicative ; in iv. 12, if we read els 
 eoTiv vopoBeTrjs, the absence of the article shows that eh is subject ; if again 
 we read eh eariv vop.o6errjs, making eariv not the copula but the substantive 
 verb, els becomes an epithet of vop,. ' there is one lawgiver.' 
 
 P. clxxii. — Under eh, insert, after i. 18 d7reKirj(rev...dirapxriv : iii. 3 ^aK\op.ev 
 eh TO neiBeirBai avrovs. 
 
 P. clxxiii.— Under e^ (for which read e'/c), insert in 1. 2, after y'KvKv: v. 20 
 emarpe'^as dp,apTa)\ov eK TrXdvrjs : in 1. 5, for iii. 18 read iii. 13. 
 
 P. clxxiv. — Add at the bottom Aor. Pass, used as Middle, iv. 10 raneivaBrjTe, 
 V. 19 irXavrjd^. 
 
 P. clxxix. — Add under edv after yivaa-Kera : with per/, suly. in prot. and 
 fut. ind. in apod., v. 15 k&v ipaprias jj jtettoitjkcos dtf)e6fjaeTai. 
 
 P. dxxxi. — Insert before Ellipsis : ' For yap, be, xal, o5v, re, see Index.' 
 
 P. cxoii. — At end of first paragraph insert xpv i"- 10, cl. : 1. 3 of second para- 
 graph omit irriSdKiov. 
 
ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA 
 
 TrixT AND Notes 
 
 P. 8, ver. 2.— Omit tiji/ before (rvvayayr)v, and in critical note insert (after 
 BO) Ti. Tr. "WH. as accepting the omission. 
 
 P. 25, ver. 16. — I think now that I was not justified in reading ra wapa- 
 7rTa>iJ.aTa instead of ras d/iapn'at. The primary reason for the exhortation to 
 mutual confession will then be to assist them in praying for one another. 
 Still the sins first thought of would naturally be their failures in duty towards 
 each other. 
 
 P. 31. — For the play of words in x^'P^'") X^P"" compare Tobit v. 9 (varia 
 lectio) i^aipeTKrev avTOy 7rpa>TOs KoX elirev avrUf ^aipeiv (rot TroWa yevoiro' Kat 
 aiTOKpiBfls T. eMrej' aira, tI jioi. en VTrdp^ci xaipeiv ; 
 
 P. 32.~ Tr^piTriarjTe. 'Add Acta Johannis Zahn p. 244 n. iavnfpiirea-rjswetpair- 
 p.ois prj TTTOirjdria-rj . 
 
 P. 38 n. — Hofmann might have found a better example of buucpiva) in the 
 sense of 'to question' in Herm. Sim. ii. 1. 
 
 P. 46. — ov eirrjyyeiKaTO. For omission of subject Oeos, cf. 1 Joh. v. 16 Sairei 
 avTa ^(arjv. 
 
 P. 48. — an-fipaa-Tos. Other examples may be found in Acta Johannis Zahn 
 p. 75 1. 15 Tois Tore Treipd^ovfrtv tov Qeov 6 direipatrTos ttj nelpa eKeli/cov rrjv 
 fiSirriTa ibiSov, p. 113, 5 p,rj jrei'pafe tov dwcipaarov, p. 190, 18 fiaxapios oartsovK 
 emipaaev iv trol tov Qeov, 6 yap (re Tretpd^uyv tov airelpao'Tov ireipd^et. 
 
 ib. n. 1.— For ' 1066, Panar.' read 'Fanar. 1066.' 
 
 ib. n. 3. — Add 1 Cor. xi. 19 Set alpeo'ets iv vpHv elvat iva ol doKtp^t tpavepoi 
 yevcovTai. 
 
 P. 53. — (All good comes from God,) cf. Tobit iv. 19 avrbs 6 Kvpws SlSaai 
 irdvTa TO. dyada. In reference to the hexameter, H. Fischer makes the some- 
 what comical suggestion (Philologus 1891, heft 2) that St. James is here 
 giving a novel application of a proverb which in common life meant ' do not 
 look a gift horse in the mouth.' But surely the difference of intonation 
 required by the two senses would prevent any such application, not to 
 mention the improbability of a phrase like jrav bapr)p,a Te\eiov getting such a 
 proverbial force. 
 
 P. 55. — tS>v (parav. Cf. the Benedictions before Shema given in Edersheim 
 Sketches of Jewish Life p. 269. 
 
 P. 58. — imoKvea. Of. Clem. Al. Strom, vii. 890 toIs yvaa-nKols KeKvrjKairiv al 
 ypat^al. 
 
 lb. n. 1. — For (Mishnah. Surenh. iv. 116) Jewish Fathers p. 85, read: 
 Mishnah, Surenh. iv. 116 {Jewish Fathers p. 85). 
 
 lb. n. 3. — On deXeiv and ^ovKeo-dm cf. Plato Alcib. i. 135, quoted fbelow on 
 p. 141. 
 
 P. 59. — For Xoyos d\ri6clas cf. Westcott on 1 Joh. i. 1 n-epi tov \6yov t^s fw^r. 
 In lines 9 — 14 read after 'apposition' as follows : comparing John viii. 31, 
 32 ' if ye... thy word is truth' ; but why not objective etc. 
 
 P. 60, 1. 6. — For quidam read quemdam. For position of aiiTov cf. Joh. v. 
 47 Tois fKfivov ypdfi/iao-iv, 2 Cor. viii. 9 t§ ckuvov nrtuxeia, ib. ver. 14 to eKcivaiv 
 iaTeprjiia...7rept<ra-evpa, 2 Tim. ii. 26 ro eKeiVou de'Krjp.a,, Tit. iii. 5 Kara to avrov 
 eXeos, ib. iii. 7 Tff eKeivov x°-l>"h 2 Pet. i. 16 t^s ixeivov jueyaXetoTijros. On 
 mood of i'ore cf. Joh. ii. 20, iii. 5, 15. 
 
 ib. 1. 13 from bottom. — For (Prov.) II, xxix. read xxix. 11, 20 
 
 P. 61.— Heading : for i. 20, 21, read i. 18—21. 
 
 P. 62. — ■mpwaclav. Cf. Plut. De And. 42 B diroTlBfirBai to. nepiTTa t^s ^^l'Yns 
 c[uoted below under ia-drtTpm ver. 23. It seems to be equivalent to fuun Kaieias 
 in 1 Cor. v. 8. 
 
 P. 65.— Heading : for i. 21, 23, read i. 21—23. 
 
ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA 
 
 P. 66. — ia-oTTTpco. Cf. pseudo-Cyprian De duobus montibus c. 13 ita me in 
 vobis videte, quomodo quis vesirum s« videt in aquam aut in speculum. 
 
 P- 70. — Bprja-Kela. Cf. Ad Diogn. 2 d i-otf npoeiprifievois (the sacrifices of tlie 
 heathen) ofioiorpoTrwr ttjv Bptja-Keiav ■7rpo<ra.yovcrtv, Stanaprdvovcnv. 
 
 ib. — x"^"'"'y'"V"''. Cf- Luc. De Saltat. 70 to XoyurnKov be'iKmaiv, orav 
 eKairra t&v iraBSyv x^^'^voyoayfj. 
 
 P. 71. — Kadapd. In quotation from Erasmus, read morticinum for morti- 
 cinium. 
 
 P. 76. — t's So^ris. Cf. Justin Tryph. c. 61 6 Geos yfyivvrjKe Svvajilv nva i^ 
 iaVTOv \oyiKrjv, rjns Koi 86^a Kvpiov KoKevrai, irore de vios, nore 8e trofpia k.t.A. 
 
 P. 78. — e7ri|8Xf'i|/'j)T-e. In Arist. Magna Moralia ii. 15 we find im^Ximiv eVi 
 ^iKov. 
 
 ib. 1. 7 from bottom. — For ^ read ij. 
 
 P. 79, 1. 1. — Add Exod. xix. 17 vnh to opos. The addition of tS>v iroSav, 
 found in A and other MSS., is borrowed from Ps. ox. 1, which is quoted 
 repeatedly in the N.T. 
 
 ib.—KpiToi SiaX. TTov. Peile compares Soph. AJ. 888 p,aKpdv oKartiv novav. 
 
 P. 83, 1. 4 from end of second paragraph. — For 'has' read 'have.' 
 
 P. 84. — ^axrCKiKos. Cf. Justin Apol. i. 12 6 \6yos...ov ^aaiXiKwTaTov (superl. 
 for comparat.) cip^ovra /Aera t6v yevvrja-avra debv ovdiva o'idafiev ovra. 
 
 P. 86. — iv hi. The substantival use of hi in this verse is supported by i. 4 
 €v fiTjSejH \ei7r6fjLevoi. 
 
 P. 87. — fij) p.oi)(fva'T]s. For the order of the commandments, compare also 
 Clem. Al. Strnm. vi. 816. For the general thought of. Basil. Baptism, ii. 9 
 (quoted by Cellerier) napdvofios eWu/ o p,iav ivToKrjv irapa^ds. 
 
 P. 88. — dveXfi/s is found in Philo M. ii. 53 ; dv/jXei/r ib. 65. KaraxauxaT-oi 
 eXfOS Kpiaems, cf. Sibyll. ii. 224 pverai ck davaTov eXeos, Kplais omroT av 
 e\0rj. 
 
 P. 90. — For itfijjpepos rpo^iy cf. Aristides xlix. 537, 631. 
 
 P. 91. — For 8e in the fourth place, add Job. viii. 16 koI edv Kpivto fie, vii. 31 
 eK Tov 0)(Xov 8e, Acts iii. 1 iirl to avTO Se. 
 
 P. 92, ver. 18. — dWd, cf. 1 Pet. iii. 14 dXX' el koX ndtrxoire 6ia SiKaioa-v- 
 vr]v, fioKapioi. 
 
 P. 96. — dva^epeiv eiri. Cf. 1 Pet, ii. 24 dva<f>epeiv Tas afiapnas etti to 
 ^vXov. 
 
 P. 100. — XrjiiyjfopieOa. For the use of the first person cf. 1 Joh. i. 6, ii. 18 with 
 Westcott's notes. 
 
 P. 1 01. - t8e. MS. C has epen for epis in ii. 16. 
 
 P. 106. — 6 Kda-jios T^s dSiKias. Jerome (Pelag. ii. 6) uses the phrase seculum 
 illud iniquitatis. c.t. 
 
 P. Ill, last line of n. on Sa/idferat. — Aid. aiter dedimus : 'with Mayor's n. 
 in J. of Phil. vol. xx. p. 265 ' ; and for 35 read 38. 
 
 P. 117. — dvaaTpoff)!]. Cf. Epict. Diss. i. 22. 13 evSe'^eTai ttjv irpos tovs koivovs 
 e^eiv olav 8fl ava(TTpo(f>Tiv. 
 
 P. 127. — Proposed reading -^^oi/f ire is supported by Stier. B has the same 
 mistake {<f>6vovs for <j>66vovs) in 1 Pet. ii. 1. 
 
 P. 128.- — ewiTvxeiv. Used absolutely by Epict. Diss. ii. 6. 8 dXX' ovk 
 eireTVxes. 
 
 P. 136. — ToKanraipea. Cf. Ps. xxxviii. 6 iToKamaprjira roI KareKafiXJiBrii/. 
 
 ib. — On the difference between dyvi^a and KaOapi^m see Westcott's n. on 1 
 Joh. iii. 3. 
 
 P. 137. — TaireivadrjTe. For aor. pass, with middle meaning cf. irKavrjBfj in 
 V. 14. 
 
 P. 138. — iroir^Trjs vop.ov. In classical Greek this stands for ' lawgiver,' never 
 for ' doer of the law.' 
 
ADDENDA ET OOREIGENDA 
 
 P. 140. — jrpos oXtyov. Cf. 1 Tim. iv. 8 Trpos oKlyov earlv acpeXifios. 
 
 P. 143. — ifiana. Of. Curt. v. 20 In PersepoUn totius Fersidis opes con- 
 gesserunt : aurum argentumque cumulatum erat, vestis ingens modus. 
 
 P. 144. — eo-TM. The force of the future may be thus expressed : ' when you 
 come to inspect your treasures, the rust will be a witness that you have not 
 used them as you ought.' 
 
 ***** 
 
 Since the notes were printed, Bernhard Weiss has brought out his Text- 
 hritische Untersuchungen und Textherstellung of the Catholic Epistles, containing 
 a careful investigation of the characteristics of the two groups of uncial MSS., 
 Sin.ABC representing the older text, and KLP representing the later text. 
 As he follows WH. in assigning the greatest authority to B, his own text is 
 generally in agreement with theirs. I notice below all the instances in which 
 his reading differs from theirs and from mine. The exegetical notes are not of 
 much importance. As regards orthography he writes oKa^ovcia, KaKonadeia, 
 ipiOeia, 'HXias, where I have adopted Hort's spelling (see p. cliii of my Intro- 
 duction). For airoKvei he reads anoKvei, for dprja-Kos, 6prj<TKos. 
 
 I. 8. — He takes dvrjp Siyj/vxos in apposition to avdpaTros, as I have done ; 
 not (with WH.) as subject of \ripL\jfeTm. 
 
 I. Q.^He reads d (omitted by B) before a.8e\<j)6s. I have followed WH. in 
 bracketing it. 
 
 I. 10. — He follows Huther and Beyschlag in understanding nXoia-ios of an 
 unbeliever and giving an ironical force to Kavxaa-Sa. 
 
 I. 17. — He takes avadev icniv Kora^aivov together ; and interprets Tponrjs 
 aiToa-Kiaa-fia in the same way as Beyschlag 'eine durch eine Wendung der 
 Himmelslichter hervorgebrachte Beschattung.' 
 
 I. 21. — He puts a comma after cV wpavTrjn, taking it with anodep^voc. 
 
 1.23. — He translates ro 7rpd(ro)7ro>' T^£ ■ycveVeof 'das Angesicht womit einer 
 geboren ist.' 
 
 I. 25. — He translates eV rfj noirjo-fi ' auf Grund seines Thuns,' referring to 
 I. 9. 
 
 II. 1. — He takes e^crc as imperative, not (with WH.) as indicative asking a 
 question. In the same verse he makes rrjs b6^s genitive of quality after 
 'Ii/eroCr Xpiaros. 
 
 II. 2.— He explains a-ui/ayojy^!/ vpS>v as a Jewish synagogue frequented by the 
 Christians. 
 
 II. 5. — iTTaxois TO Kocrpco. Weiss translates ' in Bezug auf weltliche Giiter, 
 and says that the Dative ' steht zur Bezeichnung der Sphare.' In the same 
 verse he translates iv Tvlarei ' auf Grund Glaubens. 
 
 II. 14 and 16. — He reads W t-o o0eXos, against B and WH. 
 
 II. 18. — Taking dX\* ipei ns as an objection made by a bystander to what 
 had just been said, he tinderstands av of the professing believer censured by 
 St. James. Surely it is incredible that any writer coiild have stated an ob- 
 jection in so awkward a form. 
 
 II. 19. He reads eis 6 eedr ia-riv with C and WH.™ ; els ee6s itrnv is the read- 
 ing of B and WH. ; I read us icrriv 6 etds with Sin. Ti. Treg. Weiss weakens 
 the force of kA to. Suipovia iriarevovtriv Kai (fiplairovaiv by making it parenthetical. 
 
 III. 3. — He reads €i Be, though he fails, like every one else, to find a natural 
 apodosis, and acknowledges (p. 66) that the reading ei fie yap in Sin. proves 
 that t'Se was intended. 
 
 III. 6. — t6p rpoxov rrjs yevea-ems. He explains ' human life, whose restless 
 movement spreads in all directions the once kindled flame.' 
 
 III. 16. — He translates epidela by ' Rechthaberei, der es nicht auf die Sache 
 ankommt, sondern auf das Verfechten der eigenen Meinung,' and opposes it to 
 eiwuBfji. ' A pertinacious argumentative disposition ' is a meaning which 
 
ADDENDA ET COERIGENDA 
 
 would suit tlie passage well, but is hard to get out of the word. Why may we 
 not suppose parties in the Churches of the Diaspora, as in the Church of 
 Corinth ? 
 
 IV. 2. — He reads (^oixucrc Koi fijXoOre without a stop, 
 
 IV. 3. — He reads 8a7ra>^o-€Tf with B for SaTramJo-ijre, the reading of the other 
 MSS. accepted by WH. 
 
 IV. 5. — In this difficult verse Weiss makes Trpbs <^66vov inmodel to nvevfia d 
 KaT(fKL<Tev iv fjfiiv, fui^ova Si Sldiotriv x^P'" parenthetic, and takes to jrveSfia as 
 object of eir model. I have stated in my notes my reasons gainst this way of 
 taking the passage. 
 
 IV. 9. — He here reads fueraTpmrifrai with BP and WH. 
 
 IV. 10. — He reads toS before Kwpi'ov against the best MSS. and edd. 
 
 IV. 14.— He reads with WH. ttis aipiov iroia r) f<B^ ijiav. I have stated in 
 my note why I prefer the reading of Sin. If a change is to be made I should 
 rather give the exact reading of B, omitting the article before foi^. In the 
 latter part of the verse Weiss departs from B and WH. by inserting the article 
 before jrpdj. 
 
 IV. 15. — He departs from B and WH. by reading fleX^o-i/ for dekri. 
 
 V. 3. — He puts a fuU stop after irSp in opposition to WH. 
 
 V. 6. — He departs from WH. by reading avnTairaerai vpXii without a question. 
 
 V. 11. — He omits 6 before K^pios with B and WH.™ 
 
 V. 12. — He refers the swearing, which is here forbidden, to the asseveration 
 of innocence made before the judges of verse 6. He writes to vm vai (not, as 
 WH., TO Hal vai) translating it ' Let your yea be yea,' i.e. perfectly straight- 
 forward, so as not to need the confirmation of an oath. 
 
 V. 13. — He reads KaKcmaOfi ns iv iiplv without an interrogation, and so 
 airBevfl tis iv vfiXv in verse 14. 
 
 V. 14. — He departs from B by keeping tov Kvplov after 6v6p,aTi, in spite of 
 the variations of the other MSS. 
 
 V. 15. — He follows Huther in translating kov ' even if.' 
 
 V. 16. — He reads ras a/iapnas with WH. and the best MSS., and understands 
 id5i)Tf of bodily healing (comparing Gen. xx. 17, Exod. xv, 26) which could 
 only be effected after the sin, which had caused the disease, had been confessed 
 and forgiven. He thinks that npea-^vrepni means simply the older members of 
 the Christian community, who, as being the most experienced, would be sent 
 for in the first instance, but that the same duty devolved upon all. He takes 
 ivepyov/ievT] as middle, 'hinsichtlich seiner Wirksamkeit.' 
 
 V. 20. — He reads yivaxrKere with WH. and B. In the latter part of the verse 
 he reads iraKrei i/ru^iji' « BavaTov avTov with B, where WH. have o-. ij^v^riv 
 aiiTov « davarov with Sin. P. Surely if B's order were right, we must have 
 had aire's, to suit the preceding ■^vxfjv. Weiss understands the sins which are 
 hidden to be those of the converted person. 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 
 INTRODUCTION 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 THE AUTHOR 
 
 Internal Evidence. The author speaks with authority and in the tone of the 
 O.T. rather than of the N.T. This agrees witti what we read of James, 
 the President of the Church at Jerusalem. Remarkahle agreements 
 between this Epistle and the speeches and letter of St. James contained 
 in the Acts. This James was known as the Lord's brother, p. v. Three 
 different explanations of the phrase. Passages of- Scripture bearing on 
 the subject. Hieronymian theory examined, p. ix. Epiphanian theory, 
 p. xviii. Helvidian theory, p. xxii. Examination of the objection, that 
 the last is opposed to tradition, p. xxiii ; and to Christian sentiment, p. 
 xxxiii. Further particulars as to St. James derived from uninspired 
 writings, p. xxxvi., the Gospel according to the Hebrews, Hegesippus, 
 Josephus, Clementine Homilies. General conclusion as to the life and 
 character of St. James, p. xli. Hellenism in Syria. Resemblances between 
 this Epistle and the teaching of our Lord, especially as recorded in the 
 Sermon on the Mount, p. xlii. Unbelief and conversion of James, p. xlv. 
 
 CHAPTER II 
 
 EXTERNAL EVIDENCE FOR THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE EPISTLE 
 
 Direct evidence : Eusebius in his account of the Canonical books classes it 
 amongst the Aniileqomena, but elsewhere cites it as genuine, p. xlvii. It 
 is omitted in the Muratorian fragment and in the Canon Momrasenianus ; 
 but included in the Peshitto and in the Catalogues of Origen, Cyril of 
 Jerusalem, Gregory of Nazianzus, Athanasius, Amphilochius of Iconium, 
 Epiphanius, Jerome and Augustine, and was finally accepted by the third 
 Council of Carthage, p. xlviii. Indirect evidence : was known to Clement 
 of Rome, to the author of the Didach6, of the Epistle of Barnabas, and 
 of the Testaments of the Patriarchs, to Ignatius and to Polycarp, p. 1. 
 Hermas is fuU of allusions to it, p. Ivii. It is referred to by Justin 
 Martyr, Athenagoras, Irenaeus, Theophilus, Clement of Alexandria, and 
 by the writers of the Ep. ad Diognetum, and the Acta Johannis, p. Ixi. 
 Origen first cites it by name as Scripture and as the work of St. James, 
 p. Ixiii. Allusions are also found to it in TertuUian, Dionysius of 
 Alexandria, Gregory Thaumaturgus, the Clementine Homilies, Consti- 
 tutiones Apostolioae, Laetantius, Athanasius, Chrysostom and Didymus. 
 By the end of the fourth century it is all but universally accepted, p. Ixiii. 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 CHAPTER III 
 
 RELATION OF THE EPISTLE TO BAKLIEE WHITINGS 
 
 Canonical books of the Old Testament, p. Ixviii. Apocrypha, p. Ixxiii. Philo, 
 p. Ixxvi. Greek Philosophers, p. ixxix. 
 
 CHAPTER IV 
 
 RELATION OF THE EPISTLE TO THE OTHER BOOKS OP THE NEW TESTAMENT 
 
 The Synoptic Gospels, p. Ixxxii. Gospel and Epistles of St. John, p. Ixxxiv. 
 Acts of the Apostles, p. Ixxxvii. Epistles of St. Paul, p. Ixxxvii. Epis- 
 tles of St. Peter and St. Jude, p. xcv. Epistle to the Hebrews, p. ci. 
 Apocalypse, p. cii. 
 
 CHAPTER V 
 
 THE CONTENTS OP THE EPISTLE. P. civ. 
 
 CHAPTER VI 
 
 PERSONS TO WHOM THE EPISTLE IS ADDRESSED AND PLACE FROM WHICH 
 
 IT IS WRITTEN 
 
 The various Dispersions of Israel, p. ex. This Epistle was probably addressed 
 to the Eastern Diaspora, p. cxii. What may be inferred from the Epistle 
 as to the character and condition of the readers, p. cxiii. It contains no 
 allusion to Gentiles ; the rich oppressors are unbelieving Jews, p. cxiv. 
 The faults noted are the same as those laid to the charge of the Jews in 
 the Epistles of St. Paul and St. Peter, p. cxvi. The allusions are in 
 accordance with the supposition that it was written from Jerusalem to 
 
 Jews, p. cxvii. 
 
 CHAPTER VII 
 
 ON THE DATE OF THE EPISTLE 
 
 The general result of the external and internal evidence points to the fifth 
 decade after Christ as the time of composition, p. cxix. This date is 
 confirmed by the absence of any reference to the fall of Jerusalem, or to 
 the admission of Gentiles into the Church, p. cxx. The allusions to 
 Church order and discipline, and the Judaic tone, are in accordance with 
 an early date, p. cxxi. On the other hand it was written after a per- 
 secution, St. James had attained a position of authority, and the persons 
 addressed were no longer recent converts, p. cxxiii. Grounds on which 
 it has been ascribed to a later date: the use of the name ' Christ ' without 
 the article, condition of the Churches addressed, waning belief in the 
 Second Coming, p. cxxv. Examination of Dr. Davidson's argument 
 proving that it was written by an anonymous Ebionite shortly before the 
 fall of Jerusalem, p. cxxviii. Examination of von Soden's argument 
 proving that it was written in the time of Domitian, p. cxxx. Examina- 
 tion of W. Briickner's argument proving that it was forged by an Essene 
 living at Rome after 150 a.d., p. cxxxv. Examination of Pfieiderer's argu- 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 
 ment that it was -written by a catholic contemporary of Hermas, p. cxl. 
 Principles for determining the relative priority of two writers when the 
 resemblance is so great as to make it probable that one borrowed from 
 other, p. cxliii. The question of the genuineness of our Epistle must be 
 considered in connexion with that of the genuineness of the other books 
 of the N.T., p. cxlvii. Large demands on the credulity of their readers 
 made by the advanced critics, p. cxlviii. 
 
 CHAPTER VIII 
 
 ON THE GRAMMAR OF ST. JAMBS 
 
 Orthography, p. clii. Inflexions, p. cliv. Syntax : the Article, p. clvi ; 
 Pronouns, p. clxviii ; Number and Gender, p. clxix ; Cases, p. clxx ; 
 Prepositions, p. clxxii ; Verb, p. clxxiv ; Participle, p. clxxvi ; Com- 
 pound Sentence, p. clxxvii. Negatives, p. clxzix. Other Adverbs and 
 Particles, p. clxxx. Ellipsis and Pleonasm, p. clxxxi. Order of Words, 
 p. clxxxiii. 
 
 CHAPTER IX 
 
 ON THE STYLE OP ST. JAMES 
 
 A comparison between the Greek of St. James and that of other writers of 
 the N.T. in reference to Inflexions and to Syntactical uses, p. clxxxv. 
 Examination of his Vocabulary, p. cxc. His use of Rhetorical Figures : 
 Metaphor, Paronomasia, Alliteration, Asyndeton, p. cxciii. His Rhythm, 
 p. cxcix. Energy and vivacity the distinguishing features of his style, 
 p. ccii. 
 
 CHAPTER X 
 
 DID ST. JAMBS WRITE IN GREEK OR IN ARAMAIC? 
 
 Grounds on which it has been held that St. James wrote in Aramaic, p. ccv. 
 The Greek does not read like a translation, p. ccvii. It was within the 
 power of a Galilean peasant to acquire a good knowledge of Greek, and 
 there is no trace of any other form of the Epistle, p. ccix. 
 
 CHAPTER XI 
 
 ■ BIBLIOGRAPHY, p. CCxiv. 
 
 CHAPTER XII 
 
 APPARATUS CRITICUS, p. CCXxii. 
 
 Greek MSS. Ancient Versions. Collations of the Codex Patiriensis and 
 Codex Bobiensis. 
 
 TEXT OF ST. JAMES 
 The Greek with three Latin versions in parallel columns, pp. 2—27. 
 
 NOTES, pp. 29—172. 
 xix 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 
 [PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS, pp. 175-224. 
 
 I. 1—15. P. 175. 
 
 Trial, Temptation, p. 175. 
 
 I. 16—18. P. 185. 
 
 God the Author of all Good, p. 185. 
 
 Regeneration, p. 186. 
 
 The Word of Truth, p. 189. 
 
 r. 19—27. P. 190. 
 
 Hearing the Word, p. 191. 
 Slow to Speak, p. 192. 
 Slow to Wrath, p. 194. 
 Modes of Self-deception, p. 196. 
 
 II. 1—13. P. 196. 
 
 Respect of Persons, p. 1 97. 
 
 Solidarity of Duty and the Law of Liberty, p. 200. 
 
 II. 14—26. P. 201. 
 Faith, p. 201. 
 
 III. 1—12. P. 205. 
 
 Use and Abuse of Speech, p. 205. 
 
 in. 13—18. P. 207. 
 Wisdom, p. 208. 
 
 IV. 1—17. P. 209. 
 The World, p. 210. 
 
 The Divine Jealousy, p. 212. 
 Accompaniments of Repentance, p. 213. 
 Judging, p. 213. 
 Making Plans, p. 214. 
 
 V. 1—11. P. 215. 
 
 Sternness of St. James, p. 216. 
 
 V. 12—20. P. 216. 
 Swearing, p. 217. 
 
 Healing of the Sick by Anointing and Prayer, p. 218 . 
 Confession of Sin, p. 220. 
 Conversion of the Sinner, p. 223. 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Of Greek Words, pp. 225—244. 
 Of Subjects, pp. 245—248. 
 
CHAPTER I 
 The Atjthoe 
 
 The writer calls himself ' Jacob' (from which our name 'James' internal 
 is derived through the Italian ' Giacomo '), and describes himself as The writer 
 ' a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ.' As the name authority, 
 was very common in the first century, and the description is 
 one which is applicable to all Christians, it is evident that he 
 must have been distinguished from other Jacobs by position or 
 character, so as to justify him in addressing the ' Twelve Tribes in 
 the Dispersion' with the tone of authority which is so marked a 
 feature in the Epistle before us. This inference receives support 
 from the Epistle of Jude, the writer of which styles himself 
 ' servant of Jesus Christ and brother of Jacob,' evidently assuming 
 that his brother's name would carry weight with those whom he 
 addressee 
 
 The Epistle of Jacob, or James, is strongly contrasted not t]jg"^J°(,f 
 only with the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians, against which T*gt\°*4t 
 some have supposed it to be directed, but also with the First ^^3™*^*^^ 
 Epistle of St. Peter, which in some points it closely resembles. ^''^■ 
 The general characteristic by which it is distinguished from these 
 Epistles is its Jewish tone of thought, style and doctrine. In style 
 it reminds one now of the Proverbs, now of the stern denuncia- 
 tions of the prophets, now of the parables in the Gospels. It has 
 scarcely any direct reference to Christ, who is indeed only 
 named twice.^ In commending the dutj"^ of patience (v. 7-11), 
 the writer refers, with the Psalmist (cxxvi. 6), to the example 
 of the husbandman, and to Job and the prophets of the Old 
 Testament: if he alludes to our Lord at all, he only does so 
 obscurely in ver. 6 ' ye killed the just ; he doth not resist you ' ; 
 
 1 i. 1, ii. 1. 
 
ii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 while St. Peter on the contrary dwells exclusively on the example 
 of Christ (of. 1 Pet. ii. 19-24, iv. 12-14). So in urging the 
 duty of prayer reference is made, not (as in Heb. v. 7) to the 
 promises or the prayers of Christ, hut to the prayer of Elijah : the 
 duty of kindness, and the warning against evil-speaking in ch. iii. 
 are based not on the example of Christ and the thought of our 
 common brotherhood in him (as in 1 Pet. ii. ^3, Rom. xii. 5, Eph. 
 iv. 25), but on the parables of nature, on the fact that man was 
 created in the image of God, and on general reasoning : and again 
 (in iv. 11, 12) speaking evil of a brother is condemned as putting a 
 slight on the Law, not as causing pain to Christ. No mention is 
 made of the death or resurrection of Christ, or of the doctrines of 
 the Incarnation and Atonement. To a careless reader the tone of 
 the Epistle, as a whole, seems scarcely to rise above the level of the 
 Old Testament ; Christian ideas are still clothed in Jewish forms. 
 Thus the Law, called for the sake of distinction ' the law of liberty ' 
 or ' the royal law,' seems to stand in place of the Gospel or even of 
 Christ himself (ii. 8-13, iv. 11) : the love of the world is condemned 
 in the language of the Old Testament as adultery against God. 
 This contrast rises to its highest point in treating of the relation 
 between Faith and Works (ii. 14-26). While St. Paul writes 
 (Rom. iii. 28) ' We reckon therefore that a man is justiBedby faith 
 apart from the works of the law,' the language of St. James is (ii. 
 24) ' Ye see then how that by works a man is justified and not by 
 faith only.' And while the case of Abraham is cited in Rom. iv. 
 3, 13, 16 in proof of the doctrine of justification by faith, and the 
 case of Rahab is cited for the same purpose in Heb. xi. 31, 
 St. James makes use of both to prove that man is justified by works 
 (ii. 25). I shall have to go more fully into these questions here- 
 after, and shall then point out some considerations which will to a 
 certain extent qualify the first impression left on the mind by a 
 perusal of the Epistle ; but speaking generally we may safely say 
 that it has a more Jewish cast than any other writing of the New 
 Testament, and that the author must have been one who would be 
 more in sympathy with the Judaizing party and more likely to 
 exercise an influence over them than any of the three great leaders, 
 Peter, Paul or John. 
 
 If we turn now to the Epistles of St. Paul and to the Acts of the 
 Apostles we find mention there of a James who exactly fulfils the 
 
THE AUTHOR iii 
 
 conditions required in the writer of our Epistle. In Gal. i. 18, 19 ™grtltis 
 St. Paul says that three years after his conversion, probably about ™'i.*",*'^° 
 the year 38 A.D., he want from Damascus to Jerusalem and stayed """i Acts of 
 
 •^ ' "^ James, the 
 
 with Peter fifteen days, seeing no other apostle but only James the President 
 Lord's brother. This is quite in accordance with what we read in churoii at 
 
 .. f_ . . X Jerusalem. 
 
 the Acts xii. 17, where Peter, on his escape from prison (A.D. 44), 
 is recorded to have gone to the house of Mary the mother of Mark, 
 and desired that the news of his escape might be sent to James 
 and the brethren. In Gal. ii. 1-10 St. Paul describes a later visit to 
 Jerusalem after an interval of fourteen years, i.e. about A.D. 51. In 
 this visit the leaders of the Church, James, Peter and John 
 (I.e. ver. 9), after hearing his report of his first missionary journey, 
 signified their approval of his work and 'gave right hands of 
 fellowship,' agreeing that Paul and Barnabas should preach to the 
 Gentiles and they themselves to the circumcision. In verses 11-14 
 of the same chapter Peter's inconsistency in regard to eating with 
 the Gentiles at Antioch is explained by the arrival of certain from 
 James, irpo rov yap eXdelv nvai; airo 'la/cm^ov fiera tmv idvwv 
 a-vvrjcrdiev' ore Be rfkOov, vTreaTeKKev Koi a,(j}a)pi^ev eavrov (f>o^ov- 
 lievo<; Tou? iic TreptTOfirji;. This second visit is more fully described 
 in Acts XV. 4-29, where James appears as President of the Council 
 held to consider how far the Gentile Christians should be required 
 to conform to the customs of the Jews. It is James who sums up 
 the discussion, and proposes the resolution which is carried, in the 
 words iyo) Kplvm fir] ■Trapevo')(\eh< roi? airo twv sOvmv iirio'Tpe^ov- 
 criv eirX rov @e6v, k.t.X. 
 
 It is important to notice that in his speech (ver. 14) Peter RemartaWe 
 
 ' r \ ' agreements 
 
 is called Symeon, a name never assigned to him elsewhere in oJi?'ESe 
 the Acts or in any part of the N.T. except in 2 Pet. i. 1. g™^^^*"', 
 From this we gather that the actual words of the speaker are ^^1",;^" 
 recorded either in their original form or in a translation ; and 
 it becomes thus a matter of interest to learn whether there is 
 any resemblance between the language of our Epistle and that 
 of the speech said to have been uttered by James, and of the 
 circular containing the decree, which was probably drawn up by 
 him.^ I cannot but think it a remarkable coincidence that, out of 
 
 ^ The similarity between the First Epistle of St. Teter and the speeches ascribed 
 to him in the Acts is noticed in Alford's Greek Testament, vol. iv. Frolegomena, 
 p. 137. 
 
 a 2 
 
iv THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 280 words contained in the speech and circular, so many should 
 reappear in our Epistle, written on a totally different subject. 
 They are as follows : (1) the epistolary salutation y^aipeiv (Jas. i. 1, 
 Acts XV. 23), found in only one other passage of the N.T., the letter 
 of Lysias to Felix (Acts xxiii. 26) : (2) the curious phrase borrowed 
 from the LXX. which occurs in the N.T. only in Acts xv. 17 e<f 
 ob(i eTTiKeicXriTai to ovofid fiov eV avToix;, and James ii. 7 to koKov 
 ovofia TO iiriKXTjdev ecj)' vfiai : (3) aKOvauTe aSe\(})Oi fiov found in 
 James ii. 5 alone in the Epistles, compared with avSpef aSe\<j}ol 
 aKova-aTe fiov in Acts xv. 13 : (4) eTria-KeiTTea-Oai James i. 27, Acts 
 XV. 14: (5) eiriaTpi^eiv James v. 19, 20, Acts xv. 19: (6) TTjpelv 
 and hiaT-qpelv, James i. 27 olottiXov eavTov Trjpetv otto tov Koa-fiov, 
 Acts XV. 29 6^ &v hiaTTjpovvTe'i eavTovg ev nrpd^eTe : (7) dyaTrrjTO^ 
 occurs in the Acts only in xv. 25 criiv rot? ayaTrriToi's 'BapvdjSa koL 
 IlaiiXa), while dSeX<f>oi fiov dyaTrrjTOi is found three times in our 
 Epistle : (8) perhaps we may compare also the repetition of the 
 word dSeX^o? in James iv. 11 fj,Tj KaToXaXeiTe dXX'^qXeov dS€X<j)oi' 
 6 KaTaXaXtbv dBeX<j)ov rj Kpcvcov tov dSeX^ov avTov Kpivei tov 
 vofJLov K.T.X. and Acts xv. 23 ol trpea^vTepoi dSeX<f)ol rot? KUTa ttjv 
 'AvTi6y(^eiav...dBeX(J3ol(i '^aipeiv : and the pregnant use of the word 
 ovofia in James v. 10 iXdXyjtrav iv too ovofiaTi K.vpiov, ver. 14 
 dXeiyfravTeg iXai^ ev too ovofiaTi, ii. 7 to icaXbv ovofia and in Acts 
 XV. 14 Xa^elv e^ eOvSiv Xaov tw ovofiaTi avTov, ver. 26 xnrep tov 
 ovofiaTO^ Tov K.vpLOv rjfiwv Irfcrov X.piaTov. 
 aXeements '^° retum to our immediate subject : James is seen in the same 
 whawe'are position of authority in Acts xxi. 18, when Paul presents himself 
 ■ ^^ °j^ before him on his return from his third missionary journey (a.d. 58). 
 tntom ^ft®'^ joii^ing ill praise to God for the success which had attended 
 Epistle, his labours, James and the elders who are with him warn St. Paul 
 of the strong feeling against him which had been excited among 
 the ' myriads of Jewish believers who were all zealous for the law ' 
 (fijXturai TOV vofiov) by the report that he had taught the Jews of 
 the Dispersion to abandon circumcision and their other customs. 
 To counteract this impression, they recommended him" to join in a 
 Nazarite vow, which had been undertaken by four members of their 
 community, as a proof that the report was unfounded and that he 
 himself walked according to the law. The description here given 
 of the state of feeling at Jerusalem and of St. James' anxiety to 
 avoid causing any offence to it is quite in accordance with the 
 
THE AUTHOE v 
 
 tone of our Epistle and may help to explain the reserve with which 
 distinctive Christian doctrines are treated in it. Is it going: too far 
 to compare the use of dyvi^o) in Acts xxi. 24 and James iv. 8, and 
 the construction of hairavav in the same verse {Zairavqa-ov iir 
 avToisi) and in James iv. 3 "va iv rai<; 7]hoval<; vf^wv hairavrjarjre ? 
 
 The only other passage in which James is mentioned by name tws James 
 in the Epistles is 1 Cor. xv. 7, where we are told that Jesus knownas 
 appeared to James after his Resurrection. Of this more will be brother. 
 said shortly. But we have seen that in Gal. i. 19 he receives the 
 appellation of ' the Lord's brother,' and there are further allusions 
 to the ' brethren of the Lord ' in 1 Cor. ix. 5, which is generally 
 taken to imply that they were all married, and in Acts i. 14, where 
 we are told that after the Ascension 'the Eleven with the women 
 and Mary the mother of Jesus and his brethren remained together 
 at Jerusalem waiting for the promise of the Spirit.' These passages 
 also will come in for further consideration immediately. 
 
 An objection may be raised to the identification of the writer of Sf?"™ ''!'y 
 
 _ "^ ^ "^ this title IS 
 
 the Epistle with the brother of the Lord, on the ground that no ?,''*S^?'\j" 
 
 claim is made to this title in either of the Epistles which go by the 
 
 names of the brothers James and Jude. If they were really 
 
 brothers of the Lord, would they not have laid stress on the 
 
 authority derived from this relationship, just as St. Paul lays stress 
 
 on his apostleship ? But what was Christ's own teaching on the 
 
 matter ? When his mother and brothers sought on one occasion 
 
 to use the authority, which they assumed that their kinship gave 
 
 them, they were met by the words ' Who is my mother, and who 
 
 are my brethren ? ' And he stretched out his hand to his disciples 
 
 and said ' Behold my mother and my brethren.' St. Paul expresses 
 
 the same idea, of the disappearance of the earthly relationship in 
 
 the higher spiritual union, by which all the members of the body 
 
 are joined to the Head, in the words ' though we have known 
 
 Christ after the flesh, yet now know we him so no more,' 2 Cor. v. 
 
 16. Surely it is only what we should have expected beforehand, 
 
 that James and Jude would shrink from claiming another name 
 
 than that of ' servant ' to express the relation in which they stood 
 
 to their risen Lord, after having failed (as I shall shortly endeavour 
 
 to show) to acknowledge Him as their Master in the days of his 
 
 humiliation. 
 
 So far we have arrived at the following conclusions : the writer 
 
vi THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 expiations of t^e Epistle is or, to allow for a moment the possibility of its 
 "tiue!" ii"t being genuine, wishes to be understood as being, the President 
 of the Church at Jerusalem, and the brother of the Lord.^ We 
 have now to investigate the meaning of this last expression. Is 
 it to be understood literally of half-brotl)ers of the Lord, sons of 
 Mary his mother and of Joseph his reputed father ? Or is it to 
 be understood of foster-brothers, sons of his reputed father by 
 a former wife ? Or is it to be understood of the cousins of the 
 Lord, sons of Clopas or Alphaeus, the husband of his mother's 
 sister, who bore the same name as herself? It may be well fitst 
 to bring together the passages bearing on this subject in the 
 Gospels, and then to examine them more carefully in reference to 
 the three theories above stated. I quote from the R.V. 
 
 ^thrNew" Matt. i. 25. Joseph . . . took unto him his wife and knew her 
 
 '^beartog'* ^°^ ^^^^ ^^^ ^^<^ brought forth a son. 
 
 upon the Luke ii. 7. She brought forth her first-born son. 
 
 subject. o 
 
 John ii. 12. After this he went down to Capernaum, he and 
 his mother and his brethren and his disciples : and there they 
 abode not many days. 
 
 Matt. xiii. 54 — 56. And coming into his own country he taught 
 them in their synagogue, insomuch that they were astonished and 
 said, Whence hath this man this wisdom and these mighty works ? 
 Is not this the carpenter's son ? is not his mother called Mary ? 
 and his brethren James and Joses and Simon and Judas ? And 
 his sisters are they not all with us ? Whence then hath this man 
 these things ? 
 
 Mark vi. 3. Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and 
 brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon ? and are not 
 his sisters here with us ? And they were offended in him. Cf. 
 Luke iv. 16—30, John vi. 42. 
 
 Matt. xii. 47. While he was yet speaking to the multitudes, 
 behold his mother and his brethren stood without, seekinsr to 
 speak to him. And one said unto him, Behold thy mother and 
 thy brethren stand without, seeking to speak to thee. But he 
 
 ^ I have made no reference to the Tiihingen theory whiuh supposes the Acts to be 
 a Tendenz- schrift written with the view of minimizing the difference between St. Paul 
 and St. James, (1) because I do not see that it in any way affects my argument, unless 
 it should be maintained that the writer of the Acts had our Epistle before him and 
 intentionally imitated its language, which would give an even stronger support to 
 my argument from a different point of view ; and (2) because the theory itself seems 
 to me by this time exploded. 
 
THE AUTHOR vii 
 
 answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother ? 
 and who are my brethren ? And he stretched forth his hand to 
 his disciples and said, Behold my mother and my brethren. 
 
 Mark iii. 20 — 22, 31 — 33. And the multitude cameth together, 
 again, so that they could not so much as eat bread. And when 
 his friends {ol- Trap' avrov) heard it they went out to lay hold on 
 him : for they said, He is beside himself. And the scribes which 
 came down from Jerusalem said, He hath Beelzebub, and by 
 the prince of the devils casteth he out the devils. . . . And there , 
 come his mother and his brethren ; and standing without, they 
 sent unto him, calling him. And a multitude was sitting about 
 him; and they say unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy 
 brethren without seek for thee. And he answered them and saith, 
 Who is my mother and my brethren ? &c. Cf Luke viii. 19 — 21. 
 
 John vii. 2 — 8. Now the feast of the Jews, the feast of taber- 
 nacles, was at hand. His brethren therefore said unto him. 
 Depart hence and go into Judaea, that thy disciples also may 
 behold thy works which thou doest. For no man doeth anything 
 in secret and himself seeketh to be known openly. If thou doest 
 these things manifest thyself to the world. For even (ovBi) his 
 brethren did not believe on him. Jesus therefore saith unto them. 
 My time is not yet come, but your time is alway ready. The 
 world cannot hate you, but me it hateth, because I testify of it 
 that its works are evil. 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 56. And many women were there beholding from 
 afar, which had followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering unto 
 him : among whom was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of 
 James and Joses, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee. 
 
 Mark xv. 40. ' And there were also women beholding from afar : 
 among whom were both Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of 
 James the less (jou fniKpov) and of Joses, and Salome.' A little 
 below (ver. 47) the second Mary is called 'Mary the mother of 
 Joses,' and in xvi. 1 ' the mother of James,' as in Luke xxiv. 10. 
 
 John xix. 25 — 27. There were standing by the cross his mother, 
 and his mother's sister, Mary the loife of Clopas, and Mary 
 Magdalene. When Jesus therefore saw his mother and the 
 disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother. 
 Woman, behold thy son ! Then saith he to the disciple. Behold thy 
 mother ! And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home. 
 
viii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 I think any one reading these passages for the first time, without, 
 any preconceived idea on the subject, would naturally take what 
 is called the Helvidian view, that the brethren of the Lord were 
 sons of Joseph and Mary. It will be seen, however, that there is 
 much to be said in favour of the other views mentioned above. 
 We will examine first the argument in favour of the Hieronymian 
 theory — that those who are called brethren were really cousins.^ 
 
 A. — -The Hieronymian Theory. 
 Jerome's This thcorv was put forward about the year 383 A.D. as a 
 
 theory, that ■' ^ . "L . iij 
 
 by the novel hvpothesis ^ by Jerome m answer to Heividius, wno naa 
 
 brethren of ■' ^ .... „, ..-, • j ± 
 
 the Lord attacked the prevailing view of the superiority oi the unmamed to 
 sons of his the married state by referring to the example of the Lord's mother. 
 sister, ' of whom we read in Scripture that she bore children to her husband 
 Joseph.' Jerome's argument briefly stated is, that James the 
 brother of the Lord is called an Apostle by St. Paul, that he must 
 therefore be identified with James the son of Alphaeus, since 
 James the son of Zebedee was no longer living when Paul wrote ; 
 identified also with James the less in Mark xv. 40 (the compara- 
 tive implying an opposition to James the greater,* viz. the son of 
 Zebedee), this James being there stated to be brother of Joses, 
 But in Mark vi. 3 we find a James and Joses among the brethren 
 of Jesus, and this agrees with John xix. 25, where Mary the 
 mother of James and wife of Alphaeus is called Mary of Clopas, 
 sister of the Lord's mother ; from whence it follows that the four 
 brothers and two or more sisters mentioned in Mark vi. 3 and 
 elsewhere are really first cousins of Jesus. Jerome himself had no 
 
 ^ In the discussion whicli follows I have had constantly before me Bp. Lightfoot's 
 dissertation on the Brethren of the Lord, admirable alike for thoroughness, clearness, 
 and fairness, which is contained in his Galatians (10th ed. pp. 252-2911. I have 
 also consulted Credaer's HinleUung in d. N. T., Laurent's JVeutent. Studien, Mill's 
 Pavt/ieistic Principles, Part II. pp. 220-316, and the articles 'Maria 'and ' Jakobus ' 
 in Herzog's Encycl. f. prot. Theol. I should have been glad to put the question 
 aside with a simple reference, but I think there are some considerations which have 
 not been suiEciently attended to, and that the Epistle gains an added interest from 
 what I hold to be the right solution of the difficulty. [Since this was written I 
 have read Canon Farrar's able discussion of the subject in his Early Days of 
 Christianity, ch. xix., and Bungener's Rome et la Bale, both of whom take the same 
 view as I have done. J 
 
 ^ See Pearson On the Creed, p. 175 n. Bp. Lightfoot (p. 273) has shown that the 
 Papias cited by t)r. Mill and others in favour of the Hieronymian view is not the 
 companion of Polyoarp, but a writer of the eleventh century. 
 
 ' ' There is no scriptural or early sanction for speaking of the son of Zebedee as 
 James the Great ' (Lightfoot, Gal. p. 263). 
 
THE AUTHOR ix 
 
 information on the subject of Clopas, but suggests that he may 
 possibly have been father of Mary. Later writers added further 
 developments to this theory. Clopas was identified with Alphaeus, 
 as another form of the common Aramaic original Chalphai; and 
 'Judas of James,' who occurs in St. Luke's list of the Apostles 
 (Luke vi. 16, Acts i. 13), is identified with the writer of the 
 Epistle, who calls himself ' brother of James ' (Jude 1), and also 
 with the brother of Joses, James and Simon in Mark vi. 3. 
 Simon Zelotes, who is joined With James and Judas in the list of 
 the Apostles, is supposed to be another of these brethren ; and 
 some held that Matthew, being identical with Levi the son of 
 Alphaeus, must belong to the same family. 
 
 Bishop Lightfoot calls attention to the fact that not only does „*|^her 
 Jerome make no pretence to any traditional support for this view,-' J"?°°rj' 
 but that he is himself by no means consistent in holding it. Thus ^ t™e of 
 
 '^ . , ^ Terome and 
 
 in his comment on the Galatians written about 387 A.D. he says : is not ijeici 
 
 ' corsistently 
 
 'James was called the Lord's brother on account of his high tyium. 
 character, his incomparable faith, and his extraordinary wisdom ; 
 the other apostles are also called brothers (John xx. 17), but he pre-r 
 eminently so, to whom the Lord at his departure had committed 
 the sons of his mother (i.e. the members of the Church at 
 Jerusalem).' In a later work still, the epistle to Hedibia, written 
 about 406, he speaks of Mary of Cleophas (Clopas), the aunt of our 
 Lord, and Mary the mother of James and Joses, as distinct 
 persons, 'although some contend that the mother of James and 
 Joses was his aunt.' 
 
 I proceed now to examine the above argument. 
 
 (1) It is assumed that ' brother ' (aSeX^o?) may be used in the t°^|°Jj^"?g 
 sense of cousin {ave-<^i6<;, found in Col. iv. 10). The supporters of Jf'^^-, 
 this theory do not offer any parallel from the N.T., but they appeal 'brother 
 to classical use both in Greek and Latin, and to the O.T. The -cousin' 
 examples cited from classical Greek are merely expressive of warm Hebrew 
 affection, or else metaphorical, as Plato Crito § 16, where the laws sometimes 
 of Athens are made to speak of ol ■^/j.eTepoi aSeX<j)ol ol iv AiSov noparaiiei' 
 vouoi. There is no instance in classical Greek, as far as I know, of is cited 
 
 eitlier from 
 1 After disputing the value of the authorities appealed to by Helvidius, he sets *^* ^^^ 
 aside the appeal to authority in the words Verum nugas terimus et fonte veritatis classical 
 omisso opiniomMn riimlos amsectamur {Adv. Helii. 17) ; and in another treatise (De Greek. 
 Viris Illustribus 2) contrasts his own view with the Epiphanian in the words Ut 
 nonnulli existimant, Joseph ex alia uxore ; ut autem mihi vidctur, Mariae sororis 
 matris Domini... filnis (Lightfoot, p. 259). 
 
X THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 fiSeXi^o? beiQg used to denote a cousin. In Latin frater may 
 stand for frater patruelis, where there is no danger of being mis- 
 understood (cf. Cic. ad Alt. i. 5. 1). The Hebrew word is used 
 loosely to include cousin, as in Gen. xiv. 14 — 16 (of Abraham and 
 Lot), where the LXX. has dSe\(j>iSou<! ; in Levit. x. 4, where the first 
 cousins of Aaron are called brethren (dSe\(l>ol) of his sons, Nadab 
 and Abihu ; in 1 Chrori. xxiii. 21, 22 ('The sons "of Mahli, Eleazar 
 and Kish. And Eleazar died, and had no sons, but daughters : and 
 their brethren the sons of Kish took them '), where also the LXX. 
 has aSeX^ot. These passages. seem to me to be hardly covered by 
 the general rule laid down by Bishop-Lightfoot (p. 261): "in an affec- 
 tionate and earnest appeal intended to move the sympathies of the 
 hearer, a speaker might not unnaturally address a relation or a 
 friend or even a fellow-countryman as his ' brother ' : and even 
 when speaking of such to a third person he might through warmth 
 of feeling and under certain aspects so designate him." I think, 
 however, the Bishop is entirely right when he goes on to say : " It 
 is scarcely conceivable that the cousins of any one should be 
 commonly and indeed exclusively styled his 'brothers' by in- 
 different persons ; still less, that one cousin in particular should be 
 singled out and described in this loose way 'James, the Lord's 
 brother.'" If we remark too the care with which Hegesippus 
 (quoted under § 6 below) employs the term a8eX</)09 of James and 
 Jude, the brothers of the Lord, while he keeps the term dvei^to? 
 for Symeon, the cousin of the Lord and second bishop of Jerusalem, 
 we shall feel that there is a strong probability against the use 
 of dSe\<l>oi in the N.T. to denote anything but brothers, i.e. in the 
 case before us either half-brothers or foster-brothers, accordincr 
 to the evidence to be considered later on. 
 broTher'of (^) Jerome's main argument is that James the Lord's brother 
 wS.*Mt me ^^^ ""^^ °^ ^^^ Twelve, and therefore identical with James the son 
 Twelve °^ Alphaeus. He grounds this assertion on a single passage in St. 
 Paul, which I shall presently examine. Bishop Lightfoot and others 
 have shown that it is not a necessary consequence of St. Paul's 
 language, and that it is opposed to the distinction everywhere made 
 in the N.T. between the Brethren of the Lord and the Twelve. 
 Thus in Acts i. 14, after the list of the Eleven including James the 
 son of Alphaeus, we read ' these all continued instant in prayer ' 
 aw yvuai^lv Kcil Mapikfi tjj firjrpl rov 'Iija-ov Kal rot? dBe\<f>oU 
 
THE AUTHOR xi 
 
 avTov. It will hardly be said that they are included in the 
 Twelve, as Mary among the women, and specially mentioned 
 afterwards, as she is, only on account of their superior importance. 
 If so, they would have been mentioned immediately after the 
 Apostles ; on the contrary they are placed after Mary, being 
 joined with her, as in several other passages, because they, with 
 her, constitute the family to which Jesus belonged. Thus in 
 John ii. 12 we read that Jesus went down to Capernaum avro<; 
 Kal r/ firjTTjp avrov Koi oi dBeXcjiol /cal oi fJ-a6r]Tal avTov- Kai i/cel 
 efj,eivav oil TroXXas rjfiepai! : in Matt. xii. 47 foil. ' One said to him ' 
 iSoii rj fjirjTrjp aov Kal oi aSe\<j)oi aov e^co earrjKacnv f/^roui'Tes aoi, 
 \aXrj(Tai . . . . ' and stretching forth his hand to his disciples he 
 saith. ' tSou 7] fjLTjTijp fiov Kal ol aBeXipoi fjuov otxTts yap av TrotJjo-j? 
 TO 6eKr)iJLa tov ITarpo? p-ov, rov iv ovpavol^, avTO^ /xoi aSeX^o? Kai 
 aS€X(prj Kai fiijrjjp eariv. In the last passage there is the same 
 strong antithesis between natural earthly ties and his duty to his 
 Father in heaven, which we observe in the words spoken by him 
 when found as a boy in the Temple. 
 
 Notice also that there is in this passage not only a distinction '^1^^^ ''^' 
 made between the brethren of Jesus and his disciples, but a ''^^"^ifj""'' 
 certain opposition is implied, which is brought out more clearly weie^not 
 in St. Mark's narrative of the same event (iii. 21, 31 — 35). believers. 
 From the latter it appears that the reason why they of his 
 family {ol Trap' aiirov) desired to speak with him was because the 
 rumour which had reached them of his incessant labours led them 
 to believe that he was out of his mind. As St. Mark goes on to 
 say (ver. 22) that the scribes accused Jesus of casting out devils 
 through Beelzebub, and as we further read in John (x. 20, viii. 
 48) that many said ' He hath a devil and is mad ' ; it would seem, 
 though it is not expressly stated, that these calumnious reports of 
 his enemies had not been without effect on some members of 
 his own family. At all events, they went out prepared Kparelv 
 avTov, i.e. to put him under some restraint. This narrative gives 
 additional point to the words in Mark vi. 4, spoken with immediate 
 reference to the unbelief of the people of Nazareth, ovk eanv 
 •jrpo&riTr)!; dTi/jiOf el fir] iv rrj narpihi avTOV Kal iv toZ? crvyyeveveriv 
 avrov Kal iv rrj oUia avrov. If it were simply the disbelief of 
 townspeople not immediately related to him, there seems no need 
 for the addition 'in his own kinsfolk and in his own house.' 
 
xii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 This inference, which we naturally draw from the words of St. 
 Mark, is confirmed by the express statement of St. John (vii. 3 — 5), 
 oiiSe yap ol aZe\<^ol aiirov eiricrTevov eU aiiTov, and by our Lord's 
 words addressed to them (ver. 7), oi SvvaTao 6 K.oajj.o'i fiiaeiv 
 UyCias' ifie Be /iiarei, on iyo) fiaprvpco irepu avTov on ra epya 
 avTou Trovrjpd iariv. Compare this with the words spoken 
 shortly afterwards to the disciples (xv. 19), el eic rov koctiiov 
 rjTe, 6 Koa-fioi; av ro 'iSiov icjjiXef on Se i/c rev Koafiov ovk eare, 
 aXK' e'yw i^eXe^a i/id'; eK rov koct/mov, Sta rovro pLicrel v/J,d<; a 
 Koa-p.o'i. I defer the question as to the cause and nature of the 
 unbelief imputed to the Lord's brothers, and the cause of their 
 subsequent conversion. I simply note here that in vii. 3 they are 
 represented as making a distinction between themselves and the 
 disciples, and that in vv. 5 — 7 they are said to be on the side of the 
 world against Christ. I think my readers will agree that the argu- 
 ment derived from St. Paul's words must be one of great force if 
 it is to overthrow the combined evidence of so many passages, all 
 showing that Christ's brothers were not included in the Twelve. 
 Examination The words on which Jerome lays stress are Gal. i. 18, 19, 
 
 of the texts ,„- jtt / > " - vi/ \ 
 
 adduced on avrfkOov 6i9 lepoa-oXvfia la-Toprjcyai, K.rj(f>dv Kai eTre/xeiva Trpos 
 
 tlie other , % , , ^ / » fs - ' '% > »t » 
 
 side. avTOv Tj^iepwi oexairevTe. erepov oe rayv airoa-ToXcov ovk eioov, et 
 eiiiijin fifj 'IdK(i}/3ov Tov ctSeXcfiov Tov Kvpiov. Bishop Lightfoot in his 
 note discusses whether this should be translated, ' I saw no other 
 Apostle save James,' or, ' I saw no other Apostle, but only James.' 
 He gives instances to show that el fit) may have the latter force, 
 e.g. Luke iv. 27, iroWol Xe-Trpol ^a-av ei> ra 'laparjX eirl 'EXiiraiov 
 rov 'irpo<p'^TOv, koL ov?iel<; avrmv etcaQapLaQii el fj,rj 'Naafiav 6 'Zvpo<;, 
 Gal. ii. 16, oii ZiicaiovTai avSpcoiroi; e^ epjcav vofiov eav firj Bia 
 iriaTewi 'IijaoO Xpicrrov, Apoc. xxi. 27, ov fir) elaeXOy eh av-rqv 
 irdv Koivov Kai a Troioiv ^SeXvyfia koI ■\}revBo<;, el /j,r) ol yeypa/i/iivoi 
 ev Tw ^(,^Xl<p T7J9 fwi}?, ih. ix. 4. The peculiarity of these cases 
 is that, whereas, according to the ordinary use, et p.r) introduces an 
 exception to a general statement applicable to all the members of 
 the class to which the excepted case belongs, in the instances 
 cited the excepted case is not included in the foregoing class. 
 It appears to be originally a colloquial use, and is employed with 
 comic effect in Arist. Eq. 185, &c. Thus here Naaman was not 
 one of the many lepers in Israel ; they who are written in the 
 Book of Life are not included among those who are guilty of 
 
 Gal. i. 19. 
 
THE AUTHOR xiii 
 
 abomination and falsehood ; faith is not included in the works of 
 the law, but is contrasted with them as a different kind of 
 justification. Accordingly, St. James need not be included in the 
 preceding Apostles. Much in the same way we find ifKriv used, 
 where we should rather have expected oKKd, e.g. Acts xxvii. 22, 
 atro^okrj yap y}rv)(fj<; ovSefiCa eaTai e^ vfi&v irXrjv tov ifKoiov. 
 But even if we give its usual force to el fiij, it will not follow that 
 St. James was included in the Twelve, for there can be no doubt 
 that in Gal. i. 19 erepov looks backward to K.'r}(f>av, not forward 
 to 'laKto^ov. The sentence would have been complete at elSov, 
 ' I saw Peter and none other of the Apostles.' Then it strikes 
 St. Paul, as an afterthought, that the position of James, as Presi- 
 dent of the Church at Jerusalem, was not inferior to that of the 
 Apostles, and he adds ' unless you reckon James among them.' 
 
 That the term 'apostle' was not strictly confined to the The term 
 
 ■*■ apostle 
 
 Twelve appears from another passage in which James is men- wasnnt 
 
 i, h, TT • • ' • 1 I T 1 • oonflned to 
 
 tioned, 1 Cor. xv. 4 — 7. Here it is said that Jesus after his the Twelve. 
 resurrection 'appeared to Cephas, then to the Twelve, then to 
 above 500 brethren at once, then to James, then to all the 
 Apostles,' where we should perhaps consider the term to include 
 the Seventy, according to the view of Irenaeus and other early 
 writers. At any rate there can be no doubt as to St. Paul's 
 apostleship. Barnabas also is called an apostle (Acts xiv. 4, 14), 
 probably also Andronicus and Junias (Rom. xvi. 7), and Silvanus 
 (1 Thess. ii. 6).^ 
 
 It seems to me that the most natural interpretation of the two 
 passages just dealt with is that which concedes the name ' apostle ' 
 in the wider sense to St. James, but makes a distinction between 
 him and the Twelve. We should infer the same from 1 Cor. ix. 5, 6, 
 'have we not a right to take about a wife that is a believer' 
 (^aSeXtjjrjv yvvalKo) w? Kal ol \onroL a/novTo\oi Koi oi aBe\.<pol 
 TOV K.vpiov Kal lLr)<f>d<; ; fj fi6vo<; eyw Kal 'Rapvd^a'; ovk e'^ofiev 
 e^ovcrlav fir/ epyd^eadai ; Here oi Xoi'trol dnocyTdXoi is contrasted 
 with eyo) Kal Bapvd^aq : and apparently the ' brethren of the 
 Lord ' and ' Cephas ' are particularized as being those who were 
 known to make use of the liberty belonging of right to all. 
 
 If it should be argued that, where the ' brethren of the Lord ' 
 are distinguished from the Twelve, this may be spoken loosely of 
 
 ^ See Lightfoot, I.e., pp. 92-101, and the DidacM xi. 1. 5 witli Funk's notes. 
 
xiv THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 the majority of them, and need not be understood to apply strictly 
 
 to each separate brother ; that it is consistent therefore with the 
 
 supposition that James, for instance, was an Apostle, provided that 
 
 Simon and Jude were not Apostles ; the answer is that the theory 
 
 derives part of its seeming strength from the coincidence of the 
 
 names of three of the brethren of the Lord and three of the Twelve 
 
 Apostles. But it is impossible to suppose repeated assertions to 
 
 be made respecting the brethren of the Lord, which (on this 
 
 supposition) are untrue of him who was by far the best known 
 
 Jame^n'or ^mong them. Lastly it is to be noticed that neither James nor 
 
 themselves J^^^® claims the title of Apostle in his Epistle, and that Jude seems 
 
 Apostles, to disclaim the title for himself in ver. 17, fivrjcrO'qre rwv prjfiaTav 
 
 tSiv TTpoeipTfjjbevnv viro tmv aTToaToXccv tov Kuptov. 
 
 ^onheLord^ (3) I* has been shown that probability is strongly against a 
 
 "founder cousin of the Lord being habitually known as aSeXtpbt: Kvpiov, 
 
 with'His ^^'^ *^^* ^^^ evidence is overwhelming against the brothers of the 
 
 mother. Lord being included in the Twelve. Scarcely less strong is the 
 
 argument against the Hieronymian view drawn from what we 
 
 read of the relation of the brethren of the Lord to his mother. 
 
 Though, according to this view, their own mother Mary was living 
 
 at the time of the crucifixion, and though there is nothing to show 
 
 that their father was not also living, yet they are never found in 
 
 the company of their parents or parent, but always with the 
 
 Virgin. They move with her and her divine Son to Capernaum 
 
 and form one household there (John ii. 12) ; they take upon 
 
 themselves to control and check the actions of Jesus; they go 
 
 with Mary 'to take him,' when it is feared that his mind is 
 
 becoming unhinged. They are referred to by the neighbours as 
 
 members of his family in exactly the same terms as his mother 
 
 Thetesti- and his reputed father; the neighbours, it is evident, have no 
 
 raony of the ■*■ ' o ' > 
 
 neighbours more doubt as to the one relationship than thev have as to the 
 
 goes to prone r j 
 
 the reality other; they have known the parents, they have known the 
 
 of the 1 ■! 1 , . . , . "^ 
 
 'lesSn ot ^'^^'■'^^^^ ' tbere is m their eyes no mystery in the matter, nothing 
 the maternal to suggest anything out of the common order of nature. It is 
 
 relation. °° . "^ ^ 
 
 suggested indeed that the Virgin and her sister were both widows 
 at this time, and had agreed to form ono household ; but this is 
 mere hypothesis, and is scarcely consistent with the remarks of the 
 neighbours, who endeavour to satisfy themselves that Jesus was 
 not entitled to speak as he had done, by calling to mind those 
 
THE AUTHOR xv 
 
 nearest to him in blood. We read that Joseph was still alive at 
 the time of the visit to the Temple in His twelfth year; the 
 neighbours must surely have known whether these six or seven 
 brothers and sisters were really Joseph's children or those of 
 Joseph's sister-in-law. But we need not dwell further on this 
 point, since the assumption on which the whole theory rests is 
 untenable, as I now proceed to show. 
 
 (4) That Mary of Clopas was the sister of Mary the mother of "J^ M°^'""ot' 
 the Lord, is not only most improbable in itself (for where do we ^^''^^^^j^^^''" 
 find two sisters with the same name ?), but is not the most natural st. John the 
 
 '' aunt of 
 
 interpretation of St. John xix. 2.5, elcnriKeicrav Se irapa to3 aravprn Jesus. 
 Tov 'Irjcrov rj fi'^jrjp avTov Kal rj dBe\<f>r] rij'; firjrpbii avrov, M.apta 
 ■f) TOV KXtoTTa Kal M.apia 57 ^aySaXrjvi^ (translated in tbe Peshitto, 
 ' His mother and his mother's sister, and Mary of Cleopha and 
 Mary Magdalene '). If we compare this verse with Mark xv. 40 
 and Matt, xxvii. 56, we find that, of the three women named as 
 present in addition to the mother of Jesus, Mary Magdalene occurs 
 in all three lists; 'Mary the mother of James and Joses' of the 
 two synoptic Gospels is generally identified with ' Mary of Clopas ' ; 
 and we then have left in Matthew 'the mother of the sons of 
 Zebedee,' in Mark ' Salome,' and in John ' his mother's sister.' 
 Salome is generally identified with 'the mother of the sons of 
 Zebedee," and there seems good reason also for identifying her with 
 ' his mother's sister ' in the Fourth Gospel. It does not seem likely 
 that St. John would omit the name of his own mother ; and the 
 indirect way in which he describes her is very similar to the way 
 in which he refers to himself as ' the disciple whom Jesus loved.' 
 If we are right in this supposition, it is natural that the two 
 sisters should be paired together, and then the two other Maries, 
 just as we have the Apostles arranged in pairs without a connecting 
 particle in Matt. x. 3, 4. If the sons of Zebedee were so nearly 
 related to our Lord, it helps us to understand Salome's request that 
 they might sit on his right hand and on his left hand in his 
 glory, as well as the commendation by our Lord of his mother to 
 one, who was not only his best-loved disciple, but her own nephew. 
 If, however, this interpretation is correct, if the sister of the Lord's 
 mother is not the mother of James and Joses, but the mother of 
 the sons of Zebedee, then the foundation-stone of the Hieronymian 
 theory is removed, and the whole fabric topples to the ground. 
 
xvi THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 graimdfo? (^) ^ *^^® ^^'^^ *^° minor identifications, that of ' James the 
 theidentifl- Jess' With the 'brother of the Lord/ and that of 'lovSa? 'laxcojSov, 
 
 cation either ' 
 
 °Litt"^with° °-^ ^^^^ vi. 16 and Acts i. 13, with Jude the writer of the Epistle, 
 the brother who calls himself ' brother of James.' We have seen that Mary 
 
 of the Lord, - zr i • 
 
 or of 'loiiSas the mother of James tov uikoov and of Joses, m Mark xv. 40, is 
 
 loKtafiov 
 
 with the probably the same as Mary of Clopas, and that we have no reason 
 epistle ot for inferring from the Gospels, that she was related to Jesus. If so, 
 there is an end to the supposition that James the less is James 
 the brother of the Lord. But it is worth while to notice the 
 mistranslation in which Jerome imagined that he found a further 
 argument for the identification of our James with the son of 
 Alphaeus. The comparative minor, he says, suggests two persons, 
 viz. the two Apostles of this name. But the Greek has no com- 
 parative, simply TOV fiiicpov, ' the little,' which no more implies a 
 comparison with only one person, than any other descriptive 
 epithet, such as evepyeTr)<; or (f>i\dBeX^o^. As to 'loiJSa? 'laKco/Sov, 
 no instance is cited for such an omission of the word aSe\(f>6';, and 
 we must therefore translate ' Judas son of James ' with the K.V. 
 Independently of this, if James, Judas and Simon are all sons of 
 Alphaeus, what a strange way is this of introducing their names in 
 the list of the Apostles, ' James of Alphaeus, Simon Zelotes, Judas 
 of James ' ! Why not speak of all as ' sons of Alphaeus,' or of the 
 two latter as 'brothers of James'? Why not speak of all as 
 ' brethren of the Lord ' ? It is especially strange that, if Judas 
 were really known as such, he should have been distinguished in 
 John (xiv. 22) merely by a negative, ' Judas not Iscariot,' and in 
 the other Gospels by the appellation 'Lebbaeus' or 'Thaddaeus' 
 (Matt. X. 3, Mark iii. 18). 
 
 ^TOundfo? (^) ^"^^ ^^^ ^66" ^ade of the identification of the names 
 '"cloprs"^ Alphaeus and Clopas, and of the duality of Clopas and Cleopas 
 Aiptalus. ^^^^^ ^'^^'^- ^^)- ^* ^^^^^ doubtful whether the identification of 
 the former and the separation of the latter pair can be maintained. 
 Bp. Lightfoot considers that ' viewing the question as one of names 
 only, it is quite as reasonable to identify Clopas with Cleopas as 
 with Alphaeus ' (I.e., pp. 256, 267). Supposing our previous argu- 
 ment to be sound, the question is of no importance as to our main 
 subject. If however we extend our inquiry beyond the limits of 
 the N.T. it again becomes a matter of interest, because we learn 
 from Hegesippus (about 160 A.D.) that there was a connexion of a 
 
THE AUTHOR xvii 
 
 different nature between Clopas and our Lord. His testimony, negesiiipus 
 preserved by Eusebius (H. E. iv. 22), is to the effect that ' after the ciopaswas 
 martyrdom oi James the Just on the same charge as the Lord, his Joseph. His 
 paternal uncle's child Symeon, the son of Clopas, is next made the second' 
 bishop, who was put forward by all as the second in succession, Jerusalem, 
 being cousin of the Lord ' (jiera to [xaprvprjaai 'Id/cco^ov rov hUaiov cousin, not 
 to? Kai o is.vpio<; eTrt too avrqi \oyq>, ttoXiv o eK tov aeiov avrov tiie Lord. 
 "iiiVfiemv 6 TOV KXcoird KaOiaTaTat eTriaKO'iro';, ov irpoeOevTO Trai/re? 
 ovTa dveyjribv tov Kvpiov BevTepov). Some have understood this to 
 mean that Symeon and James were both sons of the Lord's reputed 
 uncle Clopas, and thus that Symeon was the second of his cousins 
 who was bishop of Jerusalem. But Bp. Lightfoot well remarks 
 that, if this were meant, we must have had erejoo? t&p e'« tov 
 deiov, not 6 eK tov Oelov, and that it would have been far more 
 natural simply to have said o dBe\<f>b'i avTov. The meaning of 
 hevTepov is made clear from Euseb. H. E. iii. 22 t&v eir 'Avtio- 
 ^et'a? ^voBiov irpwTOV KaTaa-TdvTO<i, BevTepo^ iv T0t9 SrjXovfievoi'; 
 'lyvaTio^ iyveopc^sTo. '^v/ji.eaip ofMolwi SevTepo<; fieTO, tov tov "ZcoTij- 
 po<; ^fiav dSeX^ov t^« iv 'lepocroXvfioi'i iKKXr]a-ia<s kuto, tovtov; 
 TTjv XeiTovpyiav iyKe'^eipto'/j.evo^ ?jv, ib. iii. 32 iv d> (Sicoy/imj 'Zv/ie- 
 Siva TOV TOV KXwjrd, ov BevTepov KaTacrTrjvai ttj? iv 'lepocroXv/Moti; 
 iKK\r)cria<; eTriaKo-irov iBrfXaxrafiev, fiapTvpio) tov ^lov avaXva-ai 
 irapeiXri^afiev. These passages are also important as showing that, 
 while the son of Clopas is described as the cousin of Jesus, James 
 is still described as his brother: so too Jude {ib. iii. 20). The 
 relationship is more exactly defined in the 11th ch. of the same 
 book, where it is said that after the death of James the surviving 
 apostles and disciples of the Lord unanimously elected Symeon as 
 his successor, dvei^iov, W9 76 ^aari, yeyovoTa tov A(>>Tfipo<i' tov yap 
 oiiv KXtOTrai/ dheX<^ov tov 'Icocrr]^ {nrdp')(eiv 'Hyrjcrnnro'i laTopel. 
 If Clopas is really the same as Alphaeus, this Symeon would be 
 brother of the Apostles James the Little and Matthew, as well as of 
 the Joscs mentioned in Ma,rk xv. 40 : but few would contend that 
 these nephews of the reputed father of Jesus could really be known 
 as ' the Lord's brethren.' 
 
 I have endeavoured to point out the difficulties which beset the ^jo^Xity' 
 Hieronymian theory and make it in my opinion less worthy of jjlerony- 
 acceptance than either of the other theories. As it seems still to ™a" ™w. 
 be the predominant theory in the churches of Western Christ- 
 
 h 
 
xviii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 endom, reformed^ and iinreformed, I have thought it might be well 
 to show by a rough numerical estimate the force of the pro- 
 babilities which are really arrayed against it. This will be found 
 in the note below.''' 
 
 B. — The Epiphanian Theory. 
 
 I proceed now to examine the Epiphanian view, according to 
 
 which the Lord's brothers were sons of Joseph by a former wife. 
 
 This was the generally accepted view when Jerome put forward 
 
 his new theory, and to a great extent it escapes the difficulties 
 
 forofii'the which, we have seen, attach to that theory. 
 
 made'to'th'e '^^o Unimportant objections made both to it and to the Helvidian 
 
 £nf ftom theory from the Hieronymian point of view are : (1) that they 
 
 *mim point" ^ssume the existence of two sets of cousins having two names in 
 
 of view, common, James and Joseph being found both among the sons of 
 
 Alphaeus and among the Lord's brothers ; and if we accept the 
 
 statement of Hegesippus that Symeon was son of Clopas, and 
 
 1 Even a commentator so little fettered by tradition as Dr. S. Cox writes thus in 
 the Expositor for Jan. 1890, p. 68 : ' James thpn (as I hold and shall assnme, after a 
 careful study of the various theories proi)ounded about him...) was the son of 
 Alphaeus, otherwise called Clopas, and of his wife, the sister of the Virgin Mary... 
 Among his brothers were Simeon. ..Jude...Joses... and Levi the publican.' It is 
 curious that the one authority to which Dr. Cox refers those who care to examine the 
 controversy for themselves is ' tlie admirable suinmaiy in Dean Plumptre's commen- 
 tary,' where however we read (p. 17) 'there is absolutely no ground for identifying 
 the brother of the Lord with the son of Alphaeus.' 
 
 ^ Those who have followed the orgument in the text will not, I think, regard the 
 following estimates of the chances in favour of the several suppositions involved in 
 tbe Hieronymian theory as giving an unfair representation of the ciise : 
 
 {a) for the use of bSeK(p6s for cousin in the phrase oSeAif is Kvplov — one out of five 
 (i), making 4 to 1 against it. 
 
 (i) for the brethren of the Lord being included in the Twelve — one out of ten (^), 
 making 9 to 1 against it. 
 
 (c) for the supposed sons of Clopas-Alphaeus being always found in company — 
 not with their own mother, who was certainly still living, — but with their aunt, 
 residing with her and her Son, and taking on them.selves to control the actions of 
 tbe latter — one out of ten (•f'y), making 9 to 1 against it. 
 
 (d) for two sisters having the same name — one out of ten {-},,), making 9 to 1 
 against it. 
 
 There are various other improbabilities, some of which have been already touched 
 on, and others of even greater weight will appear in treating of the Epiphanian 
 view, but I should be willing to rest the case on the four points here named, giving 
 a resultant probability in favour of the simultaneous realisation of the four above- 
 stated hypotheses of —~- — — — _ = ^^, making 4999 probabilities to 1 against 
 it, that is, against the truth of the Hieronymian theory. 
 
THE AUTHOR xix 
 
 identify Clopas with Alpliaeus, we then get a third name Symeon 
 ■common to the families. This objection is based on several 
 assumptions, one being that Mary the wife of Clopas was sister of 
 the Virgin Mary, which has been shown to be all but incredible. 
 But waiving this, why should it be thought improbable that three 
 of the commonest Jewish names should be found in two sets of 
 cousins ? We have a greater variety of Christian names in ordinary 
 use in England than there were then in Judea, but no one would 
 think such a recurrence of names in any way remarkable or extra- 
 ordinary ; in fact, so far as my experience goes, the improbability is 
 all the other way. 
 
 (2) When a certain Mary is described as ' the mother of James ' 
 we naturally assume that the James intended is the most celebrated 
 of the name, viz. the Lord's brother. But we elsewhere find the 
 same Mary designated as mother of Joses (Mark xv. 47), or more 
 generally of James and Joses (Matt, xxvii. 56, Mark xv. 40), so 
 that no stress can be laid upon this. 
 
 It appears then that the Hieronymian theory is as weak in itsreai 
 
 ^^ . -^ ^ weakness 
 
 attack as it is in defence, and that if the Epiphanian theory is to ,i>«sinits 
 
 ■*■■*■ "^ forced interr 
 
 be attacked with any prospect of success, it must be from the pretationof 
 
 •J »■ ^ ^ ^ ' _ ^ certain 
 
 Helvidian side, on the ground that it gives an artificial and non- texts. 
 natural rendering of two passages of Scripture which we have still 
 to consider ; that it weakens the force of the narrative which we 
 have already considered, telling how the mother of Jesus came with 
 his brothers to take him ; and gives a less natural meaning to the 
 word ' brother.' The two passages yet to be considered are Matt. i. 
 24 '\(0(T7)<^...'irapeKaPev Trjv yvvaiKa avTov kui ovk e<yivcoaKev 
 airrfv eeo^ ov ereKev viov, and Luke ii. 7 koi ereKev tov vVov avrrj^ 
 Tov irpcoTOTOKov. Keadiug these in connexion with tliose other 
 passages which speak of the brothers and sisters of Jesus, it is 
 hard to believe that the Evangelists meant us to understand, or 
 indeed that it ever entered their heads that the words could be 
 understood to mean, any thing else than that these brothers were 
 . sons of the mother and the reputed father of the Lord. It has 
 been attempted however to prove that we need not take the 
 passages referred to in their ordinary and natural sense. Thus 
 Pearson, treating of the phrase ea? ov, tells us that ' the manner of tcSthe 
 the Scripture language' produce th no such inference,' as that, from ^°^'g '^i^^ 
 a limit assigned to a negative, we may imply a subsequent affirma- '■ ^*- 
 
 62 
 
XX THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 tive : and he cites the following as instances in his favour. ' When 
 God said to Jacob " I will not leave thee until I have done that 
 which I have spoken to thee of" (Gen. xxviii. 15), it foUoweth not 
 that, when that was done, the God of Jacob left him. When the 
 conclusion of Deuteronomy was written it was said of Moses " No 
 man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day '' (Deut. xxxiv. 6), but 
 it were a weak argument to infer from thence, that the sepulchre 
 of Moses has been known ever since. When Samuel had delivered 
 a severe prediction unto Saul, he " came no more to see him unto 
 the day of his death " (1 Sam. xv. 35) ; but it were a strange 
 collection to infer, that he therefore gave him a visit after he was 
 dead. " Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of 
 her death (2 Sam. vi. 23) ; and yet it were a ridiculous stupidity to 
 dream of any midwifery in the grave. Christ promised his presence 
 to the Apostles "until the end of the world" (Matt, xxviii. 20); 
 who ever made so unhappy a construction, as to infer from thence 
 that for ever after he would be absent from them ? ' (Greed, p. 174). 
 ^S^'^S™ ^^ ^^ difficult to believe that a man of Pearson's ability can have 
 betweeii''tiie ^^®^ blind to the difference between two kinds of limit, the 
 limitwhioh mention of one of which suggests, while the mention of the other 
 
 negatives, && ' 
 
 ""whkh™* negatives, the future occurrence of the action spoken of. If we 
 suggests read 'the debate was adiourned till the papers should be in the 
 
 fuciire action -^ re 
 
 hmH*i's° *'^°^s °f *^® members,' it as certainly implies the intention to 
 attained, resume the debate at a subsequent period, as the phrase 'the 
 debate was adjourned till that day six months,' or ' till the Greek 
 Kalends,' implies the contrary. So when it is said ' to the day of his 
 death,' ' to the end of the world,' this is only a more vivid way of say- 
 ing in saecula saeculorum. In like manner the phrase ' unto this day ' 
 implies that a certain state of things continued up to the very last 
 moment known to the writer : the suggestion is of course that it 
 will still continue. The remaining instance is that contained in 
 Gen. xxviii. 15. This is a promise of continued help on the part 
 of God until a certain end is secured. When that end is secured 
 God is no further bound by his promise, however much the 
 patriarch might be justified in looking for further help from his 
 general knowledge of the character and goodness of God. To take 
 now a case similar to that in hand : supposing we read ' Michal had 
 no child till she left David and became the wife of Phaltiel,' we 
 should naturally assume that after that she did have a child. So 
 
THE AUTHOK xxi 
 
 in Matt. i. 24 the limit is not one beyond which the action becomes 
 naturally and palpably impossible : on the contrary it is just that 
 point of time when under ordinary circumstances the action would 
 become both possible and natural,^ when therefore the reader, 
 without warning to the contrary, might naturally be expected to 
 assume that it did actually occur. How far this assumption on the 
 part of the reader, natural under ordinary circumstances, becomes 
 unnatural under the very extraordinary circumstances of the case, 
 will be discussed further on. I confine myself here to the argu- 
 ment from language.^ 
 
 (3) The natural inference drawn from the use of the word Thensoof 
 •rrpcoTOTOKov in Luke ii. 7 is that other brothers or sisters !° L»ke u. i 
 
 ' . implies tliat 
 
 were born subsequently ; otherwise why should not the word fiovo- J«s"s was 
 ryevrjii have been used as in Tobit iii. 15 fiovojevrjt; elfii to3 iraTpi cMMof uis 
 /Aoii, Lulie vii. 12, viii. 42, &c. ? In Rom. viii. 29 the word is used 
 metaphorically, but retains its natural connotation, irpwroTOKov iv 
 7roXXot9 dB6\cf)oi<;, and so in every instance of its occurrence in the 
 N.T. It occurs many times in its literal use in the LXX., e.g. 
 Gen. xxvii. 19, 32, xliii. 33, Deut. xxi. 15, 1 Kings xvi. 34, 1 Chron. 
 V. 1, xxvi. 10, but, so far as I have observed, never of an only son. 
 It is said in answer to this by Bp.Lightfoot (p. 271) that "the pro- 
 minent idea conveyed by the term first-born to a Jew would be not 
 the birth of other children, but the special consecration of this one. 
 The typical reference in fact is foremost in the mind of St. Luke, 
 as he himself explains it, ' Every male that openeth the womb shall 
 be called holy to the Lord ' (ii. 23)." But need we ascribe to St. 
 Luke any other purpose, in giving this quotation from the Mosaic 
 law, beyond the simple desire to explain how it was that Simeon 
 was enabled to see Him, who was not only 'the glory of his people 
 Israel,' but also ' a light to lighten the Gentiles ' ? No doubt the 
 law as to the first-born is equally valid whether there are other 
 children or n«t ; but St. Luke is not here concerned in stating the 
 
 1 Compare Plut. Qv, Conv. viii. 1, Diog. L. iii. 2 (nn the Tision which appeared 
 to Ariston warning him /lii iruyylvfirdai ttj yvvaiKl till the birth of her son Pluto), 
 Hygin. F. 29, quoted in Wetstcin's note' in loco ; Athenag. Apol. 33 as yip 6 
 yeapyhs Kara^iXKtov els yrjv t4 ffrepiiara H/iiiTov Trepifievei, ovk ^iriaiielpmv, /col t)Iuv 
 lifTpov iiriBviilas ri iraiSoiroda, Const. Apost. vi. 28. 5 jii-re jjAiv iyKviiOVo6<rats dfiiXel- 
 Taxrav (rais yvvai^Xv oi &vhpes), ovk eV! iraiSmv yap yeveaei toCto iroiovaiv, aW' ^Sov^s 
 
 ^ Laurent remarks on the use of the imperfect lyivasKe implying abstinence from 
 a habit ('refrained from conjugal intercourse") as opposed to the far more usual tyva 
 denoting a single act. 
 
THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 law, but in giving a narrative of domestic life, viewed retrospectively 
 from the standpoint of accomplished facts : under these circum- 
 stances the use of the word irpasToroKo'i is surely misleading, and 
 therefore improbable, if there were no children born afterwards.^ 
 s™Vstedb I think also that there are circumstances connected with one 
 the vi°sitto' remarkable episode in our Lord's childhood, which are more easily 
 "'^J™^pi« explicable if we suppose him not to have been his mother's only 
 twelfth year. gQji_ jg jt likely that Mary and Joseph would have been so little 
 solicitous about an only son, and that son the promised Messiah, as 
 to begin their homeward journey after the feast of the Passover at 
 Jerusalem, and to travel for a whole day without taking the pains 
 to ascertain whether he was in their company or not ? If they 
 had several younger children to attend to, we can understand that 
 their first thoughts would have been given to the latter ; otherwise 
 is it conceivable that Mary, however complete her confidence in 
 her eldest Son, should first have lost him from her side, and then 
 have allowed so long a time to elapse without an effort to find 
 him ? 
 
 G. — The Helvidian Theory. 
 
 There are however some difficulties which must be grappled 
 with before we can accept the Helvidian theory as satisfactory. 
 (1) If the mother of Jesus had had other sons would He have 
 commended her to the care of a disciple rather than to that of a 
 brother ? (2) Is not the behaviour of the brethren towards Jesus 
 that of elders towards a younger ? (3) The theory is opposed to 
 the Church tradition. (4) It is abhorrent to Christian sentiment. 
 
 (1) Bp. Lightfoot regards the first objection as fatal to the theory. 
 ' Is it conceivable,' he says, ' that our Lord would thus have 
 snapped asunder the most sacred ties of natural affection .' ' (p. 272). 
 The usual answer to this is that the disbelief of the Lord's 
 brothers would naturally separate them from His mother. But as 
 this disbelief was even then on the point of being changed into 
 undoubting faith ; and as the separation, if it ever existed, of 
 
 ^ Suicer, ii. p. 877, quotes from Severianus, t/jmtiJtoicos Xiy^rai 6 i.SiK<j>obs fX'^", 
 and from Theodoret ei irpairSTOKos, ttHs fionoyeviis ; the latter referring to a theological 
 difficulty arising out of Col. i. 15 (where see Lightfoot), but the phrase naturally 
 applies to the word taken in its simple meaning. In the Psalms of Solomon (xviii. 
 i) we have the two words combined so as to exclude the natural inference, t) iraiSefa 
 (Tou 4(p' rificis a>s iihv TrpaniroKov fiovoyevij. The latest editors suggest that these are 
 duplicate renderings of tlie sanre Hebrew word (p. Ixxx.). 
 
 Objections 
 
 to the 
 Helvidian 
 view, that 
 the breth- 
 ren were 
 sons of 
 Joseph and 
 Mary. 
 
 If Mary had 
 had another 
 son, she 
 would not 
 liave been 
 left to the 
 care of a 
 disciple. 
 
THE AUTHOE xxiii 
 
 which there is no evidence, was at any rate to be changed in a day 
 or two into the closest union with all true followers of the Lord ; 
 and as the preparation for this change must have been long per- 
 ceptible to the eye of Jesus ; it seems necessary to find another way 
 of meeting the objection, if it is to be met at all. I think however 
 that Bp. Lightfoot goes a little too far when he speaks just below of 
 this hypothesis requiring us to believe that the mother, though 
 ' living in the same city ' with her sons ' and joining with them in a 
 common worship (Acts i. 14), is consigned to the care of a stranger, 
 of whose house she becomes henceforth the inmate.' We have 
 seen that there is reason for believing Salome to have been 
 the sister of Mary, and John therefore her nephew ; but however 
 this may be, in any case, as her Son's dearest friend, he must have 
 been well known to her. And if we try to picture to ourselves 
 the circumstances of the case, it is not difficult to imagine contin- 
 gencies which would make it a very natural arrangement. It is 
 generally supposed (from 1 Cor. ix. 5) that the brothers of the Lord 
 were married men : the usual age for marriage among the Jews was 
 about eighteen : supposing them to have been born before the visit 
 to the Temple of the child Jesus, they would probably have married 
 before his Crucifixion. If then all her children were dispersed in 
 their several homes, and if as we naturally infer, her nephew John 
 was unmarried and living in a house of his own, is there anything 
 unaccountable in the Lord's mother finding a home with the 
 beloved disciple ? Could this be regarded in any way as a slight 
 by her other sons ? Must they not have felt that the busy life of 
 a family was not suited for the quiet pondering which now more 
 than ever would characterize their mother ? and further that this 
 communion between the Mother and the Disciple was likely to be 
 not only a source of comfort to both, but also most profitable to 
 the Church at large ? 
 
 (2) It depends more upon the positive age, than the relative age, '^^\^'^-^^lf 
 of brothers, whether the interference of a younger with an elder is »<" towards 
 
 ' ./ o mm as elders 
 
 probable or improbable. When all have reached manhood and towards a 
 have settled in their different spheres, a few years' difference in 
 age does not count for much. It might however be thought that 
 those who had grown up with one like Jesus, must have felt such 
 love and reverence for him, that they could never dream of blaming 
 or criticizing what he thought best to do. Yet we know that his 
 
xxiv THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 mother, to whom had been vouchsafed a much fuller revelation 
 than was possible in their case, as to the true nature of her Son, did 
 nevertheless on more than one occasion draw upon herself his 
 reproof for ventured interference. If we remember how little even 
 those whom he chose out as his Apostles were able to appreciate 
 his aims and methods up to the very end of his life, how different 
 was their idea of the Kingdom of Heaven and the office of the 
 Messiah from His, we shall not wonder if his younger brothers, with 
 all their admiration for his genius and goodness, were at times 
 puzzled and bewildered at the words that fell from his lips ; if they 
 regarded him as a self-forgetting idealist and enthusiast, wanting 
 in knowledge of the world as it was, and needing the constant care 
 of his more practical friends to provide him with the ordinary 
 comforts and necessaries of life. Thus much, I think, is certain 
 from the known facts of the case ; and we need nothing more than 
 this to explain their fear that his mind might be overstrained, and 
 their attempt to dictate the measures he should adopt in going up 
 to the Feast, just as his mother had attempted to dictate to him at 
 the marriage of Cana. 
 tonttfeory (^) Dealing with the argument from tradition, we must bear in 
 to^taadiMon ^^^^ t^^* what WO are in search of is historical fact. The accepted 
 historical belief at any given time depends, so far as the educated 
 minority is concerned, partly upon the critical interpretation of 
 supposed authentic documents by contemporary scholars, such as 
 Jerome in the fourth century, who regarded it as mere waste of 
 time to leave the Scriptures, the fountain of truth, and follow 
 opinionum rivulos, the fancies of later writers who had no other 
 ground for their guesses than the Scriptures themselves (Jer. Adv. 
 Hdv. 17). But even of the educated it is true to a certain extent, 
 as it is entirely true of the uneducated, that they take their 
 notions of history without inquiry either from the most popular 
 meant by epitomo Or from what may be loosely called tradition. And tradi- 
 tradition? ^-^jj ^g -^ exists in any age will probably have some nucleus of fact, 
 but that nucleus is so transformed by the action of the imagination, 
 and by the thoughts and feelings of the generations which have 
 passed since the actual occurrences of which it embalms the 
 memory, that we cannot trust it for details. Thus, while we may 
 fully allow the interest and importance which attach to the 
 thoughts and feelings of Christians in former ages, yet for our 
 
THE AUTHOR xxv 
 
 present purpose it seems desirable to separate our consideration of 
 these from our consideration of tradition, as embod3'ing an actual 
 recollection of fact handed down orally from father to son, or 
 crystallized in literature at a certain stage of its progress. There 
 is also such a thing as manufactured tradition, like that of the 
 Ciceroni, or merely literary tradition, like that which has grown 
 up round the scenes of many of Scott's romances. In our investi- 
 gation of any so-called tradition it is of the utmost importance to 
 be on our guard against mistaking' deliberate invention of this kind 
 for natural growth. 
 
 If we go back to the fourth century we find Jerome, the ■Teromeand 
 author of the now dominant theory, throwing scorn on the back such 
 tradition of his day, and taunting those who considered the existed on 
 Lord's brethren to be the sons of Joseph by a former wife, as in their days 
 ' folio iving the ravings of the apocryphal writings, and inventing a ° phai"^ 
 certain Melcha or Escha (for Joseph's first wife).' ^ Origen too ''" "'^^' 
 (d. 253), who holds the view derided by Jerome, quotes as his 
 authority for it the apocryphal Gospel according to Peter, written 
 before the middle of the second century (D. of Ghr. Biog. ii. p. 712), 
 and the Protevangelium Jacobi written about the same time (Light- 
 foot I.e. p. 275) : ' He had no natural brothers, seeing that neither 
 was any other child bora to the Virgin, nor was he himself sprung 
 from Joseph ; accordingly (those mentioned) were his brothers only 
 in a conventional sense, being sons of Joseph by a pre-deceased wife.' ^ 
 ' Some persons on the ground of tradition, viz., the Gospel according 
 to Peter or the Book of James, say that the brothers of Jesus were 
 Joseph's sons by a former wife to whom he was married before 
 Mary. Those who hold this view wish to preserve the honour of 
 Mary in virginity throughout, in order that her body chosen for so 
 high a purpose might not be degraded to lower use after the Holy 
 Spirit had once come upon her. . . . And I think it reasonable that 
 as Jesus was the first-fruit of purity and chastity among men, so 
 Mary should be among women.' ^ 
 
 ^ Sequentes deliramenta apocryphorum et quandam Melcham vel Escham muliercu- 
 1am confingentes (Comm. in Matt. xii. 49). 
 
 ^ Of. Catena Gord. in Jo?utnn. ii. 12 aSe\<t>ohs /iec ovk eZx^ "^liirei oSre rrjs irapSivov 
 T€Ko{ta7js erepov ovSe aiirhs iK tov 'la(r^<p Tvyxavav vSfitp TOiyapovv ixP^f^'^'^^'^ff'^ aitrov 
 a^eXtpoit viol *lta(T^(fi Syres ck vpoTedvjjKvias yvvaiK6s. 
 
 ' Comm. in Matt. ^ii. 55 (vol. iii. p. 45 Lomm.) rohs aZ(h<pohs 'l-naov (paai rtves 
 eivai, e/c TrapahoffGas dpftdifievot tov iiriyeypafifiGi/ov Kara HeTpov evayy^\iov ^ t^s 
 ^{^Aou 'la/cctfjSov, vtovs'lo;ff^(p 4k irpoTepa's yvvainhs (rvV(^KTjKvlas avTi^ irpb ttjs Maptas' 
 
xxvi THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Thehistori- In the last prOssage the grounds for accepting the explanation 
 tiieApocry- given are two: (1) that .it is contained in the Apocryphal books 
 mentioned, (2) that it is in harmony with the sentiment of the 
 ■writer. The latter we shall shortly consider under the general 
 head which follows : the former raises the question of the his- 
 torical credibility of the Apocryphal Gospels, on which I need 
 only quote Bp. Lightfoot's words in reference to the stories of our 
 Lord's childhood contained in them : 'these accounts, so far as they 
 step beyond the incidents narrated in the Canonical Gospels, are pure 
 fabrication,' but still they may fairly be used as negative evidence 
 against the Hieronymian view for 'the fabrication would hardly 
 have taken this form, had that view been received or even known 
 when they were written ' (I.e. p. 275). 
 ^oftheflrst '^^® remaining authorities cited in Bp. Lightfoot's catena, 
 '"riesare"' '^hile they prove conclusively the truth of Bp. Pearson's state- 
 rSaif as nisnt that ' St. Jerome first invented the other solution in 
 church^*stm *^® kindred of Mary ' (Creed, p. 1 75 n.), are less decisive as 
 '^- to the Epiphanian theory. Omitting the Apocryphal Gospels, 
 the general result is as follows. Of pre-Hieronymian -writers 
 seven understand the brothers of the Lord as sons of Joseph 
 by a former wife, viz. Clement of Alexandria (about 200 A.D.), 
 Origen (d. 253), Eusebius the historian (d. about 340), Hilary of 
 Poitiers (d. 368), Ambrosiaster (about 875), Gregory Nyssen (about 
 370), and Epiphanius, whose treatise on the subject was written 
 some time before 374. Jerome put forward his theory in 383, and 
 he is followed by Augustine and the Latin Fathers generally ; but 
 Ambrose, writing in 393, still adheres to the old view, though he 
 considers the particular relationship of little consequence. In the 
 Eastern Church Chrysostom, who in his earlier writings favours the 
 Epiphanian view, comes round to Jerome in the later, and Theo- 
 doret may be mentioned on the same side ; but the later Greek 
 Fathers are almost all on the side of Epiphanius; and the Greek, 
 Syrian, and Coptic Calendars mark the distinction between James 
 the brother of the Lord and James the son of Alphaeus by assign- 
 ing a separate day to each. This distinction is also maintained, 
 apart from any statement as to the exact relationship implied by 
 
 ot Se ravra \eyovTes rh &|fai/xa t^s Mapfay iv irapBfvia TTjpeiv fifXP^ Tf\ovs $ov\ovTai 
 'Iva fi^ rh KpiBh' iicelfo <Tw^.,.yv^ KoirT\v di/5p^s )U6to t^ lireXBuv iv aitry irvivfia S-yiov 
 ...Kol o?;uoi \(i70i' ^x*'" "•'Sp"'' ("'•' '"'^"P"''''!'''''' T^s if ayvfl^f airapx^v yiyoi/ivai rhv 
 'IijtroCi', yuvaiK&v 5e t^v MapidiJ,. 
 
THE A^UTHOR 
 
 the term ' brother,' in the Clementine Homilies and Recognitions 
 of the second century, and the Apostolic Constitutions of the third.^ 
 and probably by Cyril of Jerusalem. 
 
 Hegesippus (about 160) maintains, as we have seen, that James 
 and Jude were brothers of the Lord, and speaks of the sons of 
 Clopas, the brother of his reputed father Joseph, as his cousins, 
 making no mention of cousins on the mother's side. 
 
 Basil the Great (379), discussing the meaning of Matt. i. 20, 
 allows that the perpetual virginity is not a necessary article of 
 belief, yet adheres to it himself, ' since the lovers of Christ cannot 
 endure to hear that the mother of God ceased to be a virgin.' ^ 
 He cites Matt, xxviii. 20 to show that ew? need not imply any 
 change in the virgin's state. So Tr/oajToroKo? may be used techni- 
 cally of him who opens the womb, though there may be no second 
 child. He then refers to the apocryphal story of Zacharias being 
 slain by the Jews because he ha<l placed Mary in the rank of the 
 virgins after her conception. 
 
 On the other hand Tertullian (d. 220) argues against Marcion, Tertuiiian 
 
 . ^ ° however 
 
 who had made use of the text 'Who is my mother, and who my makes the 
 
 brethren?' as showing that Christ was not really man, in the the Lord 
 
 following words : at vere mater et f rater ejusforis stabant .... Tam Mary, 
 froximas personas foris stare, extraneis intus defixis ad sermones ejus 
 
 ^ Ap. Const, iii. 6 ' There were with us (the Apostles) the mother of our Lord and 
 his sisters, also Maiy Magdalene and the mother of James, and Martha and Mary 
 sisters of Lazaras, and Salome with other women ' [We gather from this that the 
 sisters of the Lord were not the sisters of James the Little] ; ib, vi. 12 riiteis oi 
 S{i)SeKa (Tvve\66vTes eis *lepov(ra\iifi...iir€ffKeiTT6fie6aQ.fia'laKti$ci} ry tov Kvpiov ade\<p^ 
 tI yhijTai. ; and even more distinctly in vi. 14 where after the names of the Twelve 
 are added 'Iti/cwjScfs re 6 tov Kvpiov ctSeKtphs koL ^lepoa'oKvf^wv ^-JriffKOTros, kol IlavKos 6 
 tUv 4$pav SiSacTKoAos ; lb. viii. 3.1 ' I James the broth^rof Christ according to the 
 flesh, but his servant as the only begotten God, and appointed bishop of Jerusalem 
 by the Lord Himself and the Apostles do ordain thus,' &c. On the other hand the 
 constitution of James, son of Alphaeus, is given in viii. 23. So Euseb. in Isa. xvii. 
 5 SeKa Kol riffffapas votT}<Tei Tohs TrdvTas (an-offTiiAoi/s), Sv StiSe/co fiev robs trp^rous 
 airoffr6\ovs elirois ttv elvai, ovK 4\drrw 5€ avruv T^y Stper^v UavKov /coi avrhv K^rirhy 
 &.ir6aTo\ov Kol Thv 'laKca^ov yeyovdvat, rhv aBeKfphu tov Kvptov, 6s irparos iiriaKOTTOS 
 Tris 'JepoffvXifitcv iKKJ^Titrias vir* avTov KaraffrTJi/at tov ^uTrjpos ^prjfioveverai, Cf. 
 Schegg Jak. d. Bruder d. Serrn, pp. 58 — 64. 
 
 2 Kal 5io0e(r€i koX ffTopyrt koX Trdtrri r^ iiri0a\Koiffri to7s trvyoiKovfftv iirtfieKeitf yvvaiKot 
 Tjyoviieyos tSov yafiiK&v epywv &7refx^To- ovk iyivuffKe yhp auT^v, <pi)aiv, ews oZ ircKev 
 rhv vlhy avTTJs rhv irpaTOTOKov. ToCto Se ^5?; {>Tr6votav irapex^t Ss, fj-era rh Kadapus 
 vTiTjpeT'itffaaBat rrj yevvitfrei tov Kvpiov ttJ ^irneXeaQeiari 5ti tov HvevfiaTos tov ayiov, 
 TO vcvo/iitriieva tov yi/iov %pya fjAi i.irapvi\aaii,4vris rris Vlapias. 'Hjittis Se ei koX fi.i]ifv 
 T^ Tijs euire^e'aj TrapaKvp-aiveTai \6y!f {/ifXP' 7^P '''V^ /cara Tiiv olKovojiiav vTrrtp^aias 
 avayKata ^ napBiviaj rh S'e<p6^7is aTro\virpayfi6v-€vrot' t^j \6ycii rov pLvarrtpiov) ofiws 5ta 
 rh fi^ KaraSiXftrBaL ruv {piAoxpiffTwv riji/ aKo^v ort wore ^iraiSffaro ejvai irapBivos 7] 
 BeoToKos, iKsivas TjyovfxeBa Tcts fiaprvplas avrapKets, 
 
xxviii THE EPISTLE DP ST. JAMES 
 
 . . . merito indignatus est. Transtulit sanguinis nomina in alios quos 
 magis proximos pro fide judicaret . . . in semet ipso docens quipatrem 
 aid matrem aut fratres proponeret verbo Dei non esse diynum, discipu- 
 lum (Ad. Marc. iv. 19). Similarly, arguing from the same text against 
 the Marcionite Apelles, he says ' the words are not inconsistent 
 with the truth of his humanity.' No one would have told him that 
 his mother and brethren stood without, qui non certus esset habere 
 ilium matrem et fratres . . . Fratres Domini non crediderunt in iHum 
 . . . Mater aeque non demonstratur adhaesisse ei, cum Martha et 
 Maria alia in commsrcio ejus freguentantur. Hoc denique in loco 
 apparet incredulitas eorum (De Game Christi 7). As Tertullian in 
 these passages gives no hint that the brothers of Jesus aie less 
 truly related to him than his mother, so in other treatises he 
 takes it for granted that she ceased to be a virgin after the birth 
 of Christ {De Monogamia 8) : duae nobis antistites Ghristianxie sanc- 
 titatis occurrunt, monogamia et continentia. M Christum quidem 
 virgo enixa est, semel nuptura post partum} (' being about to defer 
 her marriage union till after the birth of her Son,' lit. ' being 
 about to marry first after her delivery ') ut uterque titulus sancti- 
 tatis in Christi sensu dispungeretur per matrem et mrginem et uni- 
 viram; and in even plainer terms (De Virg. Vel. 6), where he discusses 
 the meaning of the salutation benedicta iu inter midieres. ' Was 
 she called mulier and not virgo becaxise she was espoused ? We 
 need not at any rate suppose a prophetic reference to her future 
 state as a married woman ' : non enim poterat posteriorem mulierem 
 nominare de qua Christus nasci non habebat, id est virum passam, 
 sed ilia {illam ?) quae erat praesens, quae erat virgo (' for the Angel 
 could not be referring to the wife that was to-be, for Christ was 
 not to be born of a wife, i.e. of one who had known a husband, 
 but he referred to her who was before him, who was a virgin '"). 
 evia™noe"f. These words of Tertullian, himself strongly ascetic, which were 
 'ed tradition written about the end of the second century, do not betray any 
 sublet consciousness that he is controverting an established tradition in 
 CTd°of the favour of the perpetual virginity ; nor do the words of Easil cited 
 ceStuiy. before suggest anything of the sort even in the fourth century : he 
 only bears witness, to a prevailing sentiment which he thinks 
 deserves consideration. We may remember also that both Origen 
 
 ^ It is important to note that this phrase is objected to hy Origen {Horn, in Liie. 
 1), quod assenmt earn nupsisse post partum, unde approbent non habent. 
 
THE AUTHOR xxix 
 
 and Jerome make the Apocryphal Gospels responsible for the theory 
 afterwards defended by Epiphanius. I think therefore we may 
 conclude that, setting aside these Gospels, there was no fixed 
 recognized tradition on the subject before the end of the fourth 
 century, though there was a growing feeling in favour of the per- 
 petual virginity, which took definite shape in the title aeuiTapdevo<; 
 used of Mary by Athanasius; and the apocryphal fictions were 
 eagerly embraced as affording a support for this belief.^ 
 
 A short abstract of the argument of Epiphanius will show us -^t^^^^u"' 
 the grounds on which he relied, and will also furnish an interesting j,'^™*"^^ 
 specimen of tradition in the making. It is contained in the third m favour 
 
 1 1 /• 1 • of the 
 
 book of his Panarium, Kaer. IxxvJii. (Against the, Adversaries of V^'y^^'"'^f 
 
 ilfor^/) p. 1037 foil. "MaJy!" 
 
 In this age of heresy, he says, while some have ventured to propagate 
 errors about the Trinity, others have turned their assaults against r^s &yias 
 M.ipias, T^s acmapBevov. Surely her very name is enough to confute them. 
 As Abraham is always the Friend of God, James and John always Sons of 
 Thunder, so Mary always the Virgin. The assertion that she ever ceased to 
 be a virgin shows a want of knowledge of Scripture and of history. For first 
 of all it was determined by lot that she should be delivered to Joseph, a 
 widower ofeighty years, for the purpose of protection, not of marriage.^ This 
 Joseph was brother of Clopas and son of Jacob surnamed Panther. His first 
 wife was of the tribe of Jndah and by her he had six children, the eldest Jacob, 
 surnamed Oblias and Just, the first to whom the Lord entrusted the 
 episcopal throne, then Joses, Simeon, Judas, Mary, and Salome as we learn 
 from Scripture (p. 1041). Epiphanius then lays stress on the itse of the word 
 livrjarTfvSeitnis not yajirideia-qs, and argues that a just man, such as Joseph Is 
 described to be, one too who is still honoured as a pattern of virginity, could 
 never have regarded as his wife her who was the chosen vessel of the Holy 
 Ghost. The Holy Family returned from Egypt when Jesus was four years 
 old ; and not long afterwards Joseph died. If he had been still alive or if 
 Mary had had children of her own, would Jesus have entrusted her to 
 John at the Crucifixion ? And why is she called mother of John ? Surely 
 because she is /iijViyp apxrjyos TJjs wapdevias. Nothing is said as to the Virgin's 
 death, but it does not seem that she accompanied St. John to Ephesus. What 
 does this silence intimate ? I tremble almost to say it, but in the Apocalypse 
 (xii. 13) I read ' the dragon persecuted the woman which brought forth the 
 man child, and to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she 
 might fly into her place. ' May not this have been fulfilled in the Holy Virgin, 
 so that she never tasted of death ? Again let us give heed to the lessons of 
 Nature. Science tells us that the lioness can only bring forth once, and Christ 
 is the lion of the tribe of Judah. James, the eldest son of Joseph, died in his 
 
 1 The Apostolical Coristitutions, which speak with refreshing common sense on 
 marriage and kindred subjects in vi. 26-28, severely condemn the ' poisonous apocry- 
 phal books in which the wicked heretics reproach the creation, marriage, the pro- 
 vidential government of the world, the begetting of children,' &c. (vi. 16). 
 
 ^ See Protevang. 8, 9, 
 
XXX THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 ninty-sixth year, having preserved his virginity intact, having never cut his hair 
 or used a bath, or tasted flesh, or worn more than one tiinic. He alone was al- 
 lowed to enter the Holy of Holies once a year and to wear the priestly petalum, 
 because he was a Nazarite and of kin to the priests. After other particulars 
 borrowed from Hegesippus (except that Epiphanius puts into the mouth of 
 Symeon, son of Clopas, the words ' Why do you stone the Just? Behold he 
 prayeth for you,' which Hegesippus ascribes to ' a priest of the sons of Eechab ') 
 he continues 'if then the sons of Joseph were virgins and Nazarites, how much 
 more would their father have known how to respect the purity of the Virgin ?' 
 Can we conceive it possible that, after all the miracles which attended the birth 
 of Jesus, this pious old man should have been guilty of impiety towards the 
 sacred body ei/ a <aT(OKi.a-dri Geds 1 But why inquire into these things 1 Why 
 not accept what is written and leave the rest to God ? Surely you will nijt 
 assert that our salvation depends on believins that Joseph did know his wife 
 after the birth of her first-born. Had the Scripture asserted this we should 
 have accepted it without scruple. We fully believe in the sanctity of marriage. 
 But a prophet has no time for the cares and duties of marriage. Moses had no 
 children after he entered on his prophetic office, and Mary was a prophet as is 
 shown by Isa. viii. 3. Hence the daughters of Philip who prophesied were 
 virgins, and Thecla broke off her engagement when converted by Paul.' 
 
 " But, it is said, how are we to explain such expressions as wpiv fj trwcXde^v 
 ainoi/s, and uvK Eyva auTtjv ecus orov eyevvTjtre top vlbv amrjs tov TrpaytoTOKOv, As 
 to the latter it must be observed that it is not said tow npioTorroKov avTrji, not 
 ' her first-born,' but ' her son, the first-born,' viz., the first-bom of all creation. 
 As to the former, what difficulty is there in the. phrase ovk r/8fi avrrjvl [notice 
 the tacit substitution of jfSfi for eyrtu]. How was Joseph to Icnow the dignity 
 conferred on her, until he had seen the miraculous birth ? Then as to the 
 phrase irpXv ^ avveXBe'iv, this might represent an expectation on the part of 
 Joseph, but this, as we have seen, was precluded by his great age." 
 
 But while we do due honour to the Virgin, we must beware of deifying her, 
 as some have done, out-6 -yap Oeos ^ Mapla, oifre dir' ovpavov to tratta, oKTC ex 
 (rvWrj-^eas avBpos Ka\ yvvaiKos, Kar iTrayyeXiav 6e, annup 6 'lo-aoK, Epiphanius 
 then proceeds to deal with his seventy-ninth heresy ' Against the Collyridians 
 who offer sacrifice to Mary ' ; where he refers to the history and traditions of 
 Mary, as stating that it wus revealed to Joachim in the desert that his wife 
 Anna should bear a child. ^ 
 
 Growth of I t/f'xW make one or two remarks on this passage and then con- 
 
 asceticviews . , « , i 
 
 of marriage, sider any further arguments advanced by later writers on the same 
 side. The exaltation of virginity above marriage, of which we see 
 traces in the New Testament itself, as in Apoc. xiv. 4, 1 Cor. vii. 1, 
 as well as among the Essenes and Therapeutae (Josephus B.J. ii. 
 8. 2, Philo Frag. M. 2 p. 633, Vit. Gont. pp. 471 foil.), and against 
 the exaggeration of which St. Paul warns Timothy (Ep. 1. iv. 1), 
 spread rapidly both amongst heretics and orthodox Christians. Of 
 the former, Saturninus, Marcion, the Encratites and the Montanists 
 in the second century are named as either depreciating or actually 
 
 ' Thecla also appears as a patroness of virginity in Methodius' Banquet of the Ten 
 Virgins, written towards the close of the third century. 
 - Cf. Protev. c. 4, Kaliv. S. Mariae c. 3 (Thilo p. 321 foil.). 
 
THE AUTHOR xxxi 
 
 forbidJing marriage among their adherents. Of the latter, evidence 
 may be found in Athenagoras Apol. 28 eiJ/sot? S' av ttoXXoix! tSiv 
 Trap Tjiuu Kai avBpa^ xal yvvaiKaf KaTayrjpda-KovTai; aydfjL,ovi; 
 eXTTiSi Tov fiSXKov avvia-eadai rtp @eo3 ; in such language as that 
 of Cyprian (ITah. Vir. 3) fios est ille eccles-iastici germinis . . . Dei 
 imago respondens ad sandimoniam Domini, illustrior portio gregis 
 Christi ; ib. 22 quodfuturi sumus, vosjam esse cocpistis . . . cum castae 
 perseveratis et virgines, angelis Dei estis aeqitales ; and in the rash 
 act by which Origen, at the beginning of the third century, believed 
 himself to be carrying out the words of Christ (Matt. xix. 12). The 
 same tendency is also noticeable in the neo-Pythagoreans and neo- 
 Platonists. By the end of the third century it began to produce 
 its natural consequence in the institution of celibate communities 
 and the discouragement of marriage among the clergy. In the 
 Council of Nicaea a determined attempt was made to compel 
 married clergy to separate from their wives, and the hermit Paph- 
 nutius, who led the opposition, only pleaded in favour of what he 
 calls the ancient custom, which, while it forbade marriage after a 
 man had been ordained, did not require him to leave the wife whom 
 he had married as a layman.^ We cannot doubt that those who 
 were agitating for a stricter rule would make use of the example of 
 the Virgin, insisting on the name as implying a permanent state, 
 and would endeavour to give an artificial strength to their cause 
 by the addition of imaginary circumstances to the simple narrative 
 of the Gospel. 
 
 Thus it was not enough to suppose the brethren of the Lord to be ?•'« A?o'y.°' 
 
 o srr ^ _ the Nativity 
 
 sons of Joseph by a former wife ; Joseph s age must be increased gradually 
 so as to make it impossible for him to have had children by his under the 
 
 ^ , , '' influence of 
 
 ■ second wife, though this supposition contradicts what the upholders the a.scetic 
 of this view maintain to be the very purpose of Mary's marriage, 
 viz. to screen her from all injurious imputations. How could the 
 marriage effect this, if the husband were above eighty years of 
 age, as Epiphanius says, following the Apocryphal Gospels? Again, 
 if this were the case, why should not the Evangelist have stated it 
 simply, instead of using the cautionary phrases Trplv rj avveXOelv 
 and ovK iyivaia-Kev avTrjv eco? ov eTeicev ? But even this was not 
 enough for the ascetic spirit. Further barriers must be raised 
 between the contamination of matrimony and the virgin ideal. 
 ' See Stanley, Eastern Church, Lect. V. 
 
xxxii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Joseph himself becomes a type of virginity : the ' brethren ' aj'e no 
 longer his sons, but sons of Clopas, who was either his brother by 
 one tradition, or his wife's sister's husband by another. Mary is 
 made the child of promise and of miracle like Isaac, though not 
 yet exalted to the honours of the Immaculate Conception ; and we 
 see Epiphanius already feeling his way to the doctrine of her 
 Assumption, which was accepted by Gregory of Tours in the sixth 
 century. One other development may be noticed, as it is found in 
 the Protevangelium c. 20, though not mentioned by Epiphanius, 
 viz. that not only the Conception but the Birth of our Lord was 
 miraculous ; in the words of Jeremy Taylor ' He that came from his 
 grave fast tied with a stone and signature, and into the college of 
 the Apostles, the doors being shut . . . came also (as the Church 
 piously believes) into the world so without doing violence to the 
 virginal and pure body of his mother, that he did also leave her 
 virginity entire.' ^ 
 appucatton This miracle, superfluous as it is and directly opposed to the words 
 prop ecy. ^^ g^^ Luke (ii. 23), is yet accepted by Jerome and his followers ; and 
 it is in reference to it that Bp. Lightfoot {I.e. p. 271), thinks that too 
 much stress has been laid by modern writers on the false asceticism 
 of the early Church as the only cause of the dislike to the Helvidian 
 view. He considers that this dislike is ' due quite as much to another 
 sentiment which the Fathers fantastically expressed by a comparison 
 between the conception and the burial of our Lord. As after death his 
 body was placed in a sepulchre wherein never man before was laid, 
 so it seemed fitting that the womb consecrated by His presence 
 should not thenceforth have borne any offspring of man.' So we 
 find Pearson {Greed, p. 326) citing Ezek. xliv. 2 ' This gate shall be 
 shut, it shall not be opened, and no man shall enter in by it ; 
 because the Lord, the God of- Israel, hath entered in by it, therefore 
 it shall be shut ' in proof of the aeiirapOevia. Whether this senti- 
 ment is to be regarded as something independent of the idea of the 
 impurity of marriage or as a natural offshoot of it, which I should 
 be rather inclined to believe, is not of much importance. The only 
 question worth considering is : Are these sentiments so authorita- 
 tive as to justify us in twisting the words of the Scripture narrative 
 
 Chrys. Bom. oxlii. (ap. Suicer, ii. p. 306) & Xpiirrhs irporjxetf 4k lU'^rpos Kcd SXutos 
 (fieivev T] liiirpa, and it was affirmed in the 79tli Canon of the Council in Trullo 
 towards the end of the seventh century. 
 
THE AUTHOR xxxiii 
 
 and giving to them a non-natural sense ? This question I shall 
 endeavour to answer in the next section. 
 
 (4) It is 'the tendency/ says -Dr. Mill (I.e. p. 301), 'of the TheHeiw- 
 
 Christian mystery, God manifest in the flesh, when heartily opposed to 
 
 J ' •' Ohnstian 
 
 received, to generate an unwillingness to believe that the womb sentiment. 
 thus divinely honoured should have given birth to other merely 
 human progeny.' ' The sentiment of veneration for this august 
 vessel of grace which has ever animated Christians . . . could not 
 have been wanting to the highly-favoured Joseph.' 'On the 
 impossibility of refuting these sentiments . . . the truly Catholic 
 Christian will have pleasure in reposing.' So Epiphanius, Jerome, 
 and other ancient writers speak of this as a ' pious belief,' and the 
 same is reiterated by Hammond and Jeremy Taylor cited by Mill 
 (p. 309). In answer to this I would say that unless we are pre- 
 pared to admit all the beliefs of the mediaeval Church, we must 
 beware of allowing too much authority to pious opinions. Is there 
 any extreme of superstition which cannot plead a ' pious opinion ' 
 in its favour ? Of course it is right in studying history, whether Danger of 
 
 1 » ' 1 • , . . - P , iniputingthe 
 
 sacred or profane, to put ourselves in the position oi the actors, to sentiment of 
 
 1 1 PI 1T1 !•• • alatera.geto 
 
 imagine how they must have felt, and acted; but this is not quite an earlier. 
 the same thing as imagining how-we ourselves should have felt and 
 acted under their circumstances, until at least we have done our 
 best to strip off all that differentiates the mind of one century from 
 the mind of another. If we could arrive at the real feeling of 
 Joseph in respect to his wife, and of Mary in respect to her Son 
 before and after his birth, this would undoubtedly be an element of 
 the highest importance for the determination of the question before 
 us : but to assume that they must have felt as a monk, or nun, or 
 celibate priest of the Middle Ages ; to assume even, with Dr. Mill, 
 that they fully understood the mystery ' God manifest in the flesh,' 
 is not merely to make an unauthorized assumption, it is to assume 
 what is palpably contrary to fact. 
 
 Mary and Joseph were religious Jews, espoused to one another, s,„^f™nJton 
 as it is natural to suppose, in the belief prevalent among the Jews auh^wme 
 that marriage was a duty, and that a special blessing attached to a christian 
 prolific union.' They looked forward, like Simeon and Anna, to the 
 
 1 Cf. Lightfoot, Coloss. p. 139, ' The Talmudic writings teem with passages imply- 
 ing not only the superior sanctity, but even the imperative duty of marriage. The 
 words of Gen. i. 28 were regarded not merely as a promise, but as a command, which 
 was binding upon all. It is a maxim of the Talmud that " Any Jew who has not a 
 
 C 
 
 era. 
 
XXXIV 
 
 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Joseph. 
 
 coming of the Messiah, the prophet like unto Moses who would 
 speak the words of God to the people, the Prince of the house of 
 David, who would not merely judge the heathen and restore again 
 the glories of Solomon, but would sit as a refiner and purifier of 
 silver and purify the sons of Levi themselves, and yet one who 
 would bear the sins of many and make intercession for the trans- 
 gressors.i To both it is revealed that the Messiah should be born 
 of Mary by a miraculous conception, Joseph is told that ' his name 
 is to be called Jesus, because he shall save his people from their 
 sins.' Mary is told in addition that ' he shall be called the Son of 
 the Highest, and that the Lord God shall give him the throne of 
 his father David, and he shall reign over the house of Jacob for 
 ever.' There is surely nothing in these words which would disclose 
 the Christian mystery ' God manifest in the flesh.' They point to a 
 
 Scripture greater Moses, or David, or Solomon, or Samuel. Mary's hymn of 
 ™ to^he praise is founded on the recollection of Hannah's exultation at the 
 
 Maiy^and fulfilment of prophecy in the birth of her son. Her mind would 
 naturally turn to other miraculous births, to that of Isaac under 
 the old dispensation, to that now impending in the case of her 
 cousin Elizabeth. And as there was nothing in the announcement 
 made to them which could enable them to realize the astounding 
 
 wife is no man " ( Yehamoth, 63 a). The fact indeed is so patent, that any accumula- 
 tion of examples would be superfluous, and I shall content myself with referring to 
 Pesachim, 113 a, b, as fairly illustrating the doctrine of orthodox Judaism on this 
 point' ; ib. pp. 168, 9, ' The early disciples in the mother Church of Jerusalem show 
 Phu-isaio but not Essene sympathies. It was altogether within the sphere of ortho- 
 dox Judaism that the Jewish element in the Christian brotherhood found its 
 scope.' Cf. also C. Taylor, Lectures on the Didache, pp. 86-88. 
 
 ' See Ryle and James, Psalms of Holomon, p. lii. (speaking of the 17th Psalm) : 
 ' It may be taken, we believe, as presenting, more accurately than any other 
 document, a statement of the popular Pharasaic expectation regarding the Messiah, 
 shortly before the time when our Lord Jesus, the Christ, appeared.' Among the 
 characteristics of the Messiah's rule there given, it is stated that ' He is to bo a 
 descendant of David,' that His Mission is of a twofold character, destructive 
 towards Gentiles and sinners, restorative as regards Israel ; His rule is spiritual, 
 holy, wise, and just: 'all his subjects will be sons of God, all will be holy,' cf. 
 Ps. xvii. 35 Kal ai/rhs fiatriK^ijs Sitcatos Kal SiSaKrhs iiirh ®eov 4ir* avTovs' Koi oi/K ^ffriv 
 aiiKia 4v Tots Tifi^pats aitrou ^u fieffcp outwc, Jfr* Tnicrcs 07*04 «al jSacriXeifS aiiT&v 
 Xpicrrhs Kipios {al. Kipwu). But (p. Iv.) 'though endowed with divine gifts, he is 
 nothing more than man. Neither of supurnatural birth, nor of pre-existence in the 
 bosom of God, or among the angels of God, do we find any trace." He is an 
 idealized Solomon. Again (p. Ixii.) they remark, ' it is a matter not without interest 
 and importance that our Psalms, which stand closest of all extant Jewish religious 
 poetry to the Christian era, are so conspicuously similar to the songs contained in 
 the opening chapters of St. Luke's Gospel.' The editors appear even to suggest the 
 possibility that the so-called Psalms of Solomon may have been written by the 
 author of the Nune dimittis (p. lix. n.). In Justin's dialogue (§ 49) Trypho asserts 
 that the general belief of the Jews is that Christ would be merely man. 
 
THE AUTHOR xxxv 
 
 truth that he who was to be bora of Mary was VERY God of vert 
 God, so there is nothing in the subsequent Hfe of Mary which 
 would lead us to believe that she, any more than his Apostles, had 
 realized it before his Resurrection. On the contrary, it is plain 
 that such a belief fully realized would have made it impossible for 
 her to fulfil, I do not say her duties towards her husband, but her 
 duties towards the Lord himself during his infancy and childhood. 
 It is hard enough even now to hold together the ideas of the 
 Humanity and Divinity of Christ without doing violence to either ; 
 but to those who knew him in the flesh we may safely say it was 
 impossible until the Comforter had come and revealed it unto them. 
 As to what should be the relations between the husband and wife 
 after the birth of the promised Child there is one thing we may be 
 sure of, viz. that these would be determined not by personal con- 
 siderations, but either by immediate inspiration, as the journey to 
 Egypt and other events had been, or, in the absence of this, by the 
 one desire to do what they believed to be best for the bringing up 
 of the Child entrusted to them. We can imagine their feeling it 
 to be a duty to abstain from bringing other children into the 
 world, in order that they might devote themselves more exclusively 
 to the nurture and training of Jesus. On the other hand, the 
 greatest prophets and saints had not been brought up in solitude. 
 Moses, Samuel and David had had brothers and sisters. It might 
 be God's will that the Messiah should experience in this, as in 
 other things, the common lot of man. Whichever way the Divine 
 guidance might lead them, we may be sure that the response of 
 Mary would be still as before, ' Behold the handmaid of the Lord, 
 be it unto me according to thy word.' 
 
 Even if the language of the Gospels had been entirely neutral '^j!?|'|jj'^=g"J'j 
 on this matter, it would surely have been a piece of high pre- »;^y «'^*_j- 
 sumption on our part to assume that God's Providence must their part 
 
 •T r • <■ i_ i • which would 
 
 alwavs follow the lines suggested by our notions oi what is justify us in 
 
 •' °o "^ , . , , 1 J wresting the 
 
 seemly; but when every conceivable barrier has been placed plain 
 
 ■' .-IIP i±'j language of 
 
 in the way of this interpretation by the frequent mention ot scripture. 
 brothers of the Lord, living with his mother and in constant 
 attendance upon her ; when He is called her first-born son, and 
 when St. Matthew goes into what we might have been inclined 
 to think almost unnecessary detail in fixing a limit to the separa- 
 tion between husband and wife ; can we characterize it otherwise 
 
 c2 
 
xxxvi THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 than as a contumacious setting up of an artificial tradition above 
 the written Word, if we insist upon it that ' brother ' must mean, 
 not brother, but either cousin or one who is no blood-relation at all ; 
 that ' first-born ' does not imply other children subsequently born ; 
 that the limit fixed to separation does not imply subsequent 
 union ? 
 
 'dfsoussion^ The cdnclusion then, to which our discussion leads, is that James 
 the Lord's brother was son of Joseph and Mary, brought up with 
 Jesus until his eighteenth year at any rate, not one of the Twelve, not 
 even a disciple till the very end of our Saviour's life, but convinced, 
 as it would seem, by a special appearance to him of the risen Lord, 
 and joining the company of the disciples before the day of Pente- 
 cost. After the martyrdom of Stephen, when the Apostles were 
 scattered from Jerusalem, we find James holding a position of 
 authority in the Church of Jerusalem (Gal. i. 18, 19, Acts xii. 17), 
 which, as we may probably conjecture, had been conceded to bim 
 as brother of the Lord, and retaining this position till the end 
 of his life. 
 pa^TOiars Further particulars are supplied by Josephus, Hegesippus, the 
 
 °' james° "' Gospel according to the Hebrews, and other Apocryphal books, 
 trommSn- including in these the Clementine Homilies and Recognitions. 
 wrS^i^s ^® ^^^® **^ ^^ ^'^ ^""^ guard against the Ebionite tendencies of 
 some of these writers, and their delight in puerile marvels and 
 ascetic practices, but we may perhaps accept the general outline 
 as correct, since St. James occupied a prominent position, and 
 the facts were for the most part patent to all the world. An 
 marked contrast with the circumstances of the infancy and child- 
 hood of our Lord. 
 
 Tiie appeal- The Gospel according to the Hebrews, which Bp. Lightfoot 
 Lord to speaks of as 'one of the earliest and most respectable of the 
 
 James after ^ , u^ v . 
 
 thoresnr- apocryphal narratives (Gal. p. 274), is quoted by Jerome {De Vir. 
 narrated in lUustr. 2) to the following effect: The gospel known as that 
 
 the Gospel . . o t 
 
 according accordiDg to the Hebrcws, which I have translated into Greek and 
 
 to tlie . . 
 
 Hebrews. Latin, and which is often referred to by Origen, tells us that the 
 Lord after his resurrection appeared to James, who had sworn that 
 he would not eat bread from the hour in which he had drunk the 
 cup of the Lord till he saw him risen from the dead. Jesus there- 
 fore ' took bread and blessed and brake it and gave it to James the 
 
THE AUTHOR xxxvii 
 
 Just, and said to liim, My brother, eat thy bread, for thci Son of 
 Man has risen from the dead.' ^ 
 
 It will be seen from the note that there are other versions of the 
 story, and that in these the vow is said to have been made after the 
 death of Christ. It is easy to see how a confusion might have 
 arisen if James, whether having heard from others or himself 
 having witnessed the events of the Last Supper, had shaped his 
 vow after the Lord's own words ' I will not drink henceforth of the 
 fruit of the vine, till the kingdom of God shall come.' There is, I 
 think, a ring of genuineness about the narrative. Whereas we 
 usually find in the Apocryphal Gospels some real incident of our 
 Lord's life smothered in a parasitic growth of puerilities and 
 
 ^ The Latin is Dominus autein cum dedisset siTidonem servo saeerdotis (apparently 
 implying that Malchu.s was present at the resuiTeotion and received from the Lord's 
 hands the linen cloth in which his body had been wrapt), ivit ad Jacobum et ap- 
 paruit ei — juraverat enim Jacobus se ruin comesiirum pannn ab ilia hora qua hibernt 
 calicem Domini, donee videret cum resurgentem, a dormicntibus ; — rursusque postpaulu- 
 lum ' afferte, ait Dominus, merisatnetpanem.' Statimque additur : Tulitpancmetbeiie- 
 dixit ac frcgil ct dedit Jacobo Justo et dixit ei, ' Fraier mi, comede pancm tuum, quia 
 resurrexit t'ilius hominit a dormicntibus.' Bp. Lightfoot reads calicem Domi- 
 nus for calicem Domini, ' as the point of time which we shonld naturally expect is not 
 the institution of the eiicharist, but the Lord's death,' to which He had Himself alludtd 
 under ihe phrase of ' drinking the cup ' (Matt. xx. 22, 23, xxvi. 39, 42 ; of. Mart. 
 Polyc. 14 iv Tijj noTripiqi -rov XpiffTov <rov), and the Greek translation, which goes 
 under the name of Sophronius, has Kipios. There is however no various reading in 
 Herding's edition of the De Vir. Jllustr., and Mr. Nicholson, in his edition of the 
 fragments of the Gospel according to the Hebrews (pp. 62 foil.), gives instances of 
 the untrustworthiuess of the Greek translator. If Domini is the true reading, ' the 
 writer represented James as j)resent at the Last Supper, but it does not follow that he 
 regarded him as one of the Twelve. He may have assigned to him.. .a position apart 
 from, and in some respects superior to, the 'Twelve... It is characteristic of a Judaic 
 writer that an appearance which seems in reality to have been vouchsafed to James 
 to win him over from his unbelief, should be represented as a reward for his devotion ' 
 (Lightfoot, I. c). The story appears in three other forms, given in Nicholson, none 
 of which date the oath from the Last Supper. Thus Gregory of Tears, in the sixth 
 century, {Hist. Franc, i. 21) writes : Fertur Jacobus Apostolus, cum Dominum jam 
 mortuum vidisset in cruce, detestatum esse atque jurasse numquam se comesturum, 
 panan nisi Dominum cernerct resurgentem. Tertia die rcdiens Dominus... Jacobo se 
 ostendens ait ' surge Jaeobe, comede, quia jam a morttiii resurrexi ' ; his contemporary, 
 the pseudo-Abdias {Mist. Apost. vi. 1), who refers to Hegesippus as his authoiity for 
 part of his account of James, says that he was son of Joseph by a former wife, and 
 so full of love to Jesus ui cruciftxo eo cibum capere noluerit, priusquam a mortuis 
 resurgentem videret, quod meminerat sibi ct fratribus a Christo agente in vveisfuisse 
 pracdictum. Quare ci primum omnium, ul et Marine Magdalenae et Fetro apparere 
 voluit...et ne dixitinum JTsjunium toleraret, favo mellis oblato ad comedendum insuper 
 Jacobum invitavit. Similarly in the thirteenth century Jac. de Voiagine {Legend. Aur. 
 Ixvii.): In Farasceue autem mortuo Domino, sicut dicit Josephus et Hieronymus in 
 libra De Viris Illustribus, Jacobus votum vovit, &c., mixing up in what follows the 
 accounts of Jerome and Gregory. Mr. Nicholson thinks that Josephus here stands 
 for Hegesippus, the names being often interchnnged, and that the latter may be 
 the original authority for the particulars in which the later writers difl'er from 
 Jerome. ' 
 
xxxviii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 trivialities, here there is an originaHty and simplicity which is not 
 unworthy of the genuine Gospels themselves. 
 HegesijipvB I pass On now to Hegesippus, who is quoted to the following 
 
 on James. ^3.^^^. ^^ g^gg^j_ jj^ j. 33 . 
 
 The charge, of the Chiiroli then (after the Ascension) devolved on James the 
 brother of the Lord in concert with the Apostles. He is distinguished from tlie 
 others of the same name by the title ' Just ' (righteous) which has been applied to 
 him from the first. He was holy from Lis mother's womb, drank no wine ur 
 strong drink, nor ate animal food : no razor came on his head, nor did he 
 anoint himself with oil, or use the bath. To him alone was it permitted to 
 enter into the Holy Place, for he wore no woollen, but only linen. And alone 
 he would go into the temple, where he used to be found on his knees, asking 
 forgiveness for the people, so that his knees became hard like a camel's because 
 he was ever upon them worshipping God and asking forgiveness for the' 
 people. Accordingly through his exceeding righteousness he was called 
 righteous ('Just ') and ' Oblias ' which being interpreted is ' the defence of the 
 people' and 'righteousness,' as the prophets declared of him.' Some of the 
 seven sects, which I have mentioned, inquired of him, ' What is the door of 
 Jesus {tU r) 6vpa Tov 'IijtroC) ? '^ And he said that he was the Saviour, where- 
 upon some believed that Jesus is the Christ. Now the forementioned sects did 
 not believe in the resurrection or in the coming of one to recompense each man 
 according to his works. But as many as did believe, believed through James. 
 So when many of the rulers believed, there was a disturbance among the Jews 
 and the Scribes and the Pharisees, saying that there was a danger that all the 
 people would look to Jesus as the Christ. They came together therefore and 
 said to James 'We pray thee, restrain the people, for they have gone astray in 
 regard to Jesus thinking him to be the Christ. We pray thee to persuade all that 
 have come to the Passover about Jesus. For we all listen to thee. For we and 
 all the people bear witness that thou art just, and hast no respect of persons. 
 Do thou therefore stand 0:1 the pinnacle of the temple, so that thou maycst 
 be conspicuous and thy words may be well heard by all the people, and 
 persuade them not to go astray about Jesus. For all the tiibes have come 
 together with the Gentiles also on account of the Passover.' Then the fore- 
 mentioned Scribes and Pharisees set James on the pinnacle of the temple and 
 cried to him ' thou just one to whom we are all bound to listen, since 
 the people are going astray after Jesus who was crucified, tell us what is 
 the door of Jesus.' And he answered with a loud voice ' Why do you ask me 
 Concerning Jesus the Son of Man ? He is both seated in Heaven on the right 
 hand of Power, and will come on the clouds of heaven.' And when many 
 were convinced and gave glory at the witness of James, and cried ' Hosanna to 
 the Son of David,' the same Scribes and Pharisees said to each other ' We 
 have done ill in bringing forward such a testimony to Jesus, but let us go up 
 and cast him down that they may fear to believe him.' And they cried out 
 saying ' Oh, oh, even the just has gone astray ' and they fulfilled that which is 
 written in Isaiah ' Let us take away the just, for he is not for our purpose ; 
 wherefore they shall eat the fruits of their deeds.' So they went up and they 
 east down James the Just, and said to one another ' let us stone James the 
 Just.' And they began to stone him, since he was not killed by the fall ; but 
 
 1 Probably a reference to the verse cited below, Isa. iii. 10 (LXX. version), 
 j* Mosheim, quoted in Routh, Rcl. Sncr. i. 237, suggests that ' Jesus ' here is a 
 misreading of the original Aramaic word {Jeschua) denoting 'Salvation.' 
 
THE AUTHOR xxxix 
 
 he turned round and knelt down saying ' O Lord God my Father, I beseech 
 thee, forgive them, for they know not what they do.' While they were thns 
 stoning him one of the priests of the sons of Rechah, of whom Jeremiah the 
 prophet testifies, cried ont ' Stop ! What do ye ? The Just is praying for you.' 
 And one of them who was a fuller smote the head of the Jiist one with his 
 club. And so he bore his witness. And they buried him on the spot, and 
 his pillar still remains by the side of the Temple (with the inscription),' ' He 
 hath been a true witness both to Jews and Greeks that Jesus is the Christ.' 
 And immediately Vespasian commenced the siege. 
 
 The brief account given by Josephus {Ant. Jtid. xx. 9. 1) of the 
 death of James exhibits some important divergences from that of 
 Hegesippus. 
 
 During the interval between the death of Festus (probably in the year 62 ^^ceountof 
 A.D.) and the arrival of his successor Albinus, the high priest Ananus tbe his death ty 
 younger, being of rash and daring spirit and inclined like the Sadducees in Josephus. 
 general to extreme severity in punishing, brought to trial James, the brother 
 of Jesus who is called the Christ, and some others before the court of the 
 Saniedrin, and having charged them with breaking the laws, delivered them 
 over to be stoned. Josephus adds that the better class of citizens and 
 those who were versed in the laws were indignant at this and made complaints 
 both to King Agrippa and to Albinus, on the ground that Ananus had no right 
 to summon the Samhedrin without the consent of the procurator ; and that 
 Agrippa in consequence removed him from the high priesthood.^ 
 
 Origen (Cels. i. p. 35 Spencer) and Eusebius (H.E. ii. 23) also cite Josephus 
 as ascribing the miseries of the siege to the divine vengeance for the murder of 
 James the Just ; but this does not occur in his extant writings. 
 
 Bishop Lightfoot's comments on the preceding (Lc. pp. 366 and 
 330) are worth quoting.^ Of the account given by Josephus he f«ot's 
 
 T* ^l^''•^/*■|•^^ • comments 
 
 says : ' It IS probable in itself, w^hich the account in Hegesippus is on these 
 not, and is such as Josephus might be expected to write, if he 
 touched on the matter at all. His stolid silence about Christianity 
 
 ' This seems the force of the Greek en avrov tj (tt4iKi) ^.ivet irapk t^ yoij)* fidprvs 
 oirros a\Ti9}is 'lovSalois re Kal "KWrjatv ovtos yiy^vrjTui k.t.X. Wieseler in the JB. f. 
 dcwtsche Theologie 1878, pp. 99 fi.Jl., understands o-ttjA?) of a cenotaph, consisting of 
 a broken pillar with inscription, erected by later Christians close to the temple of 
 Jupiter Capitolinus, which was built by Hadrian on the site of the Jewish Temple. 
 Jerome {Do Vir. III. 2) renders ariiKri by tifMlus. 
 
 ^ Schiirer [Jewish People, vol. ii. p. 186 foil. Eng. Tr.) gives what to me appears 
 a very singular reason for rejecting this date. The passage, he says, has probably 
 suffered from Christian intei'polation, since Origen read it differently from our text, 
 as agreeing with Hegesippus in bringing the death of James into close relation with 
 the fall of Jerusalem. But if there were such interpolation, its object must surely 
 have been to magnify the importance of James' martyrdom and make it the im- 
 mediate cause of God's anger shown in the destruction of the guilty city. It is 
 plain therefore that i he inconsistent date (62 A.D.) cannot have formed a part of 
 the interpolation. Jerome I.e. says that Clem. Al., in his Hypot. bk. vii., gave the 
 same date as Josephus. In Ant. xx. 9. 6 Josephus assigns a different cause for the 
 fall of Jerusalem, viz, the presumption of the Levites in wearing the dress of the- 
 priests. 
 
 ' I have given them in a slightly condensed form.. 
 
xl THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 elsewhere cannot be owing to ignorance, for a sect which had been 
 singled out for years before he wrote, as a mark for imperial 
 vengeance at Rome, must have been only too well known in 
 Judaea. On the other hand, if the passage had been a Christian 
 interpolation, the notice of James would have been more lauda- 
 tory, as is actually the case in the spurious addition read by Origcn 
 and Eusebius.' Of Hegesippus he says : ' His account presents 
 some striking resemblances with the portion of the Clementine 
 Recognitions conjectured to be taken from the Ebionite 'Ava^ad- 
 aoi 'laKw^ov (so called as describing the ascents of James up the 
 temple stairs, whence he harangued the people) ; and we may 
 hazard the conjecture that the story of the martyrdom, to which 
 Hegesippus is indebted, was the grand finale of these "Ascents." 
 The Recognitions record how James refuted the Jewish sects ; 
 Hegesippus makes the conversion of certain of these sects the 
 starting-point of the persecution which led to his martyrdom. In 
 the Recognitions he is thrown down the flight of steps and left as 
 dead by his persecutors, but is taken up alive by the brethren : in 
 Hegesippus he is hurled from the still loftier station, and this time 
 his death is made sure.' ' There is much in the account which 
 cannot be true : the assigning to him a privilege which was con- 
 fined to the high priest alone is plainly false ; such an imagination 
 could only have arisen in a generation which knew nothing of the 
 temple services. Moreover the account of his testimony and death 
 not only contradicts the brief contemporary notice of Josephus, but 
 is so full of high improbabilities that it must throw discredit on 
 the whole context. Still it is possible that James may have been 
 a Nazarite, may have been a strict ascetic' Perhaps it may seem 
 even more incredible that the Jews could have been in doubt as to 
 the belief of him who had been the most prominent member of the 
 Church at Jerusalem for twenty years or more, or could have 
 imagined that one of such firm, unbending character, the very 
 opposite of a Cranmer, could be induced to deny his faith before 
 the people. 
 ftS^'edto I'^ *^^ Clementine Homilies James stands at the head of the 
 "cSirtiM* whole Church, as is shown by the commencement of the letter from 
 Homilies. Clement, KXi]fji,rj<; 'Ia/cco/3p tw Kvpltp Kal eincTKoirmv i-n-Lo-Koirfp Sci- 
 TTOVTi SI Tr)v <iv> 'lepovaaXrifi dyiav 'E^paimv eKKXrjatav Kal Ta<i 
 'n-avraj(fi €)eov irpovola lBpvdeicra<s «aXw5 k.t.X. ' 
 
THE AUTHOR xli 
 
 What do we gather from all this with regard to the life and cha- General 
 
 " ° conclusion 
 
 racter of James the Just, the son of that Joseph of whom also it is q,? to the 
 recorded that he was 'a uist man ? The word 'iust' implies one character of 
 who not only observes but loves the law, and we may be sure that 
 the reverence for the Jewish law, which shows itself in our Epistle, 
 was learnt in the well-ordered home of Nazareth. There, too, he may His training 
 have acquired, with the full sanction of his parents, who would gladly education. 
 devote the eldest-born of Joseph in such marked way to the future 
 service of God and his Messiah, those strict ascetic habits which 
 tradition ascribes to him. But the constant intercourse with Him 
 who was full of grace and truth, in childhood as in manhood, must 
 have prepared James to find in the Ten Commandments no mere 
 outward regulations, but an inner law of liberty and love written in 
 the heart. That deep interest in the mysteries of the kingdom, 
 that earnest search after truth which led the child Jesus to remain 
 behind in the temple, both listening to the doctors and asking them 
 questions, must surely have had its effect upon his brother. 
 Whatever means of instruction were within reach of the home at 
 Nazareth would, we may feel certain, have been eagerly taken ad- 
 vantage of by all its inmates. While accepting, therefore, the view Heiicnism 
 which seems to be best supported, that Jesus and his brothers "'^s'"*- 
 usually spoke Aramaic, we are surely not bound to suppose that 
 with towns like Sepphoris and Tiberias in their immediate vicinity, 
 with Ptolemais, Scythopolis,^ and Gadara at no great distance, they 
 remained ignorant of Greek. In the eyes of the Scribes they might 
 ' never have learnt letters,' since they had not attended the rabbi- 
 nical schools at Jerusalem ; but the ordinary education of Jewish 
 children and the Sabbath readings in the synagogue would give 
 sufficient start to enable any intelligent boy to carry on his studies 
 for himself; while the example of Solomon and the teaching of 
 the so-called ' sapiential ' books, with which the writer of our 
 Epistle was familiarly acquainted, held up the pursuit of knowledge 
 and wisdom as the highest duty of man.^ Not many years before, 
 four of the most accomplished literary men of the time were 
 
 ^ Neubaiier (Stud. Bibl. i. p. 67) says, ' The inhabitants of Beth Shean or Scytho- 
 polis are mentioned as pronouncing Hebrew badly, and Scythopolis is considered an 
 exclusively Greek town." See T. K. Abbott, Fssays, 1891, pp. 129-182. 
 
 2 See Sohiirer, Jewish People, §§ 27 (on School and Synagogue) with the references 
 to Philo and Josephus. The visit to Egypt (Matt. i. 13 foil.) suggests another 
 channel for Hellenistic influences. 
 
xHi THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 natives of Gadara, Philodemus the Epicurean, a friend of Cicero 
 and one of the poets of the Anthology, whose writings fill the larger 
 part of the Herculanean scrolls; Theodoras, the instructor of 
 Tiberius in rhetoric ; Meleager, the famous writer of epigrams and 
 collector of the first Greek Anthology ; and Menippus the Cynic, 
 whose dialogues were imitated by Varro and Lucian.^ The question 
 whether our Epistle was originally written in Greek will be con- 
 sidered further on ; but these considerations may perhaps lead us to 
 the conclusion that it was not more impossible for a peasant of 
 Galilee to learn to write good Greek, than for one who had been 
 brought up as a Welsh peasant to learn to write good English, or 
 for a Breton to write good French ; far more likely, we might think, 
 than that a clever Hindoo should, as so many have done, make, 
 himself familiar with the best English authors, and write a good 
 English style. Connected with this is the question, as to which 
 something will be said in a future chapter, whether therp are any 
 indications of acquaintance with Greek poets and philosophers on 
 the part of St. James, and possibly even of our Lord Himself. 
 *^is«^s'of" There are other characteristics of our Epistle which find their 
 ""w^ff" best explanation in the supposition that James was the son of 
 th°e°°supEiosi Joseph and Mary. The use of parables was common among Jewish 
 *writer'was° toachors, and especially common in Galilee,^ but it was carried to 
 Joseph "nnd ^^ uuusual oxtcnt by our Lord, both in his preaching to the multi- 
 ^^^'- tude, of which it is said 'without a parable spake he not unto 
 them ' (Matt. xiii. 34), and even in his ordinary conversation, which 
 constantly ran into a parabolic or figurative form, to the great 
 bewilderment of his disciples, as when he bid them ' beware of the 
 leaven of the Pharisees' (Matt. xvi. 6, cf. John xvi. 29, Luke viii. 
 fl'^urati've' ^^)' ^'^^ distinctive feature of our Lord's use of parables is that 
 speech, there is nothing forced or artificial either in the figure or in the 
 application : natural phenomena and the varied circumstances of 
 human life are watched with an observant eye and a sympathetic 
 and loving imagination, and the spiritual analogies which they sug- 
 gest are seen to flow naturally from them. And we may be sure 
 
 1 SLraho .says of Gadara (xvi. 29), 4k Se toSi/ TaSdpav ^i\6Srifi6s ri S 'ETrtKovpftos /col 
 Mehfaypos real McVittttos 6 ffTrovSoyeKotos Kai ®e6S(opos 6 /cad* Tjfias ^iiTup. 
 
 ^ Of. Neiibauer in Studia Biblica i. p. 62, ' It is stated iu tlio Talmud that Gali- 
 leans were wandering preachers, and excelled especially in the aggadio or homiletio 
 interpretation of the biblical texts, which was often expressed in the form of a 
 parable.' He refers to his Olographic du Talmud, p. 185. 
 
THE AUTHOR xliii 
 
 that the habit of mind which showed itself in the use of parables 
 was not acquired after manhood. The love of nature, the sympathy 
 in all human interests, the readiness to find ' sermons in stones 
 and good in everything ' must have characterized the child Jesus 
 and coloured all his intercourse with his fellows from his earliest 
 years. It is interesting, therefore, to find the same fondness for 
 figurative speech in the Epistles of his brothers St. James and St. 
 Jude. This will be fully treated of in the subsequent Essay on Style. 
 
 Another marked feature of our Epistle is the close connexion „o^i°J^„„ 
 between it and the Sermon on the Mount, in which our Lord, at ''|pY,t™ ml 
 the commencement of his career, laid down the principles of the "'o^^^™ 
 kingdom of God which he came to establish on earth. This will Mount. 
 be shown in detail further on. It will suffice to refer here to the 
 more general harmony between the two as to the spiritual view of 
 the Law (James i. 25, ii. 8, 12, 13, Matt. v. 17-44), the blessings of 
 adversity (James i. 2, 3, 12, ii. 5, v. 7, 8, 11, Matt. v. 3-12), the 
 dangers and the uncertainty of wealth (James i. 10, 11, ii. 6, 7, iv. 
 4, 6, 13-16, V. 1-6, Matt. vi. 19-21, 24-34), the futility of a mere pro- 
 fession of religion (Janies i. 26, 27, Matt. vi. 1-7), the contrast be- 
 tween saying and doing (James i. 22-25, ii. 14-26. iii. 13, 18, Matt. 
 vii. 15-27), the true nature of prayer (James i. 5-8, iv. 3, v. 13-18, 
 Matt. vi. 6-13), the incompatibility between the love of the world 
 and the love of God (James ii. 5, iii. 6, iv. 4-8, Matt. vi. 24), the 
 need to forgive others if we would be forgiven ourselves (James ii. 
 12, 13, Matt. vi. 14, 15), the tree known by its fruits (James iii. 11, 
 12, Matt. vii. 16-20), the interdiction of oaths (James v. 12, Matt. 
 V. 34-37), and of censoriousness (James iv. 11, 12, Matt. vii. 1-5), 
 the praise of singleness of aim (James i. 8, iv. 8, Matt. vi. 22, 23). 
 It is to be noticed that, close as is the connexion of sentiment and 
 even of language in many of these passages, it never amounts to 
 actual quotation. It is like the reminiscence of thoughts often 
 uttered by the original speaker and sinking into the heart of the 
 hearer, who reproduces them in his own manner. And the Sermon 
 on the Mount is made up of what may be called the. common- 
 places of Christ's teaching, the fundamental ideas with which he 
 commenced his ministry. 
 
 But these reminiscences are not confined to the Sermon on Reminis- 
 ce* -nr i cences of 
 the Mount, or to our Lord's words as reported by St. Matthew, other sayings 
 
 Tims the opposition between faith and wavering {Siaicpivea-dai,) t^e oosyeis; 
 
xliv THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 which appears in James i. 6, ii. 4 is found also in Matt. xxi. 21, 
 Mark xi. 23, 24 ; the royal law of James ii. 8 is the same of 
 which it is said in Matt. xxii. 39 that on it and its companion 
 law, which enjoins love to God, 'hang all the law and the 
 prophets ' ; the desire to be called Eabbi is condemned alike in 
 James iii. and Matt, xxiii. 8-12; the dangers of hasty speaking 
 are pointed out in James iii. 2 and in Matt. xii. 37 ; the Judge 
 ' standeth before the door' in James v. 9, 'he is nigh even at the 
 doors' in Matt. xxiv. 33, Mark xiii. 29 ; the woes denounced against 
 the prosperous and self-confident in James iv. 9, v. 1 are also found 
 in Luke vi, 24, 25 ; the light, and the truth, and the freedom in- 
 spired by the truth, of which so much is said in the discourses 
 reported by St. John, are recalled to us in James i. 17, 18, 25 ; and 
 there are many other similar parallels which will suggest them- 
 selves to the attentive reader. 
 unrMorded "^^^ thotight naturally suggests itself, If St. James in his short 
 sayings. Epistle has preserved so much of the teaching of our Lord as 
 recorded in the Gospels — more, it has been said, than is con- 
 tained in all the other Epistles put together — is it not probable 
 that he may have also preserved sayings of our Lord not re- 
 corded in the Gospels ? Dr. A. Resch, in his collection of such 
 unrecorded sayings,^ includes several verses from our Epistle 
 which are mentioned in my note on i. 12 : 'Blessed is the man that 
 endureth temptation : for when he hath been approved he shall 
 receive the crown of life, which he promised to them that love him.' 
 This is repeated in nearly the same words in ii. 5, ' Did not God 
 choose them that are poor to the world to be rich in faith and heirs 
 of the kingdom which he promised to them that love him ? ' and in 
 2 Tim. iv. 8, 1 Pet. v. 4, Apoc. ii. 10. Beyond this passage, however, 
 I am not satisfied that any of those quoted by Resch are certainly 
 to be included in the Agrapha, though it can hardly be doubted 
 that there must be other echoes of Christ's words in the Epistle, 
 which we are now unable to identify, as they do not occur in the 
 Gospels and are not expressly ascribed to Him either by St. James 
 or by any early writer. Dr. Resch seems to regard the frequency 
 of quotation by subsequent writers as a proof that the passage was 
 originally uttered by Christ, but is nT)t this to assume that it was 
 impossible for a text from St. James to get into general circulation ? 
 ■■ Agrapha : Aussercanonische Evangelienfragmente (Leipzig, 1889). 
 
THE AUTHOR xlv 
 
 Leaving this subordinate point, the facts we have been consider- Possible 
 iag are certainly confirmatory of the belief that St. James was unteiiefof 
 really our Lord's brother, and not only so, but that he grew up 
 under his Brother's influence, and that his mind was deeply 
 imbued with his Brother's teaching. How then are we to ex- 
 plain the fact that at a later period 'he did not believe on him'? 
 
 I have given what seems to me the general explanation on p. xxiii. 
 foil., but, after reviewing the particular points in which we have 
 definite proof of agreement from the Epistle written by St. James 
 long after he had enrolled himself among the disciples, we may 
 perhaps gather from its silence a confirmation of what we might 
 have suspected on general grounds, that one of his character of 
 mind would find a difficulty in accepting some of the utterances of 
 Christ. 'Before Abraham was, I am,' 'Except ye eat the flesh 
 of the Son of Man and drink his blood, ye have no life in you,' — 
 these must have been ' hard sayings ' to the brother of Jesus even 
 more than to strangers. It is highly probable that his faith may 
 have been shaken by the absence of any sign from heaven to 
 announce the inauguration of the temporal reign of the Messiah. 
 We can imagine also that he may have found a stumbling-block 
 in our Lord's severity towards the religious leaders of the time and 
 his tenderness shown to publicans and sinners, so unlike the 
 Psalmist's declaration ' I will not know a wicked person,' ' I hate 
 them with a perfect hatred.' 
 
 This state of mind, while perhaps not incompatible with the belief ms 
 in Christ's mission as a preacher of righteousness, and a willingness 
 to accept him as the anointed King of the Jewish people, might 
 easily lead to an anxious solicitude as to his sanity, and the prudence 
 of the measures he took for extending the number of his adherents. 
 Yet underneath this anxiety there must have always been on the 
 part of the brothers an intense love and reverence for Jesus, a 
 suspicion that, after all, if it were only practicable. His course was 
 a nobler, simpler course than that which they themselves sug- 
 gested; just as the friends of Socrates felt when he refused to 
 follow their counsel and escape from prison. I do not quite 
 understand Bp. Lightfoot's saying that the circumstances of the 
 Crucifixion were such as 'to confirm rather than dissipate the former 
 unbelief.' If Crito and the other friends of Socrates felt that his 
 death had added a crown of glory to his life, and raised affection 
 
 conversion. 
 
xlvi THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 iuto all but worship ; how much more must this have been the 
 case with the friends of Jesus, when according to his jsvord 'the 
 corn of wheat had fallen into the ground and died,' and they could 
 look back on that life of pure self-sacrifice, that high mysterious 
 perfection of which they had all along been dimly conscious, and 
 remember how its sorrows had been increased by the lack of 
 sympathy on the part of those who should have been the nearest 
 and the dearest. How natural that a brother standing beneath the 
 Cross, having heard of the words spoken at the Last Supper, should 
 then at last have thrown in his lot with Jesus and resolved, 
 whether in despairing remorse or with some faint dawning of 
 believing hope, ' I too will no more eat bread nor drink wine till 
 the kingdom of God shall come ! ' How natural, also, that one of 
 the earliest appearances of the Eisen Lord should have been made 
 to his repentant brother, and that that brother should from that 
 day forth have united himself to the company of the Apostles, 
 and been chosen by them to preside over the church in Jerusalem, 
 while they proceeded to carry out their Master's last charge, to 
 preach the Gospel to every nation ! ^ 
 
 ^ One or two points may be added here from Jerome's account given in Vir. III. 2 
 Post passionem Domini statim db apostolis Bierosolymarum episoopus ordinatus. (This 
 may be compared with Clem. Al. Sypot. vi. and vii. cited in Euseb. ff. B. ii. 1 
 n^Tpoy ydp (jyriffL /col 'laKw^ov Koi 'luiyyiju fier^ t^v ai/d^rj^piv rov ^QiTTJpos fi^ iiridiKoi- 
 CeffQat SS^rjs, &\K' 'liKoi^ov t))V SiKaiov eTriffKotrov ^lepoaoXifjaov eK^ffdat. . . 'laKiiffip 
 T^ SiKalifi Kol 'ludyvTj Kol U^rpcp fiera t^v hva.ffTa.ffiv "TrapeSuKe rijv yvwffiv 6 Kipios. 
 OuToi rois XoOTois a,iroffT6Kois trap^SaiKav^) . . , Triginta itaqtie annis Hierosolyinae 
 rexit eeclesiam, id est, usque ad septimum Ncronis annUT/i (a.d. 60), et juxta 
 templum, ubi et praecipitatus fuerit, sepultus titulum usq^ui ad obsidionem Titi et 
 uUimam Adriani notissiimmi habuit. Quidam e Tiostris in monte Oliveti eitm 
 conditum putant, sed falsa eorum opinio est. 
 
CHAPTER II 
 
 Ox THE External Evidence for the Authenticity op the 
 
 Epistle 
 
 A. Direct Evidence. Catalogues, &c} 
 
 I have endeavoured to show that the general tone and character 
 of the Epistle are just such as we should expect from James the 
 Lord's brother, as he is described to us in the New Testament. It 
 remains now to exhibit the external evidence for its authenticity. 
 We will take, as our starting-point in the investigation, the well- 
 known passage in which Eusebius distinguishes between the 
 disputed (avTiXeyofieva) and the xmdisputed (o/jLoXoyovfieva) books 
 which made up 'the New Testament' and were publicly read in 
 Church at the time when he wrote (Lightfoot, in D. of Oh. 
 Biog. ii. p. 323, gives 314 a.d. as the date of the earlier books of 
 the H. H.). Together they contain all the books included in 
 our present Canon and no others, those which were 'disputed, 
 though generally known,' being the Epistle which goes under the 
 name of James (r&v S' dvTiXeyo/j.ivcov, yvcopcficov B' ovv ofia)<; toi<s 
 TToWois, 57 Xeyofievr} 'laKm^ov tpeperaC) and that of Jude as well 
 as the second of Peter and the so-called second and third of John, 
 ' whether they really belong to the Evangelist or possibly to another 
 of the same name.' The Apocalypse of St. John he had before 
 doubtfully classed among the undisputed, but questions whether it 
 should not rather be classed with the spurious, like the Acts of 
 Paul and the Revelation of Peter {H. E. iii. 25), Elsewhere, 
 speaking more particularly of our Epistle, he says, ' The first of the 
 
 ^ This is taken chiefly fiom Westcott's History of the Cxnon of the N.T. and 
 Zahn's Gesch. d. NeutestwmentHchen Xanons. 
 
xlviii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Epistles styled Catholic is said to be by James the Lord's brother. 
 But I must remark that it is held by some to be spurious. 
 Certainly not many old writers have mentioned it, as neither have 
 they the Epistle of Jude, which is also one of the seven so-called 
 Catholic Epistles' (ib. ii. 23). His own practice, however, betrays 
 no suspicion of its genuineness, as in one passage he quotes James 
 iv. 11 as Scripture {Comm. in Psalm, p. 648 Montf), in another 
 quotes James v. 13 as spoken by the holy Apostle (ib. p. 247). 
 
 The doubt as to the canonicity of the Epistle in early times 
 is sufficiently shown by its omission from some of the early 
 versions and catalogues of Sacred Books. Thus it is omitted 
 from the earliest extant catalogue, contained in what is known as 
 the Muratorian Fragment, of which Bp. Westcott says that it 
 may be regarded as ' a summary of the opinion of the Western 
 Church on the Canon shortly after ,the middle of the second 
 century.' i Of the disputed books this contains two Epistles of St. 
 John, the Apocalypse, and Jude, omitting Hebrews, James, and 
 Peter 1, 2. It has been suggested, however, that there is a corrup- 
 tion in the text, where it now speaks of the Apocalypse of Peter 
 (Apocalapse etiam Johannis et Petri tantum recipimus quam quidavi 
 ex nostris legi in ecclesia nohoni), and that the original Greek may 
 have been something of this sort : Kal fj dTroKaXv\jrii; Be 'Icodvvov 
 Koi Hirpov [eVto-roX^ fiia, yv] jjlovtjv aTroSey^^ofieda' [ecm Se xal 
 eTepa] rjv Tive^ tS)v rjnerepcov avwyivaxTKecrdai, iv iicKX/rjaia ov deXov- 
 a-tv. Bp. Westcott remarks that the canon of the old Latin version 
 used by Tertullian corresponds with the Muratorian in omitting the 
 Epistle of St. James, the second of St. Peter, and Hebrews.^ The 
 Canon Mommsenianus, first published by Th.Mommsen in 1886 from 
 a MS. of the tenth century, containing the Liber Generationis attri- 
 buted to Hippolytus, appears to belong to the year 359 a.d., and 
 to have been written in Africa.^ It contains all our canonical books 
 with the exception of James, Jude, and Hebrews ; but the mention 
 of the three Epistles of St. John and the two of Peter is followed 
 by the words una sola, apparently a correction by an early 
 
 1 Dr. Sauday places it at the end of the century (Expositor, 1891, p. 408). 
 
 ^ Tertullian, it is true, refers to the Hebrews {De Pudic. c. 20), but not as 
 canonical or authoritative ; just in the same way as he refers to St. James in the 
 passages quoted below. 
 
 ^ See for this Dr. SamJay's article on the 'Cheltenham List of the Canonical 
 Books' {Studia Siblica, iii. 217 foil.). 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE EPISTLE xlix 
 
 reader.! On the other hand, the old Syriac version (Peshitto) ^ 
 contains all the books of our present Canon excepting the Apoca- 
 lypse, the second of Peter, and the second and third of John. 
 Origen {Horn, in Jos. vii. 1) recognizes all our books, and the cata- 
 logue contained in the Catechism of Cyril of Jerusalem (348 A.D.) 
 includes all but the Apocalypse, with an urgent warning against 
 the use of any other books. With him agrees Gregory of Nazian- 
 zus writing about the same time, who ends his metrical catalogue 
 with the words 7rao-as e%ei?. Elf rt? Se rovraiv ekto';, ovk iv 
 yvrjo-coi^. Athanasius, in his 39th Festal Letter, dated 367 A.D., 
 gives precisely our present Canon, concluding with the words eV 
 Tovroi<; fiovoi^ to Trji; eva-e^eia<i ScSacrKaXetov evayjeXi^eTat. firjS- 
 6t? TouTOis 67rt/8aXX6T6), firjSe tovtcov d^aopeicrdb) Tt. Amphilo- 
 chius, bishop of Iconium, speaks less confidently in a metrical 
 catalogue (about 880 A.D.), rtve^ Be ^aa-l ttjv tt/oos 'E^pacov; voOov, 
 OVK ev Xejovre^' lyvrjaia yap rj '^dpi'i. eiev- Tt Xouirov ; KadoXiK&v 
 eTTicrroXmv Tive<s /juev eirTO, ^acriv, ol Se rpet? fjbovati ')(p7Jvat hijfea-Oai,, 
 Trjv 'laKto^ov fiiav, fiiav he Tlirpov, Trjv t 'ladwov fiiav, Tivh Se 
 Ta<; Tpei<i Koi ■jrpo<; avTai<; ra? Svo lieTpov Bi'^ovrai Trjp 'lonSa 8' 
 e^Sofirjv rfjv 8' ^A/KOKaXv^tv ttjv 'Imdvvov -TrdXiv Tive<i fiev 
 iyKpivovaiv, ol "TrXeiov; Si ye v66ov Xeyovcrtv. Epiphanius, bishop 
 of Salamis in Cyprus, who died about 403 A.D., gives ' a canon of 
 the N.T. exactly coinciding with our own ' (adv. Haeres. Ixxvi. 5). 
 On the other hand we are told that our Epistle was rejected by 
 Theodore of Mopsuestia (d. 429).^ 
 
 Towards the end of the fourth century Jerome (representing 
 the views of the Church of Rome) and Augustine (representing 
 the Church of Carthage) pronounced in favour of our present 
 Canon. The judgment of the former is given in the Vulgate 
 and in the catalogue contained in his epistle Ad Faulinum liii. 8 ; 
 elsewhere speaking of James he says (Vir. III. 2) Jacobus qui 
 appellatur frater Domini . . . unam tantuvi scripsit epistidam, qicae de 
 sepUm Catholicis est, quae et ipsa ah alio quodam sub nomine ejus 
 
 1 C. H. Turner {Stud. Bibl. iii. 308) suggests that tlie original list contained only 
 1 John and 1 Peter, and that this was corrected by a later scribe, who appended the 
 note una sola implying that the MS. named only one Epistle in each case. 
 
 2 This has usually been ascribed to the beginning of the second century, but from 
 the absence of references to the Catholic Epistles in the Doctrine of Addai and the 
 Homilies of Aphraates it has been argued that these Epistles were not included in 
 the earliest Syrian Canon. See Stud. Bibl. iii. p. 245, Glass. Rev. in. 456 foil. 
 
 » Sec Leontius quoted by Vestcott, Can, pp. 513 and 576. 
 
 d 
 
1 THE EPISTLE OF ST, JAMES 
 
 edita asseritur, licet paulatim tempore procedente oUinuerit auctori- 
 tatem. Augustine {Be Doctrina Christiana, ii. 12), after giving a 
 complete list of the sacred books, adds in his omnibus lihris timentc 
 Deum et pietate mansueii quaerunt voluntatem Dei. He took part 
 in the third Council of Carthage (397 A.D.), where our present 
 Canon of Scripture received its first undoubted synodical ratifica- 
 tion ; though this was not binding on the Eastern Church till it 
 was sanctioned by the TruUan or Quinisext Council of 692 A.D. 
 It will have been observed that, while the Churches of Eome and 
 Carthage long doubted the canonicity of the Epistle of St. James, 
 it was acknowledged from a very early period by the Churches of 
 Jerusalem and (probably) of Syria, and is included in the catalogues 
 of Sacred Books which have come down to us from the Churches of 
 Egypt and Asia Minor. The difference is easily explained from 
 the fact that the Epistle was probably written at Jerusalem and 
 addressed to the Jews of the Eastern Dispersion; it did not 
 profess to be written by an Apostle or to be addressed to Gentile 
 churches, and it seemed to contradict the teaching of the great 
 Apostle to the Gentiles. 
 
 B. Indirect JEvidence. Quotations and Allusions. 
 
 Thus far I have confined myself to the evidence as to the 
 canonicity of our Epistle, which is to be found in catalogues more 
 or less formal ; but the casual references which occur in early 
 writers are of no less importance and interest as bearing on the 
 question (1) of its date, and (2) of the authority attaching to it, as 
 proceeding from an inspired writer, if not an Apostle, yet one whose 
 words were no less weighty than those of an Apostle. Most of 
 the references occur without any mark of citation; and in. some 
 cases it may be thought that the resemblance to St. James is 
 merely accidental ; but if I do not deceive myself, the general 
 result is to show that our Epistle was more widely known during 
 the first three centuries than has been commonly supposed. It is 
 a remarkable fact that our earliest witnesses belong to the Church 
 which was one of the latest to recognize the Epistle as canonical, 
 viz. the Church of Rome. Zahn explains this from the prepon- 
 deratingly Jewish character of that Church during the first century 
 of its existence {Neut. Kan. I. p. 963). In proportion as the 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE EPISTLE li 
 
 Gentile element in the Church increased, the Judaistic epistle fell 
 into the background. A parallel case is that of the Epistle to the 
 Hebrews, which Clement seems to have known by heart, but 
 which, like the Epistle of James, is omitted in the Muratorian 
 Canon. 
 
 Clement of Eome, Epistle to the Corinthians. A.D. 95. The fact 
 that Clement balances the teaching of St. Paul by that of St. 
 James is sufficient proof of the authority he ascribed to the latter, 
 see below on c. 33.^ 
 
 *c. 23 (a quotation from an earlier treatise, perhaps Eldad and Modat, as 
 Lightfoot suggests) jtoppa yeviaBa acj)' rifimv f] ypafjjfi avrrj Sirov Xe'yei TaXaiVoopoi 
 cKTivoJ Siijrvxoi ol 6l<tt d^ovT f s ttjv ^vxrjv, also quoted in Clem. E. 
 n. 11 Xe'yfi yap 6 irpoi^rjTiKos \6yos TaXaiTrapoi (c.r.X. There is nothing to show 
 whether this treatise was earlier or later than the Epistle of St. James. 
 
 *C. 30 TTOi^o-co/iei'] TO Tov dytairpov irdvTa, (pevyovres KaraXaXiay. ../SSeXuxTiji/ 
 viT€prf<paviav. Oebs yap, (jirjo-iv, vnepri(f>dvois di»Ti racrcreTat, raTreii'oif 
 oe otooxrif ;i^apti'...eV5ucr&)/xe^a rfju ofiovoiav TaireivotppovovVTes, ,,0.710 ttuvtos 
 ^Lovpioiiov Kol KaraXaXids TToppco eavroiis noLovvTes, epyots dLKaiovfievoi Kot 
 fir) Xdyois: the quotation from Prov. iii. 34 is given by James (iv. 6) and 
 Peter (1 Ep. v. 5) in the same form, reading ecos for the Kvpios of the LXX. ; 
 in iv. 11 James condemns KaTaXdXid ; in ii. 25 he opposes justification by works 
 to justification by faith, which latter, as explained in ver. \i {idvniari.v Xeyrj tls 
 c'x">') and by the illustration from a mere profession of charity in ver. 16, is 
 equivalent to Clement's fir) Xdyois, 
 
 *c. 33 After speaking of the necessity of faith in ch. 32, Clement here urges 
 the necessity ot good works. In his note Bp. Lightfoot points out other 
 instances of Clement's effort to reconcile and combine the teaching of the 
 Apostles of the Circumcision and the Unoircumcision. Thus Abraham, whom 
 Clement (c. 10 and 17) after St. James (ii. 23) speaks of as 6 (j>i\os (toO Geot)) 
 wpoa-ayopevBets, is rewarded neither for faith alone, nor works alone, but for 
 faith combined with righteousness and truth (c. 31), with obedience and 
 hospitality (c. 10). So too of Eahab it is said (c. 12) Sid ma-nv ical cjiiko^eviav 
 k(ri>6rj 'Pad^ ri rropinj. 
 
 c. 3 cK TovTov (from prosperity) f^Xos koI (jiSdvos xai epis Koi o-rda-is, 
 Siayfids KOL dtcaTauTairia, TroXe/ios /cat alxiioKaxria. . .8id tovto Troppto aimmv i) 
 biKaioiTVVJ) Ka\ clprjvri, iv ra aTToXeiirciv eKaarov tov (pofiov ToC Seoti...dXXa 
 exaoTov ^ahi^iiv Kara tos imOvfiias avrov rds TTOvrfpds, c. 14 rois iv dXafovci'a Kal 
 aKaraa-Taa-ia /ivaepov C^Xovs dpxiyois i^oKoKovOiiv : James iv. 2 fVi^u/ieire 
 (tat ovx EX^''^' ^BoveiTe (?) Kal ^Tj\ovTe Kal ov Svvaadf iiriTVXUv' p.dxfo6e Kal ttoXc - 
 /tei7e, iii. 16 OTTOu yap f^Xos Kai ipiBla, iKti dKaracTacria Kal ndv ^avKov npdypa, 
 ib. 18 KapiTos Bi hiKaiotrvvr^s iv elprjvrj crTreipfTat rots ttocovolv eiprjvrjv. 
 
 *C. 5 dXX* tva Tojv dp^oiav VTrodeiyp^droiv 7Tav<Ta)iJt£6a..,Xdj3ap.£v rfjs yeveds 
 fjfiwv TO yivvaia iTroSetyfiaTa, shortly afterwards Paul is mentioned as a 
 pattern inro/ioy^y, c. 17 liipjjTal yevafieBa of the prophets, of Abraham, the 
 friend of God, . . . 'Io)/3 ^v Sixatoj koi afiefiitros k.t,\, ; James v. 10 vnohdyfia 
 Xd^ere rrjs KaKoiraBias Kal r^s liaKpoBv/iias Tois npo^rjTas, ver. 11 Trjv inofiovfiv 
 'Ii/3 TjKovaaTt, 
 
 C. 13 Ta7rcivo(jipovri(T0DiJ,ev ovv, dScXcjioi, drroBeiicvot ndtrav dXa^ovelav 
 Kai,..opyds, Kal iroijjirajj.iv to yeypap.ixivov',,.p.rj Kovx'^o'da 6 (Tp(p6s iv 
 
 ^ I have prefixed an asterisk to the more striking parallels. 
 
 d 2 
 
lii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 TTJ (To^ta avTov.,.^rj8€ 6 7r\ov(Tios iv rat TrXoi/ro) avToVj CI. 57. 2 : Jainesi. 
 9, 10, 19, 20, 21, 22. 
 
 *c. 21 iyKav\tt>ji,evoii iv aXa^ovela tov \6yov avTav : James IV. 16 Kav- 
 X^acrOe iv toIs dXafoceiaii ifiav. 
 
 c. '2,1 jia6 4r (ixrav t£ TaTreivocjipo trivr] rrapa Oea Icrx^ei: James 
 V. 16, TToXii l<Txyei Seijo-is SiKaLov, 
 
 *c. 23 6 oiKTipfiav Kara wavra xal evepyfriKos Trarrjp e^" crTrXayx"" 
 eVi TracToj Tovs cfio^ovfifvovs aiT6v...Ka\ Trpour]vo>s fas x'^piTas airov diro- 
 didoi TOis Trpoaepxofievois avrat anX^ btavola' dio firj fit-v^u^oi/xey, 
 c, 19 ibmfiev avTov (Bfov) Kara Sidvoiav Koi e/i/SXt'i^co/iei' toIs oiiiuun rrjs ^XV^ "^ 
 TO fiaKpodv/iov avTov /3ouXeu/ia : James v. 11 t6 reXos Kvpiov e'iSere, otl itoXv- 
 (rwXayxvos iariv 6 Kvpios koL olKrlpp^v, i. 5 atTeiro) irapa tov dtdovros Qeov iraiTLV 
 ciirkas KOI /ii) oveiSi^ovTos, airfiTa 8e iv nioTei p,rjdev diaKpLv6fievos...p.r) yap oliada 
 OTL Xrjp.'^eTat ti napa tov Kvpiov dvfjp diyjrvxos, 
 
 *C. 35 hyaivi,aa>p.i6a evpeOfjvai iv tim dpi6p,iS tS>v viroixevovTav avrov, oirais 
 (jLeToKd^apLev tUv i'irr]yyi\p,iva>v diopeav '. James i. 12, 17. 
 
 *C. 38 o (ro0oi ivbeiKVva-Bo) ttjv (TO(j)iav aiiTov fir] iv Xoyois dXX' iv 
 'ipyois dyaSo'is : James iii. 13 n's a'o(j)6s...iv vp.lv; Sei^aTa ix Trjs Ka\^s 
 dvafrTpo(j)^s ra 'ipya avTov iv irpavrrjTi a'o(jiias, 
 
 C. 40 iyKeKV(j>6Tes els ra ^ddrf rrjs Beias yvaxretos, C. 53 iyKeKvijiare fls ra 
 Xoyi'a TOV 6eov : James i. 25 6 8e Trapaid'^as fls vo/iov riXeiov tov rrjs iXivSeplas. 
 
 *o. 46 ivaTi 'ipcis naX OvjioX Ka\ hixocTairlai Ka\ axlafiaTa jrdXcfuif 
 tc iv vjiXv; James iv. 1 iroBev iToKep,oi Kcu nodcv ndxaL iv i/xij/; 
 
 Pseudo-Clement, Momily to the Corinthians (often called the 
 Second Epistle to the Corinthians), written towards the middle of 
 the second century. 
 
 0.4 p,ri KaTaXa\€tv dWrjXav : James iv. 11. 
 
 *C. 15 p.i(rd6s yap ovk CfrTiv p,iKp6s 7r\av<op.ivr}v ^Irvx^v Ka\ diroWvpivrjv 
 drrocTTpitlrai els to o'oidrjvai,, c. 16. dyaTrrj dc KaXviTTei ttX^^os apapTiwV 
 npoacvxh 8^ 'K Kokris uvveihrjtrfios eK Savdrov pveTai, C. 17 avXKd^iapfV 
 iavTols Ka\ tovs dtrdevovvTas dvdyeiv ircpX to dyaSdv ontos aaBafiev anavTCSj 
 Kai Itthjt pi^aip,€v dXXijXovy, tile Jacobean terms bi^vxla and KaKorvaBfiv 
 occur immediately afterwards : James v. 16 evx^ade imip oKKijKaiv oirws 
 laBrJTe. rroXv Icrxvei Se?)(rts fitxaiou ivfpyovpivr], ver. 19 idv ris iv vpXv irXavrjdfi djro 
 Trfs dXrjdelas Koi iiTKTTpi^^ Tts avTov, yivo^aKfTc oti 6 innrTpiyj/as dpapTcoXov 
 iK TtXdvTfS obov avTov a-axTfi ■^XV" ^^ davaTOV Kal KaXv^ei ttX^^os afiapTiav. 
 Clement seems to combine this with 1 Pet. iv. 8. 
 
 *c. 20 Qeov ^SavTos Tvetpav ddXovpev Kal yvpva^dpeda r^ vvv ^loi iva Ta 
 fiiXXovTL a'Te(j)ava>6S)nev...ovBe\s twv SiKalaiv Taxvv Kapirov eXnpev, aXX' 
 i K^ixfTat avTov : James v. 7, Idov 6 yewpyos eK8e;^cTUt tov Ttpiov Kapnov 
 
 Tqs yrjs p,aKpo6vp,S>v in aira, cf. i. 2, 3, 12. 
 
 The Didach4 is usually assigned in its present form to the end 
 of the first century, but was probably founded on an earlier Jewish 
 work : see C. Taylor, Lectures on the Teaching of the Twelve Ai^ostles, 
 pp. 8 — 48. It is difficult in these early writings to satisfy oneself 
 in regard to resemblances to our canonical books, whether these 
 arise from direct quotation or are merely allusions to the oral 
 teaching which preceded the composition of the books. The 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE EPISTLE liii 
 
 following passages, however, seem to take a colouring from the 
 Epistle of St. James. 
 
 n.4:oiKe<rr]8iyva>iiav oiSe SlyXaxriros' wayls yap davdrov 17 biyXatraia : 
 
 James iii. 6—8, 9, 10. 
 11. 5 ovK etrrai 6 \6yos (rov yjrevSrjs, ov Kfvos, dWa jxe iMetTTafievos rrpd^ec : 
 James iii. 14 /irj ^fibeade Kara ttjs aKrjdeias, ii. 20 deXeis 8e yviovai, S 
 liydpame K(ve, on fj nicms ;(<opir rav epyav dpyr\ ktrnv; ib. i. 21, 26, ii. 14 — 17, 
 lU. 18 rj avtodev a'0(pta, ..p-effTrj eXeovv Koi Kapirav dyadSyv. 
 
 *iv. 3 ov 8f^V)(rja-eis norepov Eorat rj ov, see above ii. 4 Siyvafuav and v. 1 
 StTrXoKopSia : James i. 8, iv. 8. 
 
 IV. 14 iv ekkXt/o-io i^opoXoyrja-r/ ra 7:apaTrTa>p.aTd <rov, cf. xiv. 1 koto 
 KvpLaKTjv . . .elxapuTTT]&aT£, ■irpoe^opo\oyr)(Tdp,evoi to. irapairTap.aTa vpS>v, 
 OTTCos Kadapa fj 6vcrla fj : James v. 16 i^opo\oyeia-6e ovv dWrjXoLS xa irapoKrii- 
 para (al. ras dp^pTias) . . .onas taBrJTe. 
 
 V. 1 rj 8e Tov davdrov 686s ianv avTY}' npSiTov Trdvrmv novripd ion. /cat Karapas 
 pearTfi...(j>dvoi, p.oi)(fiai, iTTi6vpiai...8iiv\oKap8la.,.vTtiprj<l)avia, KOKia, 
 avddSfLa, Trkeovf^la...^r]\orvTria...d\a^oveia.,.&v paKpdv trpavTtjS Koi vtto- 
 povr]... OVK eXfoOi/Tcs 7rTa))(^6v...dTrocTTpe<p6pevoi tov ivSeopevop, Kara- 
 TTOvovvTes TOV 6\i^6pevov, irXova-iav TrapdxXrjToi, TTevrjTav avop,oi 
 xpiTai : James iii. 10, iv. 2, v. 6, i. 14, iv. 6, i. 21. iii. 16, iv. 2, 16, i. 3, 
 4, V. 11, i. 21, iii. 13, ii. 6, 16, v. 4, ii. 2, 3. 
 
 The Epistle of Barnabas, which was written, according to Bishop 
 Lightfoot {Apostolic Fathers, Part I. vol. ii. 503 foU. 1890) at 
 Alexandria during the reign of Vespasian (a.d. 70 — 79),^ according 
 to Hilgenfeld in the reign of Nerva (a.d. 96 — 98), according to 
 Volkmar during the reign of Hadrian (A.D. 119 — 138), contains 
 references to the Gospels and to some of St. Paul's Epistles. 
 The following appear to be allusions to St. James. 
 
 *I. 2 ovTas ep.<j)VTov t^s Scopeds^Trjs^'TrvevpaTiKrjs X"/'"' et\ri<j)aTe, cf. ix. 9 
 ol8fV 6 TTjV ep(pvTov Sapedv Tqs SiSax'js aiiTov 6fpevos iv vpXv : James i. 
 
 21 iv TTpavTrjTi Si^aaBe tov €p(j)vTOv \6yov, ib, Ver. 17 nav 8a>pripa reAeiov Svaidev 
 i<rTtv. 
 
 I. 8 iya 8e, ovx ^f 8i8do-<aXos dW as els i^ vpS)v, v7ro8ei^(i> oXiya, cf. iv. 6 en 
 8e Kal TOVTO ipcoTo) vpds, as fls i^ vpav av, ib. 9 ovx ™* 8i8d(TKa\os, dW uc 
 npeTrei dyairavn, d(f>' &iv exppfv pr) iX\i7re7v, ypd(j)eiv i<T7roi8aaa ; James iii. 
 1 prj TToXXoi SiBdcTKoKoi yivtaBe d8ek<l>oi pov, cf. Matt xxiii. 8. 
 
 *II. 6 TavTa ovv KarrjoyricrfV iva 6 Kaivos vipos tov Kvpiov rjpav 'Irjaov 
 XpiaTov civev fvyoC avdyKrjs i>v k.t.X. : James i. 21. 
 
 VI. 17 fipels Tji TTioTei T^s iirayyeXias Kal ra Xoym ^aonoiovpevoi fijo'o/iei' 
 KOTaKvpuvovTes Tijs yfjs : James i. 18. 
 
 X. 3 oTav crwaraXaoiv im\av6dvovTai tov Kvpiov iavrav, orav 8e vareprjda- 
 <Tiv imyivdxTKovin tov Kvpiov '. James v. 5, ii. 6, 7. 
 
 1 Bishop Lightfoot argues for this date on the strength of the prophecy contained 
 in oh. 4 ; but it is difficult to reconcile it with the fact that the Epistle appears to 
 contain references to St. John's Gospel, and is undoubtedly posterior to the IHdacM, 
 which itself contains quotations from the Gospels, as well as from some of the 
 Pauline Epistles, and is usually assigned to the closing years of the first century. It 
 is not, however, certain whether we have the original form either of the DidacM or 
 of the Epistle of Barnabas. 
 
liv THE EPISTJ:.E of ST. JAMES 
 
 XIX. 5 oi fifj SLilrvvrja-ris irorepov earm ^ ov: taken straight from -DMac/ie 
 iv, 4, ultimately from James i. 8. 
 
 XIX. 8 ovK ea-fi iTp6y\aia(ros' irayls yap to a-TOfia Bavwrov ; altered from Did. 
 apparently to bring it nearer to James i. 19. iii. 6, 8. 
 
 *XIX. 10 fivriard^arri rjixepav Kpi(rea>s...p(KeTa>v elf to (raa-ai i/'U^^" ''# 
 Xdya), rj 8i.a rS>v xetponv a-ov epyda-rj (is Xvrpcoaiv dpapriav eroO (altered from 
 Did.' iv. 6 so as to bring it nearer to St. James) : James v. 9, 12, i. 21, 
 V. 20 6 iiTurTpe^as ipxtproKov . . .naiiTei. ''jruxrjv fK davdrov Kal KoKvyj/et wXtjBos 
 afiapTiav. 
 
 XXI. 2 eparSj Toiis ii7rcpe;^o>'Taf...eyyiif rj fjpepa iv y crwan-oXciTai Trdvra ra 
 TTOvrjpM ■ iyyvs 6 Kvpws Kol 6 piaBos avT0v..,5 6 Se 6eof...S6)ij vp'tv <ro(pLav, 
 (ruveori.v, eViaT/jfii)!', yvairiv tS>v SiKmiopdrav avTov, virop,ovT]v: James v. 
 1—5, 8, i. 3—5. 
 
 XX. In the account of the Way of Death, borrowed, with variations, from 
 the Didachh v., we find the insertion xW" ""'' op(pavai prj 'iTpoaix°''^^s '• James 
 i. 27. 
 
 Testamenta XII. Patriarcharuin, written about the beginning 
 of the second century by a Jewish Christian,^ who seems to have 
 been much influenced by the teaching and example of St. James. 
 Thus Mr. Sinker, in his edition (1869), calls attention to the 
 high estimate of poverty and of an ascetic life (p. 21 foil. p. 121), 
 to the view of the Law ' as an eternal system of justice' which had 
 been 'partially changed in its outward aspects and workings by the 
 coming of Christ, who is called dvBpa avaKaovoiroiovvra tov vofjuov ' 
 (p. 26), to the commendation of wisdom, benevolence, compassion, 
 peaceableness, above all of aTrXoTij?, the opposite to Sti|ri/^ta.^ 
 
 ^Reuhen^'nvfvp'aiTvyfyva'ias pcB^ T^s uvv c i(y e p-)(^eT ai hia rrjs (J>iXtj d ov tas 
 fj upapTia, 4 oKiBpoi yj^v^ris iariv fj nopveia ;((i)p/foucra 6eov Ka\ 
 irpofTeyyi^ovffa to\s eiS&)Xotff...7rXai/mo"a rov vovv Ka\ rrjv 
 Siavoiav Kal KardyeL veavliTKovs- f I s a 8<i) v...idv pfj Kariaxvarfr^Tropveia 
 Trjv evvoiav oiiSe BeXi'ap /caTi(T;(i;(rci vp.av, lieuh. 5 iyevovTo iv iwi6vp.'ta 
 aXXijXmi/ fcai aw iXa^ov t fj Siavoia ttjv irpd^iv. James i. 14, 15, 
 iv. 1, 4, 8. _ 
 
 Syni. .3 6 ^Bdvos Kvpicvei 7rd(rr]s t^? dtavoias tov dvdpaTTOv Ka\...TT dvror f 
 i7ro/3aXXft dveXeiv tov (j>6ovovpcvov: James iv. 2. 
 
 Sym. 4 (f}v\d^aa-S€ otto iravTos ^r)\ov Ka\ (j)66vov Ka\ Tropfvefrde iv 
 djrXoTijTi \JAVXTJ ^..-dTroaTrja-aTe d(j)' vpav t o TTVevpa tov 06oi»ou, oti 
 dypiol TTjV ^vx^iv . . .0 p y f) V Ka\ ndXe pov ivapixfi to) Sia^ovkiifi Kai els 
 at par a napo^vve i : James iv. 1, 2. 
 
 Lev. 14 ujLiei; ol <l) a) arrj pe s rov ov pavov as 6 rj\ to s Kal fj a" eXrjv rj' 
 r'l iroirjiTovai rrdwra to. Wvq idv ipels a Kor laS^rc iv oio-e^eia, of. 18, Jud. 24 : 
 James i. 17. 
 
 Jud. 13 pt] TTopevfo'de oTrtVo) to)v iir tOv piav vpav prjBe ivOvprjaeai 
 
 ' This is now much questioned in Germany, where the dominant view is that it is 
 a Jewish writing interpolated: so Schnapp, Die Test, der xii Pair., Halle, 1884; 
 Schiirer agrees in the main. (S.) 
 
 ^ Bishop Lightfoot {Gal. p. 319 foil.) says of the Test. xii. Pair, 'the language in 
 the moral and didactic jiortions takes its colour from the Epistle of James,' and 
 quotes Ewald to the same elfect. 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE EPISTLE Iv 
 
 StajSouXiffli' V fiav iv vir t pr)<f>av la Kapdias vfiav, km /ijj Kav^airde iv 
 epyois Icrx^os vfiav : James i. 14, ii. 4, iv. 6, 16. 
 
 lb. 13 TO nvevpxi toO fijXou xai rrfs iropveias Traperd^aTo cv kp^i: James 
 iv. 1. 
 
 ib. 14 ev 8ia\oy i(T fio IS pvirapols {oivos) (ruvTapdaaet tov vovv cis 
 iTopV€Lav . . .Kai, ct, irdpetTTi to T-qs imdvplas aiTioVj n p da a e i ttjv 
 dpapriav : James i. 14, 15, 21. 
 
 ib. 18 {(piKapyvpla) atpiaTo. vopov Qeov Koi TV(f)\ol to 8ial3oiiXiov Ttjs 
 ^VXV^ ""^ VTrepTjt^oxt'ai' eKSibda-Kii Koi ov k a<piei avhpa i\€fj<rai Tov 
 tt'K T] a- i o V aiiTov : James iv. 4, 6, ii. 1 — 9. 
 
 ib. 19 o Be OS 6 oiKTip pmv Ka\ i\eripaiv: James v. 11. 
 
 *ib. 20. On man's responsibility. Sxio irvevpaTa axo^d^ovai tS dvBpaira, r o 
 TTJs aXrjOeias Koi to ttjs nXdvrjs, Koi p.€(rov earl to rrjs avvtaeois tov vobsj 
 oS eav de\ri kX i i/a t...(cai i pn emi p laT ai 6 a papTT/O' as Ik ttjs 
 IS ias KapSlas Kai cipat it poa uttov ov 8v vaTOi tt po s tov KpiTT/v : 
 James i. 13, 15, v. 19, 20. 
 
 ib. 21. The oppression of the poor by the rich : James ii. 6, 7, v. 1 — 6. 
 
 ib. 22 cias wapov (T ias tov &€ov ttjs SiKaiocrvvris : James v. 7. 
 
 ib. 25 ol e V \ V1T tj TeXevTrjaavTes avao'Trja'OVTat ev x^P^ 'fcti o * ^ v TrTax^ I 
 Sid Kvpiov 7r\ovT to" Otj a ovTai koi ol iv it e v l a ;^opTaa"^ijiroi'rai...oi 
 Se aa-e^els tt e v 6 rj o-ov (r i Ka\ d papT aXoX /cXai/o-ovrat: James ii. 5, iv. 9. 
 
 Isach. 3 6 Qeos avvepyel t^ dnXoTijT l pov' iravTi y d p tr e vrjT i Kal 
 ttuvtI BXt^opevto 7rapet;(oi'T^ff'y^ffTaaya^aej^ aTrXorJjTt Kap d las : 
 James ii. 22, 15, 16, i. 5. 
 
 *ib. 4 6 dirXov s ;^pvo"tou ov k Itt iBv pel, t 6v ttXtj a lov ov irXe ov- 
 e KT el, ^ p a pdTtov iro iK IXoiV ov k l<pieT at, e a" drjT a 8 idcf) o p ov ov 
 6 eXf I, xpo^o'os paKpovs ovx viroy pdf^ei ^fjv, dXXdpdvov e K&i x^Tai 
 TO SeXripa tov 9foC: James V. 2 — 5, ii. 2, iv. 13 — 15. 
 
 *ib. 7 ndv irvev pa BeXi'op (f)ev ^eTai dtj) vpmv Kal. ..irdvra ciy piov 
 ffrjpa KdTaSovXma-eo-de, Nephth. 8, Beiij. 5 : James iv. 7, iii. 7. 
 
 *Zab.T fISov BXifio pevov iv yvpvi'iTrjTi ^^ 'F'^*'"^ '''''' "^"■^"VX''"''^"* 
 eV avTov...i pdT lov e 8a) Ka...exeT e evo'TrXay xv lav Kara navTos dv- 
 p 0117 ov I V iXiet Xva Kai 6 ^vptos els vpds airXayxvurdels eXerjarj- vpds. . . 
 na ov ydp dvd'pconos (r7rXayx'"'f^''''" ^'* tov irXrj a lov, toit ovtov 
 Kipios els avTov : James i. 27, ii. 15, 16, 13. 
 
 Dan. 5 dTroo-Tj/i-e 6v pov Kal pio'r] craTe to ■^ev 80s Xva Kv p los 
 Kar oiKrj(Tri ev vplv Kal ^uyj; d(j)' vpav 6 BeXlap: James iv. 4, 5, 7, 
 iii. 14. ' 
 
 ib. Hyios 'lerpa^X ^aaiXev wv ejr avToii s iv Tone ivdxre i Kal ev 
 JTTCoxe la, Kal 6 iritrTevav e n aiiTW ^aaiXevaei ev dXrjBe la iv to is 
 ovpavols : James i. 9, 10, ii. 5. 
 
 *ib. 6 IT po<T ex^Te eavTOis aTrb tov SaTavd...eyy i^eTe 8e ra 
 e e ^ : James iv. 7, 8. 
 
 ib. 8iaTripri<TaTeeavTovs dno ivavTos e pyov ttovt] pov Kal dnop- 
 p l\jraTe Tdv 0v pov Kal jrav \jfev 80s Kal ay airrja'aT e tt/v paKpo- 
 ^D/iKji- : James i. 27, 18— 21, iii. 14, V. 7, 8, 10. 
 
 *Nephth. 2 Kvpios Trdvra av6 pairov e kt la-e Kar elKova eavTov 
 ...o)s 6 vovs avTOv, ovTa> Kal to epyov avTov. ..(OS rj Kapbia avTov, 
 ovT(o Kal TO iTTopa avTov...ais fj yjfvxv "wtou, outo) koi 6 Xdyos 
 avTov f] ev vo'/ioi Kvpiov fj ev vopto BeXlap: James iii. 9, ii. 14, 17, 
 iii. 2, 11, 12, 15, it. 
 
 *ib. 3 ptj o-JTov8d(eTe...ev Xoyois Kevo'is diraTav Tas ^jfvxds oti 
 aiaitmvTes iv KaBapoTrjTi Kapblas avvrjtreTe to deXr/pa tov Oeov 
 KpaTelv Kal diro p plirTeiv to deXr) pa tov 8ia^6Xov. HXtoj koI 
 aeXipnj Kal do-Tepes ovK aXXoiovtri rd^iv avT&v' ovrios Kal vpels pi] 
 
Ivi THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 dXXoioxrijTe voiiov &€ov iv ara^ia trpa^eav i/iav. Wvri 
 Tr\avr)64vTa...r]\\oiafTav rdiiv : James i. 19, 26, 27, iv. 7, i. 17. 
 
 Oad. 3 Tfjv d\i)^ciai/ yjfeyet, T <S KaropdoCvTi (l>6oV€'i., Kara- 
 \a\iav acnrd^€Tai, vTre pri<pav iav ayaird : James iii. 14, iv. 2, 6, 11. 
 i6. 4 iav TTTalarr] 6 a& e\<fi 6 s...crTTfu&ev iva Kp idij : James ii. 10 — 12. 
 ib. 4 TO TTvevixa rrjs ~dyairrjs iv p-aKp odv /Jtia avvepycl t<S no/ia tov 
 &eov els (TuiTrjplav av6 panriov, James v. 7, 8, 20, ii. 22. 
 
 ib. 5 {t6 fua-os) loC SiajioXiKov rfjv KapSiav ffXi/poi, pL 6 tov tov 
 TOV iilaovs cf. Sym. 4 nvevfia lojSdXo v : James iii. 6, 8. 
 ib. KaTciKdKu : James iv. 11. dvjjXfSs: James ii. 13. 
 
 ib. iKvpia V fivov irpoa-cpi pere...iJ.r) (f>d ovfTTC.nrj (rj'h aa-ijT e : 
 James v. 13, iv. 2. 
 
 ib. opov Kvptov i k8c ^ao- de : James V. 11. 
 
 Asher 1 Svo 68 ovs (daxevo &€os...Kal 8vo Si.a0ov\ia,..Kal 8io Te'Xi;: 
 James i. 12, 14, 15, v. 19, 20. 
 
 ib, 6 Orjaavpos TOV 8ta/3dXow (al. Sia^ovXlov) lov wovrjpov nvevp-aTos 
 7T eTrXrjpioTaijBee above on Gad. 5. 
 
 2 irXfOve UTotv tov rrXr] cr lov jrapo pyl^c t tov ©eov Kat tov 
 v-^ iaT ov en to pKei Kal tov 7rTa>}(bv eXca, tov e VToXe a tov vo^lov 
 Kvpiov adcTel Kal Ttapo^vvfi . . .t rj v ^VXV" <r iriX oi...Kai toOto fiev 
 StTTpoa-anov. James v. 4, 12, ii. 15, 16, iv. 11, 12, i. 27, 8. 
 
 ih. 3 at 8 tn p oa (OTTO L ov ©e&> dXXa t a1 s eir lOv p.iais avT a v 
 BovXevovo" IV Lva t (S B eX lap dpeo'coai'. James iv. 1, 3, 7, 8. 
 
 *Jos. 2 f J/ ScKO V eipaa- jiols 86Kip.6v p.e dveSe i^ev (Ki'pios) Kal iv 
 Trdo'iv avTols i p.aKpo6v p,ri a a, on jxeya (j^dpftaKov ioTiv fj jiaKpoQv fila Kai 
 TToXXa dya6d SlStocrtv rj vwop.ovTj: James i. 2, 3, 4, 12, v. 7, 10, 11. 
 
 *ib. 10 idv TTjv ayvelav fieTeXdrjTe iv vn o fxovfj Kal t air e tv a) (t e t Kap 8 tas, 
 Kvpios KaT oiKrjore I iv v p,lv...ojTOV 8e KaroiKel 6 v^iaros K&v Tis irepi- 
 Treo"?; (I>d6va> rj 8ov\ela...Kvpios...ov p,6vov eK Tav KaKS)V pveTai aWa 
 Kal i! il^ o I : James i. 2, 3, 12, iv. 5, 10. 
 ih. iv icTxdTais fifiipais: James v. 3, 
 
 *BenJ, 4 eI'Setc tov dyaBov dv8p6s to t/Xos' jxipiqa^aaBe iv 
 dyaSfj biavola ttjv ev a-w\ay )(v iav avTov Hva Kal rjp.eis arr e(jidv ov s 
 8<i^r}s <f)opea-r]Te : James v. 11, i. 12. 
 
 (6. TOV &f6v dvv pvfl...T6v ddcTOv vra t6v vyjfia-T ov vov6 ctSiv 
 iiria-Tpicj)ei : James V. 13, 19, 20. 
 
 *lb. 6 ij dyaOfj Sidvoia ovK e'x^' ^^ ° yXoxro'as evXoylas Kal Kardpas, 
 V ffpe a>s Kal ti prj s, XvTnjS Kal xP-pds, vtt o k p Icr £ a> s Kal dXrjdc las, 
 TT evias Kal ttXou'tov, dXKa p. lav e X ^ ' ""^P' ^dvTav eiKiKpiv^ Kal KaBapav 
 Blade a- LV.. .77 dv yap 6 rroiei tj Xa\e'i..,oi,8ev ot i Kv pios in itr KenTe i 
 ■^v x^v avTov Kal Kadalpei ttjv Bidvotav avTov n pos to fifj Kora- 
 yvaaOrjvai, vno eeoiJ: James iii. 10, ii. 1^4, 13 — 17, i. 9, 10, iv. 8, ii. 12. 
 ib.l TOV JSeXiap irdv epyov SittXouc eOTi, Kat ovK exei dnXoTriTa: 
 James i. 8, iv. 4, 8. 
 
 *ib, irp&Tov o'vWap.fidvei rj Bidvoia 8ia tov BeXi'ap, cf. Reub. 5: 
 James i. 15. 
 
 Ignatius, d. about 115 A.D. 
 
 There is little general resemblance between the epistles of Igna- 
 tius and that of St. James, but the following phrases may be noted. 
 
 pf] irXavdade, d8e\cjiol pov, Eph. 16, Phil ad. 3, cf. Magn. 8, Eph. 5, Smyrn. 6 ; 
 James i. 16 (also found in St. Paul, whose writings were certainly well 
 known to Ignatius). 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE EPISTLE Ivii 
 
 *a8tdKpiTos, used in the sense 'whole-hearted,' as by St. James (iii. 17), 
 apparently by no previous writer, Trail. 1, Magn. 15, cf. Rom. inscr. and 
 Philad. inscr. quoted in loc. 
 
 *Smyrn. 11 tva ovv re'Xeiov i/iSiv yevtjTai to epyov, TrpfVei K.T.\.,,,Te\e loi 
 ovTcs reXfia xai <f)poveiT( : James i. 4 ^ 8c vTrofiovfj epyov fiXeiov fx^ra, tva 
 rjre TeXeioi. 
 
 *Polyc. 1 alrov (Tvveaiv TrXetova rjs ?X"*) *^- ^ ™ Se dopara airei iva (rot 
 (j)avepu>6ri, ovas firj8ev6s Xfllrrj : Janiesi. 5 « Sins KelneTat a-o(j)ias, alTeiToi 
 impa Tov SiSovTOS Qeov, ver. 4, tva rJTC T(\eioi...ev ij,r)8ev\ Xemopevoi. 
 
 [Pseudo-Ignatius, probably written in the 4th century. 
 
 . *Philipp. 11 ndSs weipa^f is tov direlpao-Tov, iirCKaBojiivos tov vojxoBiTov Trapa- 
 Kt\tvop.iVov oTi ovK eV7r6ipd(T«9 'K.vpiov TOK Scdv aov ; James i. 12. 
 
 *Sniyrn. 6 tottos (tai d^ieo/ia Ka\ ttXovtos p,r]biva (fivo-iovTa ' dSo^ia Ka\ nevia 
 p.rjhiva TaTTdvovTm ' to yap oXov Triurtr fj els eedv : James i. 9, 10. 
 
 *Ephes. 17 Sia ri e/icliVTOv to TTfpi &€ov rrapa XpiCTTOv XafiovTfs KpiTrjptov els 
 ayvoiav KaTaninTOfiev ; James i. 21.] 
 
 Polycarp, d. 155 a.d. 
 
 Ad Phil. 3 eSiSa^ev dxpcficos tov nept ttJs d\rj6elas \6yov...eypa^ev 
 cVitrroXas, els as edv JyKvTTTrjre, SwrjOrja-ea^de olxoSop.e'iadai : ■ James i. 18, 25. 
 
 c. 5 ;(aXn'ay<i>'yoOj'Tf s eavTovs dno iravrhs Ka<ov : James i. 26, iii. 2. 
 
 *c. 6 ol 7rpea^vTepoL...els navTas eijaTrXayxvoi, e7rnTTpe<f>ovTes rd diroTre- 
 jiXavrjiieva, emo'KejrTop.evoi. iravTas dtrBevets, p.r) djieXovvres X7'p°s V 
 optjiavov jj wevriTos...d7rexdfievoi, Trdarjs opyrjs, irpocrcaTroXrjyIfias, Kpiaeas 
 uSLkov : James v. 20, i. 27, 19, ii. 1. 
 
 *c. 11 sicut passibilia membra et errantia eos revocate; ut omnium vestriim 
 corpus sahetis. Hoc enim agentes vos ipsos aedifieatis : James v. 20. 
 
 Our next witaess, Hernias, who probably wrote before the 
 middle of the second century, abounds in references to St. James, 
 dwelling especially on the subject of Biyjfvy(^la. His peculiar style 
 of quotation is well described by Dr. Taylor, who has made a 
 careful study of the manner in which he has used the BidacM and 
 St. James in the Jmornal of Philology, vol. xviii. pp. 297 foil. He 
 disguises the Scriptures from which he quotes, 'the form of his 
 work, which claims to be the embodiment of a revelation, not 
 allowing him to cite them openly.' ' He allegorizes, he dis- 
 integrates, he amalgamates. He plays upon the sense or varies 
 the form of a saying, he repeats its words in fresh combinations or 
 replaces them by synonyms, but he will not cite a passage simply 
 and in its entirety ' {I.e. pp. 324, 5). 
 
 *In Mand. ix. Siyjfvxos and its cognates occur fourteen times in forty 
 lines, ctpov dirh creavrov rfjv bi^vxiav <a\ firjSev oXm? diyjfvx''l<^V oItIj- 
 aaadai napd tov 3eov...alTOv nap' avTOV dhiaraKTas Ka\ yvixrrj ttjv 
 iToXvdTrXayxvlav avTov...ovK cctti yap 6 Qeos as ol avdpwiroi oi fiv-qiriKa- 
 
Iviii THE EPISTLE OP ST. JAMES 
 
 Kouj/Tfs dW avTos afivrjclKaKos iariv,^ ib. § 5 oi yap durra^ovTes 
 els Tov Qeov, o{jtoi elaiv ol dl-^v^ot Kat ovdeu o\a)S e7riTVy)(^dvova't 
 TcuV aiTJjfidToiv avTajf.,,ot Be oXoreXels ovres iv rfj TTioTft ndvTa alrovvrat 
 TTPrroiBoTes em tov Kvpiov kol \aiiPdvov(nv, ib. § 8 iav Se eKKaKri<rTjs koI Sii/^vp^^o-i; j 
 alrovfievosj aeavTov alria Kai fxrj tov dt86vTa trot [_Sim. vi. S. 5 ovK dva^atvei 
 avTOiV eirl rrjv Kap^lav otl eirpa^av irovrjpa epya dX\* alTiwvrai TOV Kvpiov^ 
 Maud. ix. § 11 /SXeVett oti fj nla-Tis ava>6ev ecTTi irapa tov Kvpiov Koi 
 e^^et dvvafitv p,€yd\Tjv' T] 8e diyjru^La eTriyeLov 7rvevp.d etJTi Trap a tov Bta- 
 jSoXou 8vvap.iv pr] e)(ova-a; James i. 5 — 8 atreiro Trapd tov didovros Qeov 
 wdaiv oTrXmr, koi pfj oveibi^ovros, Kai SodrjireTai avToi' aiTeiTia 8e ev 7ri(rTet prjbtv 8ia- 
 Kpiv6pevos...prj yap olecrdio 6 avBpamos eKelvos oti XrjpyjreTai Ti Trapd. tov Kvpiov 
 dvfip 8l-\JAV}(os,YeT. 13 /iijSeif ireipa^opevos \eyeT<o oti diro ©eoO neipd^op.ai, ver. 17 
 Tray 8ap7]pa TeKeiov dvay&ev ecTTLV KaTaj^alvov diro tov UuTpos t5>v (pdyrcov, ii. 22 
 /SXeTTets art fj Trtdrts ffvvrjpyei Tols epyois, iii. 15 ovk eanv avTTj r) ao^ia avwdeu 
 tcaTep^opevrj, dWd eTTiyeioSf i|/'i';(tK^, 8aLpovid>Bi}s, iv. 7 dvTLarrjTe tw dia^oXa Kai 
 (jiev^eTat di^i vpSiV, V. 16 ttoXu ttr^uet derjcriS hiKalov evepyovpevrj^ V. 11. 
 
 "^Maild. ii. 2 prj^evos /caraXaXetj ib. § 3 TTOvrjpd rj nc araXaXta, dKUTda-TttTov 
 Saipdvidv eaTiv, V. 2. 7 ire-nXrjpaipevos To'is Tn/evpacn Tois TTOvrfpo'is dKOTaa-TaTel 
 €v irdarj Trpd^ei avTov nepKrirapevos S)8e KOKetcrc vird Totv TTvevpdTcov Tav 
 TTovrjpSiv, Sim. vi. 3. 5 Tip.aipovvTai ol pev CrjpLaLs...ol 8e Trdtrrj dKaTatTTaaia... 
 aKaTaaTaTOVVTes Tois /SouXair : James i. 6 6 hiaxpivopevos eoiKe KXvSavi 
 
 daXda-a-qs dvepi^opevta Kai puiri^opeva, ver. 8, iv. \\ pr] KavaXaXeire aKKr]\cov, 
 iii. 6 rj yXStiraa. . .<j>Koyi(opevr] {mo Trjs yeevvrjs, V. 8 (^ ■yXmcrira) duaTaa-TaTov kokov. 
 
 *Mand. ii. 4 nda-iv 6 &e6s 8i8oa-8ai. 6e\et eK tS>v I8ia>v SaiptjpdToiv, 
 SiTn. ii. 7 tovto epyov deKTOv Trapd Tot Ofo), 0TL...eipydaaT0 els tov TrevrjTa 
 eK tS)V SaptjpdTOiv tov Kvpiov: James i. 17 irdv Sapr/pa Tekemv dviodev 
 
 ecTTiv, i. 5 aiTciVo) rrapd tov SiBovtos Beov aTrXws, ver. 27, ii. 15, 16. 
 
 *Ma7ld. ii. 6 pr/dev hiaKpivav nvi So) rj pr) Sw, Sim. ii. 1 KaTavoovvros (jiov) 
 TTTeXeav Kai apireXov Kai BiaKpivovTOs irepl avTa>v.,,6 noipriv Xeyet Ti trv ev eavTto 
 fi;reis rrepl Trjs irreXeas Kai Trjs dpneXov ; (here hiaKpiva> seems to have much, the 
 same force as BtaKpivopaC) : James i. 6 avrelTta be ev iTiuTei prjbev BiaKpivopevos. 
 
 *Maiul. iii. 1 dXr/Beiav dydira-.-iva to nvevpa b 6 Beds KaraKiaev iv rfj irapKl 
 TavTrj dXijdes e'vpe6ii...Kal ovTias bo^aaBtjO'eTai 6 Ku'pios 6 ev (roi KaToiKmv, Mand. 
 iv. 5 edv paKpodvpos etrrjj to jrvevpa to dyiov to KaTOiKovv ev (Tol KaOapdv 
 eiTTai prj emaKOTOvpevov vird eTepov novrjpov irvevpaTos, aXX' ev evpv^d>pa> 
 KaToiKovv dyaKKtd(reTai....edv 8e d^v)^o\ia tls irpoa-eXdrjj ev6ifs to nvevpa to 
 dyiov, Tpv(j>epbv dv (being sensitive and fastidious), a^Tevox'>>peLTai...Kal fijTei 
 dwoiTTfivai eK tov tottov, cf. Sim. v. 5, Maiid. v. 2. 6, vi. 2. 3, X. 2. 2 : James 
 iv. 5 Trpds <^6dvov eimvoOe't to irvevpa o KaTcuKiaev ev rjpiv, cf. ver. 4 and i. 20. 
 
 *Mand. iv. 1. 2 fj yap i v6v prj a-ts avTrj SeoC SouXa> dpapTia 
 peydXr] eariv, edv 8e ns epyda-rjTai to epyov to TTOvrjpdv toUto, ddvaTOV eavTa 
 KUTepyd^erai, cf. Vis. i. 1. 8 below : James i. 14, 15. 
 
 *3fand. Yiii. 9 (good works), trpioTOV ndvToiv 7ria-Tis...dydiTrj, dpdvoia, 
 dXrjdela, vrr o povrj...xr} p ais virr) peT eiv, dpfjiavov s Kai v aTe pov- 
 pevovs eiv itT KeTTTead ai...e(T Kavha\icr pevov s dird Tr/s it i(TT e a s... 
 eiria-Tpe'tpeiv Kai ev 6i pov s TToietv, dpapTavovTas vovderelv \ James i. 3, 
 ii. 8, i. 27, V. 19, 20, 13. 
 
 *Mand. x. 2 Btov 6 Siyfrv^o s e7ri/3dXijTai w pd^tv tip a Kai TavTt] s 
 dnoTvx'!l---V ^"T'; avTT) ela-nopeverai els tov dvdpaiirov, ib. SevSva-ai ovv rfjv 
 IXapoTrjTa irjv irdvTOTe e^ovirav xop'" Trapd t<S Qea : James iv. 2, i. 2. 
 
 *Mand. xi. (on true and false teachers) § bTrdv'TrveCpa dn-6 eeov 8od(v...d<f)' 
 eavTov \d\el Tvdvra, oti dvadev e<TTiv...Td he Ttvevpa to \d\ovv KaTd tqs emBvpias 
 tS>v avBpanraiv CTriyeidv eaTi, of. § 6 and § 11, § 8 6 e^av to TTvevpa ro deiov 
 
 ' Cf. Sim. ix. 23, 21 ircii'TOTe dir\oT...TrttVTl hvBfiiinif ix'>P^yW"' dvoveiSliTTas. 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE EPISTLE lix 
 
 TO avaOev irpais eort Ka\ r)(Ti)^i,os Ka\ Tan€Lv6(f)pav Ka\ a7re\6fievos 
 arto Traa-rj! irovrjplai koi eiriBvjxias paraias rav alavos ToiTov...ov8e orav 
 deXtj avdpaTTos l^aXeli/, XaKel ro TrveOfia to ayiov, aWa ToVe \a\fl brav BiKrjtTri 
 avTov 6 0eoj \aX^(rai, § 12 6 av6pa>wos ineivos 6 SokcSk irveC/aa cx^ix ii/'oi iavrbv 
 Kal BeXei. irpaTOKadfbpiav ex^'" *""' cidiis ira/io'f ean kol ai/aiSijs Koi 
 7ro\vXa\os-~,r(ov roiouro)!/ e ir iye tov i<TTi, t6 irpevp^a ... fls a-vvayoiyrjv dvbpav 
 SiKoiW ouK iyyl^fi dW an o^evye i avToiis : James iii. 1, 15 — 17. 
 
 Mancl. xi. 9. orav eXflfl d av6 panros 6 f)(aiv to Tnievfia to 6fiov € i s 
 a-vvayayrjv avSpSiv hutaiav t5>v i-)(6vTa)V ir'nTTtv deiov iriievfiaTos, Kai iVTiv^is 
 yevrjTai wpos tov Qeov..,T6T€ ttXtj p (a6 els 6 avSpcoTros tqj ir v ev fiaT i 
 T^ ay la XaXfl els to ttXij^o? Ka6 io s 6 Kv pio s ^ovXeTai, 
 ib, 17 (TV he irloTeve rw irvevfian Tm e^ep\op,eva dnb tov SfoC Koi 'e)(ovTi 
 SvvafiLV, ib. 20\d/3€ TrjV hvva\iiv ttjv avoid ev epxopevrjv, Vis. iii. 
 1, 8, Kadia-ov &Se : James ii. 2, v. 16, iii. 15. 
 
 *Maiid. xii. 1 Spov diro aavrov iraarav emBvp-lav Trovrjpdv, ev8v<rai St Tiji/ eTridvpiiav 
 Trjv dya3rjv . . .evheBvp.evos ydp TavTrjv fiioTjo-eis Trjv TTovrjpav e7ri6vfilau Kal ;^aXii/a- 
 y(ayr)(reis avTrfV KaOoiS ^ovXei. dypla yap rj eiriQvfxla rj rrovrjpa Kal Bva-KoXws 
 fip,epovTai : James iii. 2 (on the evil caused by the tongue) ;(aXij/ay(ay^o-ai, 
 ver. 4 oiTOv t) opprj jSouXcrat, ver. 8 tijv 8e yXaaaav ov8els dapdaat 8vvaTat. 
 
 *Mand. xii. 2 ^ enidvixla r) novrjpd, iav iSrj a-e KaOioTth.iO'iievov Tm <j)6fia> tov 
 6eov Knl dvBea^TrjKOTa avTrj, (pev^eTai dvo aov fiaxpav, § 4 6 SidjSoXof 
 povov (f>d^ou e^et, 6 8e <J3o^os avTOv tovov ovk e)^ei' prj (jio^rjdrjTe ovv avTov 
 Kal <^ev^eTai d0* vpav, § 5 SuVarat 6 StdjSoXo? dvTtTraXalaai, KOTaTraXalaai 6e ov 
 Svvarai' eav ovv dvTiaTadrJTe avra viKtjBels (^cu'^fTOi d(j)' vpav KaTrjo'- 
 Xvppevos, ib. vii. 2 : James iv. 7 avTltmjTe rw bia^oKa koi tpev^eTOi d0' 
 
 vp.av. 
 
 Mand. xii. 4 (God gave man power over the four kinds of animals) el ovv 6 
 avdpa)7ros\vpi6s eaTi Tav KTia'paTtav tov Qeov...ov bvvaTai Kal TovTav Tav evTo\cov 
 KaTaKvpievcai ; James iii. 7, 
 
 Mand. xii. 6 oo'Oi &v KaBaplo-aonv eavTwv tcls Kap d la s a no t a v 
 paT alav iiri.6vpiS>v Toii alS>vos t ovt ov ... ^rj a-ovT at tcS Q e a : 
 James i. 27, iv. 8. 
 
 Sim. i. 8 XTP"^ '"''' opcjiavovs ima-KeTrreaSe, Mand. viii. 10, Fis. iii. 9, 2 : 
 James i. 27. 
 
 *Sim. ii. 5 d nevr/s nXovaios idTiv ev TJj evTev^ei...Kal Biivapiv peydXrjv 
 ep(et rj eVTev^is avTOv napd to) Geo) : James ii. 5 ov^ 6 Qeos e^eXe^uTO 
 
 Tovs TTTaxovs Tc5 Koorpo) TrXovalovs ev irltTTetj v. 16. 
 
 *S!m. V. 4 Of Of SovXof ji TOV GfoC zeal i'xr) tov Kvpiov eavTov ev rfj xapSla 
 alreiTai nap' aiiTOv (rvveariv Kal XapPdvei...6 8e Kvpios noXvevanXayx- 
 vdff co"Tt Kal naaL toIs alrovpevois nap" avTov dhiaXelnTois dldaat, av 
 de evhehwapapevos vnb tov dylov dyyeXov Kal eiXr)(f>a)S nap avTov 
 ToiavTTiv evTev^iv Kal p-fj i>v dpyos, SioTi ovk aWrj napa TOi) Kvpiov a-v- 
 veniv; James i. 1 Q€oO...Sot)Xor, ver. 5 e'i tis XeareTai <ro(plas, anelTU) napa 
 
 roO bibovTos Qeov naaiv dnXas, V. 11, ii. 20, V. 16 Serjiris e'vepyovpevrj, on which 
 
 see note. 
 
 Sim. V. 5. 1 napdpovos el, vii. 6 n apdpe ivov Taneivo(f>povS)v : James 
 i. 25. 
 
 Sim. vi. 1. 1 (ivToXal) Svvdpevai aSaai -^vx^jv dvfipanov : Jamesi. 21 
 TOK ep<l>VT0v Xo'yoK, TOV Svvdpevov aaMTai Tas ^vxas vpav. 
 
 *Sim. vi. 1. 2 pri 8iyJAVxrja-7)S, dXX' evSva-ai ttjv nlcrriv tov Kvpiov, Vis, iv. 
 1. 8 : James ii. 1 pfj iv npoaconoXrjpyjrlais exeTe ttjv nianv toC Kvpiov 
 
 'i.r)(rov XpiaTOv, ver. 4 ov dieKplBrjTe ; 
 
 *Si»l. vi. 1. 6 TO np6^aTa...Tpv(^aivTa rjv Kal Xlav trnaTaXaVTa, ib. § 2. 4 oStoi 
 elaiv ol npoSeStoKores pev iavToiis rals rpvcj^ats Kal andTats, eis 8e toi» Kvpiov 
 ovSev efiXaa-(j)ripria-av: Jamesv. 5 eTpvcprjaaTe eniTrjsyris KaietmaTaXriaaTe. 
 
Ix THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 *Sim. vii. 4 Sei t6p fifravoovvra .. . 6\ifirjvai iv irdo-ais 0\iyjre(n noiKiXais, 
 A'i. 3 Tifitttpei avToiis TToiKiXais Tt-fKopLais '. James i. 2. 
 
 Shn. viii, 3 to devdpov tovto to fieya...v6iios Qsov earit^, 6 8e p6p.os ovtos vlos 
 Qeov €(rn KTjpvxOs'is els to. TrepaTa ttjs yi}s '. James iv. 11. 
 
 *Sim. viii. 6. 4 &v al paji8oL...^e^pa>jievai vit& (rrjros fvpf6r]<rav, ovroi eltrw ol 
 (iVooraTat xai irpohorai t^s tKKKr^alas Km. ^\a(r(f>rijxr]cTavTes Iv Tois d/iapTiais 
 avTOiV Tov KvpioVj eTi Se Kat enaia-X'^'^^evres to ovofia Kvpiov To iiriKXr^dev 
 cTT* avTovs '. James ii. 6 ovk avTol l3\a(T<l>T]p.ov(TiV t6 KoKovJiifofia to iTnKKrjdev 
 eip' v/ids, cf. V. 2 Ta inaTia vp,cSv crrjTo^paiTa yeyovev. 
 
 - Sim. viii. 9. 1 ovtoI elai ttl(ttoi jiep yeyovoTes, TrXourijo'acTeff 8e Koi yepofievot 
 (vbo^oi napa Tols 'i6vf(nv' iircptjfjiaviav p.eyaKrjv ivehvcravTO Ka\ iyjfr)X6(j>poves 
 iyevovTo Kal KaTeXmov ttju aKr)6iiav . . .dX\' ivejieivav tj] iriuTei p,r] ipya^o- 
 fievoi Ta ipya. t^s 7ria-Tea>s, ib. 10. 3 ovToi ela-iu ol TnarevaravTes p.6vov, to. be 
 epya Trjs avofiias ijyya^opevoi : Jame.s ii. 14, iv. 6. 
 
 Sim. ix. 16. nplv (popeo-ai tov dv6 paivov to ov o fia tov vlov tov 
 Qeov veKpos ioriv, OTav be Xd/3?/ Tiji' <T<j>payl8a dw ot id eTai rfjv veKpaxrtv Kal 
 dvoKaixfidvei rfjv C'^fjv, ib. 14, 5 : James ii. 7, i. 21. 
 
 Sim. ix. 19 vTroKp tTal Kal bibda- KaXoi irovr/pias, nfj e^ovTes Kapwov 
 SiKaioa-vv7)s...ol toiovtoi, ovo/ia jxev e)^ov (Tiv, dno be ttjs ntcrTeas 
 Kevoi el a- IV, Kal oibels iv avToh Kapnbs okqBeias : James iii. 1, 14, 18, 
 ii. 14, 17. 
 
 *Sim. IK. 21 a (T TT e p alfioTdvai i)\iov lbov(Tati^r]pdv6r](rav, oSra 
 Kat ol b lyj^v \o I oTav dXlyj^tv dKOV(rai(ri...T 6 ovojxa in aKy^vvovTai tov 
 Kvptov avTav ; James i. 11, 8, ii. 7. 
 
 Sim. ix. 21. 2 Ta prjfiaTa avTotv pova ^oJO't, ra be epya avTwv veKpd eortV, 
 Mand. x. 1 : James ii. 15 — 17, 26. 
 
 Sim. ix. 22 iTraivoviri be iavTovs as trvveaiv e )(^ovTa s Kal 6 e\ov a lv 
 i d e\o bib do" K a\o t eivat...btd TavTrjv ttjv v^t]\o(f)po(Tuvrjv ttoXXoI ixevto- 
 6r)irav i'^ovvTe s e avrov s : James iii. 1, 15, ii. 20. 
 
 *Sim. ix. 23 el 6 Qeos oil p.vri cr LKaKel Tols i ^OjioXoy ov pevo ts 
 Tas apapT las, av6pa7ros...av6panra p.vrjaiKaKe'i as bvvdpevos dnoXecrai, fj 
 {Tao-ai avTov ', Mand. xii. 6 (j>o^rjariTe tov ndvTa bvvdp,evov trafrai Kal 
 aTToXecrai ; James iv. 12 els eaTiv vofiodeTrjs Kal KpiTris, 6 bvvdp,evos <ra<raL Kal 
 
 diroXeaat. 
 
 *Sim. ix. 26 aairep Ta Br/pia biafpdeipei ra eavTav la tov avBpairov Kal 
 drroXXvei, ovra Kal tUv Toioirav dvBpairav {boXlav Kal KOToXaXav) rd prjpaTa I 
 James iii. 8 •yXSo-ira fietmj tov davaTrj(j)6pov. 
 
 *Sim. ix, 31. 4 bet vpds. ..j3oT]0etv dXXrjX o ts. . .eKaoro) ttjs tov Kv p tov 
 obov 7T ape kkXivovt I irdaav dcjiatp ovvtc s Tals btbatr KaXiats 
 TTOVT) p tav, acTTTep Kal d(j)' vpav avTav, iva K at 6 n at pfjv y^apio'rfT at 
 v plv el vyid irdvTa TavTa Ta d'K oXaXor a be^eT at it po^aTa, X. 4. 3 
 hujusmodi anim,am giii liberat magnum sibi gaudium adqmret...<:^i novit 
 angustiam ejus et non redimit earn, magnum peccatum admittit et fit reus 
 sanguinis ejus : James v. 19, 20, iii. 1. 
 
 *Vis. i. 1. 8 inl Trfv Kapbiav o-ov dvePrj r) iniBv jxia Trjs Trovi/pi'ar. ..d/iapr/a 
 ye i (TT i Kal peydXrj . . . ot irovrjpd ^ovXevopevot iv Tals Kapbtats B dvaTov 
 e avTots eirto'TravTai, § 2. 1 rras lXd<rop.at tov &e6v irepi tS>v dpapnav pov 
 tS>v TeXeiav ; see above Mand. iv. 1 : James i. 14, 15. 
 
 Vis. i. 2 Kaya XvTrovpevos Kal KXaiav etnov, Kupi'a x^'P^- '^'•' eirrev poi, Ti 
 iTTvyvbs 'Ep/ifi, 6 paKp6Bvp,os Kal ao'Topd^tjTos, 6 irdvTOTe •yeXai', ti ovTa KaTr](f>ris 
 TTJ tbetf Kal ovx IXapds ; James iv. 9 TaXatnaprivaTe Kal nevBtjcraTe koI KXava'are' 
 6 yeXfflf vjucoi; els irevBos peTaa'Tpa(l)r)Ta Kal f) xapa els KaTrjCJieiav . 
 
 Vis. ii. 2. 4 OVK dne^eTat Trjs yXaaar/s ev § novripeveTai...d(jilevTai avTois aL 
 dpapTtai T7d(rai idv apao-iv diro Trjs Kapblas airrav Tas bf^^ias '. James iii, 1. 8. 
 
 Vis. ii. 2, 7 paKapiot vpels orroi vwope'veTe Trjv BXi'^iv : James i. 12. 
 
AUTHENTICITY OP THE EPISTLE Ixi 
 
 *ViD. iii. 9. 5 jSKeireTe ttjv Kplcriv ttjv iiTepxofievrjv...^'kiTT(rf ol yavpov- 
 jievoi ev T<g irkovTa vpwv, firjirore (TTfvd^ovaiv ol vcrTepovjxevoi, Koi 6 
 cTTevaypos avTmv dvajS^o-eroi irpos rdv Kvpiov: James v. 1 foil. , esp. 
 ver. 4 6 p.i(r6bs tS>v epyaraiv...6 dc^uorepij/neVos a.(j)' vp.ap Kpd^fi KaX ai /3ooi twv 
 BepKTcivTav fls ra &Ta Kvpiov Sa^aad elaekrjXvdav, Ter. 8, 9. 
 
 Vis. iii. 13 evdiis eneXdOfTo : James i. 24. 
 
 *Vis. iv. 3 TO ii€v ueXav ovtos 6 koo-uoe iariv iv £ KaToiKelre . . .to de XevKov 
 /lepos o aiav o eiTep\op.evos eiTTiv, ev a KaTOiKijtrovcnv oi exAeKroi tov Seou' on 
 (icTTTiXoL KOI KaBapoi iTovrai oi exXeXsy/xf vot sis (ar^v alonpiov, Mand. 
 ii. 4. Tracrti' iJcrTepovp,iuois 8/Sou dirXmy. .. 0uXa(r(TC ras cxToXds Taurus ?i/a 17 
 peravoid crov...ev dTrXoTi/Ti evptdfi Kot 17 KapSia aov xadapa xa'i dfii'acTos, 
 Si»i. V. 6 TTotra (rdp^ d7roXT/\^erat piaOov rj evpedclcra dptavTos /cat atrTrtXoSj 
 Sw/i. ix. 26. 2 01 /leV tovs o'TtiXous t^ovTcs Siu'/soi/ot eitrt xaKms diaKovli(ravTfS 
 Koi dtapirdcravTfs xrjpmv Koi 6p<j>avS)v ttjv (arju: James i. 27 BprfuKt'ia 
 Kadapd Koi dp.iavTos napd ra Qea Koi 7raTp\ avrrj iariv eTntTKerrTetrOat dp(j}avovs Koi 
 XVP'^^ ^^ '''V ^Xi\|^et airav, a(r7riXoi/ iavrov Trjpf'iv drro tov koo-juou, i. 5. 
 
 Hermas also uses some rare words which are found in James, e.g. jtoXu- 
 a-Tr\ayxvos (see n. on v. 11) ; KaTuSwaa-Tevoi Maud. xii. 5, James ii. 6 ; 8l\j/vxos, 
 -la and itriyeios (of which exx. are given above). 
 
 Justin Martyr, d. about 165 A.D. 
 
 *Apol. i. 16 p.rj dpoarjTe oXas ' etrra) Be vpcSv to va\ val, xal to oij ov 
 (prefixing the article with James v. 12). 
 
 0. 32 01 jTicTevovres, iv ois oIkci to Trapa tov eeou xr7r€pp,a, 6 Xoyof : 
 James i. 18, 21, iv. 5. 
 
 C. 61 iv Tffl vSaTi iiTovopd^eTai T& iXop^iva dvayevvi^drjvai to tov Beov 
 ovop,a : James i. 18, ii. 7. 
 
 C. 67 oi €V7ropovvTes...eKa(TTOs 6 ^ovXeTai BlBcoaL Kal to avWeydnevuv 
 napd TO) jrpoeffTfflTi dirorideTai Koi avrbs iniKovpel Spfpavo'is tc Kal ;^ijpais 
 Kal Tois...\ei7rop,ivois: James i. 27, ii. 15. 
 
 *Tryph. 49 (Xpiora) ov kw. to. 8aip,6via cji p i it a' ov a' cv Kal ndo'ai. djrXcSy ai 
 dpxai, C. 131, /ieXXet i^oXodpevBrjaso-dai tcl Baip.6via Kal deBievat to ovopa avTOv Kal 
 Trdo'as Tas dp^cis.. 6poi(os v(popdcrOat avTov. James ii. 19. 
 
 *ib. 100 (Ei/'a) TOV Xo'yov tov diro Trjs o(j>euis avWa^ov a a irapaKorjv Kal 
 ddvaTovi'TcKe: James i. 15. 
 
 Justin frequentlyuses the word ivepytlv, ivepyeitrdai (James v. 16) and has 
 also the rare TroXvo-TrXayx*'''' {Tryph. 55). 
 
 Ep. ad Biognetmn, probably written about 150 A.D. 
 
 0. 7 oi yap in lyeiov cvprjjxa tovt' avTols napeSoBr] .. . dXX' aiiTos 6 
 TT avTOKpaT ap , . . dir' ov pavmv tijj/ dXifd eiav Kal to v Xoyov tov 
 aytov . . . dv6 paTTOts iviSpv (re Kal iyKore o-ttj pi^e Tais Kapdtais: 
 James iii. 15, i. 17, 18, 21. 
 
 ib. TavTa ttj s tt ap ov o" la s avTov Belyp-aTa ', James V. 7. 
 
 *C. 9 (6 Geof ) ovK iplirr]a-ev r)pds. ..ov&e i p,vri a-iKdKt] a-€V dXXd ip,aKpo6v- 
 prj(rev... avTos tov 'Idiov viov direSoTO Xvrpov vTrep fjpav ...tI yap aXXo Tas 
 apaprlas r) p&v rj Svvrjdr) KaXv\jfat ^ eKeivov SiKawa-vvrj ; James i. 5, v. 20 
 (cf. Psa. Ixxxv. 2). 
 
 *c. 10 6 Oebs TOVS dvdpaTrovsrjydTrrjcre.. .ois vneTa^e irdvTa rd ev ttj yfj... 
 ovseK TTJs 18 las elKovos e7rXaa-e...ols ttjv iv ovpavm ^aaiXeiav 
 iirrjyyelXaTo Kal 8a<ret toIs dyanrjo'acrtv avTov '. James ill. 7, 9, 
 i. 12, ii. 5 
 
Ixii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Marcus the Valentinian (fl. 150 A.D.), in a formulary cited by 
 Irenaeus : 
 *Iren. TIaer. i. 13. 6 Ibov 6 Kpirfjs eyyvs: James v. 9. 
 
 Athenagoras, flourished about A.D. 170. 
 
 Apol. 0. 24 Trjs KoaiUKrjs <TO(j)las kclI <Cttjs> 6c6\oyLKris...8iaX\aTTov(rS>v, Kal t^s 
 fj.€V ovcrrjs iir ov pav lov ttjs 6e eir ty € lov '. James iii, 15. 
 
 Ada Johannis (Zahn's ed.) written by Prochorus in the fifth 
 century, but incorporating materials of the second century.^ 
 
 *p. 75. 13 foil. fiaK&pios tivdpcoiros os ovk iveipaaev rbv Oeov ev Trj KapSia airov. 
 Slims Koi Tols 'Icrpar/XiraLs t6t€ neipd^ovinv tov Beov o hneipafrros rrj neipa 
 cKfivav TTjv fiOvrrjTa i8i8ov...Ka\ trii /xij Treipafc Behv Koi ov prj ncipaxrBfji kokoC, 
 p. 113. 5 pr] neipuCe tov air e ipatrr ov, p. 190. 18 poKapios oaris ovk 
 eTTfipaa-ev iv (Toi tov Geov, 6 yap ak nfipa^av tuv air f I pao-To v wetpd^ei I 
 James i. 13. 
 
 *p. 141. 14 eppuaaTo auToi' aTTO TOD lov tov d av aTrj<j) 6 p ov '. James iii. 8, 
 
 *p. 167. 10 els TOV TTJs 8i8a(TKa\las opov tov deo\6yov irapa- 
 Kv-^opev : James i. 25. 
 
 *p. 170. 20 6 Tro\veva-7r\ayxvos &e6s: James V. 11 (reading of Thl.). 
 
 *p. 244ll. iav ire pnricrrjs Tie ipaa poXs pi) TTTorjdrja^rj : James i. 2. 
 
 Irenaeus, d. about 200 A.D. 
 
 *iv. 16. 2 credidit Deo et reputatum est illi adjustitiam et amicus Dei vocatus 
 est, cf. iv. 13. 4 : James ii. 23. 
 
 *v. 1. Ifactores sermonum ejusfacli...facti autem imiiumfacturae : James 
 i. 22, 18. 
 
 *iv. 34. 4 libertafis lex, id est verbiim Dei ab apostolis annimtiatum, iv. 39. 
 4 Ta ovv dirotTTaVTa tov naT p ikov tp oiTO s KaX Trap a^ dvT a tov 6 e h po v 
 Tfjs iXevdeplas irapa ttjv avrav dnea-Ttjcrav alriav, cf. iii. 12. 14, iv. 9, 2, 
 iv. 37. 1 : James i. 25, ii. 12, i. 17. 
 
 Theophilus, d. about 185 A.D. 
 
 *i. 15 8ei ^6v /ioi TOV avBpiimov <rou, Kaya> (rot dei^ro tov QeoV pov : 
 James ii. 18. 
 
 ii. 15 oi eTrKpavets adTepes Koi \ap7rp01 eltriv as plprprtv Tmv TrpofpTjTHv * Sta tov- 
 To Kal pevov(nv dKKivus...o[ he eTepav e}(0VTes Ta^iv rijs Xn/i7rpoTi)Tor rvnoi elirlv tov 
 AaoC rav SiKaiav. Ol 8' av peTa$aivoVTes...ol Kal 7r\dvr]Tes KaXovpevot, Kal airol 
 TvTTos Tvyxdvovaiv tiSv d(j)i(TTapevo>v dvdpcmcov citto tov SfoO : James i. 17 
 (Jiide 13). 
 
 Clement of Alexandria (d. about 220 A.D.) is said by Eusebius 
 (R. E. vi. 14) to have included in his Outlines (iv Tal<; VTrorvrrdoa-ea-i) 
 short explanations of all the sacred books /ir/Be to.? avrtXeyofievav 
 irapekOwv, ttjv 'lovSa Xiyco ical ras \onrk<s KaOoKiKCi^ eVt- 
 
 ■■ See Salmou, Inirodiiction to the N. T., pp. 378 foil. 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE EPISTLE Ixiii 
 
 OTo\a9, Trjv re Bapvd^a koX rijv ILeTpov XeyofjLevrjv airoKoKvy^LV. 
 Cassiodorius {Inst. div. lit. 8) on the other hand says that Clement 
 commented ' on the Canonical Epistles, that is to say, on the first 
 Epistle of St. Peter, the first and second of St. John, and the 
 Epistle of St. James.' The notes on I Peter, Jude, I John, 2 John 
 are still extant in a Latin translation, and some have doubted 
 whether he really wrote on the other Catholic epistles, and would 
 read Jude for James in Cassiodorius, see however Zahn, iV. K. 
 I. 322, Forschungen iii. 153, Sanday in Stud. Bill. iii. 248. 
 
 *Protr. c. 10, p. 86 ^ Svvafits fj Oe'iKri e7rtXa/ii|fa(ra ttjiz y^v frarrjpiov 
 a-TT e p jiaT o s iveTrXrjtre to irav,..(^6 Xoyos) e^ avTTJs dv ar e iXa s Trjs 
 iraT piKrj s |3ouXij(rccDS pacrra rjfuv eVeXa/iil^e tov ©eoj/, C. 11, p. 90, Xoyos 
 d\i] de ias, Xdyoy dfbdapirias, 6 duayevvav tov avdpairov, c. 10, p. 83 
 6 Tail dyadav di tios SoTrjp, cf. Paed. i. p. 125 rm yoOi' ydXaKri, Tij 
 KvpiaKrj Tpo(t>fj ev6is fiiv djr o kvtj 6 e vt e s TiSrjvovixEda, ib. p. 123 6 Xdyos rd 
 ndvT a T a vtjtt ia, Kal naTrjp /cat fiijTr) p K.a\ irmhayaybs Ka\ Tpo(j>evs : 
 James i. 17, 18 ndv Broprjfia TeXetov avadtv caTiVj Kara^aivov dirb tov iraTpos Tmv 
 <j)(UTav...Pov\ride\s dirfKvrjo-fv fjuds Xdyo) dXrjdeias, at. ver. 5. 
 
 Strom, ii. p. 439, iv. 611, Paed. iii. p. 259 koi (jjiXov airov (A^paap.) &v6- 
 p,ao-ev Trjs oiKoi Karai^povijaavTa nepiovirias, ib. p. 279 : Jaines ii. 23. 
 
 *i6. iv. p. 570 T € X e 1 v epyov dydnt]s fvedei^aTo: James i. 4, iii. 13. 
 
 *i&. iv. p. 572 '1 0) 3 ey K paT e las vir e p ^ o\tj kol irluTews vnepo^fj irevqs 
 fiev €K irXovo-iov. . .yevopevas fj filv re eort tt a pad e ly pa dy a6 ov dvay ey- 
 papfievos, dvo-cnTrav tov ireLpdaaVTOj evXoycSy tov 7r\da avT a : 
 James v. 10, 1], iv. 7. 
 
 *ib. iv. p. 613 d a^o<f)6s evSe i.kvv<t 6<o tt/v o'orj) lav avTov p^ Xdyoiy 
 pdvov d\y f V e py CIS dyad ols : James iii. 13. 
 
 *»6. V. p. 707 ™ TOV Kvpiov prjT^ *E(Trci) vpav to val vat, Kal to ov 
 oil (prefixing the article with James v. 12). 
 
 ib. vi. p. 778. dirapa^dTws to. Kara Tag evToXas KaTopdSiv' to 6* eVrt 6 prj fr K€ v- 
 € tv TO 6 elov Std Tjyy QVTtas d iKato o-v v rj s e p y av re Kal yvajo'ecos : 
 James i. 27. 
 
 ib. vi. p. 825 e'dj' ptj irXeovdo'fi ipiSv t) StKaioa-vvrj TrXei'tay twv ypappaTeav Koi 
 ^apiaaimv Tmv KaTo. dnox'jv KaKWv SiKaiovpevav, avv t<S pfTO. Trjs iv Tovrois reXe toJ- 
 (reiBf , Kal [rm] rdj" nXr] a lov dyairav Kai eiepyereij/ dvvaadaL, oiiK laeaSe 
 (3 a a- 1 X t K o I : ib. iv. p. 626 a'lrqpa to ^ao' iXi kcdt ar ov SiSdoKfov aiTclo'Bai, 
 Trjv Tap dvBpancov a-a>Tr)piav : James ii. 8. 
 
 Origen (d. 253 AD.) is apparently the first who cites the Epistle 
 as Scripture and as written by St. James. 
 
 *Comm. in Joh. xix. 6 iav yap Xe'yi;rat pev iria^Tis, x'^ pls Se epywv 
 TvyxdvTf, vfKpd itTTiv rj ToiavTrj^ as eV TJj (jiepopevrj laKa)(3ov iiriaToXji 
 dviyvcopev, cf. ib. xix. 1, XX. 10, ad Rom. ii. 12, viii. 1, in Josh. x. : James ii. 
 20,26. 
 
 *8el. in Exod. xv. 25 (Lomm. viii. p. 324) ore eedr neipd^n, cV' &(j>e)ifla 
 Treipdfet, ovk eVl rm KaKOTroirjaai. Ato Kal e'Xep^^ij OTi 'O 6cds dwe tpaaTO s 
 icTTi KaK5>v...6 ovv (f>£pcov Toiis nf ipaa polls yevvaias (rre0- 
 avovrai. "AXXo Se eVriJ' eVl roO Sio/SdXou' cKeli-ot ydp Treipdfei iva lovs 
 ireidopevovs avr^ BavaTaarj of. Levit. xii. 3 : James i. 13 — 15. 
 
Ixiv THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 *C'omm. in ep. ad Rom. ii. 13 (Lomm. vi. p. 134) et fides sine operibus morlua 
 dioitur et ex operibus sine fide nemo apud Deum justificatur: James ii 
 17, 26. 
 
 *ib. iv. 1 (Lomm. vi. p. 235) In alio Scripturae loco dioitur de Abraham quod 
 ex operibus fidei justificatus sit, cf. ib. iv. 3 : James ii. 21, 22, 23. 
 
 *ib. iv. 8 Nee solus haec Paulus scribit : audi et Jacobum fratrem Domini 
 similia protestantem cum dicit Qui voluerlt amicus esse saeculi hujus, inimicus 
 Dei constituetur : James iv. 4. 
 
 *ib. ix. 24 sicut et Jacobus apostolus dicit Omne datum bonum et omne donum 
 perfectum desursum est descendens a Patre luminum : James i. 17. 
 
 *Hom. in Gen. viii. 10 Generas autem gaudium si omne gaudium existi- 
 maveris cum in tentationes varias incideris et istud gaudium offeras in 
 sacriflcium Deo ; James i. 2. 
 
 *ib. ii. 6 Omnipotentis Dei misericordiam depreoemur, qui nos non solum 
 auditores verbi sui faoiat, sed. et factores : James i. 22. 
 
 *ib. i. 7 Ipse ait per propbetam Appropinquate mihi et appropinquabo vobis, 
 dicit Dominus, of. on Exod. iii. below : James iv. 8, of. Zech. i. 3. 
 
 *Hom. in Exod. viii. 4 Sed et apostolus Jacobus dicit P'ir duplex animo 
 inconstans est in omnibus viis suis : James i. 8. 
 
 *Hom. in Exod. iii. 3 Hoc idem Jacobus Apostolus cohortatur, dicens 
 Resistite autem diabolo et fugiet a vobis, cf. Comm. in Rom. iv. 8, whiob adds 
 tbe words appropinquate Deo et appropinquabit vobis : James iv. 7, 8. 
 
 *Hom. in Lev. ii. 4 Ita enim dicit scriptura divina Qui oonverti fecerit 
 peccatorem ab errore viae suae salvat animam a morte et cooperit multitudinem 
 peccatorum : James v. 20. 
 
 *ib. Jacobus Apostolus dicit Si quis autem infirmatur vocet presbyteros ecclesiae 
 et imponant ei manus, ungentes eum oho in nomine Domini. Et oratio fidei 
 salvahit ivfirmum, et si in peccatis fuerit remittentur ei : James v. 14 — 15. 
 
 *ib. xiii. 3 Jacobus Apostolus dicit Fructus autem justitiae ire pace 
 seminatur : James iii. 18. 
 
 *Hoiii. in Num. xviii. 1 Hie erat apud quem non est transmutatio nee com- 
 mutationis umbra : James i. 17. 
 
 *Sel, in Psalm, cxviii. 6 Et o ndir as noirj a as ras d VToXas nr altras 
 (5e cr/ita y iV €T at it avT (av €VO)(^os, KaXas yeypaTTTai Tore ov firj alc^yvdw 
 IV TO) fj.e eirc^XeneLV eTrl iratras ras €VTo\as cou : James ii. 10. 
 
 ^ib. ver. 153 MaKaptov svwinov tov ©eou TaireivovtrOar <^y]a\ yap 'laKco^os 
 'VanetuadrjTe evoiTTLOv Kv p lov Ka\ vi^oxret v fias : James iv. 10. 
 
 *i&. ver. 171 Qiairep tSv evdvpiOvvTQyvio'TlTO'^dWsiV — ev 6v ficl yap tls, (jjrjcriu, 
 €v vp.lv, ^ aWi T (0 — ovTO) TO vnveiv ratv 6€(apovvTa>v tovs \6yovs rav 
 8iKata>p.aTtov iariv, cf. Sel. i)i Psalm, xii. 6, ib. xlvi. 7, Ixv. 4 : James v. 13. 
 
 *ib. xxxi. 5 TTvdpa f] ypacpfi ttote piv...Tfjv ^V}(fiv (koKcT), &s napa 'laKti/Sa 
 "Sla-TTC p 8e TO cr a pa ;(Ci)pir n v si p,aTos vfKpov f'oTi: James ii. 26. 
 
 *ib. xxxvii. 24 Apostolus enim est qui dicit In multis enim offendimus 
 omnes, et si quis in verba non offendit, hie perfectus est vir : James iii. 1. 2. 
 
 *Sel. in Jerem. xlviii. ii7rep7/0a'coir yap o Qebs airiTna-ererai, cf. 
 Horn, in Esek. ix. 2 : James iv. 6. 
 
 *Priucip. i. 6 scienti bonum et non facienti peccatum est illi : James iv. 17. 
 
 Tertullian, d. about 230 A.D. 
 
 BajU. 20 Nam et praecesserat dictum, Neminem intenfatum regna caelestia 
 consecuturum (perhaps said with immediate reference to Matt. v. 10, but the 
 form seems to he coloured by a reminiscence of James i. 12, 13). 
 
 *De Oral. 8 'Ne nos inducas in tentationem,' id est, ne nos patiaris induoi 
 ab eo utique qui tentat. ceterum absit ut Dominus tentare videatur... DiahoYi 
 est et infirmitas et malitia : James i. 13. 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE EPISTLE Ixv 
 
 *De Orat. 29 Sed et retro oratio...imbrhim vt'dia prohihehat. Nimc vero 
 oratio justitiae omneni iram Dei avertit, pro inimicia excnbat...il!fjV«m si aquas 
 caelestes extorqvere novit, quae potuit et ignes impetrare 1 Sola est oratio quae 
 Deum vincit. Sed Ciristus earn nihil mali novit operari...Itaqiie nihil novit 
 nisi defunctorum animas de ipso mortis itinere vocare, debiles reformare, aegros 
 j'e»ie£iiaj-e...eadem diluit delicta, tentationes Te^eil\it...peregrinantes reducit... 
 lapsos erigit : James v. 16 — 20. 
 
 *Adv. Jud. 2 Unde Abraham amicus Dei deputatus f James ii. 23. 
 
 Dionysius of Alexandria, d. 265 A.D. — 
 
 *Comm. in Lucam (Migne Patr. Gr. x. p. 1595), after distinguishing between 
 the phrases eireipdadr) and els ireipaafiov fla-tjXdfV proceeds o jiev Ttovrjpos els roiis 
 ireipaafiovs KaBfKxei ola Treipa(rTr\s (? TreipacTTos) kokSiv' 6 6e Qeos ireipa^av tovs 
 wfipatTfiovs TrepKJjcpei, i>s airetpaa-Tos Kaxav, 6 yap 0eo£, (j)r](ni', ajreipa<TT6s 
 etTTi KaKav: James i. 13. 
 
 Gregory Thaumaturgus, d. about 270 A.D. — 
 
 *Fra(]ment quoted in Ca <e»a (Westcott Can. p. 437) hriKov yap ws irav aya- 
 6ov TtXeiov 6e 6d ev epxf'ai: James i. 17. 
 
 Clementine Homilies, early in the third century. 
 
 *iii. 55 Tois Be olop.emts ort 6 Qebs neipa^e i...e<j)ri 'O iroviqpos eariv 6 
 iretpd^aiVj 6 kol airdf ireipaaas '. James i. 13. 
 
 iii. 54 (f) a\rj6eia r) trm^ovaa) ^v xal tamv iv ra 'lijtroC r]p,a>v Xo-ya, cf. pera'^aPe'iv 
 TOK rqs a\r]6e ias \ayov i. 16, aat^eiv hvvdjxevoi Xoyoi, Ep. ad Jac. 
 5, 6, Xo'yoi fmoffotoi, Ep. ad Jac. 19 : James i. 18, 21. 
 
 *xi. 4 o els Qedv evae^elv 6e\<ov avBpanrov evepyerel oTi 
 elKova Beov to avBpinrov ^aara^ei, a- ia p. a. . .TiyLrjV ovv ttj tov &(0v 
 el<oi/i...irpo(T^epeiv bel ovtois, Treivmvn Tpo(j)rjV, 8f\(/'a5i'Tt n'OTov k.t.\., iii. 17 
 o el Kova Kal Tavra alaviov /SatrtXems v ^ piaas rijv apapriav e is 
 eKelvov a.va<^epopevqv ex^i ohrep Kad' opoiuayiv r] el<a>v eriyxavev oiiau, 
 xvii. 7 6 avTov (re^etv 6e\mv ttjV opaTrjV avTOv Tipa elKova, owep 
 earrXv avdpconos' on &v oiv Tis iT0ir\(Tei dv6po>iT(f, e'lT e ayaBov 
 e're KaKov, els e KeXvov dva<pepeTai.: James ni. 9. 
 
 *viii. 7 oi yap (a</> f Xijcei riva to Xeyeiv dWa to Troieii/' ex 
 wamts oSv rpmeov k a\ co v e p y a> v x p e t a : James ii. 14, i. 22. 
 
 *vii. 8 fi Se vn avTov (toO eeoO) opitrBela-a Spjia-Kela ia-rXv 
 avTtj- TO pdvou avT6v a-i^eiv Ka\ tm Trjs dXrjdeias pova n larTei e iv 
 7Tpo<l)TjTrj...iiri aKaBdpTcos 13 lov v...navTas de (ra>(j>povfiv, evnoieiv, pfj 
 dhiKeiv' vapa tov iravra bvvapevov Qeov C">r]V ali>viov irpoa-SoKav, 
 fvxals Kal Se^o-ea-iv a-vvexeo-iv aWovpevovs avTfjv Xafielv : James 
 i. 27, 5, 6, 12, 18. , « ^ - - 
 
 viii. 6 /iiar 8t' dp<l)0Te pa>v (Irja-ov KoiMavaeas) SLdaaKaXiasoviriis 
 TOV TOuVu)!/ Tivi TTemiTTeVKOTa 6 Qeis dmSexfraf dWa t on iitt eve iv Ta 
 ScSatTKoKa eveKa Toi notelv to vtto tov Oeoi Xeyopeva yiveTOi: 
 James i. 25, ii. 8, 10—12, iv. 1 1. ^ - t 
 
 xi. 11 exBpa Tis ea-TLV Oea iv vplv aXoyos enidvpia: James 
 iv. 4 1 i. 14. 
 
 *iii. 55 foTffl vp&v Toval vai, Kai to ov oxj-. James v. 12. 
 
 *xm. le Ka\ 6 ea-Sn rpo) 6 pa els TOV eeovep^Xeirovaa: ^ James 1. 2.3. 
 
 Ep. ad Jac. 11 Sco wpo4r]TOV dX^Bas SvTes paBrjTai, anoBtpevoi 
 Ti]v bixovoiav,i^ ?is yiverai r) KaKonpa^ ia, npoBvpas to eujroiei.' 
 dmSe^aa-de: James i. 21— 23, 8, iv. 8. 
 
Ixvi THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Constitutiones Apostolicae, a compilation of the fourth century, 
 portions of which belong to a much earlier date. 
 
 *i. 23 lnrjSe (WiTeTrj8evfi.ivrj <tv rfj icrdriTi. XP'!"'!! "' a.naTi)V...ixr)h€ 
 Xjiv (jrjXaTOV CT</)fi/S 0X7)1' Tols 8(iKTv\oLS aov nepiBrfs' on rauTa 
 Tfavra iraipurfiov TfKiitjpla vrtdp^ci 1 James ii. 2. ^ 
 
 *ii. 6 ?o-T<» St 6 iT!-iaKonos...fi.fi ■nk(oviKTr]s...fir] (jjiXonXovtrhos, /trj fiKTO- 
 
 TTTaxos, firj KaTd\a\os...fi.r] 6vni)hr]s...ji.r) Ta'is tov fiiov irpay- 
 
 p-arciais (TVp.Tren\fyp,evos...)i.r) Siyvrnfios, fir] 8 lyXcoa- (T o t...OTi 
 
 navra ra Toiaiira e^^P" ''"" Qeov inapxi^ ""'' Saiiiovav <piXa: 
 
 James ii. i— 7, iv. 11, i. 20, 27, 8, iii. 9. 
 
 *ii. SG firi Kplvai TOK iwia-KOTTOv (rov ^ rdv irvWaiKoV e av yap Kpivr/s tov 
 aS e\(p6v, KpiTtjs iyevov, p.7)8ev 6s ae npoxeipia-aiievov: James 
 iv. 11, 12. 
 
 ii. 37o7rou de o pyrj, ( kci 6 Kv pios ouk ea-r iv : James i. 20. 
 
 "*ii. 58 fi 5e ev TM Kade^eirdai hepts ris (7re\6oi e v <T XV !'■''"' ''°'' 
 fcSolos ii' ™ /3ia), (TV 6 imtrKonds fir] w po(Ta>TIo\rjTVTa>v KaToKmrjs Tr\v 
 hiaKovtav tov \eyou Iva d iard^ij aijra Trpoe Spiav, aX^a /zcye ^0'v\ios...ot 
 de dde\(f>o\ dia Tcov diaKoj/ai^ napabex^o'BoiO'av avTotf . . .e L Se 7r7a))fOS rj ayevrjs 
 ...e'lreX^o i...(cai TovTOiS tottov iroirja-ei e| oXtjj ttjs icapdtas 6 
 diOKOVOs, ivn fiT) IT pbs av6 poDTTOV avTOV yivr]Tai t] npoca- 
 TT oXrj^jris dWd tt p 6 s Q € 6v rj d laKO v la evapetXTos. to 8e avTO irQisLTCo 
 Kui rj diaxofOf rais eTrepxofievais yvvat^lv TTTaxals ^Toi irXoviriais '. 
 James ii. 1 — 4, i. 27. 
 
 *ii. S avrj p a 86<i,p,o s qtt £ Ipaaros napa O e ^ : James 1. 12, 13. 
 
 Lactantius, fl. 300 a.d. — 
 
 *Epitome c. 65 si eninificli ah uno Deo et orti ab uno homine, consanguini- 
 tatis jure sociamur ; omnem igitur Jiominem diligere debenius...Si quis victu 
 indiget, impertiamus ; si quis nuaus occurrit vestiamits. PupilUs defensio, viduis 
 tutela nostra non (/esii... Magnum misericordiae opus est aegros pauperes visere 
 atque refovere. Haec.si quis obierit, t'erum et acceptum sacrificium Deo immo- 
 Zauif... Deus quia Justus est suamet ipsum lege, et sua condicione prosequitur: 
 miseretur ejus quern viderit niisericordem : inexorabilis est ei quern precantibus 
 cernit immitem...contemnenda est pecunia et ad caelestes transferenda thcsauros 
 ubi nee fur effodiat nee rubigo consumat : James iii. 9, ii. 8, 15, 16, i. 27, ii. 13. 
 
 Instit. V. 1. 9 si lucrari hos a morte...iion potuerimus, si ab illo itinere devio 
 ad vitam lucemque revocare, quoniam ipsi saluti suae repugnant ; nostros 
 tamen confirmabimus : James v. 19, 20. 
 
 *Insti,t. vii. 21 daemones reformidant quia torquentur ab eo ac ptmiuntur : 
 James ii. 19. 
 
 Athanasius, d. 373 — 
 
 *De Decretis Nie. Syn. 4 Tr}V ekev6epiav t^e cavTan yjfvxfis aXXoir irponlvoures 
 TovTovs KM Ka6r)yffi6uas rrjs aipc<rea>s fX^'" ^6eKov(ri,v, av6pa>novs, &>s etirev li 'IdxojjSos 
 8ti|'u;(iius KOI UKaT aaTdT ov s Svras ev jrda-ais rats oSoir avTiSv 
 Kal fifj piuv fiev ?Y0i/Tar ymjirjv aXXore 8e nXXcor juera^aXXo^cvouc : James i. 8. 
 
 *Orat. tert. c. A rian. 6 liaBas 'laKia^os 6 oTroVroXor 8i8d<TKa)v TKeyf, /3ouXi)5cir 
 dire Kvrja-fv rj /ids Xdyw dKrjdfias: James i. 18. 
 
 *Ep. ad Afr. 8 AnXrj ydp eoTiK ovcrla ev § ovk tvi ttoioit/s ouSc, is ehrev u 
 'laXD/Sos, wapaWayi] t is f/ T p ojr^ s dnoaKiaa-p-a: James i. 17. 
 
 And elsewhere. See above on his canon of the N. T. 
 
AUTHENTICITY OP THE EPISTLE Ixvii 
 
 Chrysostom, A.D. 347—407. 
 
 One quotation will be enough to show how highly he esteemed St. James. 
 For his comments on our Epistle, see the Fragmenta in Ep. Cath. in Migne 
 Patr. Gr. p. 64. 
 
 Orat. de Paenit. v. koi ft ^oiiKea-de irapa^a vfitv d^ioniaTov frnprvpa, tov 
 aSfK<f)66€ov 'ld<a)fiov <j>d(TKOvTa- rj ttiVtis ^'^P'^ ™'' 'fpy<^v vtKpa i<TTi. 
 
 Lastly Didymus (d. 394), the head of the catechetical school at 
 Alexandria, who taught Jerome and Rufinus, has left brief com- 
 ments on all the Catholic Epistles. Within three years of his 
 death the Western Church also, at the Council of Carthage (397), 
 had formally pronounced on the Canonical character of the Epistle, 
 which is quoted like the other Scriptures by Jerome and Augustine, 
 see Bp. Wordsworth in Shod. Bihl. I. 128, 129. 
 
 e 2 
 
CHAPTER III 
 
 The Relation of the Epistle to Earlier Writers 
 
 (I) Canonical Books of the Old Testament. (2) Apocrypha. 
 (3) Fhilo. (4) Gh'eeJc Fhilosophers. 
 
 (1) Canonical Boohs of the Old Testament. 
 
 Genesis — 
 
 Besides the general reference to tte history of Abraham in James ii. 21 — 23, 
 on which compare especially Gen. xxii. 1 — 18, we have in James ii. 23 a 
 quotation from Gen. xv. 6 xai I Tri<mv<T cv 'Afipaa/i ra Qca Ka\ 
 iXnyia-6r] avT ^ els hiKaiocrv vrfv, only reading as in Bom. iv. 3, 
 Philo, &c., f TT 1 o- r e u o- e f be for Ka\ i ir. [The Hebrew here has the active 
 'God counted it to hiin.'] It is probable also that (p[Kos Qeov ekXij^j; in the 
 same verse of James is a quotation from Gen. xviii. 17 oi) ix!) xpu-^ia avh 
 'APpaa/i Tov naiSos fiou, where Philo reads tov 0iXow ixov: seethe 
 notes. 
 
 i. 26 KUL emev 6 Qeos Iloirj(ra)fi€v avQpcaTTOv Kar elKoi/a TjfieTepav Koi Ka6* 
 6 fio io3 (T tv Koi ap^iraitrav Ta>v i)(6v(>iv t^s daXda-arjs Kol Tcov ir ere iv a>v tov 
 ovpavov Koi Tav KTrjvav Koi ircurr^s Trjs yrjs Koi Trdvratv rav e pn era) v tS>v epnovTav 
 f TTi r^i- yrjs. This is the source of two verses in James : iii. 9 iv avrfj 
 eiiXnyovficvTov Kvpiov xat JJarepa, Koi iv avrfi Ka.Tapi>ii,e6a Toils dvBpaiirovs Toils Kad' 
 opLolaxnv Qeov yeyovoras (which should also be compared with Gen. ix. 6, as 
 tracing back our duty towards oiir fellow-men to our common participation in 
 the divine image), and iii. 7 ndaa yap (fiuirts driplav re koI nereivSyv, ipircTrnv re 
 Kot ivoKicoVf bafxd^eraL Koi de^dfiafrrat ttj (j)vo'€i Tr/ dvdpainivij, for the classification 
 of animals and their subjugation to man. With this should be compared 
 Gen. ix. 2. 
 
 iv. 10 ^rnvfj aifMTns tov d8fK<j)ov /3o5 npos /it ix Ttjs yrjS, cf. bolow Deut. 
 xxiv. 15. 
 
 Bxodus — 
 
 ii. 23 see below on Dent. xxiv. 15. 
 
 XX. 5 Gfos fj;Xci)T))f, see below on Deut;. iv. 24. 
 
 XX. 13 The LXX. here puts the seventh commandment before the sixth, as 
 
RELATION TO EARLIER WRITINGS Ixix 
 
 in James ii. 11 and Luke xviii. 20. The two latter, however, change the oi 
 lioixeiaeis of the former (which is preserved in Matt. v. 27) into /iij 
 
 XX]]. 22 Tra<rav x'lP'^" *"' 6p(pavov oi KaKma-ere : James i. 27, cf. Dent, 
 xxiv. 17. 
 
 Leviticus — 
 
 XIX. 13 ouK aSiKtjo-cis Tov nKrjatov ... Koi oi fir) Koiiir)6riijfTm 6 ij,t(r6os tov 
 lua-doiTov aov napa (toI eois npai, cf. below Deut. xxiv. 15. 
 
 XIX. 15 ov Aijyj; TvpofrtoTtov Trraxov ovde jiri davfidtrrjs 7rp6<ramoy bvvaa-Tov' iv 
 8iKato<n)vrj Kpiveis tov ttXt/o-iok (rov : apparently the earliest use of the phrase 
 Xaii^dvfiv irpoaawov, referred to in James ii. 1, 9. 
 
 *xix. 18 ay aTTijo-ets tov ^\rjcrlov irov w s tr fa u to v, qiioted literally 
 in James ii. 8, as in Matt. xxii. 39. 
 
 Nunibers — 
 
 XV. 30 Ka\ i/fuxV ^'"'f 'noiriarj iv X^'P' VTrcp-q^avlas, tov Qcbv ovtos irapo^vie7, 
 James iv. 6. 
 
 Deuteronomy — 
 
 IV. 7 Tiolov edvos fitya m eVrlw airm Otbs iyyi^tov, and ver. 4 vjiels oi 
 npoa-Kelfievoi Kvpim ra ee<a ifiav ^rJTe iravTes : James iv. 8 iyyla-aTe ra Qem 
 Ka\ iyyi<Tci Vfiiv. 
 
 iv. 24 Kvpios 6 6fCf a-ov irvp KaravaKla-KOV ia-ri, Qeos ^rjKtoTrjt, Deut. xxxii. 11 
 loll, as aeros,..e7rt Tots voaaoLs avrov € tt €7r 6 6rj a- €j ver. 16 napa^vvdv fj.e eV 
 dXKoTpiois, ver. 19 koI eiSf Kiptos (cat tf^Xmo-f, ver. 21 : James iv. 4, 5 p-oixaXiSes 
 ovK Oidare OTi tj (l)t\la tov koc/xov e^Opa tov Qeov iiTTiv;...T] doKfiTe oTt K€va>s ^ 
 ypacjifi \eyei Upas <f>d6vov iirtnoSei to nvev/ia 6 KaTioKitrev iv ripfiv ; 
 
 vi. 4 aKove 'Iaparj\, Kvpia 6 ©eor fjfiSiv els eaTiv, quoted exactly 
 in Mark xii. 29, referred to in James ii. 19. 
 
 xi. 14 baxrei, toj» v^tov Trj yfj aov KaS" &pav npaijiov K. o'^ip.ov, cf. Hos. vi. 4, 
 Jer. V. 24, Joel ii. 23, Zech. x. 1 : James v. 7. 
 
 xiv. 2 Kai <re € ^f\c ^aro Kipios 6 0tos (XovyeVEtrdaL ire Xaovaira 7repi,ov(Ti,ov: 
 James ii. 5. 
 
 xxiv. 15 avdr)fiep6v aTToSaaei-s tov jua6ov avrov. ..on 7revr)s eVrl Ka\...KaT a^o- 
 rjacTai Kara aov Trpos Kvpiov Koi ear at iv ao\ dp^apTia, Exod. ii. 
 23 dve^T) fj j3o^ avrav irpbs tov Qeov, Jer. xxii. 13, Mai. iii. 5 : James v. 4 
 Idoi) 6 fjLiados Tav dfirjadvTOiV ras ;((apas vpSv, 6 d^vaTepT)p,ivos dcj) vfiaVf Kpa^et' 
 Kal al fioal Ta>v depurdvTav fls rd S>Ta Kvplov Sa/3aa>d €la(\fjXvdav, iv. 17 djiapTia 
 avTa eoTtv. 
 
 xxviii. 58 ro ivojia to ^vti/xov, to 6avp.aaTov tovto, Kvpiov tov Qeov aov : James 
 11. 7 t6 koKov ovopa. 
 
 xxxii. 18 Qebv TOV yevvrjaavrd ae iyKaTeXiTres ', James i. 18. 
 
 xxxii. 36 — 39 iya> drroKreivoi ko'i ^v iroii^aa : James iv. 12, cf. ver. 6. 
 
 Joshua — 
 
 ii. esp. verses 5, 11, 12, 15, 16 : referred to in James ii. 25 opolas ko'i 'Paa/3 f/ 
 n 'pvr) OVK. i^ epyav eSiKaiadr) iirohe^ap.ivrj tovs dyyi'Kovs km irepa 6S<3 cK^aXovaa 
 and Heb. xi. 31. 
 
 /. Kings — 
 
 iii. 9 — 12 (prayer of Solomon) : James i. 5 e'i tis XciVcrai aocpias ahelTa 
 napd TOV diSovros Qeov ndaiv dnXas. 
 
 xviii. 1, 42 (prayer of Elijah) : James v. 17, 18, and Luke iv. 25. 
 
 2 Chron. xx. 7 Art not thou our Father who gavest it (the land) to Abraham 
 thy friend (Heb.) : James ii. 23. 
 
kx THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Job. The general moral of this book, that patient endurance of 
 affliction leads to wisdom and to final happiness, is also that 
 enforced in the Epistle of James : see especially xlii. 12 6 he 
 Kvpiov evXoyrja-e to, ea-xa-Ta 'lajS r) ra 'ifiirpoaOev: James v. 11 
 rrjv VTTO/jLovrjv 'I(ByS ■^KOLxrare koI to reXo? K.vpiov eiSere. 
 
 vii. 9 aa-nep vecj)os airoKaBapBiv av ovpavov k.tX. : James iv. 14. 
 
 xiii. 28 7raXaio{)Tat...w(T7rf/iJ i/iarioi/ arfT o^parov. James v.2Ta luaTta 
 i/KSf ariTo^pwTa yiyoviv. 
 
 xxiv. 24 7roXXou« yap iKaKtua-e t6 v'<]rafia aiiTOV, i fiapavBr) Sf aaircp 
 lioKox') if KavfjiaTi fj &airfp (rrdxvs dnb KoKap-r]! avTofiaros a7ro7rc<ra)v; 
 ib. xxvii. 21 dvdKri^fTai 6e airov {top 7t)>oi<Tiov) Kavaoiv Koi dff eX f u <Tf tq t, 
 cf. below, Jonah iv. 8 : James i. 10, 11 (o ttXoijo-ios) i>s dvBos x''P'^"^ nape'hfva-e- 
 Tat" dvereiKev yap 6 ijXiOS (Tvv rw Kaijacovi Kat i^rjpavei^ Tov x^prov Koi to av6os avTov' 
 €^en€a-ev..,ovT<as Ka\ 6 nXo-^trios p,apav6T]<jeTai, 
 
 xxxiii. 23 ayyikoi 6 at/ arrj ^ 6 po l (not in the Heb.) : James iii. 8 {yXaaaa) 
 fietrrrj lov 6avaTT](l)6pov. 
 
 Psalms — 
 
 vii. 14 aibivr/Tev dSiKiai/, trvveXa^e ttovov, Kal ireKev iivo filaV, 
 James i. 15 ^ imSvpia avWaPova-a tUth dpapriav. 
 
 xii. 2 iv KapSia Kai iv Kapbia iXd\i]aav : James i. 8 S/i^uxo*- 
 
 xxiv. 4 ddaos x^/'"'' ""' Kadapos rff KapSia, cf. Ixxili. 13 : James iv. 8 
 KaBapia-art x^ipas, dp-apTioKni, Ka\ dyvitruTf KapSiat, Slylrv^oi. 
 
 1. 20 Kara tov dSeXfjiov arov KaTeXdXeis: James iv. 11 o KOTaXaXav 
 d5eX(^o{?...KaTaXaXa v6p.ov. 
 
 Ixxxiii. 13, 14 6 6f oj pov 6ov avToiis as t poxov. ..iya-ei nvp o 8(.a(j)Xi ^e t 
 S pv fiov, i)(Te\ (f>X6^ KaTOKavaaL opr) : James iii. 5 tjXikov irvp r)XiKr]v vXxjv dvdinii, 
 ver. 6 ^Xoyifoutra tov Tpoxov tjjs yeviirfas. 
 
 Ixxxv. 9 iyyvs tS>v (fio^ovpevmv avTov to (TCOTr) p lOV avTov, tov koto- 
 (TKrfvaxrai 86 ^av iv TJj yf/ fjjxav : James ii. 1 TrjV mimv tov Kvpiov fipav 
 'It] (Toil Xpiarov, rrji So^ijr. 
 
 ciii. 8 olKTipp,u)v Kal iXfrjpav 6 Kvpios, paxpoBvfios Kal iroXviXfos, cf. Joel ii. 13, 
 Ps. Ixxxvi. 15, Exod. xxxiv. 6 : James v. 11 iroXva-irXayxvos itrnv 6 Kvpios <. 
 olKTtppav, 
 
 cxix. 45 ' I vi'ill walk at liberty, for I seek thy precepts ' : James i. 25 vvfios 
 iXevSeplas. 
 
 cxxvi. 6, 7 (sowing in tears, reaping in joy) : James v. 7, see below on Hos. 
 vi. 1—3. _ 
 
 Cxl. 3 T]K6vr]<rav yXwairav avTav atrel oi^ecof, los do'TT i8a>v (nro to x^^V 
 avT&v : James iii. 8. 
 
 Proverbs — 
 
 ii. 6 Geof bidaxT I a ocjilav : James i. 5 e" tis XeiveTai (ro0ias airftrm irapa 
 Toil 8iS6vTos Biov ndoLv, 
 
 iii. 34 Kijptos vtt e prj<j)dvois dvT tTao- a" ct at t an e iv oXs 8e didoxri 
 xdpiv: qvioted literally (except for the change of Kupios into 6 Qtos) in James 
 iv. 6 and 1 Pet. v. 5. 
 
 X. 12 'Hatred stirreth up strife, but love covereth all sins' (LXX. piians 
 iyeipei vhkos, irdvras fie tovs pfj (piXovtiKovvTas KaXivTfi (j>iXia) : James v. 20 6 
 inuTTpiy^fas Ap,apTa>X6v. . .KaXv\j/fi TrX^flof dpapri&v, cf. 1 Pet. iv. 8 
 
 X. 19 i K TToXvXoy Las vvk i KCJiev ^tj a papT lav, of. xii. 13 fit' dpapTtav 
 
RELATION TO EARLIER WRITINGS Ixxi 
 
 XfiXe'toi/ f fiTT LTTTe I els it ay ih as a fiapraXo s, vi. 2.: James iii. 2 
 et Tts €v Xdyw ov Trrniet, ovtos TeXeios dvrjp. 
 
 XI. 30 i K. Kapw oil d I Kaiovvvr) s (pvera i bevSpov fm^j; James iii. 
 18 Kapnm 8e SiKaioavvrjs iv elpT)vri aTreipfrai toIs Trowi<nv flprjvrjv. 
 
 xiv. 21 o arcudtav nevrjTas diiapTavei, : James ii. 6 nTiuda-aTe rbv Trria vof. 
 Of. Sir. X. 22.^ 
 
 xvi. 27 hvrjp a<^pav...iTtl tS>v eavTov )(fi,Xi(av 6 r) (t av pi ^e i IT C p : 
 James iii. 6 xai ^ yKaaa-a irvp. ..rj (pXoyi^npevri vtto t^s ytevvrjs, cf. V. 3. 
 
 XIX. 3 a^poavvr] du8p6s XvfiaiveToi rat oboits avrov^ t ov 5c Q e 6v air idr ai 
 TTJ KnpSia avTov : James i. 13, 14. 
 
 xxvi. 28 y\a}a-(ra -yjrevbris fiicrei d\f]6€iav, trrdfia Se oorcyov Troift hKaraa-T a- 
 (Ttas 1 James iii. 16 ojrov {^r/Xos Kal ipiOla, fKfl dKaTUdTaala. 
 
 xxvii. 1 /xj) Kav )(^w T d els aH p lo v^ ov yap yiucoa-Keis t i t e ^ e t at 
 r) iiviov (ra, ih. iii. 28: James iv. 13, 14, 16 aye vvv oi Xeyovres Sfipepov rj 
 aiiptov Tvopev<j6p.e6a. . .oiTives oiiK eTTiO'TaaBe to ttjs avpioi/...vvv de Kav)(atr6e ev Tol 
 aKa^oviais. 
 
 xxvii. 21 boKi p,iov dpyvpia Kal )(pvir(S wvpoaats, avfjp de SoKt/xafera't 
 bid oTOfiaTos eyKafiLa^ovrav avToVj cf. xvii. 3 wtnrep boKipd^erat ev Kafiivia dpyvpos 
 Kal xpvo'os, ovras eiiKeKTal Kapbiai rrapd Kvpia : James i. 3, iii. 2. 
 
 xxix. 11 edv tSr/s avbpa Tap^iiv iv Xoyois, yivaxrKe ort eXttiSo e;)(ft fiaXXoi' 
 a<ppav aiiTov, cf. xiii. 3 : James i. 19. 
 
 Ecclesiastes — 
 
 vii. 9 fir] aneinTJj s ev TrveviiaTL aov Tov 6viiova'6ai, on 6vfi6s iv ko A irm 
 d(f>p6vav dvanaveTat : James i. 19 ^pabvs els dpyrjv. 
 
 Isaiah — 
 
 i. 11 — 17 Ti fiOLirK^Sos Totv 6v<TLti)V vfitSv i \eyeL Kvptos' TrXrjprjs elpX oXoKau/xarcav 
 Kpi.S>v...\ov(rair6e, KaBapol yeve a6e...iiddeT€ Ka\6v no le'iv. ..Kpivare 
 dpipavM Kal biKaiaa-aTc xvP'^^'j '^f- Exod. ii. 23, xxii. 22 : James i. 25, 26, 27, 
 iv. 8 
 
 V. 7 — 9 ' He looked for judgment, hut behold oppression ; for righteousness, 
 hut behold a cry {Kpavyfjv). Woe unto them that join house to house, that 
 lay field to fielA'...ri kov a-Brj yap els rd Si-a Kvpiov Sa/Saiifl ravra 
 (the Heb. of the last clause is different), cf. Deut. xxiv. 15 : James v. 1—4. 
 
 ix. 18, X. 17, 18, cf. on Psa. IxxxiiL 14. 
 
 xiii. 6. oXoXi^ere, iyyis yap rj pepa Kvpiov: James v. 1 quoted below 
 under Jer. xxv. 34. 
 
 xxxii. 17 Kal earai to epya biKaioa-vvris elprjvi], cf. above Prov. xi. 
 30 : James iii. 18 Kapnos be biKaioa-vvrjs iv elprivr; atrelpeTai. To'is voifva-iv elpi)vr^v. 
 
 xl. 6, 7 ndira crapl x°P''°^ ™' '''dira 6o'|a dv6pi>irov ws dvBos xoprov. 
 i^rjpdvdrj 6 xdpros Kal to dvBos i^eneae, to be prj^a tov Qeov rjiiZv 
 fjievei els tov almva: James i. 10, 11 (6 n-Xoutrios) ens avSos xdpTOv napeXevireTui,' 
 aveTeiXev yap 6 tjXios...Kal i^t)pav=v toi/ xoprov Kal to avdos avToy i^e-nea-^v. Ci. 
 below 1 Pet. i. 24, where the quotation is given almost verbatim. 
 
 xli. 8. The seed of Abraham my friend (Heb.) : James ii. 23. 
 
 1. 9 o-ijr KoracjidyeTai ifias ; James v. 2 Ta IpaTui (rrjTo^pxTa, ver. 3 (6 los) (jidye- 
 Tai Tas trdpKas vpSiv. 
 
 liv. 5—8. 'Thy Maker is thy husband (the LXX. is different)... the Lord 
 hath called thee as a wife forsaken... even a wife of youth when she is cast 
 oS'...xpdvov fiiKpdv KOTeXmov <je Kal p.eT iXeovs /ieyaXov iXerjaa ae- iv Bvpa^ 
 fUKp^ diretrrpe-^a to wpoa-amdv p.ov aTrh a^ov Kal ev eKeei alavia eXe^cro) ae, emev 6 
 pva-d'p,ev6s <xe Kipios : James iv. 6, 7. Cf. above, Deut. iv. 24. 
 
Ixxii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Ixi. 1 t6 TTveiifia Kvplov fV efi£...(iayye\i(Taadai TTTa^^ois aniaraKKe jie, CI. xxix. 
 19 ; James ii. 5 6 Qehs e^eKi^aro rous nrtopfovs ra Kotrjuo Kkr^povonovs T^r 
 
 Jeremiah — 
 
 ix. 23 /Ji) Kav^iacBun 6 (TO(j>os iv Trj <TO(j)ia aiiTov Kai fifj Kav)^d<Tdu> 6 l(TXVpos f'v 
 TJj L(Txvi auTov Koi fjLT] Kau;^ao"^o) 6 n\o v a- to s €v ra ttXovtco avTov, 
 a\X rj i V TOVT a KavxatrB ta 6 Kav^oi }i€ v qSj (rvvteitf Kai y iva (t- 
 Ke IV 6t i eyo) tl fi\ Kuptof 6 ir o ta v e\€ o s Ka\ Kp Ifia /cat dc/cato- 
 crvvr}v eVl Tqs yrjs, on iv tovtois to BeXr/ fid fiov, Xeyf t Kvpios : James i. 
 9, 10 Kav)(d<i6<o 6e 6 d8e\<j)os 6 raireivos iv ra vijrei avTov, 6 Se ttKovitios iv rfj 
 raivftvaiuei avTOV, i. 18 ^ov\rjde\s k.t.A., ii. 13, V. 11. 
 
 xii. 3 ayvitrov avTois els fip,ipav o'<pay^s '• James v. 5. 
 
 XXV. (xxxii.) 34 d\a\d^aTe...Kal Ke Kpd^are Kai kott re a 6e...oTi 
 iirXri padrj (rav a I fj fii pai ii fiSiv els (rcj)ayr)v, xii. 3 dyvurov avTOVS fls 
 fj p,e pav (TCJiay^ s airav : James V. 1 KkavtraTe oXoXufoiret iirl rats rdXamapiait 
 vfimv Tois i7rep)(Ofiivais, ib. ver. 5 idpi-^are ras KapSias iv rifiipq. tT<payrjs, ib. iv. 9 
 ToKaiTraipriCTaTe Koi nevBrja-arc Kai KXavcrarc. 
 
 JHzckiel 
 
 xxxiii. 31, 32 dxovoixn to. pruiard <tov kuI avra ov ixrj rroi-qa-ovcTiv : James, i. 22 
 23 yiveade fie noirjral Xoyou Kai firj aKpoaral fidvov. 
 
 Daniel — 
 
 *xii. 12 paxdpios 6 virop,iv(ov: James v. 1 1 Ihov jiaKapi^ofiev tovs vno/ii- 
 vovras, ib. i. 12. 
 
 Hosea — 
 
 i. 6. dvTiTa<T(Topevos avrird^ofiai aijois, cf. Prov. ill. 34 : James iv. 6. 
 
 vi. 1 — 4 ' Come and let us return unto the Lord, for He liath torn and He 
 will heal us'...Kai ^^fi as verbs rjp.iv tt pa'Cpos Kai oijf ipos: James 
 V. 7 [MiKpodvptja'aTe oSv afieX^ol ews rrjs napoviTias Tov Kvpiov, *l6ou 6 yea>pybs 
 iKdi)^€Tat TOV Ttpiov Kupnbv t^s y^s fiaKpoSvpav iir avra ecos Xa/Sj; irpoifiov Kai 
 o^ipov. 
 
 vi. 6 eXeos 6i\a) rj Bva-'tav. James ii. 13. 
 
 Joel — 
 
 ii. 1 Kqpv^aTC.hiOTi itdpfO'Tiv fjpipa Kvpiov, OTi iyyvs: James V. 8 
 (TTrjpl^aTe Tas KapSlas vpSiu on rj napova-ia tov Kvpiov rfyyiKe. 
 
 Amos — 
 
 iii. 10 'They know not to do right who store up violence and robbery in 
 their palaces' ol Brjcravp I^ovtc s adiKiav Kai raXamaipiav iv rats x*"?"'* 
 avTwv : James v. 3, 4 iBrjcravpitrarc iv iu^fdrais rjpipats' IBov 6 fU(r6bs.,.T(cv 
 dp.r]<rdvTa)v Tas \u)pas vfiav . . .Kpd^ei. 
 
 ix. 12 oirms iK^r/Trjaaa-iv oi KaTaKomoi t<Sv dv6pd)Trav Kai rnvra to i6vr) i (j>' 
 ovs iiT iK£ K\r)T ai TO ovofxd fiov i-TT avTovSj Xiyei KvpLos '. James ii. 7 
 rb KoKov Svofia Tb iiriKXrjdiv i^' vfids. Tlie verse is quoted with slight varieties 
 in the speech of St. James (Acts xv. 17). 
 
 Jonah — 
 
 iv. 8 Kai iyivfTO a p. a Tm dxnrciXai rbv rjXiov Kai wpotrtTa^ev 6 Oebs 
 jTVf V par I Kava lovi a-vy xaiovT i, Koi indTO^ev 6 ^Kios eVi Trjv Ke(j>d\fiv tov 
 'laivd, see above on Job xxiv. 24 : James i. 11. 
 
RELATION TO EARLIER WRITINGS Ixxiii 
 
 Micak — 
 
 vi. 5 rf hiKaioa-vvr) tov Kupi'ouis said to consist, not in ritual or offer- 
 ings, but in doing justly and loving mercy : James i. 20 opyri yap dvSpos Sikoio- 
 (Tvvriv 0eov ovK fpyd^erai,, cf. ver. 27. 
 
 Zechariah — 
 
 i. 3 emarpeyjraTe irpos fie, Xeyft Kvpios twv 8vvdp.€a>v xal i7ri<rTpa<f)rja-op.ai jrpos 
 ipas : James iv. 8 cited above on Deut. iv. 7. 
 
 i. 14 — 16 TtiSe Xeyet Kvpios, 'EfijXcoKn ttjj/ 'lepoytrdKrjiJ, Kai rrjv Strai/ ^rjKov ^/yai' 
 ...5ta TOVTO Xeyct Ki^pio; 'ETriaTpeyjrta iirl 'lepova-aKrjp iv oiKrtp/x6), /cai 6 oikos (jlov 
 dvoiKoboia)6rj(TeTai iv avTJi, ib. viii. 2, 3 : James iv. 6 quoted above on Isa. liv. 5. 
 
 ii. 5 'I will be the glory in the midst of her' (LXX. w 86^av) : James ii. 1 
 quoted on Psa. Ixxxv. 9. 
 
 vi. 14 d 8e (TTe(j)avos tarai toXs virop,evov(Ti (Hebrew different) : 
 James i. 12 fiaicdpios dvfjp bs vTvofxevet •neipatrp.ov oti boKLp^os yevopevos \rip^tTai tov 
 ari^avov ttjs fco^s. 
 
 X. 1 atreio'^e irapa "Kvpiov verov Kad &pav 7rpoiip,ov kol o^ip^v ; James v. 7. 
 
 xiii. 9 SoKijura avToiis its boKijid^erai to xp^iriov, cf. Mai. iii. 3 : James i. 3, 12. 
 
 Malachi — 
 
 ii. 6 iv elprjVTj KarevQiivtov inopeiidtj peT ipoii Kai noWoiis eTrearpeylfev dno abtKias: 
 James iii. 18 quoted above on Prov. xi. 30. 
 
 iii. 5 €(ro pai pdpTvs...em tovs diro aTf p ov vt as pi (t 6 6v pia 6 a)TO\. 
 Kanovs KaTaSvvacrTfvovTas^fipav Koi tovs KovSvKi^ovTas 6 p(j)avoiis...Kai 
 Tovs pfj cfio^ovpivovs pe, Xeyei Kvpios vavTOKpdTap : James v. 3, 4 quoted above on 
 Amos iii. 10, Deut. xxiv. 15, also James i. 27, ii. 6, cf. above Exod. xxii. 22. 
 
 iii. 6 iya> Kvpios 6 eeos vpSiv Ka\ ovK rjWoiapui : James i. 17, cf. Numb, 
 xxiii. 19. 
 
 iv. 2 rjXios hiKaiotrvvrjs : James i. 17. 
 
 (2) Apoceypha. 
 
 Wisdom of Jesus, Son of Sirach — 
 
 Beside the general resemblance between this book and the 
 Epistle of St. James on the use of the Tongue, seen in Sir. xix. 
 6 — 12, XX. 4 — 7, 17 — ^19, xxxv. 5 — 10, xxviii. 13 — 26 as compared 
 with James iii., we may notice the following closer resemblances. 
 
 i. 19oi hvvTja-sTai dvpahrfs dvrj p (al. 6vp6s aSiKos) diKaiw6^vai, ij 
 yap pour) tov Bvpov airov tttSxtis avT^ : James i. 20. 
 
 L 25 p.fj TrpocreXfl^s Kvpia iv KapSla S/o-o-t/, ib. ii. 12 — 14 oval... 
 ipapToAm in i^aivovTi eirX Svo Tpi^ovs' ova'i KapSia napeipevij, 
 OTi oil TTKTTevei, oval vpiv toXs diroXaXeKoa-i tijv vtto povrj v, ib. v. 9. 10 pri 
 iropevov iv 7rd(rrj aTparr^' ovTtos 6 apaprrtoKos 6 biyXaiara-os' itroi e it ttj p ty- 
 pe vos iv avveaei aov, Kcii cts eoTta aov 6 Xoyos : James i. .8, v. 8. 
 
 ii. 1 — 6 « jrpoa-ipxn SovXeveiv Kvpia iroipaa-ov ttjv ^xV" (Tov...els ireipacr- 
 p6v...K(u iv dWdy paa-i TaTre ivaa-eas o-ov pa<po6i! pijtTOV, on ev 
 nvpl hoKiptd^eTai ypvo-os, ib. iv. 17, 18 (fj a-o(j)ia) ^aa^avia-ei airov iv TraiSeia 
 avTTJs eas ov iiiirurTeva-ji TJ V'"X.? avTov, Kai neipaaei avToy iv tois 8iKaia>pa<riv 
 avTTJs, Kai TrdXiv. , .diroKoKv^ei ajJ™ ra Kprnrra aiiTrjs, xxxi. 9. 10 d TroKvTreipos ex- 
 8iriyr]a-iTat (rvveo'iv or ovK i-neipdor] oKiya oiSev : James 1. 2. 
 
Ixxiv THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 iii. 17 ev Trpau TijTi to epya a-ov S.c^ayt : James iii. 13. 
 iii. 18 o<ro> fieyas el, too-ovtoi rane ivoS creavT6v, Koi evavrt Kvpiov 
 eipijo-ets X"/"") '^' ^- 21 ir\ov(rios Koi evSo^os (cai nrax^s, '''o Kavxtf'" 
 avT&v ^ojSos Kvpiov : James i. 9, 10. 
 
 iv. 1 — 6 TTjv ftoiji' Tov ITT a>\ov jit) d7ro(TTfpri(rfis...awo 8eo p-tvov 
 prj airoaTpe^ii s o(/)flaX/i(5v leal jir) SoJs toitov avBpanra KaTapcuraa-Bai ere' Korapa- 
 pevov yap <ri ev TriKpia ^ux?' "vtov rrjs 8eiJ(Tfas avTOV t jr aKOvcrfTai o 
 iroiija-as airiv, ib. xxxii. 13, 17 : James v. 4, ii. 15, 16. 
 
 iv. I0ylvov6p(jlavol<! i)S Trarfip Koi dvrl dvbposrfjfiTjTpiavrmv, 
 Kai ea-Tj asvios'V'^ia-Tov: James i. 27. 
 
 iv. 29 ^ ^ yivov rpaxvs (sl. raxvs) i p yXaxrcj; <tov koi vatBpos Kai irapti- 
 fiivos iv Tols "epyois crov, ib. v. 11 yivov rax^s f" uKpoacre i <tov, Kai ev 
 paxpodv pia tpdeyyav d itok p( a- lu : James i. 19, ii. 14—26. 
 
 V. 13 8d|a Kai hrip-ia iv\a\iS, Koi yXavora dvdpainov wT<i(rts air a, 
 ib. xix. 16 Tis oix VpapTTjO'ev iv rij y\a<T<Trj avroC; ib. xiv. 1 
 poKoptos avrip os ovK mXt'cflijo'ei' iv (tto pan avTov, ib. xxii. 25 tis 
 da>a-€t em aropa pov (l)v\aKr]V...'lva pq neao) dw ovttJSj Kai rj yXaaaa pov d7ro\e(rrj 
 pe, ib. XXV. 8, xxviii. 26 : James iii. 2. 
 
 vi. 18 o)s 6 dpor piav Ka\ 6 <nreipa>v irpoo'eXSe avrfj {ao<j)ia), koi 
 dvdpe ve tovs dyaBois Kapn ov s avTrjs '. James v. 7. 
 vii. 10 pfj 6Xiyo^vxri<Tijs iv rji jrpoaevxfj crov : James i. 6. 
 
 X. 7 fiKri/Tij evavTi Kvp iov Kai dvBp&nav vn e prjcjjav la, ver. 9 rt 
 vire prj^aveverai yrj Kai aivoSos ; ver. 12 dpxv vne pjj^aviai dv6pi>- 
 Tvov diTOfTrapevov drrb Kvpiov, Kai airo tov notrja'avros avTov drrefmj rj 
 KapSia avTov, ver. 18 ovk eKritrrai, dvdpoanois vit e pr]<j)av la, ib. xiii. 19 
 ^beKvypa virepTjipdv^ TaTreivorrjs, ib. XV. 8 tj <ro(j)ia paKpdv ea-Tiv vnepq- 
 (j)avLas: James iv. 6. 
 
 X. 22 ov SiKfliov dripda'ai 7rTa>x<>v avverbv Kai ov Ka6fj<ei ho^do'ai avhpa 
 apapTaX6j : James ii. 2, 3, 6. 
 
 X. 10 fiaa-iKeiis arjpepov ical avpiov TeXevTrjaei, ib. xi. 16, 17 (where the 
 rich oppressor says) eSpov avdnavcriv Kai vvv (j>dyopai ck tS>v dyadiov pov, Kai o i k 
 oibe ris Kaipos napeXevo'erat Kai KaraXe ifjf e i avra erepots 
 Kai dnoBaveiTai: James i v. 14. 
 
 xi. 25 KUKaiTts &pas in iXrj<T povqv iToiel Tpvcpijs : Jam es i. 25. 
 xii. 11 eoT) avT<S ras cKpepax^s eaonrpov : James i. 23. 
 
 xiv. 23 {paKapios dvjjp) 6 napuKvvTav bia tS>v Bvpibav avrrji {(T0(pias) : 
 James i. 25. 
 
 XV. 6 (6 (fyoPovpevos Kvpiov) ev(f>po<rvvriv Kai <tt et^avov dydKXidpaTOS Kai 
 ovopa aliSvos KaraKXr) povo pr/ir e i : James i. 12. 
 
 XV. 11 — 20 pi] eXirrfS oxt 8ta Kvpiov dnearijv' a yap iploTja-ev ov 
 jToirjCreis' pfj etnus on aires pe inXavrja-ev, ov yap xpeiav ex" dvbpos 
 dpapraXov. ttSc jSBeXvy iJ,a epiaqaev 6 Kv pios,..avTds i^ dpxtjs i7roiq(rev 
 S.vBpamov Km d(j)rJKev avTov iv x^'P' Sia^ovXiov avTov...evavn 
 dv6pa>iT(av f) ^aq Kul 6 Sdvaros Kai 6 iav evSoKqa-r/ Sodqa erai 
 a i) T « : James i. 12— 15. 
 
 XVli. 3, 4 (COT (iKOva eavrov eiroiqa-evavTOvs- eBqKe tov (fio^ov 
 avTOv eirl Tracrq s trap k6 s Kai KaraKvpievfiv Sq p icdv koI irereiv^v: 
 James iii. 9, 7. 
 
 xvii. 26 T{ (pa)Teiv6Te pov qXiov; Kai tov to e KXeiire i, ib. xxvii. 
 11 6 Si &(ppa)v ins <t eXqvq dXXoiovrai: James i. 17. 
 xviii. 15, xxxi. 16. xliii. 22 Kava-av. James i. 11. 
 
 xviii. n pmpAs dxapia-Tas oveiSiet Kai So'o-ts ^aa-Kavov eKrqKei 6tf)6aXpovs, 
 XX. 14 {a^pav) oXtya Saaei koI iroXXa ovetSiei, xli. 22 ueTci ro 
 tovvat pq oveiSi^e: James i. 5. 
 
 xix. 18 — 22 TrScra <ro<pia <^oj3os Kvpiov Kai iv 7rd<rji (ro(pia 
 
EELATION TO EARLIER WRITINGS Ixxv 
 
 TToiijo-is vofjo v...e(rT4 irav ovpy ia Ka\ avrr] iSSe'Xwy/za, xxi. 12 ov 
 natSevBrjireTai os ovk eari Traj/oOpyos, e<TTi 8c wavov py ia 7t\r)6v v ovir a 
 TtiKpiav: James iii. 13 — 17. 
 
 xxi. 15 (Xoyov <ro(j)ov) ^K0v<rfv 6 awaTaXcSv xat anripiaev avT(S, xxvii. 13 
 6 ycXcos avTav iv <nr ardXri d^iopn'os ; James v. 5. 
 
 xxviii. 1, 2 o CKStKrav napa Kvplov cvprj(Tft (KSlKr)(riv...a(j) t s ahlKrjjxa ra 
 7r\ijo"tov trov, Kai rdre SeridevTo s <tov a I ifiaprlai it ov Xvdrj- 
 (TovTaf. James ii. 13. 
 
 xxviii. 12 eav <j»iiTTi(rj]s (nrLvBrjpa iKKarjaeTai, Kai iav wniaris iir avriv a^ea- 
 BTjaeTOij KOL dp.<j}6Te;ia ck tov ard/xaros aov e^eXeuVerai. ^tOvpov kcu. diyXwatTov 
 Karapaa-dai, xxxi. 24 fls ev)^6iievos koI els Korapaiiievos, rivos (jxovrjs elfraKovireTai 6 
 fifo-n-oTTjs ; James iii. 10. 
 
 xxviii. 13 — 26, esp. ver. 14 yX(5<ro-a Tpirq jroWovs iaaXevcrf, Koi Sieimjoci/ 
 ttvTovs aird Wvovs els e6vos Koi iroKeis 6)(vpds KaBeTKe, ver. 18 noWol eireirav ev 
 aTop.an iiax^lpas, aXV ou;( as ol rrenraKores SiA yXacraav, ver. 21 6 a varus 
 irout] pos 6 Bdvaros ai Trjs, Kai XvcrtreX^f pdXKov 6 a brjs avTrjs' ov firj 
 KparljiTri evire^mv Kai tv rfj (j>\oyl avrrjs ov KarjirovTai' ol KaTdkeiwovTes 
 Kvpiov €iiiTe<T0VVTai els avTrjV, Kai iv axWols e KKar)a'eT ai Kai ov firj afieaBrj- 
 €5ra7ro(rraX^(reTat avTols a)s XeuiK, Kai i) s vd pSaXis XufiamTOi auVoiJs : James 
 iii. 5—8. 
 
 xxix. 10 djT oXe (T ov dpyvpiov d l db e\<f)ov Kai (jyikov Kai fi^ I at 6 tj Tat 
 i/TTo TOV \i6ov els dn aXe lav' des tov drjo-avpov trov kO-t' evTo}\.ds Y>//'i(j'Toi', Kai 
 T^vo'ireXtjirei. aoL fidWov rj to xP^o'^ov, xii. 10 ws yap 6 x'^^ i'^^ lovrai, ovtuis 
 7] TTOvrjpla av tov, xxxiv. 5 6 dyatraiv xp^^rlov ov dtKoiatdrjo'erai, Kai 6 d tat koi v 
 Biacj>6opdv avTOS v\ri a drj a- er ai : James V. 2, 3. 
 
 xxxi. 22 (ftovevcov tov irkrja-iov 6 d(fiatpovp,evos avfi^iaariv Kai eKxeav alpa 6 
 diro(TTepS>v jXiirBov iiktBlov: James V. 4. 
 
 xxxvi. 2 6 imoKpiv6p,evos iv i/d/im i>s iv Karaiy iSi w\oXov : James i. 6. 
 
 xxxviii. 9 iv appaarrjixaTi <rov jifj jrnpd^Xejre, dXX' c3|ai Kv pica Kai avTos 
 IdaeTai a-e : James v. 14. 
 
 Book of Wisdom^ 
 
 i. 1, 2, 3 iv dirXoTrjTi Kap&ias fijT^ixare avTov (tov Kvpiov), ort evpi<TKeTai 
 rots fir] ireipd^ovo'LV avrov, epx^avl^erai be toIs p-rj dirtarovtrtv aiiTa. otkoXioi yap 
 XoyLO'pol x<^P^Co^^^^ ^TTO Qeov ', James i, 6 — 8, ii. 4, iv, 3. 
 
 i. 11 (ftvXd^aa'de yoyyvcr p,ov dvai(j)e\rj koI a it 6 KaraXaXiSs (jje i- 
 a-atrBe yXoxroT/s : James iv. 11, v. 9. 
 
 ii. 4 TTopeXfu o-crnt 6 ^ios fifimv i>s ix"'! vfpeXijs, Kai its oixix^l 
 8iaa-Ke8aa-6rio-eTai. Sia>xdei(Ta iiro aKTivov rjXiov : James iv. 14. 
 
 ii. 10 KaTabwacrTeva-atp-ev Tiev tit a biKaiov, p-r] <j)ei(Tatpe8a ^Jjpay, 
 12 — 20, esp. ver. 20 BavaTa daxripovt KaT ahlKda atpev avT<iv,ct. XV. 14, 
 xvii. 2 : James ii. 6, v. 6. 
 
 ii. 23 6 Qebs eKTiae tov avBpamov iir d(j)6apa-la, Kai elKova T^s ISias 
 iStoTi/Tos ejT0iri(T ev avTov. James iii. 9. 
 
 iii. 4 — 6 iv o^ei, dvdpairutv edv Ko\a<r6S>a-iv (oi bUawi), j] iXirls avrmv dBava- 
 a-las TrXrjpTjSjKal 6\iya naihevB evTes peyd\a eve pyerrjdifiT ovTai, 
 oTi o Beos eireipaa-ev avTovs...its ;(pucroi'...£ fioKi/iao-ei/ avrovs: James i. 
 2, 3, 12, 13. ^ , , , , 
 
 V. 8 Ti &(l>e\7ia-ev fjpus fj vjre pri<fiavia; koItI wXovtos perd aXafovft'as 
 <Tvpfie^\riTai fipXv ; TraprjXBev iKe'iva wdvTa its (r Kid, ver. 15, 16 Sixaioi fie 
 ...XrjyjfOVTat to fiaaiXeiov Trjs evnpeneias km to bidhr)p,a Toii 
 (cdXXovs iK x^i-P^^ Kvpiov: James iv. 6, 16, i. 10, 11, 12. 
 
 vii. 7 MI. viii. ix. x., wisdom given in answer to prayer : Jamea i. 17. 
 
 vii. 18 Tponav dXXayds Kai peTO^oXas Kaipatv, ver. 29 eari yap 
 
Ixxvi THE EPISTLE OF ST, JAMES 
 
 <ro<jita eiiit pen i(TT ipn ^Xi'ou K.a\ vir e p natrav airrpav 6 e (rtv, ^ail 
 <rvyKpivojj,€vr) evpitrKeTM irporepa- tovto ftev yap StaSex^eTatvv^, (roipias 
 8e oi K avTKT^yj e I Kuxia: James i. 17. 
 
 ix. 6 kSk yap Tis y TcXeior iv viols avOpimutv Tijiairi) irov o'ocjjias 
 airovari s els ouSeK \oyi(T6rja'eTai: James i. 5 . 
 
 ix. 17 /SouXiji' fie aov ris eyvio, ei prj (rv eSaKas iroiplaii, Koi 
 enetxy^as to ayiov frov irpevp^a airo vyfrlo-Tiav: James i. 2 — 5, ill- 15, 17. 
 
 xi. 9 ore yap eTreipdadrjcraii, Kalirep ev ekeei TraiSevo/ievoi, eyvaaav ttSs per' 
 opyrjs Kpivopevoi dffe^fis e^aaavi^ovTo' tovtovs [lev yap ats TraTrjp vovOerS)!' e S o Ki pa-' 
 a as, eicelvovs be as ^aiTiXevs KaraSiKa^av e^i}Ta(ras '. James i. 2, 3, 12. 
 
 (3) Philo.i 
 
 Mund. Op'if. M. i. p. 7 (to vorjrov (j)S>s) eariv vwepovpdmos dcTTrjp wi/y^ rS>v 
 alirBrjTSiv dcTrepuiv : James i. 17. 
 
 Leg. All. i. p. 50 M (ptXoBjipos Sn/ 6 Qebs ^apl^eTat ra dyaSa irdtrt Koi toTs prf 
 TeXeiois, Plantat. p. 342 rj)y ck tov TrpoatpeTiK&s eivai ^iK6ba)poy...eK7riha ^cottu- 
 peXv : James i. 17. 
 
 p. 52 contrasts ttjv en iyeiov <ro<p lav with, ttjv Beiav Ka\ ov pdviov : 
 James iii. 15, 17. 
 
 ih. ov yap dverai Kai (r ^ e vvvr at dXV del ire^VKev dvareKKtov 6 opBos 
 \6yos : James i. 17. 
 
 p. 6i 7r ep tr TO u navovpyias dne^eaSai : Ja^iiiesi. 21 aTrodepevot naa'av.., 
 77 e pio" a" e lav KaKias. 
 
 p. 72 Trav p.ev ovv rh yevvi]T ov dvay xaiov TpeirearBaf iSiov ydp can 
 TOVTO avTov, iSxTTTep 3eov to St peirrov elvai, cf. p. 82 : James i. 17. 
 
 p. 72 6 vovs trvv TToWals bwdpeat Kal e^ea-LV eyevvdrOj XoyiKrjj yj/v^tK^, ipvTiKjjy 
 SxTTe Kal alcrBriTiKy : James iii. 15. 
 
 p. 80 OTav yap dpapT^...alT laT at to. Be'ia, ttjv Idlav TpoTrrjv Trpoar- 
 diTTtav Qea, cf. De Prof. p. 558 : James i. 13, 14. 
 
 p. 86 KaXAtcTTOv dywva tovtov bid6\r}<Tov Kal a-irovdao'ov (rTe(j}av(oBrjvai 
 KaTO. TTjS Tovs oWovs VLKaoTjs Tj d o V TJ s KoKov Kal euKXeo a-T ecji av ov '. 
 James i. 12. 
 
 p. 102 8a pea Kal evepyecrla Kal x^P^a-pa Beov to ndvTa, 108 OeoS 
 iSiov Ta jiev dyaBd irporeiveiv Kal ^Bdvew Stopovpevov, cF. i. p. 161 
 ii. p. 246 : James i. 17. 
 
 p. 108 TOV eyKvpova Beicov (j)d)Tti>v \6yov : James i. 17. 
 
 p. 131 Comparison of reason and passion to the ship and the chariot guided 
 by the rudder and the reins, cf. Agrie. i. 271 : James iii. 3, 4. 
 
 p. 132 Folly of forming plans without reference to Providence : James iv. 13. 
 
 p. 135 o^TOt e^ep^ovrai pev otto tS)V apapTrjpdrojV) els eTepa de e^ep^ovrai.' tov 
 he Tekems eyKpaTrj del ndvTa <pevyetv to. dpaprrjpaTa Kal Ta pel^ta Kai to. e\dTTa> : 
 James ii. 14. 
 
 p. 141 dvdyKjj OTav dirb ttjs tov Qeov ^avTao'ias e^eXBrj didvoiaj yews avriKa 
 Ba\aTTevov(TT]s Tponovj avTitTTaTOVVTav ^iattos wvevpaTtavj coSe Kal eKelae <j)epea'Bai '. 
 James i. 6. 
 
 Cherubim i. p. 142 M to pev Belov u.t peirTov to he yempevov (pvcrei 
 perapXfjTov: James i. 17. 
 
 p. 147 TLs 6 (TTrelpav to. KoKd ttXtiv 6 Toiv oKa*v iraTtjp ; o'Treipet pev ovtoSj to he 
 yevvrjiia to 'ihiov 6 eaiveipe hcopelrat : James i. 18. 
 
 ^ Many of the quotations which follow will bo found in Schneckenburger's com- 
 mentary and in Siegfried's Philo, pp. 310 foil. 
 
RELATION TO EARLIER WRITINGS Ixxvii 
 
 p. 149 orav 6 iv fjjxw v ov s alcrSria-et nTi-rj (r iaa-rj, rj 8 e avW afijB dv f i 
 ...eyKu^mv re yiverai Ka\ etdiis utbivfi Ka\ t'iktu KaKmv -^vxrjS rh 
 jiiyiiTTov : James i. 15. 
 
 p. 161 6 Qe OS d<o pTjT Ko s t S>v aTrdvTiav: James i. 17. 
 Sacr. Ab. et Caini ^. 173 iravreXfls ai tov dyevvrjTov 8 a p e al ndaat: 
 James i. 17. 
 
 p. 177 yivea-iv fiaXXoi/ Qeov irporeTifiiiKain: James i. 23, iii. 6. 
 
 p. 181 ov)( "iva aaXov icai t poirrfv Koi KXihav a & 8 £ Koi cKetcre (f>opov- 
 fifvos aoTarcos inrop.4vriSt aX'K iva, aaircp €ls...\tpeva ttjv dpirriv dt^iKO- 
 p,evo s, ^e^alcas ib pvvdfj s : James i. 6. 
 
 Deterius potiori insidinri p. 195 TTfnXdvrjTat rrjs irpos dae^eiav 68ov 6 pr] a- 
 Ke lav avrl otrioTTjTos rjyovfievos : James i. 27, 
 
 p. 196 eirKTTOjxi'f 0)1/ ra'is tov crvveiSoTos ijvlais tov avQdhrj bpofiov 
 y\a>TTJ]s, cf. Mut. Nom. p. 615, Sacr. Ah. et C. 171 : James iii. 2. 
 
 p. 199 T^fjyT) \6yaiv bidvoia kol <rT6p.L0v avT^s XoyoSj on Ta iv6vp.rjp.aTa 8ia tovtov 
 Kaddirep vdpara avaxf^Tai : James iii. 10. 
 
 p. 200 axaXiva KfxpilJ'^'">vs y\a>TTT], cf. Somn. M. i. p. 695 ro tTTopa 
 ida-avTes axaXiv (otov, Monarch, ii. p. 219 : James i. 26. 
 
 Poster. Caini 230 and 231 a description of the Si'i/'upfoy, esp. SvTms yap 
 aT p iivT a ^vxjj iJ" p 6 s tov aT pen t ov Q e 6v povrj irpoo'odos e o-t iv : 
 James i. 7, 8. 
 
 ib. 0€ov pev tbiov (TrdiTis, yeveo-ems Be perd^aais: James i. 17, 
 iii. 6. 
 
 p. 244 7] wpos Oeov 686s, are ^ao-tKetas ovo-a, clkotcos Q}v6pa<rTai (3 a<r t\t Krj... 
 T]v 6 vopos KoXel Qeov prjpa '. James ii. 8. 
 
 p. 261 TTjv pKrdpfTov Kal (pikrjSovov yevecriv, cf. above p. 177 : James iii. 6. 
 
 JDeus immut. p. 284 ov povov 8iKacras eXeet, dW eXtijo-as Siicdfff irpecr^vTepos 
 yap 8'i.KT)s 6 eXeos Trap avTa eiTTiv : James ii. 13. 
 
 AgricuUura p. 316 ov8ev eariv o pr/ n pos rjSovrj s SeXe airB ev ciXxvo" 
 TO I, cf. p. 512, 568, ii. p. 470, 474 : James i. 14. 
 
 p. 322 oTov 6 TToXepos iyyiis Kal ini 6vpas i>v ^Si; Tvyxdvy. James 
 V. 8, 9. 
 
 De Plantatione p. 335 Kad dir e p dvl<TX<^v rjXios SXov tov ovpavov kvkXov 
 fpiyyovs dv aTrXrj p ol, tov ovtov Tpoirov ai dperrjs aurXves dvaXdpyfrao-ai to 8ia- 
 voias ;(o>pioj' pea-Tov avyrjs KaOapds direpyd^ovTai, cf. p. 566, 631, ii. p. 254 : 
 James i. 17. 
 
 De Ebrietate p 368 rbv iv ^vxij tS>v in i6v piSiv i p(j>vXiov n 6Xe pov, 
 cf. Victim, ii 253 or a iyKddrjvT at Kal eXXop^mcriy iiriBvpiai, 
 also-p. 445, 678, ii. 205 : James iv. 1. 
 
 De Conf. Linguae p. 412 fipadiis o>(f>eX^<Tm, raxvs ^Xd-^ai: James i. 19. 
 
 De Migr. Abr. p. 445 el ydp rts ^ovXrjBelri tov oxXov /utas ^v xrj s Siavel- 
 pai iroXXds av ev pot T-d|eif aKoa'poiiras, &v rjSov al ^ eivtOvplai 
 ...Kal ai TOVTcov avyyevets TO^tapxovat : James iv. 1. 
 
 ib. ovTos 6 Spas eVrl tov peydXov, to Ta 0ea avveyyi^etv rj co 6 &e6s avveyyl^ei : 
 James iv. 8. 
 
 p. 454 prjSev ovv prjre tS>v els evXoylas Kal evxds, pf\Te tS>v els ^Xa<r^yipias Kal 
 KaTapas eirl Tois iv rrpo^opa 8te^d8ots dvaffjepeo'do) pdXXov rj biavoia, a(j) rjs atTirep 
 diro ■jrrjyrjs eKdTepov elbos tSiv Xexdevrav SoKipd^erai, cf p 199 : James iii. 10, 11. 
 
 p. 455 oo-a 8' 5.V pfi evpi(rKri Trap' edvTW (6 SUaios) tov povov irdpirXavTOV alrevrat 
 Qedv' 6 8e tov oipdvtov avot^as dr/aavpov op^pei Kal iirtviejjet to. dyadd ddpoa : 
 James i. 5, 17, v. 16. 
 
 p. 459 elo-i Ttves ev8oiaa-T(u Kal iirapfpoTepuTTal irpos cKUTepov toIxov aa-irep trKa- 
 <^os vtt ivavT itov nvev pdrtav 8 ta<j) e pd pev ov diroKXivovTes . . .i<j)' eVos 
 a-TT) ptx6rjv at Pefialas dbvvarovvTes : James i. 6, v. 8. 
 
 p. 466 6 vovs...a> s wpos KdTOWT pov d(po pav dXrjd e lav : James i. 23. 
 
Ixxviii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Quis Rer. Div. Haer. p. 512 in i6v /xia oXkov (xova-a bivajiiv to 
 TToBovfievov Si&Keiv dvayKa^fi '■ James i. 14. 
 
 Cong. Erud. Grat. p. 524 vn o fiovrj the queen of virtues : James 
 i. 3, 4, V. 11. 
 
 p. 526 fi (ivfv TTpd^eas Beapia ■^iKq irpbs ovdev oi/)eXor rots eTTiaTfuiotriv : James 
 ii. 14. 
 
 p. 529 ToC ^iov fUiiTjTTjV edei t6i> d(TKTjrfiv ov k aKpoarifv \6yav eaiai : 
 James i. 23. 
 
 De Profugis p. 558 ris hi yhoiTo alcryjav Karriyopia fj to (j>d(r Kf iv p.ri itepX 
 f] p,as dWd TT e pi Q e 6v yeyeo-tj/ e lv at t av KaKoiv J James i. 13. 
 
 p. 563 (6 Xoyoj) dp.eroxos Ka\ ajrapad cktos navTos clvai iretjyv- 
 Kev dpapTr]p,aTos, cf. ii.280 (eeoy) p,6vos fiSai/uov, ndvTiov p,iv dfitro- 
 Xos KOK&v, 'TtXt) prfs Sc dya6S>v reXeiau, pdWov 8e avTos i>v to dyaBov 
 OS TCL KUTa pjpos atp.^pto'ev dyaSd : James i. 13, 17. 
 
 p. 566 d Qeos \ap,'7T poTdTio kjxotI iavrS Ta o\a auydf ct-.-T^r 
 aWipiov a-ofjjiav 6 0eos ava>6 ev fiTiyjffKd^fi, cf, 571, 579 : James i. 17. 
 
 p. 568 8e\e ap oXxra Kexp^f'ivov hvvdpei, ci. 569 : James i. 14. 
 
 p. 577 Ka\r]v TaiT iivaxriv, <ppovrip.aTos oXdyou Kadaipcfriv nepiixovvav: 
 James i. 10, iv. 6, 10. 
 
 De Somniis p. 631 pf) davpda-rjs el 6 rj\ los i ^opoiovT ai rm irar p\ t&v 
 crvpTzdvrtcVi 632 Kv p ios ydp ov povov <\>a>s dXXd koX it avTo s ct e pov (j) atr 6 s 
 dpxcTvnoVj 637 Tas Q eov aiyds as Bt eKeov tov yevovs f]pSiv els v ov v 
 Tov dvBpairivov ov pav66 ev dn o(rTeWe i: James i. 17. 
 
 p. 664 T po^ov dvdyKjqs dreXf urijT-ou : James iii. 6. 
 
 p. 678 ^a6eias elpr)VT]s dv atrXrj o'd e VTas Trj s ev eavTOis, fj npbs dXrj- 
 6eiav earlv elpijvri, Ka\ 8id tovt' eiSalpovas vopitrBevTas on tov otto tSiv tt aSwv 
 dvappiTvi^opevov e p(j)v\tov n6\fpov ov8' ovap e7rrj(r6ovTO k.t,\., cf. 
 above p. 368 : James iii. 17, 18, iv. 1. 
 
 De A hrahanw Mii. p. So Te\eios o\6k\tj pos e^ dpx^s: James i. 4. 
 
 De Josepho p. 61 evbo^els Ka\ tct iprjcai; pTj KaT aXa^ovevoV t air e i- 
 vos ei T als Tvxais; dWd to (j) povrj pa ufj KaTaimrTeTto: James 
 i. 9. 10. 
 
 p. 62 evprjo'ei tov ovpavov fipepav aldvtov vv kt 6 s Ka\ irdcrrfs tr Kids 
 a peTo xov '. James i. 17. 
 
 De Decalogo p. 192 rd KdWiirTov e peKrpa rrj s ^vx^j s e^eKo^av T^y 
 IT e p\ TOV C^VTOS del &eov iSirdXi/i^iv, &a-!rep Te dveppdnara a-Kaifrrj & 8 e 
 Kal e Kela-e <t aXj^vovo'i biaffiepopevoi tov alava : James i. 6. 
 
 p. 194 KaXKioTov Kal ^lax^ekeaTaTov to dvmpoTov : James v. 12. 
 
 p. 196 ov ydp oo'iov Si oS iTTopaTos to ie paraTov ovopa ir pofjie pe- 
 Tai T IS, hid TOV TOV (j)6eyyea-6ai T I tS>v alo-xpwv: James iii. 9, 10. 
 
 p. 204 povri enidvpia ttjv dpxfjv e^ rjpmv Xap^dvei Koi etrriv eKovtrios: 
 James i. 14. 
 
 p. 205 oi ydp 'EXX^yfflj' Kal ^ap^dpav JroXe poi irdvTe s diro pids irriyfiv 
 e p pvtjo'av ejTiBvpias: James iv. 1. 
 
 p. 203 {eiTidvpid) oia <^Xd| ev v\rj ve pcTai Sairavaxra it d v r a : 
 James iii. 9. 
 
 De Victimis p. 246 tov 0fdi/ dpiyrj kukcov to ay add btapovpevov: 
 James i. 17. 
 
 p. 250 oKoKXripov Kal TtavTeXr) Sid6ea-iv §s f/ oXoKavTos Bviria tjvp^oKov, 
 cf. Merc. Mer. p. 265 8ei Thv peKKovra Bveiv a-KeTTTea-dai pi) el to lepelov dpapov, 
 dXX el rj Sidvoia oXokXtj pos avTm Kal navTeXfi s Ka8i(nrfKe : James i. 4. 
 
 p. 254 d Qeos eartv rjXiov rjXios napex^v ck t5>v dopdrav mrjySiv opaTd 
 <t>eyyi ■ James i. 17. 
 
 De Spec. Leg. p. 331 Xvnovpfvav 6(j)daXpol crvvvolas yepova-t Kal Kn7-);(^f I'ay : 
 James iv. 9. 
 
RELATION TO EARLIER WRITINGS Ixx-x 
 
 De Creatione Frincipum, p. 366 {to 'lovbaiiav eSvos) tov trifmavTos avBpmtr oiv 
 yivovs aiTeveji,r)6r) ola Tis air apx^] t^ iTon)TTi KoXnaTpi: James i. 18, 
 
 De Nobilitate p. 442 roil Bfiov trvtiiiaTos, onep liixadcv Kara- 
 Ttveva-dev ela-aKt] a-aro ry ^v xS, wepmBevTos t<3 fikv crdjiaTi koKKos toIs 
 he Xdyois neidS) ; James iv. 5. 
 
 Omnis Prohus Liber Tp. 452 ocrot pi era vofiov ^axnv iXevBepoi' v6p,os 
 8 e di^f u8ijs 6 6p66s\6yoS: ovk iv ;;(apTi6/oir f) trTrjKais aW vir' aOavarov 
 <j>i(Tea>s fv adavara hiavoia TVTradtis : James i. 18, 21, 25. 
 
 p. 470 jrpos iniBviilas eXavvtrai rj vfji' riSovrjs SeXeaferat: 
 James i. 14. 
 
 Vita Contempl. p. 474 to irvvTjBks 6\kov Ka\ SeXeaa-ai bvvar ar arov : 
 James i. 14. 
 
 De Incorr. Mundi p. 521 ei p,r] npos avijiav piir i^oiTo to v8a>p: 
 James i. 6. 
 
 De Praem. ei Poen. p. 421 tis yap ovk &v ewrot on (ro(ji6v &pa yivos tovt* etrrti/, 
 ray deias irapaiveireis i^tyivcTo prj xevas arroXwrf iw tS>v oliee iaiv ir pd^e o>v 
 
 aWa TT Krj pa cral Toiis Xdyous f pyois eiraiverols ; James ii. 14 — 26. 
 
 (4) Greek Philosophers. 
 
 While the more general resemblances between the philosophers 
 and the Bible are no doubt to be explained on St. Paul's principle 
 of the law written in the heart (Rom. ii. 15), yet there is probably 
 more to be said on behalf of the view that the former may have 
 been influenced, directly or indirectly, by Jewish teaching, than is 
 generally recognized in the present day. I think there can be no 
 doubt that some of the touches in Virgil's fourth Eclogue are 
 derived from Isaiah through the Sibylline forgeries ; and Sir A. 
 Grant and Bishop Lightfoot have both called attention to the fact 
 that several of the Stoics came from the East. On the other hand 
 it is certain that the Jews after the time of Alexander were much 
 influenced by Greek thought, as we see in the Book of Wisdom, 
 the 4th Book of Maccabees, and above all in Philo. Possibly the 
 parallels that follow are to be explained as reminiscences of Greek 
 Philosophy filtered down through the writing of some Hellenistic 
 Jew ; but I would not exclude the possibility that Stoic parallels 
 in St. James may have been taken directly from such a writer as 
 Posidonius. I have given occasional references to post-Augustan 
 authors, because the later Stoics borrow so much from their 
 predecessors. Perhaps the parallels from Lucian and Porphyry 
 should rather be regarded as taken directly from Christian sources. 
 
 Plato, Phaedo, 66 C nai yap noXifiOV s Kal arda-fis Ka\ p. ax as ovSev 
 aWo nape\ei tj to a-5>p.a nai a'l tovtov iiridvp.iai, cf. Cic. Fm. i. 43 ex 
 cupiditatibvs odia, dwcidin, discordiae, seditiones, bella nascuntur...intus etiam 
 in animis inclusae inter se dissident et discordant: James iv. 1. 
 
.ai-iBL. luecftun. o to jrijoaAtov, fitKpov uv icat tn kuj^ixiw i«/ iwwbw, 
 TO(r avrrjv S-vva/xtv e'x^' ^"''"^ vno fiiKpov o'iaKos Kai ei/09 av- 
 6pa>7rov hwaficas, kcu TavTrjs r]pejj,alas, ptyoXo KiveiirBai fifyidr) irXouov : James 
 iii. 4. 
 
 Stoic Maxims — 
 
 Sapiens liber, dives, rex. 
 
 p-nvos 6 (ro4>6s iXevdfpos. Cio. Farad. 34 quid est Uhertas ? potestas vivendi 
 ut velis : quis igitur vivit ut vult, nisi qui recta sequitur, qui gaudet officio, qui 
 ne legibus quidem propter nieium paret, sed eas sequitur et colit, quod id 
 salutare maxime essejudicat: Fin. iii. 75 solus liber nee dominationi cujusquam 
 parens nee oboediens cupiditatis : Sen. V. B. 15. 5 Deo parere liberias est: 
 Epict. Diss. iv. 1. 13 avrr] r) ohbs (subllliasiop) in iKevBeplav ayfi, amrf fwvj] 
 aTraXKayr) SovKetas to SwrjOrjuai wot elTTfiv i^ oKrjs i|fu;(^j to "Ayou Se p.' S) Zev 
 K.T.X., cf. iv. 3 below, quoted imder 'Friend of God' : James i. 25, ii. 8. 
 
 povos 6 (ro<f>os jrXovo-ios, Cic. Farad. 42 foil. : Plato, Fhaedr. p. 279 nXova-iov 
 vopl^oipi Tov a'o<f>6v : James ii. 5 ov\ 6 Oeos c'leXe^aro tovs tttoixovs tw Koopm 
 TiXova-lovs iv TTtoret ; cf. i. 9, 10. 
 
 Cio. Fin. iii. 75 {sapiens) reeiius appellabitur rex quam Tarquinius qui nee se 
 nee suos regere potuit : Hor. Od. ii. 2. 21 regnum et diadema tutum deferens uni, 
 (&c. : Philo ii. p. 39 ra yap ovn wpSroy (ro(p6s tov dvdpa>7ra>v yivovs as xv^cp- 
 vrjrrjs ficv iv vrjt, ap)(a>v 8e iv TToXei: James ii. 8 yd/uoi' jSao-tXiKov, ver. 5. 
 
 True joy. — James i. 2. 
 
 Sen. Ep. 23. 2 ad snmma pervenit qui scit quo gaudeat...disce gaudere...nolo 
 tibi umquam deesse laetitiam ; volo illam zibi domi nasei...verum gaudium res 
 severa est, Philo Del. Fot. Ins. M. i. p. 217 cVfi iv toIs Tijs ijrvxris p.6vois ayadols 
 7} avoOevTOs X^P^ evpt(rKeTai, iv i avT (S 7r as a- otpo s ^atpct. 
 
 Solidarity of virttoes. — James ii. 10, 11. 
 
 Ciirysippns ap. Pint. ii. p. 1046 F ras dpfTas avTaKoXovdeXv aWrjXais, ov /noi/ov 
 ra TTjV p.iav e^ovra nda'as ex^iv, dWa kol t(S Kara plav ortovv ivepyovvTa Kara iratras 
 ivepyeiv' oi/r' avbpa reXctoi/ elvai tov pr] 7rd<ras %x^''^^ ^^^ dpcTas, ovre irpd^tv 
 TeXttav TjTis ov Kara Trdo'as TrpdrTeTat Tas dperds, Stob. Eel li. 198 TrdvTa rov 
 KoKov Koi dyaBov avhpa Te'Xetox dvai Xiyavai 8ta to prjSefilas diroXelneirdai dpeTrjs. 
 
 The.friend of God. — James ii. 24. 
 
 Plato, Leg. iv. 716 D 6 pkv (ra^pav Beta (jiiXos, o^otor yap, Epict. iv. 3. 9 
 iXfvBepos yap elpt Ka\ (jytXos tov Ssqv Iv' eKoyv irddapai auro). 
 
 The indwelling Spirit. — James iv. 5. 
 
 Sen. Ep. 41. 2 sacer intra nos spiritus sedet mnlorum bonorumque nostrorum 
 observator et custos: Jiic prout a nobis tractilus est, ita nos ipse traetat, Ep. 73. 
 15 Deus in homines venit: nulla sine Deo mens bona est. semina in corporibus 
 humanis divina disperaa sunt, quae, si bonus cullor excipit, similia origini pro- 
 deunt, Posid. ap. Gal. JBipp. et Plat. v. p. 469 to Se tS>v iradav a it coy to pfj 
 Kara irdv ejre(r 6 ai t tS iv aiiTa b aipovi. 
 
 Trial and Temptation. — James i. 2, 12 — 15. 
 
 Sen. Prov. ii. 2 omnia adoersa exereitationes putet vir fortis, ib. 6 doloribus, 
 damnis exagitentur ut verum colligant robur, Epict. /n 112 nda-ris KaKias ol6v 
 
RELATION TO EARLIER WRITINGS Ixxxi 
 
 Ti oeXeap ^Sovfj wpo^\rjSetcra ras \i)(ycirrepas ^vj(as inl to ciyKiiTT pov 
 rijs anaXe las ef^iXKerai, Lucian, Tyrann. 4 ray rjhovav 6 pi ^e is 
 Xa\ivayay('iv. 
 
 6 @6o? airelpaa-ro'i Kaic&v. — James i. 13. 
 
 Plut. ii. 1102 F. Travrav narfip KaX&v 6 Beos itm Km (f>av\ov 
 ov'Se)/ TToieiK avT a 6ep,is, &<r7rep oifif Trdcrp^eiv, Anton, vi. 1 o i S e- 
 filav 4v iavTa air lav e }^e i tov KaKOiroie'iv, KUKiav yap ovK f^^'' 
 Sext. Emp. Matt. ix. 91 t-6 HXciov koI apia-rov iravros kukov avan 68e ktov, 
 cf. Epic. ap. Diog. L. X. 138 to p,aKa.piov kcu a(f>6apT0v oil re air 6 7rpdyp,aTa 
 e;^6t o^re uX\o> ?rape;^et. 
 
 Desire and Aversion. — James i. 2, iv. 12. 
 
 Epiot. Ench. i. 2 p,eixvTj(TO on opi^eas enayyeXia eTrirv x^a o5 opiyy ' ck- 
 Kkiaeas iirayyekia TO jir) TTfpnrfaclv imiva o iKKKiverai.' Kai 6 pev iv opi^ii 
 dirOTvyxavav drvx^s' 6 de iv eKKKlaei ireptTri'irTtov §uoTu;^^y, Diss. ill. - 
 2, 3 nddos aWtos oil yiveTat €i prj opi^etas aTroTvyxavovaTjs rj- eKKKla-eas 
 IT € p i-TriTTTova-Tjs' o^Tos (o TOTTOs) ItTTiv 6 T apa^ct Sf Bopv^ovs^ drv x,las 
 eiri(j}epav ... 6 <l> ov e p ov Sj 6 ^r}\oTvir ov s it o i a v, ib. iv. 10 et /i?) 
 6iKas opeyetrdai dn orev kt iKm s p,rjS' inKKlvciv jrepmTioTtK&s, prjbevbs 
 opeyov Twv dWoTpitov ertf pjj8ev cKKKtve ratv pff eni troL. 
 
 Man made in the image of God has authority over the lower animals. 
 James iii. 7 — 9. 
 
 Cic. N. D. i. 90 nee vera intellego cur maluerit Epicurus deos homiuum similes 
 dicere quam homines deorum. Leg. i. 25 virtus eadem in homine au Deo est.. .est 
 igitw homini cum Deo similitude, N. D. ii. 161 jam vera immanes etferas beluas 
 nanciscimur venando ut...utamur domitis et condocefaciis, Sen. Bene/, ii. 29. 
 
 Simile of the mirror. — James i. 23. 
 
 Epict. Diss. ii. 14 rl (rot KaKov TrewoLTjKa ; el p.r] kol to e <r oitt pov ra altr- 
 Xp^^oTi 8 e i Kvv € I avTov avTa olos io'Tiv; Bias ap. Stob. Flor. 21. 11 
 Oeapei aa-TTep iv Kar ottt pa Tas cravTOV irpd^ets iva Tas fMev 
 Ka\as in iKo<Tp,fi s Tas 8e alaxpas KaXvjTTrj s. 
 
 Simile of the Jig-tree and its fruit. — James iii. 12. 
 
 Sen. Ep. 87 § 25 non nascitur ex mala honum, non magis quam ficus ex olea, 
 Plut. ii. 472 F. tt^v ap,ne\ov (rvxa (jtipeiv ovk d^iov pey ovde rrjv 
 i\alav ^6t pv s. 
 
 The venom of the tongtte. — James iii. 8. 
 Lucian, Fug. 19to5 fieorowT-o a- to p. a. 
 
 The rust of unused wealth. — James v. 3. 
 
 Plut. ii. 164 F. v7ro\ap,^dvfi tov jtXovtov dya66v eivai piyurrov tovto to -^eiSos 
 lov ex^') vipfTai ttjv ^vx^jv, ib. 819 E. (pi\oxprip.aTla Sxmep pfcrTov 
 lov voa-rjpa tjjs ^xV^> Epict. Diss. iv. 6. 14 (principles unused) ws onXapia 
 dnoKflpeva Kar larai. 
 
 Hearing and doing. — James i. 22. 
 
 . Porpliyr. Abstin, i. 57 8i tpyutv fjplv t^s a'aTrjplas, ov 8i' dxpoda-tas XoyBi; 
 fjftKris ywopivris. 
 
 f 
 
CHAPTER IV 
 
 On the Relation of the Epistle to the other Books of 
 
 THE New Testament 
 
 (1) Synoptic Gospels. (2) Gospel and Hpistles of St. John. 
 
 (3) Acts of the Apostles. (4) Epistles of St. Paul. 
 
 (5) Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude. (6) Epistle to the 
 Hebrews. (7) Apocalypse. 
 
 [The parallels which seem of most importance have an asterisk 
 prefixed.] 
 
 (1) Synoptic Gospels. 
 Matthew — 
 
 iii. 2 ^yy ixevfj ^aaiKeia rav ovpavav : James v. 8. 
 
 * V. 3 ^laKciptot oi TT r oj pf o I (t^ TrvevfiaTi) or t av t q>v e ctt lv tj |3a(rtXe/a 
 TfflK oiipavav (the Words in brackets are omitted in the parallel passage, Luke 
 vi. 20), Matt. xix. 28 Kodrjo-ea-de (cat v/iels km dpovovs : James ii. 5. 
 
 *V 7 /laKapioi oi i\ei] iioves on avTol eX f r/ 8 rj (tovt ai, ib. vi. 14, 15, 
 xviii. 21—35 : James ii. 13. 
 
 V. 8 pjiK. oi Kadapol rfi KapSla : James iv. 8. 
 
 V. 9 nax. oi elpTjvoTroioi : James iii. 18. 
 
 *V. 11, 12 (iQK. eare orau ove iS io'axr iv v nas.-.xa i p cT e Koi dyoKKiairBe 
 ...ovT<as yap eSia^av Tois irpo<f)rjTas, Luke vi. 22 : James i. 2, v. 10, 11. 
 
 V. 16 ovTas\ap,ylrdTo> rit (jjats vficov oiTo}s...Bo^d^<ao'iv r ov trare pa vfiavl 
 James i. 17. 
 
 v. 17 fjLTj vofitOTjTe OTL TjXdov KaTa\ii(rai Tovvofiov., .o^K ^\dov KaTa\v<Tai dWa 
 7r\r]pS>a-ai : James i. 25 (a law, but a perfect law of liberty). 
 
 V. 19 OS iav \v o-rj p,iav t Si v cvt o\S>v tovtwv rSiv eXax'TBi' 
 Kal di8d^7] -ovTas tovs avdpdnrovst eXa^ttrroff k\i) 6rj or €t ai ev Trj ^atriKcla Tav 
 ovpavaV OS h' hv It o I ij (r ji (cat hiha^rj ovTos p-eyas KhrjOrjaerat : James ii. 10, 
 i. 22. 
 
 *V. 34 — 37 eyo) fie Xcyu vfiiu pfj op,6uai, o\a>s, pfjTe iv t^ oi pava... 
 fJi'f}Te €V T7J yy...u.r]Te els Iepoa-6\vpn...p7]Te ev rfj KefpnX^ CT-ou...e o-TO> fie 6 
 Xoyof vp,a>v vai val, ov oil' to fie ivfpuraov Toirav ex toC novqpov iaTii/ : 
 James v. 12. 
 
 V. 48 eaeaBe oiv vp.els TeXeioi, xix. 21 el dt'Xeis rtXews thai : James i. 4, iii. 2. 
 
 *vi. 16 t6v apTov rjfiau To>/ eTTioviriov dos ripXv o'rjp.fpov : James ii. 15, 16.'^ 
 
 ' See Chase {The Lord's Prayer in the Early Chureh, p. 48), wlio gives reasons 
 for believing that iwioiirios is a second liturgical rendering of the original Aramaic, 
 represented in Matt, by oiip.epoy, in Luke xi. 3 by rh koO' rinipav, in James ii. 16 by 
 
 TTJS itpTJ/XepOV TpO(l}Tis. 
 
RELATION TO OTHER BOOKS OF THE N.T. Ixxxiii 
 
 *vi. 19 lirj 6j)<Tavp i^er f Vjilv drj (ravpoiis iirl Trjs yrjs oirov (rr]s 
 (cai fi pacr IS a<j>av L^ei, Luke xii. 21 : James v. 2, 3. 
 
 *vi. 22 kav jj 6 otpSaXfjLos fTov dirXovs, oXo;/ to (rwfid uov KJiOiTivhv earat, ver. 24 
 nv&els hvvarai Svai Kvpiois SovXeifiv...rbv fva p, i cr rj a f i xal rdv cTcpov 
 ayaiTr](r £i....ov SvvairBe Beta SovXev eiu Kai ^a/xtova, Luke xvi. 13 : 
 James iv. 4, 8 Siijfvxot. 
 
 vi. 29 oiSe SoXofiav iv TTCKTrj Ttj Su^i? Trepu^aKero as ev Tovrav, Luke xii. 27, 28 : 
 James i. 11. 
 
 vi. 33 Cv'^^'''^ irpStTov tt/v ^atriXeiav tov Qeav Kai ttjv 8 iKaio(rvvr)v 
 avTov : James i. 20. 
 
 *vi. 34 pr] fjLfpipvr](rr]re els Tjfv aiipiov : James iv. 13, 14. 
 
 *vii. 1 pr] Kp ivere iva pr/ KpidfJTe, Luke vi. 37 koI p,7] KaTahiKa^ere : 
 James iv. 11, 12, v. 9. 
 
 *vii. 7, 8 aiTc'iTe Ka\ SoBrj a-erai v plv-.-iras yo-p o alrSiv \ap- 
 j3 d V e I, Luke xi. 9, 10 : James i. 5, iv. 3. 
 
 vii. 11 6 Trarrfp vpav 6 ev toIs ov pav ols Saxret ay ad a rois 
 alrovo'iv nvTov: James i. 17. 
 
 vii. 13 7f 686s fj airdyova-a els ttjv aTrwAetay...^ djrdyovtra els Tt}v ^atjv: James 
 V. 19, 20. ^ 
 
 *vii. 16 diro T<Sv Kapnwv airCi) iniyvmo'eade avrovs' prjn iTvX\eyov(Ti.v anb dxavBiSv 
 <rra^vKas rf dirb TpifioXtav a-vKa ; ovtu> irdv bev8pov dyadov Kapiroi/s KaXov s 
 ff o t e », Luke vi. 44, 45 enaarov SevSpov ck tov Idiov Kapirov yivauTKeTai, ov yap e^ 
 dKav6av avWeyovo'iv avKa oiide eK jSaTov aTacfjvXrjv Tpvyacriv. 6 ayaBos avBponros 
 eK TOV dyaOov Brjaavpov Trjs Kapdias 7rpo(pepet to dyaadv, KaX 6 TTOVTjpos €K tov 
 TTOvrjpov npo<pepet to noPTjpov' e K yap jrepiO'aevp.aTos Kapdias XaXeT to 
 (TTopa ail TOV, Matt. xii. 33, cf. Isa. v. 2 efieiva ToC woiTJirat crrai^uX^i' Kai 
 eiroirja-ev aKdvOas : James iii. 10 — 13, 18, i. 21. 
 
 *vii. 21 — 23 of religion professed with the lips but not exhibited in the life : 
 James i. 26, 27, ii. 14—26, iii. 13, 14. 
 
 *vii. 24 IT as o ITT IS aKovei pov tov s \6yovs koI jrotel avrovs 
 6poia>67)a'eTaidv8pl<j>povLpa...Ka\ irds 6 clkovwv Ka\ pr] trotav 6poitii9r}a-eTat 
 hv8p\ patp^, Luke viii. 21 dd€\(j)oi pov ovroi elo'tv ol top \6yop tov Seov 
 aKovovTcs Kai noiovvTes, Luke xi. 28 paxdpwi oi aKOvuvres tov Xd'yov toC 
 Beov Koi (j)v)i.dcr<T0VTes : James i. 22 — 25. 
 
 *viii. 29 CKpa^av Xeyovres tI r/plv Kai iroi, vie tov Beov ; riKOes S>be npo Kaipov 
 ^atravia-ai r]pds ; Luke iv. 34, 41, viii. 27 — 29, x. 17 : James ii. 19. 
 
 *x. 22 d 8e V1T0 pelvas els reXos oiros irwBria'eTai, xxiv. 13 : 
 James i. 12. 
 
 X. 28 TOV Swdpepov Kai i|fu;(ijv Kai irmpa diro'KeiTai : James iv. 12. 
 
 xi. 2 irraxol evayyeki^ovTai, Luke vii. 22, cf. Isa. Ixi. 1 : James ii. 5. 
 
 xi. 19 eS«a«i^J) f] iroi^ia otto tSip epyav avTrjs: James iii. 13. 
 
 xi. 29 IT pais elp.1 Kai Tuneipos ttj Kaphia km. evprjo-eTe dvdirava-ip : 
 James iii. 13, 17. 
 
 xii. 7 el eyvaKeiTe Tt e(TTi.p"E\e OS deXa Kai ov Bvcriap, oiiK &v KaTe- 
 SiKdtrare rniis dvaiTiovs, Lvkeri. ST : James ii. 13, V. 6. 
 
 *xii. S2idc\)e6r)aeTai air a: James v. 15. 
 
 xii. 34 7rS>s bvvaa^ 6e ay a 6 a XaXeip TrovTjpol ovTes; R6e above on 
 vii. 16 : James iii. 10. 
 
 *xii. 36 Trdv prjpa dpy6p...a7ToSd>a-ovo'i.v ne pi avrov \6yov...eK 
 yapT&v \6yu>p (rov d ikoicoBt] arj Kai e k tS>p Xdyoiv itov Kara- 
 biKaa-Oria-ri, XV. 2 rd e ktto p ev 6 pe pop eK tov crTopaTos toCto 
 KOLPol TOP avSpairop : James iii. 1, 2, i. 19. 
 
 xii. 39 yepea potxaXis, xvi. 4, Mark viii. 38 : James iv. 3. 
 
 xiii. 3—23, Parable of the Sower, see Luke viii. below. 
 
 xiii. 6 TjXi'ou d.paT€i\apTOS e KavpaTia-Srj koi e^r]pdv6rj: 
 
 James i. 11. 
 
 /2 
 
Ixxxiv .THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 xiv. 30 oXiyoTTtoTt els tI ibiaraaas; xvii. 20 : James i. 6—8. 
 
 XV. 13 iraaa (pvreia rjv ovk etpiirevcrev 6 Tcarrfp ^ov.,.€KpL^ti)6r]CT€TaL I 
 James i. 21. 
 
 *xviii. 4 ocrrts ran e tvoxr e i eavT bv tas rh iraihiov tovto ovtos 4 (r Ttv 
 6 ixfl^wv iv Tjj ^a(ri\e ia, xx. 25 — 27, xxiii. 12 Saris ii\//<acr« cavrbv Taira.- 
 vcddrjo'eTaL Kal OffTis TancLvcarTU eavT^v vyfrcoBrjaeratj Mark ix, 35, Luke xiv. 11, 
 ix 48, xxii. 26 6 jitl^av iv vjxlv yiviuBa i>s 6 vearfpos Koi 6 ^yovfievos as 6 Sioko- 
 viiv : James i. 9, 10, iv. 10. 
 
 xxi. 21 eav exf" ■jria-Tiv Koi jir] biaKplBrjTe, of. Mark xi. 23 : James i. 6, ii. 4. 
 
 xxiv 3, 27, 37, 39 ^ napova-ia: James v. 8. 
 
 *xxiv. 33 iyyiis €<ttiv in\ Bvpais : James v. 8, 9. 
 
 *xxv. 34 — 46 the sheep and the goats : James ii. 13. 
 
 Marh — 
 
 vi. 13 ^Xe iipov eXaia ttoXXous dppaia-Tovs koI i6 e pajrevov, 
 xvi. 18 fjTi appaarovs x^ipas fmOrja-ova-fv xai koKws c^ovaiv : James v. 14 
 
 *vii. 1 — 23 condemnation ol' ceremonialism : James i. 26, 27. 
 
 *X1I. 28 — 31 Trot a €(tt\v evToXrj npatTrj ir dvT cov ; dtreKplOr^ 6 ^iTjaovs 
 OTi Trpwrt] eariv Akovc, 'IcrparjX, Kupios 6 &(os fj/iaii Kipios cis la-riv, 
 ...divrepa avTij 'Ay 07777 ire i s tok ttXijo'ioj' a-ov i)s acavroV pei^aii' 
 TorjTCDv aXXi) cVtoXj) ouk eaTiv, cf. Matt, xxii. 36 : J9.mes ii. 8 — 10, 19. 
 
 L'uke — 
 
 IV. 25 eKXeitrBrj 6 ovpavos €T7j rpla Kal fiijvas e^ : James V. 17. 
 
 v. 22 8iaXoytcrp.oi in bad sense, cf. vi. 8, ix. 46, 47, xxiv. 38 : James ii. 4. 
 
 *vi. 24 oval vp.tv Tols TrXouct o ts...ouat...o t e fiTreTrXr) a fie vo i vvv, 
 oval ol yeXavTfs vvv, on nevBrjaere Kal K\ailcr cTf : James ii. 6, 
 iv. 9, V. 1—5. 
 
 *viii. The parable of the Sower, ver. 8 eirea-ev els ttjv yrjv ttjv aya6rjv koI (j>vev 
 e TT Irj (T € V KapTTov, ver. 11 o iTTTopos € (7 T i 1/ o Xoyos TOV 0eui, 
 ver. 13 fjiera ^apas be xovt ai TovXoyov Kal...ev Kaipto n e tp ao" fiov 
 dipliTTavTaij ver. 15 to Se ffTrj KdXfj yfj oSroi elo'iv oirives iv Kapbtf KaXij Kal 
 ayadfi OKOvauvTes tov' Xoyov k are y(^ova' iv Kal Kapirotpopovo'iv ev 
 VTTO fiovij, ver. 18 PXeneTe ovv irSis a Kovere: .James i. 18, 19, 21, 25. 
 
 viii. 24, 25 ineTtprfijev T& dvifia Kal t£ kXv bcov i...Kal iyeveTo yaXrjvt), 
 emev be avTois IIoO rj tvI<tti.s vji&v. James i. 6. 
 
 *xii. 16—21. Parable of the Rich Fool : James iv. 13—15. 
 
 *xii. 47 6 yvovs r^ QeXrifia tov Kvpiov avrov Kal pfj.. tto trj a-as 
 rrpbs TO deXrjpxi avTov bapi) tj er ai, tt oXXds '. James iv, 17. 
 
 *xvi. 8 TOV olKovdfiov TTJs d b I K i a s, ver 9 tov jxafimva t ij s dbiKias: 
 James iii. 6. 
 
 xvi. 19 foil. Dives and Lazarus : James ii. 2 — 7. 
 
 xxi. 19 iv Tji virojiovrj KTrjo^e trde rdr \|cu;(ar v jiSyv : James i. 3, 4. 
 
 (2) Gospel arid Epistles of St. John} — Though our Epistle does 
 not generally show such a close verbal agreement with the Gospel 
 of St. John as it does with the Synoptic Gospels, yet there is 
 considerable resemblance in respect to such general ideas as the 
 
 ' On the resemblances between the writings of St. James and St. John see P. 
 Ewald Das Hmiptprohlem der EvangelUnfrage, Leipzig, 1890, pp. 58 foil. His aim 
 being to prove that the Gospel of St. John is u faithful record of the teaching of 
 Christ, he endeavours to show that it is in harmony with our Epistle, which he 
 regards as the oldest document of the N.T. 
 
RELA.TI01Sr TO OTHEE BOOKS OF THE N.T. Ixxxv 
 
 World, the Truth, the Light, the Glory, the New Birth, the Liberty 
 of Christ. No doubt the writings of St. John exhibit, as we 
 should expect, a far greater depth of thought and a more advanced 
 Christianity than are to be found in our Epistle ; but, along with 
 this, there is a general harmony and community of ideas, such as 
 might naturally result from remembrances of a common teaching, 
 or from continued association on the part of the two writers. If 
 we come to the conclusion that in some cases this similarity is 
 more easily explained by direct borrowing, it seems to me that the 
 borrower is in all probability St. John. The richness and fulness 
 of expression in such passages as 1 John ii. 15, iii. 9, iii. 17, 21, 
 might easily grow out of the brief hints given in the parallels 
 of St. James, but it is scarcely conceivable that the latter 
 should have deliberately discarded thoughts of such interest 
 and value, if he had had them in writing before him. The 
 .oame considerations will apply to the parallels to our Epistle 
 which are to be found in the writings of St. Peter and St. Paul. 
 It was easy for the latter, writing from a more advanced standing- 
 point, to bring out and to emphasize the more distinctively 
 Christian doctrines which were still undeveloped and to some 
 extent latent in St. James. That St. James should deliberately 
 have gone backwards, when those doctrines had once received 
 definite expression, is at any rate less probable. A further con- 
 sideration is that, if we allow a connexion between our Epistle and 
 those of the other Apostles, it is easier to explain this on the sup- 
 position that the latter were acquainted with the manifesto of the 
 President of the Church at Jerusalem, rather than on the supposi- 
 tion that he was acquainted with a variety of writings addressed to 
 distant Churches. It is to be remembered also that these parallels 
 are not confined to the earlier or the more important Epistles of 
 St. Paul, and that some of the most striking parallels appear in 
 what are thought to be the latest writings in the N. T., viz. the 
 Epistles of St. John, probably composed after the death of St. 
 James, and long after the probable date of his Epistle, as deduced 
 from other considerations. 
 
 * i. 4 iv avTci Ct^V V" '"'' V C<'>V V'" ''"° <^o'r ™v a.v6pmiTa>v, ver. 9 jjk to 
 ^5y TO aXrjd ivov o (fxoTi^ei Ttavra avBpavov ipxofievov fls Tov 
 Kocrixov, cf. iii. 19 — 21, viii. 12, etc. : James i. 17, 18. 
 
 i. 14 o Xoy OS ia-Krjvaa-ev iv ^juv koL e6eaa-dfie6a ttiv &6^av airov : 
 James ii. 1. 
 
Ixxxvi THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 iii. 3 eav fir) ns yevvrjdjj avioB ev, oi hvvaTai ISelv rfju ^atriKeiav tov 9eov, 
 ver. 8 TO itveiifia oirov BiXei nvei, ver. 13 d in tov ovpavoi KaTa^ds : 
 James i. 17, 18 (P. Ewald considers yevvda and anoKveto to be different render- 
 ings ol the original Aramaic word used by our Lord). 
 
 iii. 31 d av<o6ev e pxofievos endva ndpTiov ia^nv 6 i>v (K ttjs yrjs ix. 
 Trjs yrjs iariv Kol ix ttjs yfjs Xa\ei: James iii. 15, 17. 
 
 IV. 23 d TTor^p ToiovTovs C'?^^' Toiis Trpoa-KvvovvTas : James i. 27. 
 
 vi. 33 6 apTOS TOV Oeov eoTiv 6 KaTa^aivav e'/c tov ovpavov Koi ^afiv 
 SiSovs Ta K6(rp,a : James i. 17 irdv daprj/ia TiXeiov Svadev cim Kara^aipov dsrd 
 TOV iraTpos Totv cl)ii)T(Ov, 
 
 *vi. 39 TovTO itrri ri 6 iXrjfia rou it e p.'^avTos fie Iva nas 6 deapav 
 TOV viov Koi TV KTTevav els avTov e^n C'"'!" o.la)viav, cf. i. 13, iii. 3 foil, : 
 James i. 18 ^ovXtfdels direKirfa-ev rfp-as, ver. ,12. 
 
 *vi. 63 TO, prffjLaTa a eyai XeXdXrj Ka vfilv irvevfid ioTLv kcli C^V etTTiv, 
 ver. 68 prffiwra feoijs alaviov exeis : James i. 21 Si^a<rde tov ep.(j)VTOv \6yov tov 
 Svvdpevov aSia-ai, Tas i/'up^aj vpStv. 
 
 vii. 19 oiSeij e^ vpSiv Troiei tov vofiov '. James iv. 11 jroirfTtfs vopov, cf. i. 22, 25. 
 
 *V111. 31, 32 edv fie LV7] T e iv Ta Xdyo) tm efia,.,yva>(r€a'd€ Trjv dKrjBeiav Kal 
 fj dXrjdeia eXevSepaio-ei vfji,ds,ci. xiv. 17, xvii. 17, xviii. 37: James i. 
 18 aireKvrja-ev rffids Xoya aXrjdeiaSj ver. 25 d TrapaKvyjras els vofiov TeXeiov tov ttjs 
 eXevdepias Kal napafieivas K.T.X. ii. 12. 
 
 ix. 41 el TV<pXol ^re, oiiK &v ei)(eTe dpapTiav vvv de XeycTe oTi 
 ^XeTTofiev rf ovv dfxapT La vpmv fie vet: James iv. 17. 
 
 *xiii. 17 el TavTa otfiare, fiandptoi ea-Te edv iroirJTe avTd: 
 James i. 25, iv. 17. 
 
 *xiv. 14 edv T t alTTj o-rjTe iv t w ov 6 fiaT I fiov, iy at ttoi^ctco, cf. XV. 
 7 edv fieivrjTe iv ipo\ Ka\ Ta prjfiaTd fiov iv vfiiv fievrjj o idv deXrjTe 
 alTTfae ad e Ka\ y evrjtreT ai v fiiv, xvi. 23 foil. : James i. 5, iv. 3. 
 
 xiv. 17 TO irvevfia Trfs dXrfdeias o 6 KOO'fios ov bvvaTai Xafieiv : James iv. 4, 
 iii. 14. 
 
 xiv. 27 elprjvrfv Trj v e firjv S id (o fii v filv^ ov KaB ats 6 k6 (r fios 
 Stbaxriv eya SlSaifii ifiiv : James iii. 13 — 17, iv. 1 foil. 
 
 XV. 14, 15 Vfiels (fliXoi fiov iare idv nocrJTe oa-a iya> evreXXopm k.tX : James ii. 23. 
 
 XV. 18, 19 €i eK row Koa-fiov ^re d KOfTfios dv to 'ihiov if^iXev ort he eK 
 TOV KoiTfiov OVK cVtc, oXX' i y 0) i ^ eX e ^ d fi t) V v fids eK tov KOtr/xou, 8 id tovto 
 fi'Krei V fids 6 koo- fios : James iv. 4, ii. 4. 
 
 1 Up. John — 
 
 *i. 5d Q eo s <pS} s i o-tIv Ka\ (T kot ia oil K e (tt iv iv avT m ovdefiiai 
 James i. 17. 
 
 i. 6 ■\lrev86fied a Kal ov noiov fiev Trfv dXrjde tav : James iii. 6 
 TJrevSeade KaTd ttjs dXrideias. 
 
 *i. 8 — 10 idv eiwa pev otl dpapTiav oiiK e^opev, e avToiis 
 nXav&pev k.t.X. : James iii. 2 iroXXd ydp irTolopev airavres, i. 16, 22, 26. 
 
 *ii. 3 — 6 d Xiyav OTi eyvoKa avTov Kal rds evToXds avTov p.f) 
 TTf p&v yjr eva-Trjs iiTTiv K.T.X. cf. iii. 7 prfhels irXavaTto v pas- o Trotcoi' 
 rrfv biKaioa^vvrfv Slxaios i o-t tv ; James iii. 13, i. 16, ii. 14 — 26. 
 
 ii. 9 — 11 d Xeyav iv tS extort eivai Kal tov d8eX(f)6v avTov ptaSiv iv tv (TKOTia 
 ia-nv K.T.X. : James iii. 13 — 18 (true and false wisdom), ii. 1 — 4, 15, 16. 
 
 *ii. 15 idv Tts dyana tov K6(Tpov, ovk etrriv rf dydTrr] tov 
 rraTp&s iv avTW- ort irdv to iv rm koo-juo), rf iiridv pia t^j trapKos 
 Kal rf imBvpia tS)v oCJ>6aXfiSiv Kol rf dXa(ov ia tov /3iou ovk eo-Tiv ix tov 
 ■n- uT p OS : James iv. 4—6, iv. 1, i. 14, 15, iv. 16. 
 
 ii. 18 f crx"'"'? &pa ia-Tiv : James v. 3. 
 
 ii. 24 ffKovaare air' dpx^s iv v plv peveToi: James i. 25. 
 
RELATION TO OTHER BOOKS OF THE N.T. Ixxxvii 
 
 ^ 11. 25 avrrj eirrh rj iirayyeKia fjv avTos iivqyy ( iXar a rifilv, ttjv ^arjv rrjv 
 ai <av low : James i. 12 Xij^x^trai tov ari^avov ttjs fmijs ^k eVijyyeiXaT-o Tols 
 ayaTTao'iv aiiTov, 
 
 III. 8 6 noi&v Trjv ijiaprlav ex tov Sia/SoXou eWii', cf. ver. 10 : James iv. 7, iii. 6. 
 *lll.^ 9o yeyevvTjfiivos eK tov &eov dfiapTiav ov ttoui, on airip^a 
 
 avTov iv aiiTw fiivei, cf. ii. 29, iv. 7 was 6 aycmav eK Beov •yfve'wnrai, v. 1. 
 4, 18: James i. 18,21. / / ; > . 
 
 *iii. 17 ts 8' &v exn i""" ^tov TOV Kocr/iov Koi Bempfj tov d8€\(j)6v 
 avTov xp^iav e'xovTa Kal KXfla-rj Ta a-ir\dyxva air' avTov TrSs ij 
 ayaTTT] tov eeoC /ifvei ev avTm; TfKvia fxr) ayaTrS>iJ,ev Xoym aXXa 
 iv fpyo) KOI aXij^f I'a: James ii. 5, ver. 15, 16, i. 22, 25. 
 
 111. 21, 22 iav J) KapSia /iij KaTayivaxTKr;, ■jrapp-qaiav 'ixop,tv npos tov 
 Qeov,^ Kai o iav aiTafiev Xaii^dvo /lev OTI Tas ivToXds aiiTOv 
 rr) pov fifv, V. 14 iav Ti aiTa fie d a Kara to diXrjfia avTOv aKoxiei 
 rifi&v: James i. 6, 7, iv. 3, v. 16. 
 
 ^"^•^'^^a.vayaTrap.evaWrj'KovsoQeos iv ^ p.lv p,iv£ i: James ii, 
 
 8, iv. 5. 
 
 IV. 20 601/ T IS e iTTf] OTL ay aiT S> tov Bebv, Ka\ tov dScXcjbov avTOV 
 p-ia-fj, ■^eva-TTis iorlv, cf. ii. 9 above : James ii. 16, iii. 9, 10, ii. 1 — 4. 
 
 V. 16 edv Tis I St; tov d8 e\(f>6v avTOv dfiaoT dv ovt a dfiapTiav p,rj 
 • TTpos 6dvaT0v, aiTTitrei, Ka\ fimcrei avTw (air)v: James V. 15, 19, 20. 
 
 V. 19 d Koa- p.os oXos iv rm irovrj pa KCLTai: James iv. 4 — 7 Koa'p.os... 
 Sto^oXoff. 
 
 3 Hjp. John — 
 
 ver. 12 Ar)p,rjTpia p.ep,apTvpriTai...inb avrris Trjs aKi)6fLas : James iii. 14 /117 
 ylrev8ea-0e Kara Trjs oKrjBeLas- 
 
 (3) Acts of the, Apostles — 
 
 li. 17 iv T ais i o'xdT a ts rjiiipais'. James v. 3. 
 
 *X. 20 wopevov (Tvv avTols firiSev S i a k p i v 6 p, e v s, ci. xi. 12 /iijSei/ 8 i a- 
 K plv avr a : James i. 6 aiTelTa iv TTtoTf t prjSev hiaKpivopevos. 
 
 XV. bTrip€lvTovv6p.ov: only found elsewhere in N. T. in James ii. 10, 
 though (jjvXda-o'eiv v6p,ov and rripelv Xo'yov or ivToKds are common enough. 
 
 XV. 13 — 29, xxi. 20 — 25, speeches and letter of James. For resemblances 
 between these and our Epistle see above, pp. 3-5. 
 
 (4) Hpistles of St. Paul— 
 
 Beside the general considerations mentioned under (2), there 
 are special reasons which make it more probable that St. Paul 
 was acquainted with the Epistle of St. James than St. James with 
 those of St. Paul. We know both from the Epistle to the Gala- 
 tians (ii. 12) and from the Acts (xv. 1, 5, 24) that the Judaizing 
 opposition to St. Paul at Antioch was encouraged by persons 
 who professed to represent the views of the Church of Jerusalem 
 and of its President in particular. If there were any epistle 
 known to the Syrian Church bearing the name of James, it may 
 be taken for granted that this would have been eagerly read by 
 Paul when he was about to plead in behalf of the freedom of his 
 
Ixxxviii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Gentile converts before the Church of Jerusalem. More particu- 
 larly would this be so, if any phrases in the epistle could be 
 turned against his own doctrine of justification by faith, by those 
 who maintained that Jew and Gentile alike could only be justified 
 by the works of the law. It has been justly remarked that the 
 words ' whoever shall keep the whole law and yet offend in one 
 point, he is guilty of all' (James ii. 10) might easily be twisted by 
 the Judaizers so as to represent St. James as insisting on the 
 observance of the whole Mosaic code ; and that it is perhaps this 
 misinterpretation which is referred to in the words ' we have heard 
 that certain which went out from us troubled you saying, Ye must 
 be circumcised and keep the law, to whom we gave no such com- 
 mandment ' (Acts XV. 24).^ On the other hand there is much less 
 likelihood of St. Paul's Epistles, addressed to distant churches and 
 dealing so much with personal questions, being brought under the 
 notice of St. James. That there is a connexion between the 
 epistles of the two men, has been the general belief in the Church 
 from the time of Augustine downwards ; but this connexion has 
 been usually explained on the supposition that James meant 
 either directly to controvert Paul's own teaching, or at any rate to 
 put forward considerations which might serve to restrain the ex- 
 travagances of his followers. It has been pointed out however by 
 the more careful students of our Epistle, such as Neander and 
 Bp. Lightfoot, that the argument therein contained on Faith and 
 Works has no bearing on St. Paul's doctrine, its purport being, in 
 the words of John Bunyan, to insist that ' at the Day of Doom, men 
 shall be judged according to their fruit. It will not be said then 
 Did you believe ? but, Were you doers or talkers only ? ' ' For as 
 the body without the soul is but a dead carcase, so saying, if it be 
 alone, is but a dead carcase also ' — a doctrine which of course is 
 common to St, Paul, as to every other writer in the N.T. 
 
 But it does not follow, as some have maintained, that because 
 our Epistle gives no answer to St. Paul's argument addressed to the 
 Romans, there is therefore no connexion between them. I think 
 it is impossible to read carefully the passages given below, without 
 feeling that the one writer copied from the other ; and that, while 
 St. James has no reference to St. Paul, St. Paul on the contrary 
 writes with constant reference to St. James, sometimes borrowing 
 
 ' Plumptre, p. 40 foil. 
 
EELA.TION TO OTHER BOOKS OF THE N.T. Ixxxix 
 
 phrases or ideas, sometimes introducing a distinction for the 
 purpose of avoiding ambiguity, at other times distinctly contro- 
 verting his arguments as liable to be misapplied, though conscious 
 all the while of a general agreement in his conclusions. As 
 examples of borrowing, sometimes with additions and improve- 
 ments, I will only refer here to Kom. ii. 13, 25, v. 3, vii. 23, 
 xiv. 4, 22. As examples of new distinctions introduced compare 
 James ii. 24 i^ epyaiv SiKaiovrai dvdpcoiro'; koI ovk ek Trto-reto? 
 /jiopov, with Gal. ii.l6 ov SiKaiovrai avdpwKO's i^ epycov vofiov, 
 i av firj B La Trt'ffTews 'Ir/o-ov li.p icttov. 
 
 The controversial matter must be dealt with at greater length. 
 The two main points at issue are (1) the necessity of works, 
 (2) Abraham's justification by faith. James had said over and 
 over again ' Faith without works is dead ' (ii. 17, 20, 24, 26) ; his 
 meaning being (as is plain from ver. 1 4, and the illustration of a 
 philanthrophy which is limited to words (vv. 15, 16), as well as 
 from the whole tone and argument of the Epistle), not to depreci- 
 ate faith, which is with him not less than with St. Paul the very 
 foundation of the Christian life (cf i. 3, 6, ii, 1, v. 15), but to insist 
 that faith, like love, is valueless, if it has no effect on the life, 
 but expends itself in words. St. Paul himself does the same in 
 1 Thess. i. 3, Gal. v. 6, 1 Cor. xiii. 2, Kom. ii. 6 — 20, and indeed 
 throughout his Epistles ; but in arguing against his Judaizing 
 antagonists, who denied salvation to the Gentiles unless they were 
 circumcised and in all other respects performed ' the works of the 
 law,' he had maintained that it was impossible for men to be justified 
 by these works, and that it was by faith alone that even the Jews 
 and Abraham himself, no less than Gentiles, must be justified. 
 He therefore challenges the phrase of St. James ■^ TriaTii %(BjOt? 
 tS>v epymv dpyij ia-riv, veKpd ecrriv by a direct contradiction, 
 Xoyi^ofieffa yap SoKaiovcrdai, iriaTei, dvdpcoTrov X'^P''^ epycov vop-ov, 
 in support of which he appeals (1) to Deut. xxvii. 26 ' Cursed 
 is every one that continueth not in all things which are written 
 in the book of the law to do them,' as proving the absolute obedi- 
 ence required by the law, Gal. iii. 10, (2) to the confession of the 
 Psalmist (xiv. cxliii. 2, cf Rom. iii. 20, Gal. iii. 16) that 'by the 
 works of the law shall no flesh be justified,' and to that of the 
 Preacher (iii. 20, cf. Rom. iii. 23) ' there is not a just man upon 
 earth that doeth good and sinneth not.' If the contrary suppo- 
 
xc THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 sition were true; if St. James wrote after St. Paul, must he 
 not, with these passages before him, have either attempted to 
 meet the arguments, if he dissented; or if he agreed with them 
 (as he certainly does in ii. 10, 11 and in iii. 2), would he not 
 have avoided the use of phrases such as %a>pt9 toiv ep'yav, which 
 were liable to be misunderstood alike by the followers and the 
 opponents of the Apostle to the Gentiles ? 
 
 St. Paul goes on to argue that the blessings promised to Abraham 
 and all the families of the earth in him, and the covenant made 
 with Abraham and his seed, are anterior to and irrespective of the 
 law ; that the Scripture expressly attributes to Abraham a 
 righteousness, not of works, but of faith, and states generally 
 that ' the just shall live by faith.' To these arguments again 
 no reference is made by St. James, except to the familiar quo- 
 tation iiriCTTeva-ev 'A^paa/i to3 6eS Koi iXoyiaffrj avrm elf SiKaioav- 
 vrjv (James ii. ?1, 22), which was probably in common use among 
 the Jews to prove that orthodoxy of doctrine sufficed for salvation. 
 His answer is that Abraham's faith proved itself by action, when 
 he offered Isaac on the altar : if he had not acted thus, he would 
 not have been accounted righteous, or called the Friend of God. 
 It is interesting to observe how St. Paul deals with this statement, 
 to which he distinctly refers in Rom. iv. 2. St. James had said 
 'A^paafj, 6 TraT-qp rjjjLwv ovk i^ epyeov iStKaiwdr/ ; St. Paul replies 
 el yap 'A^paafi i^ epyasv ehiKaiadr), e^ei /cav'xrjfia, but this, as he 
 shows, is inconsistent with the phrase 'reckoned for righteousness,' 
 which, like the similar phrase in Ps. xxxii. 1, 2, implies an act of 
 free grace on the part of God, not a strict legal obligation of 
 wages earned for work done. His second answer is to replace the 
 quotation in its original context (Rom. iv. 16 — 22), as spoken of 
 the birth, not of the sacrifice of Isaac. Abraham's faith in the 
 promised birth was a settled trust in God, a long-continued hoping 
 against hope : it was this posture of mind, not any immediate 
 action consequent upon it, which was reckoned to him for 
 righteousness (iveSvva/idoOri rfj Tr/o-ret Sou? So^av tc5 ©eoiJ koI 
 'jrXr]po<f>op7]del<; on o etrri'yyeXrai hvvaTOf eaTiv Koi Trofrja-ai. S i 6 
 eXoy 1<T 6 7] avrS et? SiKaioavvrjv). Nor is he content 
 to leave to the Jews the exclusive boast in the fatherhood of 
 Abraham (James ii. 21) : all who inherit Abraham's faith are sons 
 of Abraham (Gal. iii. 7, Rom. iv. 12). All this is most apposite in 
 
RELATION TO OTHER BOOKS OF THE N.T. xci 
 
 reference to the argument of St. James and the use which might be 
 made of it by Judaizers ; but put the case the other way, suppose 
 St. James to have written after St. Paul ; and how inconceivable 
 is it that he should have made no attempt to guard his position 
 against such an extremely formidable attack ! Again if St James 
 was really opposed to St. Paul and desired to maintain that man 
 was saved, not by grace, but by obedience to the law of Moses, 
 which was incumbent alike on Gentile and on Jew, why has he 
 never uttered a syllable on the subject, but confined himself to the 
 task of proving that a faith which bears no fruits is a dead faith ? 
 
 As I am on the subject of faith it may be convenient to mention 
 here that the treatment of this subject in the Epistle to the 
 Hebrews is such as to suggest that the w^riter was acquainted with 
 our Epistle, as well as with the Epistle to the Romans. The language 
 of St. James was liable to be misunderstood because he does not 
 state distinctly what he means by ' faith.' In the eleventh chap- 
 ter of the Hebrews the author begins with a definition of faith 
 and illustrates its power by a long series of examples. In ver. 6 he 
 explains why it is impossible to please God without faith. In 
 vi. 15 Abraham is said to have obtained the promise through his 
 patience (jMaKpo6v/jLi]cra<;) : in xi. 8 his faith is evinced by his 
 obedience to the call to leave his own country and go he knew 
 not where ; in ver. 9 by his living as a stranger in the land of 
 promise awaiting the establishment of the City of God. In ver. 11 
 faith is said to have enabled Sarah to conceive when she was past 
 age. In ver. 17 it is pointed out that the offering up of Isaac by 
 Abraham flowed naturally from his faith, that He who had given 
 the promise ' In Isaac shall thy seed be called ' was able even to 
 raise him from the dead. In vv. 13 — 16 it is said of the patriarchs 
 collectively, that they died in faith not having received the pro- 
 mises but having saluted them afar off, desiring a better country, 
 that is an heavenly. Faith is exhibited throughout the chapter 
 not as in rivalry with works, as might seem to be the case in the 
 writings of St. Paul and St. James, but as the cause and ground of 
 all the noble deeds of the ancient worthies. Thus, though it may 
 be true to say with St. James ' that Rahab was justified by works,' 
 yet it is a higher and deeper truth to say that she was saved by 
 faith, since her works were only the natural outcome and fruit of 
 her faith. 
 
xcii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 1 Thessalonians (a.d 52)^ — 
 
 V. 23 6 Qfos...&yiacrai v/ias 6\ot eXels, Koi oXokXtj poi> vfiSyv to wvevfia 
 Kal Tj ■^vx''! ta* t6 cr&fita a /jie fiw tods ev ri] ir apovcr ia tov Kvpiov 
 rifiav 'Irjcrov X pip- tov t r) prj 6 e it) : James i. 4 r) 8e vTronovfj epyov TeXeiov 
 e)(era) 'iva §re TeXeioi Kal oX6KKripoi, cf. iii. 15, V. 8j ii. 1, i. 27. 
 
 1 Corinthians (Spring of a.d. 57) — 
 
 *i. 27 TO. nap a TOV Koa-fiov i ^eXe ^aro n Gcoy iva KOTaicrxvvji Tovs 
 (ro0ous, KOi TCL dtrdevrj tov Koap^ov Iva KaTaia-\vvrj Ta lar\vpa. . .oirtas pr) Kavx^o-rjTOL 
 TTaa-a irap^ iviimov tov GeoO ". James ii. 5 ovx o Qfos e^eXe^aro Toiis 
 TTTioxovs Tcj) Koa- pa nXovo'iovs ev tt l (7 t f t, i. 9, 10 KavxdaBai 5e 6 
 dd eX<j} 6 s 6 T air e IV 6 s iv t iS v^lfei avTov^ 6 de irXovtrios iv Trj TaTreivaaei 
 avTov. 
 
 ii. 9 d ocjjdaXpbs ovK etfiev. ..oo"a rjTo ipao" e v 6 Qeos Tols dy an a (r iv 
 avTov. James i. 12, ii. 5. 
 
 *ii. l^yj'vxi'KosSe avdpmjTos oiSex^^'"''" '"<''' nvev paTos rouSeoO, 
 ptopia yap aiiTa iuTLV : James iii. 15 ovk etrTiv avTrj -fj aocjila livcadev KarepxopJvrj 
 dXXd eirlyetos, yjrv x^Krjf daipoviabrjs. 
 
 *iii. 18 prj Be IS eavTov i ^ an aT dr ai' e'l Tts SoKet o-oipos eivat iv 
 vpAVi papos yev€0'Bco, cf. Gal. vi. 3 el yap 8 OKet t is e tv al t l^ p.Tj d ev &v, 
 e avT 6 V (j) p ev an aTa' James i. 26 e'l Tis doKel dprja-Kos eivai pjj ;(a\iva'ya)ywj/ 
 yXaa'a'av dX\' dnaTav Kapblav eavrov k.t.X. 
 
 vi. 9, XV. 33, cf. Gal. vi. 7, pfj nXavda-6e : James i. 16 prj nXavacrde (nowhere 
 else in N. T.). 
 
 xiii. 12 pxinopev hi ia-onrpov, cf. Cor. iii. 18 rrjv So^av Kvpiov KaTOTrrpi^opc- 
 voi : Jameg i. 23 iv io'onTpa. 
 
 XV. 35 aXX* € pel T IS tlats iyeipovrat ol veKpol ; James ii. 8 aXV i p el t is 
 Sii nloTiv 'ix^is (the phrase is not uncommon, and is apparently used in 
 different senses by St. Paul and by St. James). 
 
 2 Corinthians (Autumn of a.d. 57) — 
 
 iv. 6 6 Qebs 6 etnav 'Ek a- k6 t ov s tp S) s XapyfreifOS eXa p^ ev iv t als 
 K ap d lais rjpav npos (jicoTifrpbv ttjs yvatTGios '. James i. 17 5d)prjpu TeXeiov... 
 KaTa^alvov dno tov n aT p os t&v <jia)T (ov. 
 
 *vi. 7 iv Xoycp dXrjde ias, iv Svvdpei Qeov. cf. Col. i. 5 iXnlSa fjv nporiKov- 
 (ra-te iv Ta Xdyo ttjs dXrjd e ias tov evayyeXiov, Eph. i. 13 dxava'avies tov 
 XdyoK T^s dXrjde ias, TO evayyeXiov Trjs o'aTrjpias, 2 Tim. ii. 15 opBorropovvra 
 t6v Xoyov TTJs dXrideias : James i. 18 ^ovXrjSels dneKvrjcrev rjpds Xdyw dXr]deias (the 
 phrase occurs nowhere else in N. T. but is found in LXX. Psa. cxix. 43 pr/ 
 nepieXfjs e'k tov ord/iOTOS pov Xdyoc dXrjdeias, oti inl toIs Kpipao'i (tov inrjXniira, Kal 
 (j)vXd^a TOV vopov o'ov 5ta navros. 
 
 *viii. 2 iv noXXfj boKipjj dXi^ e as rj nepurareia Trjs x^P^^ avTavl 
 James i. 2, 21. 
 
 *xii. 20 epis (fjXos 6vpol ipiBiai Kar aXaXiaL.MKaT ao'Tatr iai: 
 James iii. 14, 16, iv. 11. 
 
 Galatians (Close of A.D. 57) — 
 
 On the relation between St. Paul and St. James in regard of Jitstification 
 and the example of Abraham, see ii. 15, 16, iii. 6, and compare the remarks at 
 the head of this section (4). 
 
 * 1 take the dates from Lewin's Fasti Sacri except in the case of the Epistles to 
 the Galatians and Philippians, where 1 follow Bp. Lightfoot (Oal. pp. 36 — 56 and 
 Fhil pp. 30—46). 
 
RELATION TO OTHER BOOKS OP THE N.T. xciii 
 
 lii. 26 ndvTes yap viol GeoG eare 8ta t^s Tr/oTciuff ev X. 'I., iv, 6 oTt fie eore vloij 
 e^aweoTeiXev 6 Geos ro wevjxa tov YioC aiirov its ras KapSias vfiav Kpa^ov 'AP^a 
 6 llaTTfp : James i. 18, iv. 5. 
 
 iv. 22 — 31 the son of the bondwoman and the son of the free, Mount Sinai 
 and Jerusalem which is above, v. 13 tV eXevSepia eRKr]6r]Te, ver. 18 d nvfip-aTi. 
 ayeardc oiiK i<TT€ imo vofiov \ Jamea i. 25, ii. 12. 
 
 V. 3 n(j)€iX€TT]s iarlv o\ov tov v 6 fiov Troirjo'ail James ii. 10 oa-ris oXov 
 TOV V 6 p.ov TTj prjo'i] TTTaitrrj fie eV evi, yeyovev TrdvraiV eroj^os. 
 
 V. 17 Tj arap^ cm,Bvfiel Kara too jTveup,aTos, ro fie jrveipa KaTCt t^s erapKor, toCtu 
 yap dWrjXoK avTiKeiTai : James iv. 4, 5. 
 
 vi. 9 TO KoKov iroiovvres p.ri iyKaKap^v Kaipa yap ifii'o) 6epl<rop,ev jiri iKKv6p.evoi : 
 James v. 7. 
 
 Romans (a.d. 58) — 
 
 *i. 16, 17 (to evrayyeXioi') biiv a p, is &eov etTTiv els aaTJ] plav wavrl Ta 
 7TiaT€vovTi...BiKaio(Tvvr] yap GeoO €v aiiTa aTTOKaXuTTTerat, cl. iil. 21, 25: 
 James i. 21 Se^aaBe tov fp,(f>VTOv Xdyoj/ tov 8vvdp,evov a a a at Tas 
 yjfv^as i/imv, vey. 20 opyr/ dvSpos Qeov &iKaioavvr)v ovk ipyd^tTai. Tlie 
 phrase S«. G. is taken from Micah vi. 5. 
 
 ii. 1 aiav6ptoiTe irds 6 k p iv (o v...Td yap avTa irpdo'a'ets 6 Kplv<oy, cf. ix. 
 20 : James ii. 20 S> av6 paire /ceve', iv. 11 quoted below on xiv. 4. 
 
 *ii. 5 6-qa-av pixels (reavTa opyf/v ivripepaopyfjs: James V. 3 e' fl t; o- a u- 
 picraTe iv e (rxdTUis ^ pi pais, ver. 5 eBpi-^aTC Tas KapSias iv ri pi pa 
 a-cj)ayfjs. Both founded on precedents in O.T. 
 
 *ii. 13 ov yap 1 aKpoaT al v 6 pov diKaioi irapd t^ Ge^, aXX'ot no irjT a\ 
 vopov 8iKai<odrj<TOVTai: James i. 22 yiveaOe TrotrjT al Xdyou Kai p 17 
 aKp oaT ai pov oVj 25 6 fie irapaKvyJAas els vopov TeXeiov tov ttJs eXevOeplas. . . 
 OVK aKpoaT r)S...yev6pevos oKKd ir oirjTTjs epyov, oiros paKdpios, cf. ii. 24, 
 iv. 11 TroirjTrjs vopov. 
 
 ii. 17 — 24 on teachers who do not practise what they teach : James iii. 1 on 
 over-eagerness to teach and the dangers of teaching. 
 
 *ii. 25 idv TTapa^aTrj s vopov js fj irepiTOpr) a-ov aKpo^vaTia yiyovev, ver. 
 27 : James ii. 1 1 el fie oi poi^eveis (poveveis Si', yiyovas irapa^dTr]s vopov. 
 
 iii. 28 Xoyi^opeda SiKaiovirdai ir itrTe i avBpairov X'»p''r e pyav vopov : 
 James ii. 24, compare remarks at the head of this section (4). 
 
 *iv. 1 — 5, 16 — 22. Paul here betrays a consciousness that Abraham had been 
 cited as an example of works, and endeavours to show that the word Xoyi^opai 
 is inconsistent with this : James ii. 21 — 23. 
 
 iv. 20 els Trjv iivayye\Lav tov GeoO oh 8ie Kpidr/ Tjj diriiTTla. dXX' ibvva- 
 padri Trj nia-Tei, d. xiv. 23 : James i. 6, ii. 4. 
 
 *V. 3 — 5 Kavxd) peda iv Tals 6\ii^e<Tiv, e 18 ores oti fj dXiijris 
 vn opovijv Kare pyd^eTai, f] fie vnopovf) doKipffv, fj 8e 8oKtprj eXmfia, 
 17 8e eXiriE oi KaTaia-x^vei, OTi fj dydirr] tov Qeov iKKexvTai, cf. 1 Cor. 27-29 : 
 James i. 2 — 4 Ttaa-av X'^P^" ijyjo-ao-^e OT av jreipaa-poXs irepivi- 
 (rT]Te...y ivdxTKOVTes oti to SoKipiov vpav Trjs iria-Teas Karepyd^erai 
 iiTopavrjv, 17 fie vitopovr) epyov TeXeiov ixeTOD iva yre Tekeioi. (Here it is more 
 probable that Paul is working up a hint received from James, than that the 
 less complete analysis should have been borrowed from the more complete.) 
 Cf. also James i. 9 xavxda-da 6 aSeX^or iv T-m v^ei. 
 
 vi. 23 TO. yap oyjraivia Trjs dpapnas ddvaTOS, to fie x"/""-/*". roi? GeoO fm?; alaivios : 
 James i. 15. , , , 
 
 *vii. 23 /SXeVo) erepov vopov iv rots peXetrlv pov avTia-T p aTjvopevoy 
 ra v6pa tou voos pov Koi alxpaKtoTiCovTa pe Ta vopm ttjs dpaprias t& ovti iv to'is 
 pekeo-iv pov, cf. vi. 13 : James iv. 1 Trd^ev noKepoi; ovk ivTtvdev ex tS>v fi8ovi>v 
 
xciv THE EPISTLE OP ST. JAMES 
 
 vfiSivTav (TTparfVOfiivav iv Tots fieXetriv vfiSiv; (Here too James 
 is simpler, Paul more developed.) 
 
 *viii. V t6 (ppovrj/ia rrjs crapKos e^S pa fis e 6 v, ra y a p pop. a tov &e ov 
 ovx i)7roTao-(rerai: James iv. 4 r/ (piXia tov Koafiov £x6pa tov 
 0eo€ eoTti/, ver. TvTTora'yi^re t a ©e«, duTiiTTrjTe de T^ StajSoXo). 
 
 *viii. 21 avrfi fj kt io-is eKiv6fpo)6r]<TfTai...eis Tr)v dXev6f piav Trjs 86^f tSiv 
 TeKvtav tov Geou, ver. 23 dWa kol aifTol ttjv an apx^v tov TTvevpaTOS 6)^ovt€S... 
 (TTcvd^opev viodeaiav d7reKSe;(d/ifi/o(, xi. 16 el r) djrapx') dyla Koi to (jivpafia: 
 James i. 18 dir e k-utj a-ev fj pas...eis to flvai rjpas dn apxv" """ ™'' 
 avTov KTia-paTwv, ver. 25 vd/ios e\ev6f pias. (Paul works Tip the hint 
 of St. James into a far more elaborate conception.) 
 
 X. 3 ayiioovvTcs ttjv tov Q e ov 8 iKaioavvrjv Kal ttju Iblav ^rjTOvvTes tiTrj- 
 aai : see above on i. 16, 17. 
 
 xi. 17, 18 KaTaKavxaa-Bai: James ii. 13, iii. 14. 
 
 xii. 14 eiXoyeire Kal pr) KaTapdaSf : James iii. 10. 
 
 *xiii. 3 OeXeis Sc prf <po^eia-6ai ; Th dyadiv iroki : James ii. 20 5 e X « t r 8 e 
 yvavai ; 'A^paap ovk. i^ epytov iSiKaimdri ; 
 
 xiii. 12 ajrod a> pi6 a to epya tov (tkotovs, ivhvtr&peBa to. oirKa tov 
 (pcDTos '. James i. 21 dir o6i pevoi irdaav pvrt apiav Ka\ we piaac lav 
 KaKlas...8€^aa-d€ tov epfjivTov \6yov tov bvvapevov tratrai Tas '^v^as vpS>v. 
 
 *X1V. 4 crii tIs e l 6 xplviov dXK&rpiov olKenjv ; Ta ISlco KV p Ico o'Ttj Kci 
 rj TT I TT T E I, cf. ii. 1 and 1 Cor. iv. 3 — 5 6 dv aKplvav pc K.v pios i o-t iv, 
 aore pr) irpo Kaipov Ti Kplve tc : James iv. 11 fir e(TT iv vopoOeTTjs Kai 
 K p ITT] Sj (TV Se T Is et, 6 Kp Iv fov TOV ttXt] o" lov i (Itls hardly conceivable 
 that a later writer could lose the point of dXKoTpiov olniTriv and t^ Ibio levpla, 
 though these are natural improvements to make, if the simpler form is the 
 older.) 
 
 *xiv. 22, 23 cv tr ItTT IV e ^e is ; KaTa iravTov e^e. ..6 8 e SiaKpivopevos, 
 eav <j>ayrj, KaTaKeKpcTat, otl ovk €k 7rl(rT€(0s '. James ii. 18 o"0 ttIctiv e;^etff 
 Kdyoy epya ex<o, i. 16 atreirm iv TTicrret pTjbev StaKplvopevos, 6 yap 
 SiaKpivopevos eooce kXuS&ji/i BaXatrcrris. 
 
 PMlippians (a.d. G2) — 
 
 i. 11 TTETrXTjpcBfieVoi Kapnhv 8 iKaio a-vvrj s '. seeonHeb.xii.il. 
 iii. 9 TTJV €K Qeov 8tKato(7vvriv '. see on Rom. i. 16. 
 iv. 6 6 Kv pios iyyvs : James v. 8. 
 
 Colossians (a.d. 63) — 
 
 ii. 4 iva p-fj ns IT apaXoylcTTjT ai vpas iv iridavoXoyla : James i. 22 tt a p a- 
 Xoy t (T a p€ V o I i avT ov s. 
 
 iii. 8 vvvl 8e aTT 66 € a" 6 e KaX vpe7s Ta TvdvTa^ 6 pyTjv, Svpov, k aK I av, ^Xatr- 
 <j)Ti plav : see on Eph. iv. 22. 
 
 iii. 12 iv8v<Ta<r6e...T air e IV o<^ po(rvvTjv, n pavTTjTa, paKpoBvplav'. 
 James i. 21, iv. 10, v. 7. 
 
 Uphesians (a.d. 63) — 
 
 i. 5 npoopla'as Tjpds els v io6 e tr lav...KaT a ttjv fv8oKlav tov SeXrj- 
 paTos avTov ' James i. 18 ^ ovXr) 6 els dwe kvtj a- ev rjpds. 
 
 i. 13 t6v X6yov ttj s aXjj^fi'as, seeon2 Cor. vi. 7. 
 
 *iv. 13, 14 pixP^ KaTavTr](T<opev ol jrdvTes...els av8pa TeXe iov...lva prjKeTi 
 &pev VTjTnoi, KXv8a>vi^6 pev 01 Kal 'iTepi^ep6pevoi iraj/Ti dvipa ttjs 
 8i8a(rKaXlas'. James i. 4 Iva fJTe TcXeioi Kal oXoKXripoi iv pT]8evl Xf«rd- 
 pevotf ver. 6 6 8taKptv6pevos eotKev kXv 8qjv t 6aXd(T(rrjs dvepi^o- 
 
RELATION TO OTHEE BOOKS OF THE N.T. xcv 
 
 p,€v(f KOI ptTTtfo^fv^. (St. Paul's is the more finislied : Ms metaphor 
 seems built upon the simile in St. James.) 
 
 *iv. 22 — 25 air 06 € (T d ai v fias Kara ttjv wpoTspav dva<rTpo<j)rjv rbv 
 noKaiov avdpamov tov (1)6 € ipo iicvov Kara t a s in i6v p,las rr) s aira- 
 Tr]s, dv av € ov or 6 at 8c ra nvevp,aTL tov yoos vp,av Koi evdvo-ao'Bat tov Kaivov 
 avBpumov tov Kara Oeov KTCtrdfvra. . .iv ocrioTijrt Trj s d\ri 6 f i as. Aio OTro- 
 6 4p,evoi. TO ylrevSos k.t.X. cf. 1 Pet. ii. 1 : James i. 21, 15, 26, 18. 
 
 *iv. 30, 31 prj AvTrelre to TrvfC/za ro aiyiov tov GeoC, eV^ ea'<ppayia'Or}T€...'iraa-a 
 TT I K p i a KcX Bvp.6s Ka\ pyrj Ka\ Kpavyrj Kot ^Xao" (pfj fJii a dpdrjTu d0' vpatv 
 a-i/v naoTi KaKia; James iv. 5, iii. 14, i. 20, ii. 7. 
 
 Epistle to Titus (a.d. 64) — 
 
 iii. 2 p-rfbeva ^Xaa-dtrj p,etv, dp,dxovs eivai, sTTtfiKeiy, ndaav iv- 
 8 f iKvv pevov s IT pavTTiT a, ver. 3 ^piv yap 7roTf...a7rei5t if, jrXav a pf- 
 voi, bovXfvovTcs iTTiBv piais (CO I 7)8 ovals notKiXats iv KaKta Ka\ 
 (j)6 6v<f SidyovTfs, ver. 8 tva thpovTi^ainv KaXav e pyiov npota-Taa-Bai. oi TrtTTio- 
 TevKOTfS Qfa : James iii. 13 oei^arco iK rrjs KaXrjs dv aa-r pocjirj s Ta epya 
 avTOV iv TT pavTTjTi o-o(j}ias, ver. 17 rj Si ava6ev ao(j>la...&yvr], elp-qviKJj, 
 i Trie iKTjS, evneidris, cf. i. 21, iv. 1, 
 
 First Hpistle to Timothy (a.d. 64) — 
 
 *i. 7 6iXovT€ s elvai vo pod iSda Ka\o i : James iii. 1 pr) ttoXXoi 
 8l8 da- Ka\o t y iv e a- 6 e, 
 
 *V. 22 tr e avrov dyvov Trj p e i, vi. 14 ttj prj w ai a-e ttjv ivToXrjv a c ttiX o v '. 
 James i. 27 aa-TriXov iavTov Trjpelv diro tov Koapov. 
 
 *vi. 17 T ois 7t\ov a- tots iv T a vvv alSivi tt a p dyy eWe pi) v'^r)\o- 
 <f) p ov e7v p7)8e TjX'jr LKe V at inl ir\ovT ov dSijXoTTjT t...7r\ovT elv iv 
 spyois KaXols: James i. 10, ii. 5, iii. 13. 
 
 Second Epistle to Timothy (A.D. 66) — 
 
 ii. 9 iv (B KaKow a6S> pixp'' bea-pmv i)s KaKovpyos, veT. 3 avyKaKOTrdBr)- 
 (T ov GiS Kokos arpaTiwTTjs "iTjo-ov XptoTOVj iv, 5 (TV 8e v7J(f)e iv ndo-tv, KaKondBi)- 
 <rov : James v. 13 KaKoiraBei ris iv vpiv ; rrpo(TfVxi<T6a>, ver. 10 VTrobeiypa Xa^cve 
 r^s KaKonadias tovs Trpocjjrjras. 
 
 ii. 12 ttkttos 6 Xoyoj. ..ft vnopivopev, xal trvp^aanXeva'opev, cf. iv. 
 7 : James i. 12 fiaKap to s os viropivet 7reipa<rp6v on 8 6 Kcpo s y e v 6- 
 pevos Xr) pyjreTai tov aTi(\>avov Trjs (frjs ov inrjyytiXaTO rols dyajrSxnv 
 avTov. (Probably St. Paul quotes from an early hymn founded on the same 
 original aypa<f)ov as the verse of St. James.) 
 
 ii. 15 tTTTOvSaa'ov ceaVTOv 86 Kipov Trapao'TTJa'ai Ta 6ea...opdoTopovvTa tov 
 Xoyov TT) s dXrjde ias : James i. 12, 18. 
 
 iii. 1 iv i a-\dT ats r) pi pais ivurrjaovTai KOtpoi xaXeirol: James V. 1 — 5, 
 esp. 3 i6r)(ravpia'aTe iv iarxdrais f) pi pals. 
 
 ■*iv. 7, 8 TOV dyatva 7)yaivta'pai. . .Xotnov dnoKftTal pot 6 ttjs 8tKaio(7vvr)s a-Tecjia- 
 vos ov an o8 dxr e I pot 6 Kv p tos...6 StKatos KptT7)s, ov povov 8i ipol 
 dXXd Kot ndo-iv to is r)y anr) k6 (t t Tr)v inKJydvetav avrov: James i. 12, see 
 above on ii. 12 ntaTos 6 Xor/os. 
 
 (5) Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude — 
 
 I think no unprejudiced reader can doubt that the resemblances 
 between the Epistle of St. James and the First Epistle of St. Peter, 
 the recurrence in them of the same words and phrases, and their 
 
xcvi THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 common quotations from the O.T., are such as to prove conclusively 
 that the one borrowed from the other. Nor can there be much 
 doubt as to which of the two was the borrower, if we observe how, 
 in almost every case, the common thought finds fuller expression 
 in St. Peter. Thus both Epistles are addressed to the Diaspora, 
 but in St. Peter we have the distinctive touch 6«\e«T04s irapeirc- 
 Si]fjboi,<; Biaa-TTopa.'i. St. James addresses the Twelve Tribes of the 
 Diaspora without limitation ; but his letter, as I have argued in 
 the chapter on the Persons Addressed, would probably be circulated 
 mainly among the Jews of the Eastern Dispersion ; while St. Peter, 
 writing, as I imagine, during the imprisonment of St. Paul at 
 Rome to the Jews of Asia Minor, with the view of removing their 
 prejudices against his teaching, took the Epistle of St. James as 
 his model, but ingrafted upon it the more advanced Christian 
 doctrine which he shared with St. Paul. If we accept the genuine- 
 ness of the Second Epistle, we shall find an interesting parallel in 
 the close relation between it and the Epistle of St. Jude. These 
 however are of course matters of more or less uncertainty. But 
 the close connexion between James i. 2 and 1 Pet. i. 6, 7 is proved 
 beyond all doubt by the recurrence in both of the phrases ttoikL- 
 Xot? Treipacr/jioi'; and rb Soki/miov ifi&v t^? TTt'crTea? with its un- 
 usual order of words. Assuming then, as we must, that one copied 
 from the other, we find the trial of faith illustrated in St. Peter (as 
 in Psa. Ixvi. 10, Prov. xvii. 3, Job xxiii. 10, Zech. xiii. 9, Mai. iii. 3) 
 by the trying of the precious metals in the fire : we find also the 
 addition, oXiyov dpri, el Beov, XvirrjOevre^, which looks as if it were 
 intended to soften down the uncompromising Stoicism of St. 
 James' iraaav X"'P"'^ rjyijcracrde. Again comparing James i. 18 
 and 1 Pet. i. 23, we find the bare ' begat he us with the word of 
 truth ' of the former expanded into ' having been begotten again 
 not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, through the word of 
 God which liveth and abideth.' So in 1 Pet. ii. 1, 2, the simpler 
 expression of James (i. 21) ' Wherefore putting away all filthiness 
 and overflowing of malice, receive with meekness the implanted 
 word which is able to save your souls ' is elaborated into ' Putting 
 away therefore all malice and all guile and hypocrisies and 
 envies and all evil speakings, as newborn babes long for the 
 spiritual (XoyiKov) milk which is without guile, that ye may grow 
 thereby unto salvation.' Compare also James i. 12 with 1 Pet. v. 4 
 
RELATION TO OTHER BOOKS OF THE N.T. xcvii 
 
 where the crown of life' becomes 'the crown of glory which fadeth 
 not away'; James iv. 10 with 1 Pet. v. 6, where 'Humble your- 
 selves in the sight of God and he shall exalt you' becomes 
 ' Humble yourselves under the mighty hand of God that he may 
 exalt you in due time.' In the immediate context the simple 
 ' Resist the devil ' of James, becomes ' Your adversary the devil as 
 a roaring lion walketh about seeking whom he may devour; whom 
 resist steadfast in the faith' in Peter. The most important 
 changes are those in which the tone of the New Testament is sub- 
 stituted for that of the Old, as in 1 Pet. ii. 21, where Christ is set 
 before us as our example of patient suffering, in contrast with 
 James v. 10, where the example of the prophets is appealed to. 
 Perhaps under this head may be mentioned the change from aTrjpl- 
 ^are rai; /capSia';, in James v. 9, to o @eo9 airos a-Trjpc^ei in 1 Pet. 
 V. 10; and the employment of the emphatic vpo irdvTwv to enforce 
 the exhortation to brotherly love in 1 Pet. iv. 8, instead of the 
 exhortation to abstain from swearing in James v. 12. 
 
 There is a curious difference between the use made of quotations 
 from the Old Testament in the two Epistles. St. James seldom 
 quotes exactly. We can see by his phraseology that he has some 
 passage of the Old Testament in his mind, but he uses it freely 
 to colour his language, applying it to his own immediate purpose 
 without any scrupulous reference to its original context. It is this 
 laxity of quotation which causes the difficulty in James iv. 4-6 and 
 presents what is probably an 'unwritten word' of Christ under 
 two forms in i. 12 and ii. 5. If we turn to the quotations which 
 are common to him and to St. Peter, we often find the inexact and 
 careless reminiscences of the former corrected and supplemented 
 in the latter. Thus there can be little doubt that when St. James 
 used the phrase hoKifiiov 7rto-T6&)s he had in his mind Prov. xxvii. 
 21 BoKCfuov dpyvpitp Kal ■ypvao) irvpa>a-i<;, dvrjp Be BoKifid^eTai 
 Bia oTTOfiaTo^ iyKco/Mia^ovTav avjov, and Prov. xvii. 3, which is 
 nearer in meaning though less closely allied in expression, wairep 
 SoKifid^erai iv Kayi,lvw dpr^vpos /cal ■x,pva-6<;, ovrai<s eK\e/cTal Kap- 
 Blai irapd Kvpia, and accordingly we find St. Peter supplying 
 these words (BoKlfuov) TrdXvTC/MOTepov xP^o'^o^ tov diroWvfievov 
 Bid TTvph Be BoKi/J-a^ofievov. Another quotation appears in James 
 i. 10, 11 (let the rich man boast in his humiliation) oti, wc anGoc 
 vopTOU TrapeXeva-erai,- dvsTeiXev yap 6 ^A,to? aiiv rm Kavamvt, /eat 
 
 9 
 
xcviii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 i^rj pav ev rov -^opTov koI to ^n9oc avrov eleneGeN ical r] 
 evTrpeweia rov Trpoawirov avrov dircoXero' ouxft)? kol 6 irXovo'io^ 
 iv rat? TTopeiaii; ainov fiapavdi^a-erai. This is evidently taken 
 mainly from Isa. xl. 6, 7, where the perishing nature of man is 
 contrasted with the imperishableness of God's Word. St. James, 
 it will be seen, confines himself to the former branch of the com- 
 parison, limiting it indeed to the case of the rich man, and makes 
 no mention here of the Word. But in 1 Pet. i. 23 the new life 
 communicated by the living and abiding Word of God, which St. 
 James treats of in another part of his Epistle, is the subject of the 
 discourse (dvajeyevvrj/u.evoi. . .8ta Xojov ^wvrog @eov koI fievovTO'i); 
 this is then proved by the quotation, given almost literally from 
 Isaiah, as follows: Stort nXsA OApI tu? xopTOc kai ■n\oi, a65a avTrj<; 
 toe anSoc xopTOy elHpANBH 6 )(opTOC KAi TO *.n9oc eleneoGN' to Ae 
 pHM<\ Kvpiov Menei eic ton AiwNA, the only changes being the in- 
 sertion of the first tu?, the substitution of avrfj^ for ANGpoinoY and 
 of Kvpiov for TOY ©eoY hmcon. In the passage of St. James we 
 observe the intermingling of another quotation from the Book of 
 Jonah iv. 8 iyevero a fia r £ dv ar ecXa i t b v ijX lov Koi 
 Trpoa-era^ev o @eo? Trvev/xari k a v <7 co v i. 
 
 In the difficult passage James iv. 4-6 (' whosoever would be a 
 friend of the world becomes thereby an enemy of God. Or think 
 ye that the Scripture saith without meaning. Jealously yearneth the 
 Spirit which he hath implanted in you ? But he giveth more 
 grace : wherefore he saith ') 6 ©eo? vTreprj^dvoi^ avTiTaaaerai ra- 
 Treivoi'i Sk SlScocriv xa/otj/, the concluding Greek words are exactly 
 the same as in 1 Pet. v. 5, being taken literally from the LXX. of 
 Prov. iii. 34, except that this latter has Kupto? for o @eo?. The 
 context however in which they occur differs much in the two 
 Epistles. St. Peter uses them to enforce the duty of humility in 
 our intercourse with our fellow-men, ' Ye younger be subject unto 
 the elder : yea all of you gird yourselves with humility for God 
 resisteth the proud, but giveth grace to the humUe,' which is probably 
 the original application in the Proverbs ; but St. James, as we have 
 seen, seems to make ' the proud ' equivalent to ' the friends of the 
 world,' and the ' humble ' to be those who submit themselves to 
 God. 
 
 The last quotation is that from the Hebrew (not the LXX.) of 
 Prov. x. 12 ' Hatred stirreth up strife, but low covereth all sins,' 
 
RELATION TO OTHER BOOKS OF THE N.T. xcix 
 
 which we find in James v. 20 and 1 Pet. iv. 8 ; but here again the 
 former simply makes use of a familiar phrase without regard to the 
 bearing of the context, applying it to the conversion of the erring 
 o eTria-Tpiylra^ dfiapreoXov eic irXdvrj'i oSoO avTov . . . k aXvyjr e i 
 TrXij^o? dfiapTtmv, while St. Peter keeps to the original 
 application, irpb iravrmv Trjv et? eavrou? dyd-Trriv eKTevrj e')(pvTe<s, 
 OTt dry aTrrj K aXv ITT € t ttXt) d o g dfiapricav. 
 
 It is scarcely necessary to point out how these facts confirm the 
 general evidence as to the priority of our Epistle to that of St. 
 Peter. The language of a Christian writer, in the first century 
 even more than in the nineteenth, was inevitably coloured by his 
 study of the O.T. This fully accounts for the Scriptural quotations 
 and allusions in St. James. It is again perfectly natural that a 
 contemporary of St. James, reviewing his Epistle in order to adapt 
 it for a special class of readers, should, it may be even uncon- 
 sciously, correct the references to the O.T., sometimes by supplying 
 points which had been overlooked, as in speaking of the trial of 
 faith, sometimes by applying them with more exactness, as in 
 regard to the simile of the fading flower. But surely the converse 
 supposition is most improbable, that the later writer should 
 deliberately misquote and misapply passages which were correctly 
 given in his authority ! 
 
 *i. 1 exXeKTOcff 7rap€7n8rjfiocs Stao'TTopoff: James i. 1 Tois SwSeKa tpvXats 
 rats ivrfiSiaa-TTopa. 
 
 *i. 3 6 Kara to ttoXli avTov eKeos dv ay e vvrj o-as r] pas els iXirida ^mcrav, . . et f 
 K \ri pov Ojilav a(j>dapTOP Koi dp,lavTnv'. James i. 18 /SouXjj^Eif dne Kvrj cr e v 
 T]p,as \6ya> aXrjdeias, ver. 27 dprj(TKeia KaSapa xal dplavr os, ii. 5 K\r)pov6- 
 p.ovsTTJsl3atTi\eias, 
 
 *i. 6 €V o> dy aWLao" €j oXtyov apTi...\v7r']6€VT€s e v TTOtKiXots n e i p atr- 
 p.olsiva TO SoKipiov vjiav rrjs n I. <t t e to s . . .evpeOrj els eiraivov, ver. 8, 9 
 dyaXXtare x^P^ dveKXaXrfTa, . .K0pi^6p,€V0i to t e\o s rrj s n l o'T e to s, (T(ot7]- 
 piav yp'VX^v, iv. 13 Kado KOiv&veXTe joXs tov 'K.pto'TOV Tradrjp.ao't \al p eTi^ LVa 
 Kol iv TJj diroKoKv^ei, ttjs Bo^rjs avTOv ^''P'j'''^ dyaWiaifievof. James i. 2 
 7rd(Tav \apav riyrjtra<T6e...6Tav tt e i.p a tr p. ol s TTepnreaTJTe iroiKiXois, 
 yivaxTKovTes on to hoKlp,iov vp&v Trjs TricrTftos Karepya^erai viropovriv, r) 
 he vTroixovrj epyov T e\e lov e)(eTa> 'Iva rJTe reXetot, V. 11 ro TeXosTOv Kvpiov 
 f iSere, i. 21 Se^aaSe TovXoyov tov dvvdp,evou a-Si o-ai Tas \jfvxas v pS>v. 
 
 *i. 12 els a iiriBvp.ovari.v 7rapaKv-\j/ai : James i. 25 6 irapaKv-^as els 
 V 6 p.ov. 
 
 i. 13 8 1 dva^aa-dpevoi Tas oa-cjjvas, see below ii. 1 : James i. 21 8 1 o dnode- 
 fievoL (both follow a reference to the preaching of the Gospel). 
 
 i. 17 Tov djT poa-aiiroXri piTTas Kptvovra: James ii. 1 /irj ev n p o tr a> n o- 
 Xr] p,\j/ iais e^eTe TrjV TricrTiu tov Kvpiov ripmv. 
 
 i. 19 Tip.la a'p-ari as dp,vov . . .d a- n IX o v. James i. 27 S.(r7TiXov iavTov 
 Tqpe'iv, V. 7 T ifi 10 V Kapirov. 
 
 9 2 
 
c THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 i. ^^TasyjrvxasriyviKoTesivTfj viroKofj Tfjs aX-q Betas els <f>iKa8e\(j)iav 
 dvvTTOKpiTov : James iv^ 8 dyvia-aTe KapStas, i. 18 X6y<f d\ri6e ias, 
 lli. 17 I) avadev <ro(j}ia.,.fi€OTfi iKe'ovs...dvv'ir6KpiTOS. 
 
 *i. 23dvay€y€vvr)ii€voi, ovk ck a-jropas (jidaprfj.! dW d<j)6dpTov 8ia 
 \6yov (mvTos Oeov Kal /ucj/oitos. Sion naara <rdp^ as xopror xai Trao-a 8o^a 
 avTrjs as a.v6os x°P'''o'"' i ^r/p dvBr) 6 xopTO s Kal to avBos i^eTTeaev, 
 TO Be pfjpa KvpLov fievei : James i. 18 (cf. above on ver. 3), i. 10 (o v'Kova-ws) a s 
 avdo s x°P'''°^ irapeXevo'eTai, dviTeiXev yap 6 ^Xios Kal e^rjpavev rov xopTOv 
 Ka\ TO av Bo s avTov e^eireo-eu. 
 
 *11. 1 an o6 e p^evo I ovv tt da- av KaK iav Ka\ irdvTa 86Xov KaX vtt 6 Kp ta-iv 
 Kal <^6 ovov s Koi irafTas KaT aXaXids cos dpTLyevvrjTa ^ p e^-q to Xoy i- 
 Kov.^.yaXa ew tiroBrj a- aT e Iva ev avTa av ^7] BrjTe els a- taTrj plav 
 (resumes i. 13), cf. iii. 21 a-apKos diroBeais pvirav : James i. 18 dTTcKvijaev fip,as, 
 21 8 lb diroB e pevoi irdarav pvrrapiav Kal Trepta'O'eiav KaKLas e v tt pavTrjT i 
 8 e ^aa- B e t 6 v e fitpvTov Xoyov t 6v 8vvd pevov a- a a ai Tas ^vxds^ 
 iii. 14. 17, iv. 11. 
 
 *ii. 11 wapaKaXS>...dmxe(TBai tS>v a-apKiKciv en iBv piS>v a'lTives cTpa- 
 T eiovTai KaTa ttjs ^XV^ '• James iv. 1 noBev Tr6XepoL;...o\)K ivTevBev eK tS>v 
 TjSovav ipStv tS)V a'TpaTevop.evav ev Tols peXea- iv vpSiv ; 
 
 *ii. 12 Tfivdvaa-Tpocjjriv vp.S>v exovres KaXfjV iva...eK twv koX&v epyav 
 enoTTTevovTes 8o^da'(oat tov Oeov, cf. iii. 2 Tr]V ev <^6^a> dyvrjv dva(rT po^rjVt 
 16 TTjV dyaBfjV iv Xpio-ra dv a<TT po<j>fiv : James iii. 13 Sft^aTo) eK ttjs KaXfj s 
 dv a<TT po^T)s TO. epya avTov ev npavTTjTi (ro(l)las. 
 
 ii. 15 a>s eXevBe poi...dXX' as ©eoC 8ovXoi: James i. 25, ii. 12 vopos 
 eXevBepias, i. 1 Be ov 8ovXos. 
 
 ii. 18 V n o T a a- (T 6 p, e V 1 Tots Sea-noTais, iii. 1 vnoTUo'a'o pevaiTols dvSpd- 
 cnv, see below v. 5 : James iv. 7 vttot dyrfTe t & Oea. 
 
 ii. 20, 21 6i dyaBonotovyres Kal irdrrxovres vir o peveiTe, tovto x^P^^ napa 0€w* 
 els TOVTO yap eKXrjBrjTej otl koi Xyato'ros enaBev vnep vpSiv, vpiv vnoXipirdvav 
 vnor/papp,6v : James v. 10, 11 vn68eiypaXd^eTe ttjs KajKoiraBias Koi ttjs paKpoBv- 
 pias Tovs ?rpo0ijTaf...iSou paxapi^opev roiis vnopeivavTas, cf. i. 12. 
 
 ii. 25 7rXai'iBj[iei'oi iwetn pa<^r]Te : James v. 19 edv ns ev vpXv nX avi) Bjj 
 ...Kal e TT ta-T pe yjrTj tis avTov. 
 
 iii. lb peTo. TT pavTrjTos, cS. ver. 4 : James i. 21 ev w pavTrjTi. 
 
 iv. ^ TT dvTtaV TO T eXos rjyy iKev o-atppovrjo-are ovv : James v. 8 o-Trjpi^aTe 
 Tas Kapdias, on rj n apov a la tov Kv p lov TJyyiKeVy ver. 3 ev e <t xaTais 
 rjpepats. 
 
 *iv. 8 n p6 TV dvTav ttjV els eavTovs dydwijv eKTevrj exovTes, on dydnri KaXvir- 
 T el nXrjB OS dpapTtav: James Y. l^TrpoTrdvT&vpr] opviiere, ver. 20 ytyo)- 
 (TKeTe OTL 6 eirtorpeyj/as dpapT<i>X6v...KaXvyl/'ei TrXriBos dpapTtatv. Cf. the 
 original Prov. x. 12 'love covereth all sins,' where the LXX. has navras tovs 
 prj <j)iXoveiKovvTas KoXvirTei. 
 
 iv. 14 7-0 TTJ s 8 6^rj s Kal to toC Qeov nvevpa : James ii. 1 ttjv nl(m.v 'Iijtrou 
 'K.pio-Tov TOV Kvplov r)pS)V, ttjs So^ijs. 
 
 iv. 12, 13 pfj ^evl^eirBe Tjj . . .nvpaa-ei jrpos ire tpaa- pov vplv yivopevij...d\Xd 
 XaipeTe Iva Kal ev Trj dnoKaXvyJAei ttjs 86^rjs avTou xetp'i'''e dyaXXiaipevoi : see 
 above on i. 6. 
 
 iv. 16 el as XpicTiavos (7ra(7;;^«)...8o|af eTo) tov Qeov ev t<3 ovopaTi 
 T ovT a : James ii. 7 to KaXov 8vo pa to e tt ikXtj B ev e (p' v pas. 
 
 *v. 4 KopielfrB e tov dpapdvTivov Trjs 86^s <TTe cjiavov, cf. i. 3: 
 James i. 12 Xrip-^erai Tbv a-TecjJavov Trj s f<a^j. 
 
 *v. 5, 6 veooTepoi vttot dyrjTe npea-^VTepoLs- TrdvTes 8e dXXrjXoi s t^v 
 TaiTeivo<ppo(rvvr]v eyKop^axracrBe, oti 6 Qehs vne prj(j)dvois avTiTda-a-erai 
 Tairetvols 8e BlSaa- IV xdpi-v. Tan eivaBrjT e oSv utto Trjv KpaTaidv 
 y elpa TOV Be ov iva vpds v'^ao'ii ev Kaip<§, ver. 8 yprjyoprjo'aTe- 6 dvrlSiKos 
 
EELATION TO OTHER BOOKS OF THE N.T. ci 
 
 ifiav S(a/3o\os.. .TrepwrareZ fijraw Karamciv <^ avTiaTriTe (rrepeoi iv rfj ttiV- 
 r«i : James iv. 6, 7 Sio Xeyfi 'O Seos i7rep7}<^di/otr avT itckt <reTai,TaTrei- 
 vois 8e SidaiTiv x^P''"' iirordyriTe oSp t<S Sew, avTioTJjTe 8f tcS 
 oia^oXiff, ver. lOraireivaBriTe fvaiTriovKvpiov Ka\ v^ixre i v fias, 
 V. 16 e^o/ioXoyelo-fle oSk aXXi^Xots ras dfiapnas Ka\ evxecrde virep d\\r)\av, after 
 bidding the sick to send for the elders to pray over them in ver. 14. I cannot 
 but think that there is remarkable similarity in the extension of the injunction, 
 that the elders should pray for the people and hear their confession (as is 
 implied in ver. 14), to the mutual prayer and confession of ver. 16, and the 
 extension in St. Peter from submission of the younger to the elder to mutual 
 submission. 
 
 V. 10 6 &e6s...6\iyov iraO ovTas avT6s...<TTr) pt^ei: James v. 9 /i a k p o- 
 dv fir] (Tare Kal vfieis, (ttt) pi^arc rds KopSiay. 
 
 2 Feier— 
 
 I. 1 mtrriv iu 8iKaio<rvvrj tov &eov fjpav : James i. 20 SiKaioa-vvriv 
 Seov. 
 
 i. Hka-Tr)piyfievovs Iv tjj Trapovcrrj aKrjQeia : James v. 10. 
 i. 16 Trapouo-iav, cf. iii 4, 12 : James v. 8. 
 i. 17 UTTo T^y /le-yaXoTrpfiroCr So^ijs : James ii. 1. 
 
 II. 2 St' ovs Tj obos Trjs dXr/de ias ^\aiT<prip,r]6rj(TCTai, ver. 15 KaTaXciVoiTes 
 cvBelav oSbv eTrkavrjdrjo-av : James v. 19, 20. 
 
 ii. 7 vTToSe tyfia lifWovrav : James v. 10. 
 
 *11. 13, 14 ffbovqv fiyovfUvoi ttiv iv fi/iepa t pv(j)r)V, ciriXot Kal liajML ivT pv- 
 <j)S>vTcs ep Tots d7rdTais...o05aX/ioiis e)^ovTfs fi eorois iJi,oix'iXiBos...8e\ed- 
 ^ovTcs i/fu;(ar darjjp'iKTOvs : James v. 5, i. 14. 27, iv. 4, iii. 17. 
 
 III. 3 €7r e (T xdrwu rav r) p. e pat v.. .Kara rds idlas eir i9v p.ias avTmv 
 7ropev6p,€voi : James v. 3, i. 14. 
 
 iii. 14 cnrovSdiraTe d(Tiri\oi...evpc6rjvai iv eip-qvy: James i. 27, iii. 18, 
 
 Judc — 
 
 1 'Ii/crou XptcTT-oO SouXos: James i. 1. 
 9 biaKpivofievos, oi. ver. 22 : James i. 6. 
 19 \lfvxtKoi: James iii. 15. 
 
 (6) Epistle to the Hebrews — 
 
 I have givea reasons above (4) for supposing that the eleventh 
 chapter of this Epistle was written with a knowledge of St. James' 
 argument on Faith. If I am not mistaken there is a further 
 allusion to St. James in ch. xii. 11, where (as in 1 Pet. i. 6) there 
 seems to be a kind of concession to those who felt themselves 
 unequal to the high-strained appeal iracrav %a/3^i' ■fj'^ria-aa-de. 
 ' Chastisement/ the writer allows, ' does not seem for the moment 
 to be a ground for rejoicing but for grief, nevertheless afterwards ' 
 — it has the effect St. James ascribes to it — ' it produces the peace- 
 able fruit of righteousness.' It may be added that the evils of 
 the Jewish Church are more developed, and the threatened judg- 
 ments more imminent, in this Epistle than in St. James ; that 
 persecutions are referred to as matters of the past Cx. 32-34\ and 
 
cii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 that in xiii. 7 many have seen an allusion to the martyrdom of 
 St. James himself. 
 
 i. 3 i>v dwavya(Tiia Trj s Sd^ijs: James ii. 1. 
 
 ii. 4 Kara rrjv avTov deXrjmv, X. 10 ep a QeKrjiiaTi fjyiaiTjihoi eV/xev : James i. 18 
 ^ov\rjdels dir€Kvr)<Tiv rjfxas. 
 
 ii. 10 8ia TTadrifiaTcav TeKtma-ai, cf. v. 8, 13, 14, vi. 1: James i. 4 ^ 8e imojj,ovii 
 fpyov reXeiov i-j^irw 'Iva rjTt reXeiot. 
 
 iii. 6 eav rb (cau'p^rj/xa ri]! eXn ISos Karaa-Xff'^v : James i. 9 KavxairO a 
 Be 6 dde'K<l)6s — € V t a vyjrei avTov. 
 
 iv. 1 1 ev ra aira UTroSeiy/iOTi Trjs aTTeidflas, viii. 5 v 17 68 e ty fia T&v 
 €irovpavl<ov : James v. 10 vn 68e ly jxa KaKOiraBlas. 
 
 V. 7 Tov bvvdjiev ov crm^fiv avTov i K 6 avaroV. James iv. 12 6 8vva- 
 fievos a-axraL koI diroXeo-aL. 
 
 vi. 1 dejicAiov Kara^aWofifvoi fieravoias ano veKpav epywv (cat irlcrTeas eVi 
 QeoV, of. ix. 14 Ka6 apiei TTjV <TVveiSrj(nv ipau diro vexpav Mpyasv els to 
 Xar peveiv Qea fSvTt : James ii. 26 rj irurris x'^P'^^ epyav veKpd e<rnv, 
 i. 26; 27. 
 
 vii. 19 ov8ev er eXe iaxT e u 6 v6p,0Sj e7rei(rayayyrj 8e KpelrTOvos eKiribos 8t r^s 
 eyy i^op,ev Ta Bea, vii. 16, ix. 11, x. 1 (TKiav e\<ov 6 vopos tS>v peXhovrav 
 dyada}v...ov 8 eir OT e 8vv ar ai roiis ivpou'epxopivovs t e\e l5> a" aL'. James i. 4, 
 25, ii. 12, iv. 8. 
 
 x. 24 Koravoap^ev dKKrjKovs els irapo^vtrpov . . . k a\ a v epycov^'pr] eyKaroKeiTrovres 
 Ti]v en KTVvaytoyriv eavrmv, cf. Tit. iii. 8: James iii. 13. 
 
 *x. 36 V IT o povrj s e^er e XP e lav iva to Se\rjp,a rov Qeov TTOirja-avTes ko p. t~ 
 a-rj a-6e ttjv eTTayyeXiav'. James i. 4, ] 2. 
 
 xi. while James uses the word nta-ns loosely and inconsistently, in Heb. we 
 have a definition of faith followed by a host of examples which exhibit it as 
 the root of action. In all probability it was written after the Romans and 
 James ; compare ver. 8 — 10, 17 — 19, on Abraham, ver. 31 on Eahab : James 
 ii. 21 — 23, 25 : see remavks under section (4) above. 
 
 xii. 1 diT q6 e pev Oi ttjv evirepio'Tarov apapriav 8i vtt o povrj s rpexcapev tov 
 TtpoKeipevov dyava, ver. 7 els JimBeiav VTropevere: James i. 21, ver. 4. 
 
 *xii. 11 Traaa pev Traideta Trpbs pev to Trapov ov boKel xo p as elvai dWa XvirrjSj 
 vtrTepov 8e Kapn b V elprjvtKbv t ol s 8 l avTrj s yeyvpvao-pevois a7ro8i- 
 8(ao-LV 8 1 Katotrv vrj s^ ver. 14, 15 elpTjvriv 8taiKeTe...e'ino'K07rovvT€s prj tis pl^a 
 TTiKp ias evox^^ : seems to explain James i. 2 — 4 irdcr av xo-pbv ijyijo-ao-fle 
 ...tva ^T6 TeXet o t, 111. 18 KapTrbs 8e 8 iK aio o'v v rj s iv elprjvrj a-ireipe- 
 T ai Tois IT oiovcriv e Iprjvrjv. 
 
 xiii. 4 T I pi OS 6 ydpos Koi rj koItti dpiavTos, cf . vii. 26 : James v. 7, i. 27. 
 xiii. 18 Ka\S>s dvaa-Tpe^ea-dai: James iii. 13 Bei^arw ex TrjS 
 KaXrjS dv aa-T p otprj s t a epya avTov. 
 
 (7) Apocalypse — 
 
 i. 3 paKap los 6 dvayivao'Kav Ka\ oi dKovovre s tovs Xoy ovs ttjs 
 17 potj)riTe ias Kal ttj povvres to ivaxiTfjyeypappeva-oyapKaipbs 
 eyy is, cf. xxii. 10 : James i. 25, v. 8. 
 
 i. 9eV Tfi ^aa- iX e L a Kal vnopovfj 'Irftrov XpiOTOv, cf. ii. 2, 3, 19, iii. 10 
 errj prfcras T bv \6y6v ttjs vi70 povrj s /lou xaym ae Tr)prj<rto (k Trjs &pas 
 rov i7fipaa-pov, xiii. 10, xiv. 12 ; James i. 2—4, 12, ii. 5, 10. 
 
 *ii. 9ot8ci (TOV Tr)v dXiyjnv Kal rr/v nraxe lav, dWa i7\ov crios el'. 
 J ames ii. 5. 
 
 *ii. 10 'Iva 17 e I paadrJTe.-.ylvov 17 ktt bs axpt davdrov, Kal 8 a a- a <ro4 
 T bv (TTe (jiavov T^r ^arj s : James i. 12. 
 
RELATION TO OTHER BOOKS OF THE N.T. eiii 
 
 *iii. 1 oiSd trov TCI €pya, on ovo/ia e^ets on f 5 f, Kal v expos el: 
 James ii. 17, 26, i. 26. 
 
 *iii. 17 \4yeis oTi UXovcrios flfii...Ka\ oi< olSas on a-u el ... 6 
 TVTaxos, cf. above ii. 9 : James i. 10, ii. 6, 7, v. 1 — 5. 
 
 *iii. 20 iSoii eo-Tij/ca enl ttjv dv pav nai Kpova : James v. 9. 
 
 xi. 6 ovTOi ey(ov(riv rr/v e^oviriav K\el(fai tov ovpavov 'Lva jj,ri veros 
 ^ pe)(^7i (jirjvas T e a <r apaKovT a Ka\ bio) : James v. 17. 
 
 xiv. 1 e)(ovtrat to ov o p.a aVT ov y ey p ap. p,ev ov e ni rwi/ peT can (ov 
 avTav, cf. iii. 12 : James ii. 7. 
 
 xiv. 4 ovroi r]yopaiTdr)(rav anb tS>v dvdpmmav an apx^ t a Oe a : James i. 18, 
 
 xiv. 12 code rj vTT o povrj t av ayiav io'TLVj ol t r) p ovvt e s tcls e jjt o\d s 
 TOV eeoC Kai Trjv n i(TT tv 'irj cr ov (combining faitli and ■works) : cf. 
 above i. 9 : James ii. 1, 10. 
 
CHAPTER V 
 
 The Contents or the Epistle 
 
 The design of the Epistle is on the one hand to encourage those 
 to whom it is addressed to bear their trials patiently, and on the 
 other hand to warn them against certain errors of doctrine and 
 practice. 
 
 I. Of Trial— \. 1-18. 
 
 (1) Trial is sent in order to perfect the Christian character. 
 That it may have this effect wisdom is needed ; and this wisdom is 
 given in answer to believing prayer. — i. 2-6. 
 
 A warning against double-mindedness. The believer should 
 recognize the greatness of his calling, and not allow 
 himself to be either elated or depressed by outward 
 circumstances. — i. 7-11. 
 
 (2) Patient endurance of trial leads to the crown of life 
 
 promised to all that love God. — i. 12. 
 
 (3) Though outward trial is appointed by God for our good, we 
 must not imagine that the inner weakness which shows itself under 
 trial is from God. God is perfect goodness, and only sends what is 
 good. The disposition to misuse God's appointments comes from 
 man's own lusts, which, if yielded to, lead to death as their natural 
 consequence. — i. 13-15. 
 
 (4) So far from God's tempting man to evil, it is only by His 
 will, through the regenerating power of His word, that we have 
 been raised to that new and higher life which shall eventually 
 penetrate and renew the whole creation. — i. 16-18. 
 
 II, How we should receive the Word. — i. 19-27. 
 
 (1) As humble listeners, not as excited speakers. — i. 19-21. 
 
 (2) Nor is it enough to listen to the word ; we must carry it out 
 in action. — i. 22-24. 
 
THE CONTENTS OF THE EPISTLE cv 
 
 (a) Blessing comes to him alone who patiently studies the 
 
 word, and frames his life in accordance with the law of 
 liberty embodied therein. — i. 25. 
 
 (b) Ritual observance is of no avail unless it helps us to rule 
 
 the tongue, and practise brotherly kindness and 
 unworldliness. — i. 26, 27. 
 
 III. Warning against respect of persons. — ii. 1-13. 
 
 (1) Courtesy to the rich, if combined with discourtesy to the 
 poor, is a sign of weakness of faith, and proves that we are not 
 whole-hearted in the service of Him who is the only glory of 
 believers. — ii. 1-4. 
 
 (2) The poor have more title to our respect than the rich, since 
 they are often rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom ; while it is 
 the rich who maltreat the brethren and blaspheme the name of 
 Christ. — ii. 5-7. 
 
 (3) If it is from obedience to the royal law of love that we show 
 courtesy to the rich, it is well : but if we do this only from respect 
 of persons, it is a breach of the law and a defiance of the lawgiver, 
 no less than murder or adultery. — ii. 8-11. 
 
 (4) Remember that we shall all be tried by the law of liberty, 
 which looks to the heart, and not to the outward action only. It 
 is the merciful who obtain mercy. — ii. 12, 13. 
 
 IV. Belief and Practice. — ii. 14-26. 
 
 (1) A mere profession of faith without corresponding action is of 
 no avail. — ii. 14. 
 
 (a) As may be seen in the parallel case of benevolence when 
 it does not go beyond words. — ii. 15-17. 
 
 (h) Without action we have no evidence of the existence of 
 faith.— ii. 18. 
 
 (c) The orthodox belief of the Jew is shared by the demons, 
 
 and only serves to increase their misery. — ii. 19. 
 
 (2) True faith, such as that of Abraham and Rahab, necessarily 
 embodies itself in action. — ii. 20-26. 
 
 V. Warnings with regard to the use of the tongue. — iii. 1-12. 
 
 (1) Great responsibility of the office of teacher. — iii. 1. 
 
 (2) Difficulty and importance of controlling the tongue. — iii. 2-8. 
 
cvi THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 (a) la our human microcosm the tongue plays the part of the 
 world, and it is used by the powers of evil for our 
 ruin. — iii. 6. 
 (6) Its malign and devastating influence. — iii. 5-8. 
 (c) It is like the rudder of a ship : he who can rule it rules 
 the whole life and activity. — iii. 2-4. 
 (3) Inconsistency of supposing that we can ofifer acceptable praise 
 to God as long as we speak evil of man who is made in the -image 
 of God.— iii. 9-12. 
 
 VI. True and false Wisdom. — iii. 13 18. 
 
 (1) The wisdom which comes from God is simple and straight- 
 forward, full of kindness and all good fruits. — iii. 13, 17, 18. 
 
 (2) If there is a wisdom which does not conduce to peace, but 
 is accompanied by bitterness and jealousy, it is not from above, but 
 is earthly, carnal, devilish. — iii. 14-16. 
 
 VII. Warning against quarrelsomeness and worldliness. — iv. 1-17. 
 
 (1) The cause of quarrelling is that each man seeks to gratify 
 his own selfish impulses, and to snatch his neighbour's portion 
 of worldly good. — iv. 1, 2. 
 
 (2) No satisfaction can be thus obtained. Even our prayers can 
 give us no satisfaction if they are infected with this worldly spirit. 
 — iv. 3. 
 
 (3) God demands the service of the whole heart, and will reveal 
 Himself to none but those who yield up their wills to His. — iv. 4-6. 
 
 (4) Therefore resist the devil, who is the prince of this world, 
 and turn to God in humble repentance. — iv. 7-10. 
 
 (5) Cease to find fault with others. Those who condemn their 
 neighbours condemn the law itself, and usurp the office of Him, the 
 Lord of life and death, who • alone has the power and right to 
 judge. — iv. 11, 12. 
 
 (6) Worldliness is also shown in the confident laying-out of plans 
 of life without reference to God. — iv. 13-17. 
 
 VIII. Denunciations and JEncouragements. — v. 1-11. 
 
 (1) Woe to those who have been heaping up money and living 
 in luxury on the very eve of judgment. Woe especially to those 
 who have ground down the poor and murdered the innocent. — v. 1-6. 
 
THE CONTENTS OF THE EPISTLE cvii 
 
 (2) Let the brethren bear their sufferings patiently, knowing 
 that the Lord is at hand, and that He will make all things turn 
 out for their good. Let them imitate Job and the prophets, and so 
 inherit the blessings pronounced on those that endure. — v. 6-11. 
 
 IX. Miscellaneous precepts. — v. 12-20. 
 
 (1) Swear not. — v. 12. 
 
 (2) Let all your feelings of joy and sorrow be sanctified and 
 controlled by religion. — v. 13. 
 
 (3) In sickness let the elders be called in to pray and anoint the 
 sick with a view to his recovery. — v. 14, 15. 
 
 (4) Confess your faults to one another, and pray for one another 
 with all earnestness. — v. 16-18. 
 
 (5) The blessing on one who wins back a sinner from the error 
 of his ways. — v. 19, 20. 
 
 Though the letter flows on from point to point without pretending 
 to strict logical sequence, yet it is easy to distinguish certain 
 leading principles on which the whole depends. Thus, in regard to 
 practice, the leading principle is the necessity of whole-heartedness 
 in religion. A man may think to serve God and Mammon at once 
 {hi'^v)(^ba, i. 8, iv. 8), but God insists on the surrender of the whole 
 heart to Him : the love of the world is incompatible with the love 
 of God (iv. 4-7). Most men seek to compromise matters, and their 
 religion thus becomes a vTr6Kptai<;. They flatter themselves that 
 they are religious, because they are fluent in speaking on religious 
 subjects (i. 19, iii. 1) ; or because they find ' the words of the 
 preacher as a lovely song of one that has a pleasant voice' (i. 19, 
 22-25) ; or because they are conscious of genuine indignation at 
 the sight of error in others (i. 19, 20, iii. 14, iv. 11, 12) ; or 
 because of their punctuality in religious observances (i. 26, 27) ; or 
 because of a partial obedience to this or that law (ii. 10-12) ; 
 or because of their orthodoxy of belief (ii. 14-26) ; but all this is 
 mere self-deception (i. 22, 26, ii. 14, 17, 19, 26, iii. 1 5). Know- 
 ledge not used only entails a heavier punishment (iii. 1, iv. 17). 
 The only religion which is of value in the sight of God is that 
 which influences the whole life and activity (i. 27, 4, 22-25, 
 ii. 12-26, iii. 13, 17, iv. 11, 17). Faith, love, wisdom, religion — all 
 alike are spurious if they fail to produce the fruit of good works. 
 
cviii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 We will next consider the doctrinal basis of St. James' practical 
 teaching. Man was created in the image of God (iii. 9), the All- 
 Good (i. 13, 17) ; but he has fallen into sin by yielding to his lower 
 impulses against his sense of right (i. 14, 15, iv. 1-3, 17) ; and the 
 natural consequence of sin is death, bodily and spiritual (i. 15, v. 3, 5). 
 Not only is man liable to sin ; but as a matter of fact we all sin, and 
 that frequently (iii. 2). God of His free bounty has provided a 
 means by which we might conquer sin and rise to a new life, in 
 His word sown in our hearts (i. 18 ^ovKrj9e\<s aireKxirjaev r]iJ.a<; 
 A,07« akr)9eia<;, i. 21 Si^aaOe rov efKpvrov Xoyov top Swdfievov 
 trwa-ai to? ■y^vxa.'^ vfimv). Our salvation depends on the way in 
 which we receive the word (i. 21). If we have a stedfast faith in 
 God's goodness as revealed to us through our Lord Jesus Christ 
 (i. 13, ii. 1, i. 5-7) ; if we read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest 
 the word, so as to make it the guiding principle of our life, the 
 law of liberty by which all our words and actions are regulated 
 (i. 25, ii. 12), then our souls are saved from death, we are made 
 inheritors of the kingdom promised to those that love God (i. 12, 
 25, ii. 5). 
 
 But the training by which we are prepared for this crown of life 
 is not pleasant to the natural man. It involves trial and endurance 
 (i. 2-4, 12) : it involves constant watchfulness and self-control, and 
 prayer for heavenly wisdom, in order that we may resist the 
 temptations of the world, the flesh and the devil (i. 26, iii. 2-8, 15, 
 iv. 1, iv. 5). Thus faith is exercised ; we are enabled to see things 
 as God sees them (ii. 1, 5) ; to rise above the temporal to the 
 eternal [\. 9-11) ; to be not simply patient, but to rejoice in afflic- 
 tion (i. 2, V. 7, 8, 10, 11), and exult in the hope set before us 
 (i. 9-12) ; until at last we grow up to the full stature of a Christian 
 (i. 4, iii. 2), wise with that wisdom which comes from above, the 
 wisdom which is stedfast, unpretending, gentle, considerate, affec- 
 tionate, full of mercy and good fruits, the parent of righteousness 
 and peace (iii. 17, 18). 
 
 But there are many who choose the friendship of the world 
 instead of the friendship of God, so vexing His Holy Spirit, and 
 yielding themselves to the power of the devil ; yet even then He 
 does not leave them to themselves, but gives more grace. He 
 hedges in their way in the present, and warns them of further 
 judgment to come (iv. 4-6, v. 1-8). If they humble themselves 
 
THE CONTENTS OF THE EPISTLE cix 
 
 under His hand and repent truly of their sins, He will lift them 
 up ; if they draw nigh to Him, He will draw nigh to them (iv. 7-10). 
 Here, too, we may be helpful to one another by mutual confession, 
 and by prayer for one another. Great is the power of prayer 
 prompted by the Spirit of God (v. 15-20). 
 
 It is characteristic of the austere tone of the Epistle that it, 
 alone of the Epistles of the New Testament, contains no attempt 
 to conciliate the favour of the readers by direct words of praise. 
 In it we hear the bracing call of duty uttered by one who speaks 
 with earnest sympathy indeed and without a particle of Pharisaic 
 assumption, but who feels that he has the right to speak and 
 expects to be obeyed. 
 
CHAPTER VI 
 
 Persons to whom the Epistle is Addressed, and Place 
 from which it is written 
 
 St. James addresses the Twelve Tribes in the Dispersion. For 
 the meaning of this phrase see the note on i. 1. I propose here 
 to sum up briefly the historical facts which it represents. 
 
 If we view the history of Israel from the outside, one of its 
 most remarkable characteristics is the long series of compulsory 
 transplantations undergone by this people from the time of Tiglath- 
 Pileser up to the present day. The Assyrian transplantation took 
 place in the latter half of the eighth century B.C. In it, we are told 
 that the tribes of Reuben and Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh, 
 together with the bulk of the Samaritans and some of the tribe of 
 Judah, were removed to upper Mesopotamia (1 Chron. v. 26, 2 Kings 
 xvii. 4 — 6, and xviii. 13). In the second transplantation the tribes of 
 Judah and Benjamin were removed to Babylon about the year 600 
 B.C. (Dan. i. 1, 2, 2 Kings xxiv. 14 — 16, xxv., Jer. lii.). The extent 
 and importance of the Eastern Dispersion is shown in the Books of 
 Esther and Tobit : Philo, writing shortly after the Christian era, 
 says that Babylonia and the most fertile satrapies beyond the 
 Euphrates were inhabited by Jews {ad Gaium M. 2, p. 587) ; and 
 we learn from Josephus that early in the first century after Christ, 
 Mesopotamia was for some fifteen years under the rule of the 
 Jewish leaders Asidaeus and Anilaeus,''^ and that, after the death 
 of the latter, more than 50,000 Jews were massacred in the city 
 of Seleucia [Ant. xviii. 9. 4 — 9). A third transplantation was 
 that to Egypt, which commenced as a voluntary emigration in the 
 time of Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings xxv. 26), but received a great 
 development in the foundation of Alexandria under Alexander and 
 
 ' Lewin, Fasti Sacri, gives a.d. 18 to 33 as the period of their rule. 
 
TO WHOM THE EPISTLE IS ADDRESSED cxi 
 
 Ptolemy I. (Jos. B. J. ii. 18. 7, Ant. xii. 1). Ptolemy also planted 
 colonies of Jews in Gyrene and the neighbourhood (Jos. c. Ap. ii. 
 4, Ant. xiv. 7. 2). In the reign of Ptolemy Philometor (B.C. 180 — 
 145) a temple modelled after that at Jerusalem was built at Leon- 
 topolis for the Egyptian Jews, whose number is estimated at not 
 less than one million by Philo {in Flacc. M. 2 p. 523). The same 
 reasons which led to the Jews being established by their Mace- 
 donian conquerors in Egypt, led to their being established also in 
 the Greek towns founded in the East by the Seleucid dynasty. 
 ' The Jews,' says Mommsen, ' had a conspicuous share in the 
 Hellenizing of the East ' : they were chosen for this purpose 'from 
 their pliancy and serviceableness on the one hand and from their 
 unyielding tenacity on the other.' ' The Jews of the Greek towns 
 became Greek-speaking Orientals,' ' the use of the Greek language 
 was compulsory,' but, to compensate for this, ' they were allowed 
 up to a certain degree to govern themselves.' ' Mesopotamia was 
 covered with Greek commonwealths,' ' the inhabitants of Palestine 
 were only a portion, and not the most important portion, of the 
 Jews : the Jewish communities of Babylonia, Syria, Asia Minor, 
 and Egypt were far superior to those of Palestine.' {The Provinces, 
 vol. ii. pp. 8, 162 — 167 Eng. tr.) The most important of the 
 Seleucid cities were the Babylonian Seleucia and the Syrian 
 Antioch, in the latter of which special privileges were granted to 
 the Jews by its founder Seleucus Nicator (Jos. Ant. xii. 3. 1). At 
 a later period Antiochus the Great transported 2,000 Jewish 
 families from Babylonia to Phrygia and Lydia (Jos. Ant. xii. 3. 4). 
 The capture of Jerusalem by Pompeius in B.C. 63 led to the 
 transplantation of Jews to Rome, where they were settled in the 
 Trans-Tiberine quarter. As early as B.C. 59 Cicero defending 
 L. Flaccus (§ 66) speaks of their numbers and audacity in en- 
 deavouring to influence the judges : scis quanta sit manus, quanta 
 Concordia, quantum valeat ih contionibus?- In the same passage he 
 commends Flaccus for having stopped the exportation of the 
 sacred tribute from the Jews in Asia to Jerusalem. Beside these 
 more or less compulsory transplantations, the pursuit of commerce 
 led many Jews to find a home in foreign lands. There is scarcely 
 a place mentioned in the Acts which is without its synagogue or 
 
 1 See Haiisrath Neut. Zeitg. Part ii. c. 2 and referencea in Mayor's Juvenal, xiv. 96. 
 Above all Schiii'er, Hist, of the Jewish People, Eng. tr. vol. iv. 232 foil. 
 
cxii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 proseucha ; and Strabo (ap. Jos. Ant. xiv. 7. 2) says that ' it is hard 
 to find a spot in the whole world which is not occupied and do- 
 minated by Jews,' the privileges they had enjoyed under their 
 Greek rulers being confirmed and extended by the Roman 
 emperors from the same motives of policy. So Josephus says 
 (c. Ap. ii. 39) ' there is no city, no tribe, whether Greek or bar- 
 barian, in which Jewish law and Jewish custom have not taken 
 root.' 
 
 It was expected of the members of the Diaspora that they 
 should not only send to the temple their yearly didrachmon, but 
 that they should at least once in their life go up to offer their 
 sacrifice there in person. Among those who listened to Peter's 
 address on the day of Pentecost there were inhabitants of Parthia, 
 Media, Elam, Mesopotomia, Cappadocia, Pontus, Asia, Phrygia, 
 Pamphylia, Egypt, the parts of Libya about Gyrene, Rome, Crete, 
 Arabia. Those who disputed with Stephen are said to have 
 belonged to the synagogue of the freedmen of Rome, of Gyrene and 
 Alexandria, and of Cilicia and Asia (Acts vi. 9). Philo enumerates 
 the following provinces as inhabited by Jews: Egypt, Phoenicia, 
 Syria, Pamphylia, Cilicia, the greater part of Asia as far as Bithy- 
 nia and Pontus, Thessalia, Boeotia, Macedonia, Aetolia, Attica, 
 Argos, Corinth, the fairest districts of the Peloponnese, Euboea, 
 Gyprus, Crete, not to mention the settlements beyond the 
 Euphrates {Leg. ad Caium M. 2 p. 587). The proselytes who at- 
 tached themselves to the worship of the synagogues, the eva-e^ei<i 
 and tre^ofievot of the Acts, as they shared in the persecutions of 
 the Jews (Tac. Ann. ii. 85, Suet. Dom. 12), would doubtless be 
 generally reckoned as belonging to the Diaspora. It was as 
 •occasional visitors to Jerusalem that the Jews and Proselytes of 
 the Dispersion would come under the cognizance of the President 
 •of the Christian community at Jerusalem. The instructions and 
 warnings contained in his Epistle would naturally be founded on 
 Lis observation of their special needs and dangers, as well as on 
 Ms intimate acquaintance with the national character and the 
 general conditions of the time. On this something will be said 
 presently. 
 
 It may be asked however whether we are to understand St. 
 James as using the word Diaspora here in its widest sense, or 
 -whether he had any special portion of the Diaspora in his eye 
 
TO WHOM THE EPISTLE IS ADDRESSED cxiii 
 
 when he wrote. St. Peter (i. 1) confines himself to the Diaspora 
 of Asia Minor. His Epistle, as we have seen, was drawn up with 
 a distinct reference to that of St. James, which in some respects 
 served as a model for his own. It seems natural therefore to 
 suppose that one reason why it was addressed to these particular 
 provinces of the Diaspora was that they were less likely to he ac- 
 quainted with the Epistle of St. James than the provinces omitted. 
 It is also probable that the name Diaspora would be understood to 
 refer, in the first instance, to the original Eastern Diaspora, settled 
 in Babylon and Mesopotamia, and extending as far as the eastern 
 and northern borders of Palestine. Josephus tells us that his 
 History of the Jewish War was first written in Aramaic and 
 addressed rot? avco ^ap^dpoK, whom he afterwards explains to 
 be the dwellers in Parthia, Babylonia, Arabia, Adiabene, and the 
 countries on the other side of the Euphrates (£. J. Prooem. i. 2), 
 but that subsequently he translated it into Greek for the benefit 
 of the Romans {Ap. i. 9). It is also noticeable that these eastern 
 provinces are the ones first named in the list given of the foreign 
 Jews who were present at the feast of Pentecost (Acts ii. 9 — 11). 
 We know that there were Christians in Damascus and Antioch 
 at a very early period (Acts ix. 2, 10, 14, 19, 25, xi. 19 — 21), as 
 well as in Cyprus and Phoenicia (Acts iv. 36, xi. 19, 20). St. 
 Peter writes from Babylon (v. 13), which is probably to be under- 
 stood literally of the city on the Euphrates and the surrounding 
 district. An early legend represents a King of Edessa corre- 
 sponding with our Lord and welcoming the mission of the apostle 
 Thaddaeus (Euseb. H. E. i. 13). 
 
 We will now see what more is to be learnt in regard to the 
 readers of the Epistle from the Epistle itself. James writes to them 
 as being himself a servant of Jesus Christ (i. 1), and he assumes 
 that they hold the faith of Christ (ii. 1), and recognize that they 
 are no longer under a yoke of bondage but under the perfect law of 
 liberty (i. 25, ii. 12). They are mixed up however with men who 
 are not only unbelievers but who blaspheme the name of Christ 
 and persecute the believers (ii. 6, 7). The believers themselves 
 are mostly poor (ii. 5) ; the few rich belonging to their body (i. 10) 
 are in danger of falling away through covetousness, worldliness 
 and pride (iv. 3—6, 13—16). The rich generally appear as perse- 
 cutors and oppressors, keeping back the hire of their labourers, 
 
 h 
 
cxiv THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 killing innocent men, themselves the slaves of lust and luxury, 
 fattening themselves in the day of slaughter (ii. 6, 7, v. 3 — 6). 
 The Church is under the superintendence of Elders, who, or some 
 of whom, are possessed of miraculous gifts of healing ; St. James 
 gives instructions as to the use of this gift (v. 14, 15). Their 
 place of meeting is the synagogue, to which strangers are admitted 
 (ii. 2 — 4). They are exposed to trials of many kinds, especially 
 from their rich oppressors, and it is one main object of the Epistle 
 to encourage them to patient endurance (i. 2, 12, ii. 6, v. 7, 8, 10, 
 1 1 ). There is much however to blame in themselves : their faith 
 is very weak; they are inclined to murmur and complain both 
 against God and against man (i. 6 — 8, 13, iv. 11, v. 9); their re- 
 ligion and their philanthropy alike are a matter of words and 
 forms, without corresponding feelings and actions (i. 22, 25 — 27, ii. 
 14 — 26) ; they are deficient in genuine love of man as man ; 
 they are haughty to the poor, obsequious to the rich (ii. 1 — 9, 
 16, 16). They are censorious, quarrelsome, given to oaths, am- 
 bitious, self-confident, eager to set themselves up' as teachers, 
 greedy of pleasure, forgetful of God (iii. 1, 6, 9, 14, iv. 1 — 8, 13, 
 16, V. ]2). 
 
 How far do these characteristics agree with what we read else- 
 where ? First, as to the rich oppressors : I have pointed out, in 
 my note on ii. 6, that these were in all probability Jews. The 
 Gentiles for a long time took no interest in the internal disputes 
 of Jewish sects : they might punish the Christian missionaries 
 as disturbers of the public peace, but they were very un- 
 likely ' to blaspheme Christ ' themselves (James ii. 7). Again, if 
 they were Gentiles, why should the rich, rather than the poor, 
 ■ take the trouble to persecute such au insignificant body ? In 
 Ephesus and Philippi, it is the rabble who make the loudest out- 
 cry against the Christians. On the other hand, if we turn to the 
 Jews, we find that the rich were as a fact the leaders in the 
 persecutions. It was the party of the high priest, the wealthy 
 Sadducees (Jos. Ant. xviii. 1. 4), who laid hold of the Apostles, as 
 recorded in Acts iv. 1 — 3 ; it was with their sanction and that of 
 the Sanhedrin in general, including the Pharisaic section (Acts xxii. 
 5, xxvi. 10, 12), both being combined against the disciples, as they 
 had been against their Master (Joh. xi. 47, 57, xviii. 3, Matt. xxvi. 
 3), that Saul, the Pharisee, took the lead in the stoning of Stephen 
 
TO WHOM THE EPISTLE IS ADDRESSED cxv 
 
 and the ensuing raid on the Church (Acts viii. 1, ix. 1, 2, 21) ; ^ at 
 Antioch in Pisidia it was the higher class of proselytes who were 
 stiired up by the Jews to expel Paul out of their coasts (Acts 
 xiii. 50). 
 
 It is easy to understand this hostility of the richer and more 
 powerful Jews to the Christians. The prosperous and well-to-do 
 are naturally suspicious of reformers : and Christ and His disciples 
 were reformers of a very thorough-going kind. They preached 
 that the kingdom of heaven was for the poor, that it was easier for 
 a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to 
 enter the kingdom of heaven. The rich man who would enter 
 therein must no longer count his riches his own ; he must sell all 
 that he had and give to the poor ; he must glory no longer in 
 wealth and station, but in having learnt that his superiority only 
 marked him out as intended by God to be the minister and servant 
 of all (James i. 10, Mark x. 43, 44). But there were other and 
 more special grounds for the hatred entertained by the chief priests 
 and Pharisees for the name of Christ. On two separate occasions 
 Christ had openly denounced the buying and selling which was 
 carried on in the Temple under the sanction and for the profit of 
 the worldly-minded and avaricious priests and their partisans : in 
 his parable of the Vineyard and the Husbandmen he had prophe- 
 sied their speedy overthrow ; and St. Luke concludes his narratives 
 of the two incidents in much the same words, ' The chief priests 
 and the scribes and the chief of the people sought to destroy him ' 
 (Luke xix. 47, xx. 19, 20). Even more scathing was his de- 
 nunciation of the intellectual aristocracy, ' Woe unto you, scribes 
 and Pharisees, hypocrites.' As he had weighed humble poverty in 
 the balance against self-satisfied wealth, so he weighed modest 
 ignorance against self-satisfied learning in the words ' I thank thee, 
 O Father, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and 
 prudent and hast revealed them unto babes ' ; and even went so 
 far as to declare that the publican and harlot were nearer to the 
 kingdom of G-od than the self-righteous Pharisee. Yet again, the 
 Sadducees' disbelief in the resurrection was directly challenged by 
 
 ^ ' The members of the new sect being strict observers of the law and agreeing with 
 the Pharisees in their opposition to the Sadducees, appeared in a favorable light to 
 at least the more moderate of the former,' until the opposition of the Gospel to 
 Pharisaic Judaism found definite expression in the teaching of the Hellenistic 
 Stephen (Neander, History of the Plcmting of the Christian Church, Eng. tr. 
 I, 56 foil.). 
 
 h 3 
 
cxvi THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 the declaration of the Apostles that they were themselves eye- 
 witnesses of the resurrection of Christ. 
 
 If further proof were needed to show that the persecutors 
 referred to by St. James were wealthy Jews and not Gentiles, it 
 might be found in the absence of all allusion to Gentiles in our 
 Epistle. Nothing is said as to hardships suffered from them, 
 nothing as to the duty of evangelizing them, or as to the con- 
 ditions under which they should be received into the Church, 
 nothing as to difficulties of social intercourse, e.g. as regards 
 eating or marriage. There is no reference to that which was the 
 burning question at the Council of Jerusalem (a.D. 51) and on the 
 occasion of St. Paul's later visit to Jerusalem (a.d. 58), viz. the 
 necessity of the rite of circumcision (Acts xv., xxi. 21 — 25), a 
 question which occupies such an important place in the Epistles to 
 the Galatians and the Eomans. It is inconceivable that, if the 
 question were one about which difficulties were generally felt or 
 which was giving rise to practical complications at the time, it 
 could have been passed over in a circular letter addressed to 
 Jewish residents in Gentile lands, especially as the writer inad- 
 vertently uses language which, though not itself bearing on this 
 subject, might seem at first sight to have a reference to St. Paul's 
 argument, that circumcision is unnecessary, because faith in Christ 
 is the sole means of justification. We may therefore conclude 
 with considerable probability that it had not yet become a matter 
 of pressing importance. If we compare the First Epistle of St. 
 Peter we find a different state of things ; the Gentiles are there 
 distinctly alluded to, as making false charges against the Christians 
 (ii. 12), who are exhorted to submit to the constituted civil 
 authorities and silence their gainsayers by their good behaviour (ii. 
 13 — 15). It is further stated that some of the Christians had 
 joined in the immoralities of the Gentiles in their unconverted 
 days, and had subsequently incurred their displeasure by the 
 change in their way of life (iv. 3, 4). 
 
 As to the faults of the Christians, the tone of St. James is much 
 more severe than that of St. Peter in his First Epistle, but so far 
 as the latter does specify any charge, it is that of impatience, 
 murmuring, evil-speaking, to which we find many parallels in the 
 plainer spoken Epistle of St. James. St. Paul, as we have seen, in 
 his Epistles to the Galatians and Romans lays stress mainly on the 
 
TO WHOM THE EPISTLE IS ADDRESSED cxvii 
 
 temptation which beset the Jews to substitute legal righteousness, 
 the performance of the works of the law with all its slavish 
 scrupulosity, for the righteousness which is by faith in Christ ; but 
 he also takes occasion to warn them against another and no less 
 dangerous error, that an orthodox profession of faith, unaccom- 
 panied by the fruits of good living, could suffice for salvation. 
 While the former error forms the subject of the first four chapters 
 of the Galatians, the second is dealt with in the two later chapters. 
 It is not abstract faith which avails, but faith working by love : 
 those who fulfil the works of the flesh shall not inherit the kingdom 
 of God : whatever a man soweth that shall he reap (Gal. v. 14 — 
 26). So he insists in his Epistle to the Romans that it is not the 
 hearer but the doer of the law that is justified (ii. 13) ; that it is 
 vain to profess a knowledge of God and claim to be a guide to the 
 blind, an instructor of the foolish, unless we practise what we 
 preach (ii. 17 — 23). He warns his readers against laying the 
 blame of their own sins on God (ix. 19 foil.) ; he urges them to 
 patience in tribulation, to perseverance in prayer, to bless and 
 curse not, to condescend to things that are lowly, to give place to 
 wrath (xii. 12 — 19), not to judge others, since we shall all stand 
 at the judgment-seat of God, to follow after things which make for 
 peace, and things whereby we may edify one another (xiv. 3, 4, 
 10 — 13, 19) ; and to turn away from those which cause divisions 
 (xvi. 17). The parallels from St. James will be found in a previous 
 chapter (p. 92 foil.). 
 
 It has been pointed out above that there is no allusion in this 
 Epistle to the controversy between the Judaizers and the upholders 
 of Gospel freedom, nay, that this controversy is so entirely ignored 
 that the writer is able to use the technical terms of the contro- 
 versy with a totally different reference. In like manner other 
 controversies or topics which are handled elsewhere by his con- 
 temporaries are left unnoticed by him. There is no direct refer- 
 ence to the atoning sacrifice of Christ ; none to the Sacraments ; 
 none to the details of the Second Coming; none to Church 
 organization, as in the Pastoral Epistles. There is no allusion to 
 incipient gnosticism, as in the Epistle to the Colossians and those 
 to Timothy and Titus and in the writings of St. John. It is 
 assumed that those addressed accept Jesus as the Messiah, that 
 the new law of liberty has been written in their hearts by the 
 
cxviii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 indwelling Spirit : but they are still ' zealous for the law,' as St. 
 James describes them in the Acts, they still seem to form one 
 body with their unbelieving compatriots ; still, as St. James says 
 again, ' hear Moses read to them every sabbath in the synagogues.' 
 In fact they exhibit an immature stage of Christianity, such as 
 must have continually been found among those who had become 
 believers on the day of Pentecost or through the preaching of 
 some passing evangelist, but were without any regularly organized 
 system of Christian teaching (James iii. 1 foil.). 
 
 The arguments of the Tubingen school, in opposition to the 
 Jewish nationality of those addressed, will be considered in the 
 chapter which follows on the Date of the Epistle. Various in- 
 cidental expressions have been noticed by editors ^ as bearing on 
 this point. Abraham is called ' our father ' in ii. 21, which in this 
 straightforward matter-of-fact Epistle must, by all rules of inter- 
 pretation, be taken, like the ' Twelve Tribes of the Dispersion,' in 
 its literal sense, unless reason can be shown to the contrary. The 
 readers are supposed to be acquainted with the story of Job, 
 Elijah and the prophets (v. 11, 17). The phrase 'Lord of Sabaoth' 
 (v. 4), the reference to Jewish oaths and to the Jewish propensity 
 to curse and swear (iii. 9, v. 12), the term 'synagogue' used for 
 their place of meeting (ii. 1), the high value attributed to the Law 
 and to the confession of the Unity of God — all mark the Jewish 
 nationality of the readers, and would be unmeaning or inappro- 
 priate if the Epistle were addressed to Gentiles. The same thing 
 appears from the reference to their avarice and their restless 
 pursuit of wealth (iv. 13 — 16, v, 1 — 4). 
 
 As regards the place from which the Epistle was written, if we 
 are right in supposing that it was written by the Brother of the 
 Lord, there can be little doubt that it was dated from Jerusalem. 
 This supposition is confirmed by incidental allusions to the early 
 and latter rains (v. 7), to the effect on vegetation of the burning 
 wind (i. 11), to the existence of salt and bitter springs (iii. 11), to 
 the cultivation of figs and olives (iii. 12), and to the neighbourhood 
 of the sea (i. 6, iii. 4). 
 
 ' Soc Bcysohlag, p. 8. 
 
CHAPTER VII 
 
 On the Date of the Epistle ^ 
 
 We have seen in Chapter II. that the Epistle was recognized r^s'ifoYthe 
 as canonical at the third Council of Carthage (a.d. 397), that it p^temai and 
 
 o \ ' ' /) internal evi- 
 
 was included in their lists of Sacred Writings by Athanasius in 367 't™the'^fl°f",j*" 
 and by Cyril of Jerusalem in 348, that it is quoted by name as Christ atthe 
 authoritative by Eusebius in his GommentariJ on the Psalms (c. 330) time ot the 
 
 ■^ '^ ^ ' coniposition 
 
 and by Origen (c. 230) and is by both attributed, though with a ^^°^^ 
 certain degree of hesitation, to James, the brother of the Lord ; 
 that it is referred to anonymously by Irenaeus, Theophilus, 
 Justin Martyr, the writer of the Epistle to Diognetus, Ignatius, 
 Polycarp, Clement of Alexandria and others, but above all by 
 Hermas during the second century; by Clement of Rome, and 
 the author of the Didach^ during the 1st century, also by 
 Barnabas, and the author of the Testaments of the Twelve 
 Patriarchs, who are commonly assigned to the same century. We 
 have seen in Chapter I. that the contents of the Epistle are 
 entirely in harmony with the supposition that it was written by 
 James the brother of the Lord, who was martyred in the year 63 
 according to Josephus, in 68 according to Hegesippus. It agrees 
 in character with all that we read of James in the Epistles of St. 
 Paul and in the Acts of the Apostles; it agrees in style and diction 
 with the speeches and letter of James literally recorded in the latter 
 book. In Chapter IV. we have seen that it is quoted by several 
 of the writers of the N. T., notably by St. Peter and by St. Paul ; 
 by the latter certainly in his Epistle to the Romans written in 58, 
 probably in his two Epistles to the Corinthians (57) and possibly 
 in his first Epistle to the Thessalonians (52). 
 
 ^ It 13 not my aim here, any more than in other chapters, to put forward an 
 independent scheme of chronology of my own ; but, assuming the general correctness 
 of the usually accepted chronology, I have endeavoured to determine, with reference 
 to it, the dale of the Epistle, supposed to be previously unknown. 
 
cxs THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 This date is The results thus obtained are confirmed by a comparison of the 
 
 confirmed by , "^ . , 
 
 the absence Epistle with Contemporary history. If it had been written be- 
 enoe either twesn the fall of Jerusalem (a.d. 70) and the death of Clement 
 
 to the fall of '^ . ' . . ,, , 
 
 Jerusalem, (usually dated about A.D. 95) it must inevitably have had some 
 reference to the preceding calamity in which so many Jews of 
 the Dispersion had been involved. In our Epistle there is a 
 reference to tribulation, but this arises from the oppression and 
 persecution of the Christians by rich and prosperous Jews, who 
 are compared to beasts fattened for slaughter, and over whom it 
 is said that judgment is already impending : the writer is looking 
 forward, not backward. I need not say how utterly misappro- 
 priate such language would be, if addressed to the crushed and 
 broken remnant of the Jews in the years immediately following the 
 utter ruin of their city and temple and nation under Titus. The 
 leaders of the persecution, the Sadducean hierarchy, had been 
 exterminated. The wealthier Jews in general, partly from the 
 hatred of their Gentile neighbours, partly from internal animosities, 
 from desire of revenge for past ill-treatment, or from mere greed 
 and envy of the rich on the part of the poor, had been plundered 
 of everything in the reign of terror which prevailed, alike in 
 Jerusalem itself and generally throughout the East, wherever Jews 
 were to be found. If here and there a solitary individual had 
 succeeded in saving some fraction of his former possessions, 
 certainly he had no longer the power to persecute others. 
 admi8sion''of "^ secoud mark of time in the Epistle is its silence as to the 
 ttiT^churoh' existence of Gentile Christians and the conditions on which 
 Gentiles should be admitted into the Church. If it was written 
 after the violent agitation caused by St. Paul's preaching to the 
 Gentiles and after the decision of the Council of Jerusalem (51), it 
 must surely have contained some reference to these events. It is 
 impossible to suppose that St. James, who was responsible for the 
 compromise agreed to at the Council, and who refers to it subse- 
 quently on a later visit of St. Paul to Jerusalem (Acts xxi. 26), 
 would have failed to make use of the opportunity to urge the 
 Jews of the Dispersion to observe the terms of the compact and 
 deal fairly by their Gentile neighbours. Nor does it seem 
 possible to accept Dr. Plummer's suggestion that it may have 
 been written between 53 and 62 (St. James, p. 61), after the 
 controversy on the subject had cooled down; because we have 
 
ON THE DATE OF THE EPISTLE cxxi 
 
 no evidence that the controversy did cool down during that period. 
 On the contrary, the furious assault of the Jews on St. Paul at 
 Jerusalem (a.d. 58) turned on this very question. When he 
 began to speak of his commission to the Gentiles, they burst out, 
 ' Away with such a fellow from the earth ' (Acts xxii. 22) ; and St. 
 James had previously warned him that, among the believing Jews, 
 there were many thousands zealous for the law, who had been 
 informed that he taught the Jews among the Gentiles to forsake 
 Moses and not to circumcise their children (Acts xxi. 20, 21) 
 This was at Jerusalem : how far the excitement was from having 
 cooled down in the provinces, is evident from the Epistle to the 
 Galatians (57). It does not seem that the baptism of Cornelius 
 had aroused anything like the same exasperation, partly no doubt 
 because St. Peter was not suspected as St. Paul was, partly because 
 Cornelius was already a ' proselyte of the gate,' and did not pass at 
 once from heathenism to Christianity like St. Paul's converts. On 
 hearing the explanation of the former ' they of the circumcision ' 
 held their peace and glorified God' (Acts xi. 18). There is no 
 reason therefore for throwing back the date of the Epistle to the 
 period before the conversion of Cornelius. But it probably was 
 not much later, for we read shortly afterwards (Acts xi. 20) that the 
 Greeks in Antioch received the word from some of those who had 
 been scattered in the persecution of Stephen, and that Barnabas 
 was sent from Jerusalem to inquire into the circumstances. 
 
 Another evidence of the early date of the Epistle may be iheaiiusions 
 found in the hints which it lets fall as to Church discipline and orderra'd 
 order. The synagogue is their place of meeting, though it is oontSne'dln 
 a synagogue of which Christians have the control.' No men- are^in accor- 
 tion is made of ' bishops ' or ' deacons,' but only of teachers an'eaSy ' 
 and elders (iii. 1, v. 14). Teaching seems to be still quite '^*^' 
 unorganized, as in the Church of Corinth (1 Cor. xiv. 26 foil.) : it 
 is not confined to regularly ordained church ofiicers : there is no 
 warning (as in 1 Tim. v. 22), to ' lay hands suddenly on no man ' : 
 all we find is a deprecation of the eagerness on the part of 
 individual members of the congregation to come forward as 
 instructors. The elders, called ' elders of the Church ' to distin- 
 guish them from the elders of the Jewish community, are 
 supposed either themselves to possess miraculous powers of healing 
 
 ' See note on ii. 2. 
 
cxxii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 or to control the exercise of such powers on the part of others: 
 they are to pray for the sick and apparently to hear their confession 
 (v. 14, 15) ; but this does not imply any distinctive spiritual 
 authority, for in the next verse the injunction is made general, 
 ' Confess your sins to one another and pray for one another.' It is 
 interesting to compare the parallel passage in 1 Pet. v. 1-5. 
 There the elders hold a much more important position: they. are 
 fellow elders of the Apostle himself, shepherds of the flock of God, 
 who shall receive their reward from the chief Shepherd on his 
 appearance : the younger are to be subject to them. But then 
 follows, as in St. James, the extension of this injunction to all, 
 including the elders themselves ; Travre? Be aXXTjXot? rijv ruTretvo- 
 (ppocrvvTjv iryico/ji^Q)cracr6e, ' yea, all of you gird yourselves (cf. Joh. 
 xiii. 4) with humility towards one another.' Further the means 
 enjoined by St. James for the miraculous healing take us back to 
 the earliest age of the Church. The only other reference in the 
 New Testament to the use of oil for the sick, is in St. Mark's 
 account of the mission of the Twelve, ' They anointed with oil many 
 that were sick and healed them' (vi. 13). 
 judS'tono. No less confirmatory of an early date is the Judaic tone 
 of the Epistle. The change from a narrow national and 
 ceremonial religion to the universal and spiritual religion 
 promulgated by Christ cannot be made in a moment, even 
 where the old religion is as corrupt and irrational as modern 
 Hinduism ; far less where there is so much to satisfy the claims 
 of the reason and conscience, as in the law of Moses. That law 
 was intended as a schoolmaster to bring men to Christ. Those 
 who had been duly prepared by it and ' were waiting for the 
 consolation of Israel ' were able at once to welcome Jesus as the 
 expected Messiah, to accept his spiritualization of the Law given 
 on Sinai, and acknowledge their own inability to fulfil the new law 
 of liberty except through the promised help of the Holy Spirit. 
 Tlie sermons reported in the Acts scarcely go beyond this. A 
 few perhaps would be able to make a further advance, and confess 
 the Divinity of Christ and the atonement wrought by Him for the 
 sins of the whole world, but the majority of Jewish Christians 
 between the day of Pentecost and the fall of Jerusalem were 
 probably even less advanced. They did not understand that the 
 former things had passed away, and that from henceforth neither 
 
ON THE DATE OF THE EPISTLE cxxiii 
 
 Jews nor Gentiles were bound by the Mosaic Law. The work of 
 James was to lead on men, who were in this stage of religious 
 belief, to higher views, as they were able to bear it. He was 
 especially fitted for this work because he was so much in sympathy 
 with those whom he addressed. By nature slow to move, he had 
 from his childhood loved the Law, as the old psalmists did ; the 
 Gospel itself was in his view still the ancient law, revealed at 
 length in its perfect form, and written in the mind and heart of 
 the believer, as Jeremiah had prophesied. We are not of course 
 justified in assuming that his own belief was limited to what is set 
 down in the Epistle. He wrote doubtless what he believed would 
 be most useful for the majority of those whom he addressed. 
 He could only appeal to motives which would have force with 
 them, and build up his arguments on premisses which they would 
 concede. This perhaps may account for his referring to the 
 example of Job and the prophets rather than of Christ. Sup- 
 posing, as was probably the case, that our Gospels were not yet in 
 existence, and tliat the Christian teaching of these Jews of the 
 Dispersion was founded on short collections of logia, containing 
 parables and aphorisms of Christ, it is quite possible that the 
 details of His life may have been less familiar to them than the 
 lessons from the Old Testament read to them in the synagogue 
 every Sabbath day. Still each year must have seen more of the 
 life and teaching of Christ set down in writing ; each year must 
 have left its impress on the mind of St. James. One who so 
 strenuously did the Father's will must have learnt more and more 
 of the doctrine, and received ever fuller revelation from the Spirit 
 of truth. So far as this consideration goes, we should be led to 
 assign the Epistle to the earliest possible date after the day of 
 Pentecost. 
 
 The considerations on the other side are (1) the position on the othM 
 
 ^ ' ^ hand it was 
 
 evidently held by the writer ; (2) the absence of any reference to an written after 
 immediately preceding conversion of those to whom he writes; (3) tion; st 
 
 mi 1 • 1 James had 
 
 the reference to persecutions endured by them, ihe third con- attained a 
 
 ., . Ti 1 Thr position of 
 
 sideration would forbid us to assign an earlier date than A.D. 37, authoiity, 
 the martyrdom of Stephen, which gave the signal for a great persons 
 persecution against the Church at Jerusalem, and which was were no 
 
 X O l0D£[6r 
 
 followed by the mission of Saul to Damascus (and doubtless by recent 
 that of other emissaries to other parts of the Diaspora), bearing 
 
cxxiv THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 letters from the high priest to excite the authorities of the 
 synagogues against the Christians. The tone used by St. James 
 in reference to the trials of the Christians does not imply, as the 
 tone of St. Peter would seem to do, that the persecution was then 
 either at its height or immediately impending (1 Pet. iv. 12), but 
 rather to the sequel of a persecution with its iretpaafiol ttoikiXoi 
 of animosities excited and losses endured, of liability to insults 
 and to interference with their religious services, as in Heb. x. 32. 
 If those addressed were still suffering under severe persecutions 
 we should have heard less of their petty rivalries and worldly 
 scheming. As to the position of St. James in the Church of 
 Jerusalem, the first intimation we have of it is in Gal. i. 18, where 
 St. Paul mentions that he saw him and St. Peter on his visit to 
 Jerusalem three years after his conversion. A more certain proof 
 of it may be found in Peter's message, sent to him on the occasion 
 of his escape from prison in 44 A.D. (Acts xii. 17). Lastly the 
 picture given of the Church is not that of one just founded. A 
 circular letter cannot of course take note of the special circum- 
 stances of each individual congregation, and it is quite possible 
 and even probable that some of those addressed may have only 
 lately received the Gospel, but it is evident that the majority must 
 have been Christians of some years' standing. Taking into 
 account these various considerations we may perhaps name the 
 year 40 A.D., as the earliest, and 50 A.D. as the latest, at which the 
 Epistle could have been written. 
 ^ing view at This is pretty much the conclusion which has been arrived at by 
 "thneJsIn* ^^^ majority of recent editors and others who have treated 
 'early datef of the date of the Epistle ; so that we may say that it is now 
 generally recognized as being the earliest portion of the New Testa- 
 ment. This is the view of Schneckenburger {Annot. p. 138, 
 Beitrcige 200 ff.), Neander (Planting of the Christian Church, 
 Eng. tr. 1842), Von Hofmann, Huther, Beyschlag (Gomm. and 
 Theol. Stud. u. Krit. for 1874), Erdmann, Schegg, Alford, Plumptre, 
 Eitschl, Altkatholische Kirche ed. 2, Weiss, JSinleitung, 1886, 
 p. 706 foil., P. Ewald, Hauptprdblem, 1890, Mangold's edition of 
 Bleek's Binleitung, 1886, pp. 706, 713, Lechler, Apostolic and 
 Post- Apostolic Times (Eng. tr. 1886, vol. i. 290). I venture to 
 think that the grounds for this conclusion have been con- 
 siderably strengthened by the minute comparison made in 
 
ON THE DATE OP THE EPISTLE cxxv 
 
 a previous Chapter, between the parallel passages in St. 
 James and in the Epistle to the Eomans and the First 
 Epistle of St. Peter. If I am not greatly mistaken, that 
 comparison has proved not only that St. James has not copied 
 from the other Epistles, but that these show distinct traces of hav- 
 ing been written with reference to his Epistle. The strength how- 
 ever of the general argument is not to be measured by the strength 
 of any one line of proof, however irrefragable we may deem it, but 
 by the cumulative force of many converging probabilities. After 
 having given many years' study to the subject, I am convinced 
 that the more closely it is examined, the more will this hypo- 
 thesis of the priority of our Epistle be found to meet all diffi- 
 culties, and explain all the facts of the case. 
 
 Those who take a different view suppose that it was either yg^'Jf'JJg 
 written by St. James towards the close of his life, or that it is a grounds on 
 
 ^ ^ . ' which it has 
 
 forgery from the hand either of an Ebionite or of a Christian i>een 
 
 " "^ . assigned to 
 
 Essene, whether in the first or second century. The former view the close of 
 
 . .— . . , *^ St. James's 
 
 is maintained by Kern (ed. 2), Wiesinger, Woldemar Schmidt, .nfe- 
 Bruno Briickner, Wordsworth, and Farrar {Early Days of Christ- 
 ianity, p. 310 foil.). 
 
 The reasons assigned by the last-mentioned writer are (1) ' the ^JV ^se^^f 
 prevalence of the name of Christ, instead of the title the Christ.' ".S''"!V' 
 
 ^ ^ , . . . without the 
 
 But the name Christ never occurs by itself in this Epistle, but only article.' 
 in the phrase 'Itjo-ou? ^piaTov, which is found without the article 
 in every book of the New Testament, except the Gospel of St. 
 Luke and the Third Epistle of St. John ; whereas the phrase 'Itjo-oO? 
 o X/5t(7Tos or 6 XpKTTO'i 'Ir]crovi occurs nowhere, except in the Acts 
 (four times) and once in Coloss. ii. 6. 
 
 A second argument is ' the condition and wide dissemination of (s) 'Condi- 
 
 ,.,.. -. ■. 1J1-1 1' tion of the 
 
 the churches to which it is addressed, which make it necessary to churches 
 assume that ' many years had elapsed since the day of Pentecost.' 
 As to this, there is nothing to suggest the wide dissemination of 
 the churches to which it is addressed, beyond the phrase ' The 
 Twelve Tribes of the Diaspora,' which is no doubt wide enough in 
 conception, but defines nothing as to the actual extent of country 
 occupied. It is consistent with two copies sent, say, to Antioch 
 and to Damascus, or with one hundred copies distributed through- 
 out the East. "All that it implies is that the advice contained in 
 the letter is in the opinion of the writer suitable for all or any Jews 
 
 addressed.' 
 
cxxvi THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 of the Dispersion. The argument derived from the ' condition of the 
 churches ' is more fully stated in Davidson's Introduction (1868) I. 
 288, ' Distinctions of places in Christian churches, an ambitious 
 love of preeminence, an unworthy partiality for the rich, are in- 
 consistent with an early period.' ' Amid the worldly views and 
 arrangements which prevailed in these Christian assemblies early 
 Christian love had grown cold.' 
 gramd^o? ■'- ^^^^ only two faults to find with this argument. It is 
 ""n'kieii^ contradicted, first, by all we know of the facts of the case, and, 
 tho'^rim'itivc Secondly, by general experience. All the evidence we have 
 ciiristians. ^s to the state of the early Church from the baptism of Christ 
 to the last record in the Acts is opposed to these dreams of an 
 ideal perfection. It is unnecessary to refer to ' the ambitious love 
 of preeminence,' the faithlessness, the narrowness, which marked 
 even the greatest of the Apostles during our Lord's lifetime. 
 Let us start with the day of Pentecost. Take the early 
 chapters of the Acts ; how long did the state of things 
 described in the fourth chapter continue ? How long could it be 
 said that the multitude of them that believed were of one heart 
 and one soul and had all things in common ? In the very next 
 chapter we find Ananias and Sapphira lying to the Holy Ghost : in 
 the sixth chapter the Grecian Jews murmur against the Hebrews 
 because their widows were neglected in the daily visitation : in the 
 eighth chapter Simon wishes to purchase spiritual gifts with money : 
 in the fifteenth chapter we read of the jealousy of the Jews towards 
 the Gentiles, which almost proved fatal to the infant Church : in the 
 nineteenth Paul meets with disciples who had not so much as heard 
 ' whether there be any Holy Ghost ' : in the twentieth he warns the 
 elders of the Church at Ephesus that after his departure ' grievous 
 wolves shall enter in, yea, from among your own selves shall men 
 arise speaking perverse things to draw away the disciples after 
 them ' : in the twenty-first it seems that Christian Jews joined with 
 others who were zealous for the law, in the attempt to kill Paul. 
 If we turn to the Epistles, we find in Rom. ii. and xiv. many of the 
 faults condemned by St. James. The Corinthians within five years of 
 their conversion are broken up by schisms : they are as much given 
 to vainglory and jealousy and strife and censorious judgments as 
 the churches to which St. James writes. They are more addicted 
 to sins of the flesh ; they indulge to excess even when they meet 
 
ON THE DATE OF THE EPISTLE cxxvii 
 
 together for the Lord's Supper ; they go to law one with another 
 in the courts of the heathen j their religious meetings are a scene 
 of confusion and disorder from each man's eagerness to get a hear- 
 ing ; they are falling back into idolatry ; they even dispute the 
 authority of their spiritual father and deny his apostleship. So 
 the Galatians within ten years of their conversion have departed 
 from the Gospel which Paul preached, and have to be sternly 
 warned against the works of the flesh. Even in his earliest Epistle 
 written to the Thessalonians shortly after their conversion, he bids 
 them be at peace among themselves, admonish the disorderly, en- 
 courage the faint-hearted, quench not the Spirit, despise not pro- 
 phesyings. The Epistles to the Seven Churches in the Apocalypse, 
 the first of St. John, the second of St. Peter, that of St. Jude and 
 that to the Hebrews, give an even less satisfactory picture of the 
 Christian Church than the Epistle of St. James does. 
 
 So far as St. Paul himself is concerned, his later Epistles, such as 
 those to the Phihppians and Ephesians, describe a nearer approach 
 to a perfect state of things in the churches addressed than is to be 
 found in his earlier Epistles. And this, of course, is what we should 
 naturally expect. A church just converted from Judaism or 
 heathenism will not at once lose the traces of its former condition. 
 The Pharisee, who loved the chief seat in the synagogue and to be 
 called of men Rabbi, will not on the moment of conversion lose his 
 liking for these things, any more than the Corinthian will at once 
 learn reverence and purity. Christian perfection is a plant of slow 
 growth. I have already alluded to the way in which the Jews of 
 the Diaspora would probably have received the Gospel. Some 
 would have been powerfully affected by hearing St. Peter preach 
 on the day of Pentecost ; others might have been baptized by a 
 passing evangelist. To judge of the probable effect, let us take a 
 similar case in the present day. Place before your mind the most 
 successful of modem missions to the heathen, or of revivals at home. 
 Is any one so sanguine as to imagine that congregations thus founded 
 will be at once freed from the dangers of ambition and worldliness 
 for years to come ? If there is such a person, let me recommend 
 to him a study of the life of Fox or Wesley, or of any honest 
 missionary journal. 
 
 A third argument is ' the sense of delay in the Second 
 Coming,' for which reference is made to ch. v. 7, 8 : 'Be patient, 
 
cxxviii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 (j2^)j.^^j'J'™g therefore, brethren,... for the Coming of the Lord is at hand.' I 
 the'second ^^^^® myself referred to the same passage, as proving that the writer 
 Coming.' shared the belief expressed by St. Paul in his earlier Epistles as to 
 the immediate Coming of the Lord. It is in strong contrast with 
 the language used in 2 Peter iii. 3, 8 : ' Knowing this, that in the 
 last times mockers shall come... saying Where is the promise of his 
 coming ? for from the days that the fathers fell asleep all things 
 continue as they were from the beginning of the creation ' : ' But 
 forget not this one thing, beloved, that one day is with the Lord as 
 a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.' It seems to 
 me that the words of St. James, while they prove his own expecta- 
 tion of the speedy appearance of the Lord, do not at all disprove 
 the same expectation on the part of those whom he addresses. A 
 man might easily be impatient under continued ill-treatment, even 
 though he believed, as an abstract dogma, that the Judge was soon 
 to appear. St. James urges him to make it a living truth, affecting 
 his daily practice. A fourth argument is that founded on the 
 discussion about faith and works, which Archdeacon Farrar thinks 
 ' finds its most reasonable explanation in the supposition that he 
 is striving to remove the dangerous inferences to which St. Paul's 
 doctrine of justification by faith was liable.' The difficulty as to the 
 absence of any reference to the subject debated in the Council of 
 Jerusalem is got over by the assumption that 'the circumcision 
 question was speedily forgotten.' On these points I have already 
 said all that I think necessary.^ 
 '^'of'S™*^ I turn now to other arguments adduced by Dr. Davidson. He is 
 prove thattt o^ opiuiou that ' the direction to send for the elders of the Church, 
 ^"iiy'an*''" ^^^ their use of oil with the prayer of faith, savours of a post- 
 '^Bbionitr apostolic time.' Why ? The Apostles made use of oil in healing 
 bl&re'the ^^^ ^^^^ (Mark vi. 13), and any Jewish community would be under 
 Jerusalem *^® direction of elders. But ' the office of elder was originally con- 
 fined to the Church's outer guidance,' and here ' the office of elder- 
 ship is separated from the members of the Church, a thing which 
 did not exist in primitive Christianity.' The meaning is not very 
 clearly expressed. If certain members of the Church were chosen 
 to hold the office of elder, they were ipso facto separated from the 
 other members of the Church ; and spiritual functions are certainly 
 implied in 1 Thess. v. 12-14, 1 Pet. v: 2, and in Acts xx. 17 and 28. 
 ^ Compare the earlier paragraphs of this chapter and pp, Ixxxviii to xol 
 
ON THE DATE OP THE EPISTLE cxxix 
 
 The passage in St. James seems to imply an earlier condition of 
 things, for he there enjoins mutual confession and prayer. 
 
 Dr. Davidson goes on to deny the authenticity of the Epistle 
 on the ground (1) that its polemic aspect towards the doctrine of 
 justification by faith alone, assigns it to a post-apostolic period. 
 [This argument has, of course, no weight with those who do not 
 recognize any polemic aspect towards St. Paul's doctrine. I 
 have shown, in ch. iv., that St. James is attacking that most 
 ancient of all religious heresies, which puts words and professions 
 in the place of deeds and conduct.] (2) ' The style of writing is too 
 good for James.' Something has been said on this point already 
 in pp. xli. and xlii., and more will be said shortly in the chapter 
 on' the Language of the Epistle. (3) ' It is not likely that 
 James, the Lord's brother, would have directly opposed Paul's 
 doctrine... That he should have written against it argues a want of 
 respect for the Apostle of the Gentiles incompatible with James's 
 position.' Quite true ; but of no force against those who deny the 
 polemic aspect. (4) ' The essential doctrines of Christianity are 
 wanting in the Epistle... Had James written it, we should naturally 
 expect some mention of Christ's resurrection at least... On the 
 other hand, the Mosaic law, circumcision, &c., are passed over, and 
 the royal law of liberty is exalted. . .The writer had therefore attained 
 to a subjective standpoint beyond James ; to ideas of Christian 
 liberty like the Pauline... Although the statement of Christian 
 doctrines is incomplete as well as imperfect, and the writer's point 
 of view more Jewish than Christian, he occupies a spiritual stage 
 in Jewish Christianity which James the Just scarcely reached.' It 
 might be well if the writer of these confused and self-contradictory 
 sentences would take the trouble carefully to compare the teaching 
 of the Sermon on the Mount with that of St. James, and consider 
 how far his remarks are applicable to the former. (5) ' The letter 
 is professedly addressed to all Jewish-Christians out of Palestine. 
 But were there churches composed of such members ?... Churches 
 were of a mixed character except in Palestine. Wiesinger there- 
 fore may well ask, Where shall we look for the Jewish-Christians 
 out of Palestine which will satisfy th e requirements of the Epistle ? — 
 a question not answered by reference to Acts ii. 5-11, xi. 19, &c., 
 because the passages are far from implying the extensive establish- 
 ment of Jewish-Christian churches immediately after Pentecost. 
 
cxxx THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 The earliest history contains no clear trace of such churches widely 
 scattered through the lands.' In answer we may say that un- 
 doubtedly there must have been such churches previously to the 
 admission of Gentiles into the Church, otherwise than as proselytes. 
 It was to persecute such a church that Saul went to Damascus 
 with authority from the high priest. Such were all churches 
 founded before the conversion of Cornelius, and the great majority 
 of churches founded before 51, except those founded by St. Paul. 
 There is just as little point in Dr. Davidson's further remark that 
 ' the writer does not convey the impression that his knowledge of 
 their condition was minute or specific, for his language is general, 
 such as a late author, writing in his name, would employ.' Of 
 course a circular letter cannot deal with personal relations. Dr. 
 Davidson then states his own conclusion that it was written after 
 James's death, in his name, by a moderate Ebionite, shortly before 
 the destruction of Jerusalem. One does not quite see why the 
 moderate Ebionite should have been capable of writing in 68 the 
 letter which we have been just told it was impossible for St. James 
 to have written six years before. If the moderate Ebionite ' occupied 
 a spiritual stage which James the Just hardly reached,' should we 
 not ' naturally expect some mention of Christ's resurrection at 
 least ' ? But these men in buckram, who are always at the dis- 
 posal of our modern critics, are wonderfully Protean in their 
 characteristics as in their powers. 
 ^arguments^ Let US tum, however, from the halting and hesitating disciple, 
 gHiuinene^s with his intervals of English common-sense, to the uncom- 
 EpMe^are promising idealism and superiority to fact of the German 
 "^facts'?'" school, to whose guidance he has surrendered himself. We 
 may take Von Soden as one of the latest representatives of the 
 school. Here is a summary of his Introduction to our Epistle, so 
 far as it relates to its date and authenticity, which is con- 
 tained in the Hand-Kommentar zum N.T., brought out under the 
 direction of Professors Holtzmann, Lipsius, and others, in 1890 : — 
 
 In thought and expression there is considerable resemblance between our 
 epistle and the writings of Clement of Rome, and especially of Hernias. There 
 is however no reason to suppose any literary connexion between them. They 
 resemble one another, simply because they were produced under the same con- 
 ditions. This view is confirmed by the fact that no trace of our epistle is to 
 be found throughout the 2nd century. Hegesippus knows nothing of an 
 epistle of James. The supposed reminiscences in Clement of Alexandria are 
 ■just as likely to be reminiscences of Philo or Peter or Clement of Rome. 
 
ON THE DATE OF THE EPISTLE cxxxi 
 
 Origen is the first to mention the epistle, without however accepting its 
 genuineness, as is evident from his comment on Matthew xiii. 55, in which he 
 gives some account of the Lord's brothers and refers to tlie epistle of Jude,but 
 not to that of James. 
 
 What is to be said when people, who ought to know better, make '^'^"g^JJjfi*'" 
 statements of this sort ? I can only refer my readers to my chapter '"J"™ '" 
 on the External Evidence for the Authenticity of the Epistle, and j];^"™ °^ 
 ask whether the quotations there given from Clement of Rome and century ; 
 others are not sufficient evidence that our Epistle was known in the 
 first century; whether the quotations from Ignatius, Polycarp, 
 Justin Martyr, the Ep. ad Diognetum, Irenaeus, above all Hermas, 
 are not such as to prove that our Epistle was studied by these writers 
 in the second century ; whether any one with the smallest particle 
 of historical sense or literary feeling could for a moment dream 
 that the author of the Shepherd was prior to, or contemporary with, 
 the vwiter of our Epistle ; whether the fact that Origen, having 
 other things of more interest to tell about St. James, omits to 
 mention that he wrote this Epistle (as he also omits to mention 
 that he presided over the Council at Jerusalem), while he mentions 
 the Epistle of St. Jude, because about St. Jude he has nothing else 
 to tell — whether, I say, this fact gives the slightest ground for 
 supposing that Origen doubted the authority of an Epistle, which 
 he over and over again cites as Scripture, and as written by James, 
 the brother of the Lord. 
 
 Let us hear next what Von Soden has to say on the relation of 
 our Epistle to other books of the New Testament. 
 
 The writer is acquainted with the epistle to the Romans and the first epistle 
 to the Corinthians. The tone is similar to that in the Hebrews, thoiigh there 
 is no literary connexion between them. On the other hand it is partly copied 
 from the 1st of Peter. The isolated resemblances to the Apocalypse prove 
 nothing. It is closely connected with the Gospel and Acts of Luke, having 
 the same Ebionite leaning, and giving the words of Clirist in the same form, 
 while there seems no trace of the special tradition of Matthew, such as we find 
 in section v. 17-vi. 13 of his Gospel (except for the injunction as to swearing). 
 There is however no direct copying from the Gospels. With the writings of 
 John there is no kind of connexion. The writer is acquainted with the 
 LXX., but betrays no knowledge of the Hebrew text of the Old Testament. 
 He is well acquainted with the sapiential books of the Apocrypha and with 
 Philo. There are also signs of his having some knowledge of Greek literature. 
 
 Here too the conclusions arrived at seem to me entirely at vari- and it is not 
 ance with the facts, as I think will be apparent to anyone who will otherbook? 
 ponder what has been said in my chapter on the Relation of the 
 
 ^■2 
 
cxxxii THE EPISTLE OP ST. JAMES 
 
 Epistle to Contemporary Writings. Some may be surprised to 
 hear that Marcion's favourite gospel is distinguished by Ebionite 
 leanings.^ It is true however that in some cases, not by any means 
 the majority, the references to the words of Christ which occur in 
 our Epistle approach more nearly to the form in which they are 
 given by St. Luke, than to the form in which they are given by 
 St. Matthew. The quotations in my fourth chapter will show that 
 it is quite a mistake to speak of section v. 17 — vi. 13 in the latter, 
 or of the Gospel and Epistles of St. John, as affording no parallels 
 to St. James. Nor is it true that the Epistle betrays no knowledge 
 of the Hebrew. Compare my note on v. 20, where the quotation 
 from Prov. x. 12 has no resemblance to the rendering of the LXX. 
 The next paragraph of Von Soden treats of the Readers for whom 
 the Epistle was intended. He argues that the address to the 
 Twelve Tribes of the Dispersion is entirely misleading, and possibly 
 a later insertion, as Harnack has suggested. His reasons are as 
 follows : 
 
 Von soden Nothing in the letter suggests Jewish readers. No reference is made to the 
 Judaiointhi Temple, the Worship, the Law. Instead of this, the one supreme rule of life, 
 Epistle, by obedience to which man receives the blessing of salvation, is the implanted 
 word, which is styled the perfect law of liberty. But there is no attempt to 
 connect this law with the teaching of the Old Testament ; and the prescribed 
 Jewish ritual is not argued against, but simply ignored. It is impossible that 
 monotheism could have been the distinctive article of faith with Jewish 
 Christians : impossible that they could have magniiied this faith to the de- 
 preciation of works. Nor could works with them ever mean works of love as 
 distinguished from works of the law. [Then follows the argument, already 
 noticed, as to the impossibility of discovering any purely Jewish church in 
 the Diaspora. I have shown above that, previous to the Council of Jerusalem, 
 the great majority of churches must have been of this type.] Von Soden well 
 draws out the impossibility of the burning question, of the admission of Gen- 
 tiles into the Church, being ignored in an epistle addressed to the Diaspora 
 {if written after this date). He gives us again the old argument, answered above, 
 that we cannot conceive first love cooling down, say, in a period of ten years. 
 
 1 Apparently the only ground for this strange assumption is that on two occasions 
 St. Luke records our Lord's teaching in its strong psiradoxical form, without the 
 explanatory additions by which it is qualified elsewhere. Thus in Luke vi. 20 we 
 read fiaxipiot oi irraxol, but in Matt. v. 3 we have the addition rip iryei/MTi ; in 
 Luke xviii. 25 we have nothing to soften the statement ' It is easier for a camel to 
 go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of 
 God,' but in Mark x. 24 the word 'rich' is explained by 'them that trust in riches.' 
 But it is a mere misuse of words to characterize as Ebionism even an ascetic admi- 
 ration of poverty. The essence of Ebionism is of course the rejection of the divinity 
 of Christ, and the belief in the permanent obligation of the Jewish ceremonial, 
 with which was connected a high esteem for the Gospel of St. Matthew, and a strong 
 aversion to St. Paul's writings. 
 
ON THE DATE OF THE EPISTLE cxxxiii 
 
 He considers that it was written at a time of degeneracy, when the Jewish 
 element in the Church had lost all significance ; that perhaps the title may 
 be after all genuine, because Christians had then learnt to regard themselves as 
 the true Israel, strangers and pilgrims in the world, waiting for the hour of their 
 Lord's appearing. If it had been really intended for Jews, there must have 
 been more of local colouring. The instances alleged for this local colouring 
 are not exclusively applicable to Jews. 
 
 The only argument here which seems to call for examination is "^g*to°the''' 
 founded on the fact that the Jewish Christians are charged with y^^^^^^^ 
 laying too much stress, not on their ritual (the works of the law), x^ ''ji'L"?'^'?^^^ 
 but on their orthodox belief in one God. No doubt there is a "hat might 
 
 . . , be expecied 
 
 striking difference between the language of St. James and the ^ftomst. 
 
 *^ o o James writ- 
 
 language of St. Paul on this point ; a difference entirely in accord- ingtoJews; 
 ance with all we know of the two men. St. James, living among 
 Jews, himself practising the Jewish ritual, saw no objection to Jewish 
 Christians continuing their ritual observances, as long as they 
 ascribed no merit to them. He warns his readers, however, not to 
 suppose that the outward rite could commend them to God (i. 27) : 
 the religious service which God approved consisted in charily and 
 unworldliness. Is not this perfectly natural teaching from a Jewish 
 apostle to Jewish believers, who would at once recognize it as a 
 re- publication of the teaching of Isaiah and Micah on the same 
 subject ? Does then the improbability consist in the assumption 
 that Jewish Christians were in danger of trusting in their orthodox 
 monotheism to the neglect of the perfect law of love ? It is plain 
 at any rate that if there were any people who were likely to pride 
 themselves on this belief, they must have been Jews by birth, not 
 Gentiles. Moreover we know as a matter of fact that Jews did 
 pride themselves just on this point, did believe that their ortho- 
 doxy placed them on a pinnacle above all other people, and was of 
 itself efficient to salvation ; compare the words of Justin spoken 
 to a Jew {Tryfh. p. 370 D), 'You and others like you {i.e. Judaizing 
 Christians) deceive yourselves with words, saying that, though you 
 should be sinners, yet because you know God, the Lord will not 
 impute sin to you,' and see Lightfoot, Gal. pp. 154-164, and the 
 quotations in my note on ii. 19. In the same way they are rebuked 
 by John the Baptist and by our Lord for priding themselves on their 
 descent from Abraham (Matt. iii. 8, 9, vii. 21-23, Luke xiii. 24-30). 
 It would be just as rational to deny that the sapiential books of 
 the Bible and Apocrypha were written for Jews by Jews, as to 
 deny this of the Epistle of St. James. 
 
cxxxlv THE EPISTLE OE ST. JAMKS 
 
 teacWng^L To go now a little more into detail, Von Soden tells us that 
 to tho Law. nothing is said of the Temple, the Worship, the Law. We 
 have seen that with regard to worship, a most important rule is 
 laid down, which implies the insignificance of the Mosaic ritual 
 no less than our Lord's words 'neither in this mountain nor 
 yet at Jerusalem.' As to the Temple, one does not quite see 
 how it could be introduced in a letter to Jews residing abroad, 
 unless it were to urge them to send contributions more regularly 
 or to come up more frequently to Jerusalem. But trivial details 
 of this sort would be entirely out of place in the exhortations 
 of one who may be best described as the living embodiment of 
 the Sermon on the Mount. As to the Law, how can it be said 
 to be ignored, when there is a distinct reference to the common 
 Jewish error, that you might pick and choose your favourite com- 
 mandment and confine your attention to that : ' Whoever offends 
 in a single point is guilty of the whole law ; for he that said Thou 
 shalt not commit adultery, said also Thou shalt not kill ' ? and 
 when in iv. 11 the Law appears as the representative of the Law- 
 giver and Judge ? This conception of the Law, as the expression 
 of the mind and will of God, leads at once to its being regarded as 
 a Law of Liberty, the guiding principle of life, not the mere 
 written statute. Von Soden asks why St. James does not point 
 out that such a Law of Liberty was already recognized in the Old 
 Testament. The answer is that it was unnecessary, because the 
 very phrase would naturally recall to the minds of his Jewish 
 readers similar expressions in the Old Testament (see note on i. 25), 
 and would also be felt to be in entire accordance with the ethical 
 teaching of Christ, as contained in what we know as the Sermon 
 on the Mount, and probably in the earliest summaries provided for 
 the use of believers. 
 ^^he'tonif Lastly Von Soden asserts that Jewish Christians would never 
 the^Biristie. ^i™^* *^® scusc of epya to ' works of love ' but would necessarily 
 include in it St, Paul's ' works of the law.' In the actual 
 passage in question (ii. 14-26) we need not limit epr^a to works 
 of love, strictly speaking : the sacrifice of Isaac (ii. 21) could 
 hardly be described as such. They are ep<^a KoXd in the widest 
 sense ; though they exhibit no doubt the joint action of faith and 
 love, if there is any meaning in the illustration from almsgiving 
 contained in vv. 15, 16, and any reference to the royal law of 
 
ON' THE DATE OF THE EPISTLE cxxxv 
 
 ver. 8, or to the pattern of pure religion depicted in i. 27. Is 
 this then an unusual sense of the word epyov in the New 
 Testament ? Does it usually include a reference to strict ceremonial 
 observance ? Would it be naturally understood by Jews to include 
 this ? In John viii. 39 the works of Abraham (i.e. his hospitality 
 &c.. Gen. xviii.) are contrasted with the murderous intentions of the 
 Jews ; in Apoc. xx. 12 we read that the dead will be judged kuto. 
 ra epya avT&v, meaning of course the same as Kara ttjv irpa^tv 
 avTov in Matt. xvi. 27, which is explained of works of love in 
 Matt. XXV. 34-46. So over and over again we find in the- Apo- 
 calypse olSa TO, epya a-ov, referring, as the context shows, to moral 
 conduct. St. Paul, writing after St. James, finds it necessary to 
 distinguish the epya Trto-reo)? and the epya aydirri<;, the natural 
 fruits of faitli and love, from the epya v6p.ov, dead works done 
 from slavish obedience to an external law. 
 
 Again Von Soden, like his school in general, exaggerates the Doesst. 
 negative side of the Epistle: the writer, he says, ignores the ■ ignore the 
 Resurrection. What does he make of the phrase t^v Sofi;? in ii. tion! 
 1 ? This surely involves the belief in the Resurrection and 
 Ascension and even in the Divinity of Christ. 
 
 The final result of his investigation is that the Epistle was von soden's 
 
 T. 1 . 1 • /. T-v . ■ ?<i • • theovythat 
 
 written at Rome during the reign oi Domitian to Christians it was 
 generally. Beyschlag well asks, If so, what possible inducement the time of 
 
 , P 1 ,. 1 , ■ 1 i • 1-1 XI Domitian is 
 
 was there for the lorger, who was certainly no sectarian, nke the inconsistent 
 author of the Clementines, but an orthodox believer, to inscribe his modest 
 letter with the name of James, rather than of Peter ? and if he '°'" ^^' 
 was determined to choose James, what possible motive could he 
 have for using the modest description ' servant ' instead of ' brother ' 
 of the Lord Jesus Christ ? 
 
 I will now take the most recent statement of the theory that the ^^ig^Jjj"!^- 
 Epistle was written in the second century. This is contained in j,*^^*j*J*^j 
 W. Bruckner's Die chronologiscke Beihenfolge der Neutestamentlichen i Peter and 
 Briefe, Haarlem, 1890. zBltl 
 
 ■I • 1 £ i. before 
 
 According to his view the only epistles written during the farst century Hadrian, 
 were those to the Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, Philemon, Philippians, 
 Hebrews, and the 1st to the Thessalonians. The first epistle of Peter was 
 written during the persecution under Trajan. As our epistle borrows from it 
 and shows no traces' of being written under stress of persecution, the latter 
 cannot be assigned to an earlier period than the reign of Hadrian. The 
 priority of Peter to James is proved as follows. The topics common to both 
 epistles are better expressed and more logically handled, the phrases used are 
 
cxxxvi THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 5 
 
 more exact and appropriate in the former tlian in tlie latter. For instance the 
 exhortation to rejoice in tribulation is common to both ; but in Peter we see 
 that there is real occasion for it — those whom he addresses are actually in the 
 midst of a fiery trial, suffering for righteousness' sake (iii. 14, iv. 12) ; this per- 
 secution is the work of the devil whom they resist by their patient endurance 
 (v. 8, 9) ; they are bidden to exult, not in their trial itself, but in the glory 
 which is to follow, the salvation ready to be revealed in the last time (i. 5, iv. 
 13) ; they are encouraged by the reminder of their high calling (i. 3, ii. 9, 20, 
 21, iii. 14, &c.), by the example of Christ whose sufferings they share (ii. 21, iii. 
 18, iv. 13), and by the hope of the promised reward (i. 4, 7). The tone of the 
 epistle is throughout that of hopefulness, and the exultant joy in tribulation 
 is only the issue and climax of this hopefulness. In James it is just the 
 reverse : he borrows the phrase ' manifold temptations,' but there is no special 
 appropriateness in it ; those whom he addresses are not suffering persecution 
 from the heathen : so too he borrows the phrase ' resist the devil,' but this 
 is not connected with the general thovight of trial ; he bids them rejoice in 
 tribulation, but he gives no reason for their doing so ; he has not prepared 
 the way for it by the spirit-stirring appeals and encouragements of Peter ; if 
 he refers to the future it is only to remind them of the terrible coming of the 
 Judge. 
 
 on a'supM- Novtf to examine this : could any one imagine from Brlickner's 
 misleading description that St. James grounds his exhortation to rejoice, on 
 betweenXe *^^ ^^^^ *^^^* ^''i^l works endurance, and endurance Christian 
 BpisSes in perfection (i. 2 — 4) ? could he imagine that it is James who says, 
 "^SeijSor*" ^^ ^^° endures trial will receive the crown of life, the kingdom 
 J^*m°°ein P^oi^ised to all that love God (i. 12, ii. 5) ? that it is James who 
 trials, speaks of the profession of Christianity as in itself a patent of 
 nobility (i. 9), and refers to the fact of Christ's being the glory of 
 Christians as annihilating all earthly distinctions (ii. 1) ? It is no 
 doubt true that he puts in the fore-front of his Epistle the high- 
 toned, uncompromising summons to rise superior to human 
 weakness, and rejoice in what the world thinks misery. I have 
 elsewhere spoken of this as an instance of the stoicism of St. 
 James, and pointed out how the same demand is softened down 
 by the gentler and more sympathetic Apostle. But it is not more 
 stoical than it is Christ-like ; it is a reminiscence, like so much 
 besides, of the actual words of his divine Brother, ' Blessed are ye 
 that weep now ; blessed are ye when men shall hate you, and 
 separate you from their company, and cast out your name as evil 
 for the Son of man's sake ; rejoice ye in that day and leap for joy.' 
 If Christ did not shrink from this sublime paradox, if paradox was 
 one of the most efficient weapons used by Him as well as by older 
 reformers, by Socrates and the Stoics, to shake men out of their 
 slumbers and rouse them to aim at a new and higher ideal, why 
 
Oisr THE DATE OF THE EPISTLE cxxxvii 
 
 axe we to dispute St. James's right to use it, as if it could only be 
 ascribed to an unintelligent repetition of St. Peter's language ? If 
 Bruckner had paid a little more attention to our Epistle he would 
 have seen that one of its most marked characteristics is the 
 commencement of each paragraph by a statement of the practical 
 maxim, usually a precept or an interrogation, which it is intended 
 to enforce; e.g. i. 19 contains the maxim, 'Let each be swift to hear, 
 slow to speak, and slow to wrath,' which is explained and illus- 
 trated in vv. 20 — 27 ; the injunction against respect of persons in 
 ii. 1 is explained and illustrated in vv. 2 — 10 ; the maxim that 
 faith without works is valueless in ii. 14 is explained and illus- 
 trated in vv. 15 — 26, &c. Again, it is true that there is no refer- 
 ence in our Epistle to persecutions from the heathen ; but , if the 
 readers are liable to be dragged before the Jewish courts on a 
 charge of Christianity by their unbelieving countrymen (ii. 6, 7) ; 
 if they are oppressed by their rich neighbours, who withhold their 
 wages and threaten their life (v. 4 — 6) ; it is surely a little absurd 
 to deny that they are iv iroiKc\oi<; •7reipaa-fioi<;. It is true again 
 that the devil is not referred to as the cause of these outward 
 Treipaa/ioi, but rather as the god of this world, the inspirer of a 
 false wisdom, the instigator of all the evil wrought by means of 
 the tongue (iv. 4 — 7, iii. 6, 15) ; which some may perhaps 
 consider to be both a deeper and a wider conception of diabolic 
 activity than that in the parallel passage of St. Peter. 
 
 Bruoknernext compares James i. 18, 21 with 1 Pet. i. 23, ii. 1. The n^V-^^" f 
 ' general conception in both is the same, that Christians are horn again through icgenera- 
 the instrumentality of the Word of God ; and the practical inference the tion, 
 same, to cast away all that might hinder the reception of the Word ; but while 
 all is natural and straightforward in Peter, James shows that he copies with- 
 out understanding, by his use of the term efi^vrov. In ver. 18 he had said 
 that God aTrenvria-fv i](i,as \6ya aKrjOetas, in ver. 21 he says de^ao-Oe rbv 
 'iji^vTov 'Koyov, but how can we receive what has been already engrafted 1 
 
 This is a criticism founded simply on a misapprehension of the 
 meaning of a term, as to which see my note in loco and also (for 
 the force of these verbals in -to?) on aTreipaa-To^ i. 13. 
 
 The next point raised is, that in I Pet. v. 1-11 there is a betteif logical (3) the 
 connexion than in the parallel passage James iv. 6-10, and that the former is torS'the 
 therefore the original. The general drift in Peter is as follows :—(vv. devil, 
 1-4) the elders are admonished to take charge of the ilock of Christ, not 
 as having dominion over them, but as setting them an example : by so doing 
 they will receive from the chief Shepherd, on his appearing, the crown of 
 glory which fadeth not away : (vv, 5-7) the admonition is extended to 
 
cxxxviii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 others, ' Likewise ye younger be subject unto the elder ; yea, all of you gird 
 yourselves with humility to serve one another, for God resisteth the proud, but 
 giveth grace to the humble : humble yourselves therefore under the mighty 
 hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time, casting all your care upon 
 him because he careth for you. (vv. 8-10) Be sober, be watchful; your 
 adversary, the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may de- 
 vour ; whom withstand, steadfast in the faith, knowing that the same suffer- 
 ings are accomplished in your brethren who are in the world ; and the God of 
 all grace who called you unto His eternal glory in Christ, after that ye have 
 suffered a little while, shall Himself perfect, stablish, strengthen you.' 
 
 The order of thought here is the following : the elders are not 
 to lord it over the younger; the younger are to be subject to the 
 elder, or rather all are to serve one another, girding themselves 
 with humility. So far humility is an attitude of man towards 
 man : in what follows it is the attitude of man towards God. 
 God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble : if we humble 
 ourselves before him, he will exalt us in due time. It would seem 
 from the following clause that this exaltation refers, in the first 
 place, to the deliverance from temporal anxieties. The devil 
 appears in ver. 8 as the cause of these anxieties : he seeks to terrify 
 the Christians into apostasy ; but God will stablish and strengthen 
 them after a short period of suffering. It can hardly be said that 
 the logical connexion is very strict in these verses. The admoni- 
 tion to the elders has little to do with withstanding the devil, 
 as the cause of their present anxieties ; and humility towards 
 man does not seem quite the same thing as humility towards 
 God. 
 
 Now take the parallel passage in James : (iv. 1-3) quarrels come 
 from unsatisfied lusts ; you are unsatisfied, because you either do 
 not ask of God, or you ask in a worldly spirit ; (ver. 4) the friend- 
 ship of the world is enmity with God ; whoever seeks the world's 
 friendship, thereby becomes the enemy of God ; (vv. 5-10) the 
 Spirit of God within us jealously demands the possession of our 
 whole heart, but gives all the more grace (in consequence of that 
 jealousy). Hence the Scripture says, ' God resists the proud (i.e. 
 the worldly), but gives grace to the humble.' Be subject therefore 
 to God, and withstand the devil (the prince of this world), and he 
 will flee from you. Draw nigh to God and he will draw nigh to 
 you. Repent, and humble yourselves iu the sight of God, and he 
 will exalt you. 
 
 I think no careful reader can fail to see that Bruckner has 
 
ON THE DATE OP THE EPISTLE cxxxix 
 
 exactly reversed the truth, and that the order of thought is much 
 more logical here than in St. Peter. All falls naturally under the 
 heading ' loyalty to God.' The word ' humility ' is used through- 
 out in reference to our attitude towards God. Quarrels arise from 
 an unchastened desire for worldly good. We cannot have peace 
 either in ourselves or with our neighbours until we submit 
 ourselves unreservedly to God, who resists those that aim at 
 worldly success and make a god of self, but gives grace to those 
 that surrender up their wills to His. He who tempted Eve, tempts 
 us also to set up our will against God's will ; but, if we refuse to 
 listen, the tempter flies ; while any attempt on our part to draw 
 near to God brings Him near to us. The meaning of ' exaltation,' 
 vyjrdocrei, in the 10th verse is explained by to3 i)i|ret in i. 9. It 
 refers to no outward prosperity, but to the moral dignity which 
 belongs to him who has made God his portion. 
 
 Bruckner refers, as I have done, to the common quotations con- (*) "'« 
 
 ,., -n'l T'l • common 
 
 tained in the two Epistles. I pointed out that it was characteristic quotations, 
 of St. James to quote carelessly, of St. Peter to quote accurately ; 
 that the former uses a biblical phrase without reference to its 
 original context, while the latter holds fast to the original context. 
 To me this seemed to favour the supposition that St. Peter was the 
 copyist. Briickner takes the reverse view. I leave it to each 
 man's common-sense to say which is right, after he has compared 
 the contexts of the quotations in the two Epistles. 
 
 - His next point is that ro koKov ovofia'va. James ii. 7 has to be (s) tijeuse 
 explained from 1 Pet. iv. 14 — 16 el 6veLSil,ecr6e iv ovofiaTi Xpiarov ^'J'y,^^^" 
 fiaKdpioi...el he tos XpiaTiavov (Trda-yei), fj,r) ala-xwicrOco, So^afeTW wMohiiave 
 Se Tov @eov iv tco ovouart tovtco. This is a similar case to the, explained 
 
 ' . . . . . from 
 
 preceding. In my view it exhibits St. Peter, as usual, filling up the st. peter. 
 bare outline of St. James. That the phrase needs no explanation 
 is plain from the parallel passages quoted in my notes in loco and 
 on v. 14 ev tw ovofiari. 
 
 Lastly he thinks that the tt/jo ttuvtcov of James v. 12 has been 
 transferred from its more appropriate context in 1 Pet. iv. 8. In 
 rny note on v. 12 I have pointed out that Trpo iravrcoi/ must be 
 understood in reference to other manifestations of an impatient 
 spirit, and not as exalting the abstaining from oaths above all 
 other Christian duties. Probably it was a common phrase with 
 the writer. If it was suggested, as I believe, to St. Peter by his 
 
cxl THE -EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 acquaintance with our Epistle, he would naturally employ it of a 
 matter of more general importance. 
 
 Briicknei's In a later chapter of the same volume Bruckner deals with the Epistles 
 isThat tt°e which he assigns to the second century as having been written after the 1 st epistle 
 Epistle was of Peter. These are the second to the Thessalonians, and those to the Colos- 
 '"Bssene ^° sians and Ephesians, belonging to the earlier half of the century ; and secondly, 
 living at the Pastoral Epistles, James, Jude, the second of Peter, and those of John, which 
 ?tt°''h°if''f ^^ considers to have been written subsequently to 150 a.d. With regard to our 
 the second Epistle he refers to what he had said before, as to its being copied from 1 
 century. Pet. and cites parallels from Eomans, Corinthians, Hebrews, Apocalypse and 
 the Gospel of St. Matthew to show that it was written after these. In reply to 
 Beyschlag he asserts that the Judaizing tone of the Epistle is not the naive 
 Judaism of an early Jewish Christian writer, but that it implies a late stage of 
 the doctrinal development, inasmuch as it attacks Paulinism as the seed of 
 an existing Gnosticism. The writer betrays his Essene tendency by his pro- 
 hibition of swearing, his contempt for riches, his dislike of trade, warning 
 against sins of the tongue, high esteem of poverty, &c. He takes the pseu- 
 donym of James, as a contemporary had taken that of Peter ; because the tra- 
 ditional reputation of the ascetic president of the Church of Jerusalem seemed 
 likely to give most authority to his teaching. Partly in order to imitate his 
 style, partly to mark his own opposition to all that was characteristic of Paul, 
 he makes use of the simple salutation pfaioEtj', which he found in a circular 
 ascribed to James in the Acts. The address to the Twelve Tribes of the 
 Diaspora cannot be taken literally. The true address reveals itself in the 
 phrase 'your synagogue ' (ii. 2), by which we are in all probability to under- 
 stand a little conventicle of Essene Christians at Eome. The phrase ' Diaspora' 'i 
 denotes similar scattered conventicles, in which alone ' the true Israel,' ' the 
 poor,' are to be found. By ' the rich,' who occasionally drop into their con- 
 venticles and so cruelly oppress and persecute the brethren, is meant Chris- 
 tians outside of the conventicle. All the warnings of the epistle are meant to 
 preserve this little flock from the snares of Paulinism. 
 
 enerai T^ew ^^ ^^ difficult foi' Englishmen to treat these baseless vagaries with 
 
 of the becoming seriousness. To us they at once suggest the great 
 
 ot post- Shakespearian Cryptogram, or somebody's attempt to prove that the 
 
 Christianity. Annals of Tacitus were written by a monk of the Middle Ages. But 
 
 that we may not be too hasty in assuming that the new criticism 
 
 has nothing more solid to offer us, we will turn now to a better 
 
 known name, and examine what Piieiderer has to tell us in his 
 
 Urckristenthum, which is an expansion of the Hibbert Lectures 
 
 delivered by him in 1885. 
 
 He distinguishes two lines of development in post-Pauline Christianity. The 
 one, which he calls Christian Hellenism, is represented by the epistle to the 
 Hebrews, which he assigns to the end of the 1st century, the first epistle of 
 Clement (between 100 and 120 a.d.), the first of Peter (not earlier than Tra- 
 jan), that of Barnabas (between 120 and 125 a.d.), the epistles to the Colos- 
 sians and Ephesians and the Gospel of John (about 140 a.d.) The other, 
 which he calls Antignostic Hellenism, marks the period of the Antonines. It 
 is again subdivided into Catholicized Hellenism and Catholicized Paulinism 
 
ON THE DATE OF THE EPISTLE cxli 
 
 (p. 845). The former branch is represented by the Johannean and the Pas- 
 toral epistles, the epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians, which with Volkmar's 
 expurgations may be regarded as a fairly genuine piece, the Ignatian epistles, 
 together with that of Jude and the second of Peter. The latter branch is repre- 
 sented by the second epistle of Clement, the Shepherd of Hermas, written 
 about the same time as the Gospel of Matthew (that is, towards the middle of 
 the 2nd century), the epistle of James and the Didach^, which last Piiei- 
 derer considers to be later than Hermas and possibly later than Clemens 
 Alexandrinus. This Catholicized Paulinism is characterized by a practical un- 
 dogmatic tone, reminding one of the Synoptic Gospels. 
 
 This brief sketch of Pfleiderer's view of the general development 
 of Christianity was needed in order to enable the reader to appre- 
 ciate his remarks on James in particular (pp. 865-880). 
 
 Pfleiderer agrees with Schwegler that our epistle is just the Shepherd stripped Heoonsideis 
 of its Apocalyptical imagery. In both writings we have a protest on behalf of author of 
 the practical piety of the common people against the increasing secularization our Epistle 
 of religion in the wealthy and iatellectual circles, which we may compare ,^por™of 
 with similar protests made by the Waldensians or Minorites in later times. Hermas and 
 Our epistle must evidently belong to the post- Pauline period ; otherwise it borrowed 
 must have contained some reference to the controversial topics of which St. ™'" ""' 
 Paul treats, such as the abrogation of the Mosaic law, circumcision, 
 sabbaths and festivals, the position of Israel as the chosen people, the 
 relation of the Old to the New Covenant, &c. The question then arises. How 
 long after the death of St. Paul must it be placed ? We are enabled to answer 
 this partly from the lateness of patristic evidence as to the existence of the 
 epistle, and partly from its dependence on other Christian writings. (1) As 
 to the former our epistle is in a worse position than any other of the books 
 of the N. T. Origen is the iirst to quote it directly, and he ex- 
 pressly says that it was not generally recognized as canonical. There is no 
 reference to it in Clemens Alexandrinus or Irenaeus or Tertullian, not even in 
 the Clementines. Moreover it is omitted in the Muratorian canon, which 
 recognizes the Shepherd. This silence of the oldest witnesses is inexplicable 
 if it belonged to the Apostolic age. (2) The writer was acquainted with the 
 epistles to the Romans and Galatians, as is apparent from his use of the 
 Pauline formula of 'justification by faith'; also with the epistle to the 
 Hebrews, the Apocalypse (including the most recent portion of the latter, 
 which dates from the time of Hadrian), the 1st epistle of Peter, above 
 all with Hermas, whom Pfleiderer regards as the older writer, because the 
 aphorisms of St. James are there found embedded in a suitable context. In 
 any case the two writings were composed under similar circumstances and 
 without doubt nearly at the same time. These facts prove that the address to 
 the Twelve Tribes of the Diaspora is not to be understood literally. If there 
 were then any pure Jewish churches it could only have been in Judea, which 
 is excluded by the term Diaspora. Besides what reason could there be for confin- 
 ing the exhortation of the epistle to the Jewish Christians ? It was not they 
 but the Gentiles who were in danger of trusting in faith without works. "We 
 must therefore understand the phrase in reference to the true Israel scattered 
 throughout the world. It is a mistake to lay any stress on the term ' syna- 
 gogue, ' which is freely used of Christian churches by Hermas and Ignatius. 
 
 The aim of the writer is the restoration of a retiring unworldly Christianity 
 of self-renunciation and brotherly kindness : what he especially attacks is the 
 worldliness of the upper classes. His condemnation of a wisdom which he 
 
cxlii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 characterizes as earthly, psychical, devilish, reminds ns of the words in which 
 Hermas describes the Gnostic teachers and prophets who were to be found at 
 Rome in the middle of the second century, and must probably be understood 
 of these. Jude, too, speaks of the Gnostics as ^/rux"^ol, and charges them with 
 complaining of destiny (v. 16 ^f/ii^moipot), which we may compare with 
 James i. 13, where we read of some who complain of God as tempting them to 
 evil. So we are told of a treatise addressed to the Gnostic Florinus by Ire- 
 naeus, in proof that God was not the author of evil. The reference in iv. 11 
 to those who 'judge the law,' would apply to the attacks of such Gnostics as 
 Cerdon and Marcion on the 0. T. Lastly, the degradation of Paul's 
 justifying faith into an unfruitful assent of the intellect was nowhere so likely 
 to bo found as among the Gnostics. To this ultra-Pauline Gnosticism James 
 opposes no Judaizing theology, but the simple rules of practical Christianity 
 as understood by the Catholic Church. His polemic does not touch Paul's own 
 doctrine : Paul would never have given the name of faith to this dead intel- 
 lectual assent ; but it does touch the Gnostics who claimed the authority of 
 Paul, and James fails to distinguish between the two views. This is easily expli- 
 cable from the fact that James himself, like his contemporaries (compare the 
 Ignatian and the Pastoral Epistles), no longer uses faith in its old sense of ab- 
 solute trust, forming the only foundation of Christian piety, but makes it co- 
 ordinate with love, patience, obedience, works, &c. 
 
 The Soteriology of the Epistle approaches so nearly to that of the Gospels, 
 that it is no wonder some have been tempted to assign it to a very early period. 
 This however has been shown to be impossible by a comparison with other 
 Christian writings ; and it is also inconsistent with the absence of all allusion to 
 the apologetic and eschatological topics which so much occupied the attention 
 of the early Church. We find here no attempt to prove that Jesus was the 
 Messiah, and that he would shortly return to reveal the promised salvation. 
 The undogmatic character of the epistle is to be explained, like the dogmatic 
 simplicity of John, not on the supposition that it was written before Chris- 
 tianity had become dogmatic, but that dogma was already securely settled. 
 The Church of Rome, however, with its predominantly practical tendency, 
 rejected those speculative and mystical elements of Paulinism, which were 
 retained and developed by the churches of Asia Minor. And thus it is that the 
 Catholicized Paulinism of the second century approaches so nearly to pre- 
 Christian Hellenism. Monotheism, the Moral Law, Future Retribution, these 
 are the prominent doctrines in both ; the only difference heing that, in the 
 former, these doctrines are based upon Revelation and propagated by an or- 
 ganized institution. 
 
 pfleidercr j^ ^jn \)q ggeu that on Several points Pfleiderer recedes from the 
 
 aDandons ^ ^ ^ 
 
 mStio'*''f g™und occupied by his predecessors of the negative school. He 
 Ms precie- allows that our Epistle could not have been written whilst the 
 
 cossors. ^ ^ ,^ , 
 
 admission of Gentiles into the Church was still a burning ques- 
 tion : he allows that it is not intended as an answer to the Epistle 
 to the Romans, and that in fact St. Paul would have assented to 
 all that is said in it as to the futility of an unfruitful faith. He 
 does not regard the author as an Ebionite or Essene, or suppose 
 him to be addressing some small dissenting body : on the contrary, 
 James is a typical Catholic of the latter half of the second century, 
 and gives expression to the ethical undogmatic Christianity of the 
 
ON THE DATE OF THE EPISTLE cxliii 
 
 time: further, he is addressing the Church of Rome, which he 
 rightly assumes to be representative ia its defects of the degeneracy 
 of the Church at large. Pfleiderer ridicules Schwegler's identifica- 
 tion of the rich with Gentile, and the poor with Jewish Christians 
 (p. 872) : he explains eficjivrov correctly, in opposition to both 
 Schwegler and Bruckner (p. 877). On the main point, however, 
 he holds to the Tubingen view, that the Epistle was written in the 
 latter half of the second century, his chief argument being that it 
 bears traces of being written after the Epistle to the Romans, the 
 1st of St. Peter, and Hermas. 
 
 I will not here repeat what I have said before as to the mutual ^^^"jSgf 
 relations of the above-named Epistles, but will simply state the ™i."j"f;^J^ 
 general principles which I think ought to determine our judgment ?"""*■? "f^ 
 in this and similar cases. Where it is agreed that there is a direct when the 
 
 ° ^ reaemblanee 
 
 literary connexion between two writers, A and B, treating of the '» so great 
 same subject from apparently opposite points of view, and using "xF?^"^'" 
 the same illustrations, if it shall appear that the argument of B borrowed 
 meets in all respects the argument of A, while the argument of A other. 
 has no direct reference to that of B, the priority lies with A. 
 Again where it is agreed that there is a connexion between two 
 writers, treating of the same subject, on the same scale, from the 
 same point of view, and using the same quotations, it is probable 
 that the writer who gives the thought in its most terse and rugged 
 form, and takes least trouble to be precise in the wording of his 
 quotations is the earlier writer. Using these tests, I venture to 
 think that it has been proved conclusively, that the Epistle of St. 
 James is prior to the first Epistle of St. Peter and to that of St. Paul 
 to the Romans ; and this one fact is sufficient to upset the whole 
 house of cards erected by Pfleiderer. Supposing however that the 
 priority of James to Paul were still a matter of doubt, I should 
 not be at all more inclined to admit the possibility of our Epistle 
 having been written at the late date assigned to it by Pfleiderer. 
 None of his arguments seems to me to be of such a nature as we 
 should rely on if it were a question about secular writers. Take 
 for instance his assertion that Hermas was prior to James. From a ^^^^m^j 
 literarv point of view, this seems to me on a par with saying that our Epistle 
 
 T-r * 1 ■ /^' Ti wfts copied 
 
 Quintus Smyrnaeus is prior to Homer, or Apulems to Oicero. But jj^^^^™)^,^ 
 on what does he ground the assertion ? ' That which occurs in an admissible. 
 aphoristic form in James, is found in its natural context in 
 
cxliv THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Hermas ' (p. 868). As examples he gives James iv. 7, ' Resist the 
 devil and he will flee from you/ compared with Mand. xii. 5 
 (abridged), where Hermas says, ' Man desires to keep the commands 
 of God, but the devil is strong and overcomes him.' The angel 
 answers, 'The devil cannot overcome the servants of God who place 
 their hope entirely in Him. If you resist him he will be 
 vanquished and flee away.' On this it may be observed (1) that 
 the saying occurs in three other passages of Hermas [Mand. vii. 2, 
 xii. 2, 4), and that it also occurs thrice in what is probably a much 
 earlier treatise, the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs ; (2) that 
 every text quoted by a preacher is naturally imbedded in a suitable 
 context, if the preacher knows his business; (3) that St. James's style 
 is confessedly condensed and aphoristic, but this is no evidence of 
 lateness, rather the contrary ; (4), that, as has been shown above in 
 answer to Bruckner, the saying is quite in its place in our Epistle. 
 His other examples are James iii. 15 (the contrast of earthly and 
 heavenly wisdom) compared with Mand. xi., James i. 27 (on true 
 religion) compared with Mand. viii., James i. 20 (' the wrath of man 
 worketh not the righteousness of God ') compared with Mand. v., a 
 passage which would have been more appropriately compared with 
 James iv. 5. As to all these examples I am confident that every 
 unprejudiced reader who takes the trouble to examine them, will 
 agree with me, that it would be as reasonable to say that any 
 modern sermon is older than its text, as to say that these comments 
 are older than the parallels in St. James. There is not even any 
 marked abruptness in the original context to excuse such extra- 
 ordinary perversity of judgment. And then the fatuity of ima- 
 gining that a man of such strong individuality, whose every 
 word attests his profound and unshakeable convictions, could 
 condescend to borrow from one so immeasurably his inferior, 
 whose thoughts show about an equal mixture of cleverness and 
 silliness, and whose language, as Dr. Taylor has proved, is little 
 more than a patchwork of old materials, new furbished to avoid 
 detection ! 
 *it?™^n ■^^ regards Pfleiderer's attempt to prove the lateness of our 
 favour of Epistle from the absence of patristic evidence in its favour, I 
 
 the canon- ■*- ^ ' 
 
 io^yof our must refer the reader to my second chapter, where he will find 
 quotations enough to enable him to decide the matter for himself. 
 But as he has made the assertion that Origen expressly says 
 
ON The date op the epistle cxiv 
 
 that it was not recognized as canonical {aber ausdruchlich als 
 ungezweifelte Schrift), I will here briefly sum up the evidence of 
 Origen on this point : (1) he never denies the genuineness of the 
 Epistle ; (2) he simply uses in one passage (Comm. in Joh. xix. 6, 
 Lomm. ii. 190) the ambiguous phrase ^ ^ejoo/^ei/j; 'laKm^ov iTria-ToXij, 
 which at the outside means that, though the Epistle was in general 
 circulation under that name, yet he did not take upon himself to 
 assert its authenticity ; (3) in Kufinus' Latin translation of Origen's 
 writings we find our Epistle referred to as follows : Comm. in ep. ad 
 Bom. iv. 1, in alio Scripturae loco, ib. iv. 8 audi et Jacohum fratrem 
 Domini, ib. ix. 24 Jacobus Apostolus dicit, and frequently ; cf. Hmn. 
 in Ex. iii. 3, viii. 4, Lev. ii. 4, where it is also called Scriptwra 
 divina; (4) these expressions of the Latin, which some have without 
 ground suspected, are borne out by similar expressions in the 
 original Greek ; thus in Sel. in Psalm, xxxi. 5 (Lomm. xii. p. 129) 
 the Epistle (co? Trapa 'la/cto^a)) is referred to as r/ lypa^ri, and it is 
 quoted as authoritative in Sel. in Exod. xv. 25, Comm. in Joh. xx. 
 10 and elsewhere (see above, pp. Ixiii. foil.) ; (5) in two distinct 
 passages Origen gives a list of the Sacred Books, and in both of 
 these the Epistle of St. James is included {Horn, in Gen. xxvi. 18, 
 Horn, in Jos. vii. 1 ; see Westcott, Canon, pp. 406 foil ). 
 
 I next take the assertion that, if our Epistle had been written , it is not 
 
 ■*■ . true that the 
 
 before the Council of Jerusalem, it must have contained arguments phenomena 
 
 ° of our 
 
 to prove that Jesus was the Messiah, such as those we find Bpsstieaie 
 
 ^ ^ . .. inconsistent 
 
 ascribed to St. Peter in the Acts, and must also have dwelt more withaneaviy 
 upon the Second Coming. If the writer were addressing uncon- 
 verted Jews, as St. Peter does in Acts ii., or were endeavouring to 
 recall Jews who were in danger of falling away, as the author of 
 the Epistle to the Hebrews does, such arguments would no doubt 
 be in place ; but as he is writing to believers, Wiho accept Christ as 
 the Lord of Glory and future Judge (James ii. 1, v. 9), such argu- 
 ments would be out of place in a short letter, directed to the 
 special object of inculcating a practical morality on those who 
 were already believers. Nor can I see why we should expect 
 more to be said about the Second Coming. Is it not enough 
 that we are told ' the Judge stands before the the door,' and ' he 
 that endureth temptation shall receive the crown of life ' ? 
 Another point is that James has lost the old meaning of faith, and 
 makes it, not the foundation of the Christian life, but merely one 
 
 h 
 
cxlvi THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 among a number of co-ordinate virtues. I do not deny that he 
 at times uses Trt'o-Tt? in the sense of a mere intellectual belief; but 
 when he describes the Christian religion as ' the faith of our Lord 
 Jesus Christ ' (ii. 1), when he makes faith the essential condition 
 of all prevailing prayer (i. 6, v, 15), when he ascribes the begin- 
 ning of spiritual life to our regeneration by the word of truth (i. 
 18) — and how can we receive that word except through the 
 instrumentality of faith ? — he seems to me to rate faith as highly 
 as St. Paul himself. Yet even St. Paul sets faith below love, and 
 goes so far as to say, ' Though I have all faith so as to remove 
 mountains, but have not charity, I am nothing.' 
 
 I really cannot see that Pfleiderer has anything else in the way 
 of argument to offer for his view. All that he tells us is that 
 towards the middle of the second century the Catholic Church had 
 very much lost its hold of distinctive doctrine, that it was secular 
 in tone, and was occupied in controversy with the Gnostics, to 
 whom he considers that allusion is made by James, where he 
 condemns a psychical and diabolical wisdom, and speaks against 
 those who judge the law, and who impute to God the blame for 
 their wrong-doing. If it were certain that the epistle dated from 
 this time, we might be justified in supposing such allusions, but as 
 all probability is against it, we have no reason to go so far to 
 explain references which would be applicable in any age. The 
 only difficulty would be in the term ylrv^cKo^, but this is already 
 used in the first Epistle to the Corinthians. 
 tandluia" Without entering into any discussion as to the correctness of 
 ^"terisS"^* Pfieiderer's estimate of the state of Christianity under the Anto- 
 inexpUcaWe ^^^^^> ^^^ without repeating the positive argument for the early 
 pfleidevei's ^^^^ °^ James, I will simply mention here some characteristics of 
 hypothesis. ^\^q Epistlo which Seem to me inexplicable on the hypothesis of 
 the date given by Pfleiderer. The first, already noticed by 
 Beyschlag, relates to the heading, ' James the servant of God.' It 
 is quite consistent with the modesty which marks the Epistle 
 throughout, that James himself should adopt this humble title ; 
 but is it conceivable that a late writer, wishing to secure a hearing 
 by the adoption of a famous name, should throw away all the 
 distinguishing adjuncts. Apostle, Bishop of Jerusalem, Bishop of 
 Bishops, Brother of the Lord, and call himself plain James, a name 
 which could attract no attention and excite no interest ? Would 
 
ON THE DATE OF THE EPISTLE cxlvii 
 
 the Church of Rome have submitted patiently to the extremely 
 severe reproofs of ,this unknown James ? Would there be any 
 appropriateness in speaking of the rich, as dragging the believers 
 before the law-courts and blaspheming the noble name by which 
 they were called ? Would the thoroughly Hebraic tone of the Epistle 
 the appeal to the example of Elijah, Job and the prophets instead 
 of Christ, the phrase ' Lord of Sabaoth,' the warning against the 
 use of Jewish oaths, the stern censure of landowners who withheld 
 the wages of the reapers, suit the circumstances of the Christians 
 of Rome in that age ? Where were the free labourers referred to ? 
 The latifundia of Italy were worked by slaves. Lastly, the writer 
 looks for the immediate coming of the Lord to judgment (v. 7 — 9). 
 Do we find any instance of a like confident expectation in any 
 writer of the latter half of the second century ? 
 
 Some of my readers may wonder at my spending so much time of ti'e°gmu° 
 on the examination of what will strike them as mere arbitrary am^^yisie 
 hypothesis. My reason for doing so is (1) that we EngUsh are so cSTsidered 
 conscious of what we owe to German industry and research, that '"on'wS' 
 we are sometimes tempted to accept without inquiry the latest genu*inenras 
 theory that hails from Germany. This danger is perhaps less g"|^g °f 'j^'e 
 threatening at present in regard to the criticism of the New ''''• '''■ 
 Testament, than in regard to some other departments of study, 
 partly from our sense of the seriousness of the practical issues 
 involved, and partly from our trust in the perfect fairness, the 
 exhaustive learning and the sound historical and literary judg- 
 ment of the great scholar and theologian whom we have recently 
 lost. What Bishop Lightfoot has tested and approved, we believe 
 we may accept as proven, so far as present lights go. But (2) 
 fanciful and one-sided as German criticism often is, it is constantly 
 stimulating and suggestive, bringing to light new facts or putting 
 old facts in a new light. And therefore on both grounds, for the 
 sake of what we may learn from it, as well as to point out its 
 shortcomings and exaggerations, I have thought it worth while to 
 lay its last word before English readers. I have done my best to 
 examine fairly point by point the argument in favour of the 
 late origin of our Epistle ; but it is impossible to estimate fully its 
 strength o'r its weakness, unless we view it in connexion with the 
 general theory, first put foward by F. C. Baur, of which it forms a 
 part. According to that theory the larger portion of the writings 
 
 h 2 
 
cxlviii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 of the New Testament are forgeries of the second century. I 
 
 have endeavoured to show the improbability of -this theory in the 
 
 case of one small Epistle. Others have done the same for other 
 
 Large books of the New Testament. But the improbability attaching to 
 
 demands on r^ • ^ t i p ii, vr 
 
 the credulity the theory as affecting one or another separate book oi the JMew 
 readers Testament is as nothing in comparison with the combined impro- 
 advanced bability of One half of the books having been forged in the second 
 century. For consider the demand thus made upon us. We have 
 on the one side a century which beyond all question witnessed tbe 
 greatest advance in morality and religion which has ever taken 
 place on this earth. If this advance is to be explained by natural 
 causes we must assume the existence of extraordinary powers, 
 spiritual, moral and intellectual, in the men by whom it was brought 
 about. The histories of the time, written by contemporaries, as we 
 believe — at any rate written, as even our opponents admit, within a 
 hundred years, more or less, of the events which they record — tell 
 us that there were such men then living, and depict them so clearly 
 and vividly that we seem to be personally acquainted with them. 
 Again we have letters purporting to be written by some of these 
 men, which so fully answer the expectations excited by the histories 
 and soar so high above the ordinary level of human thought, that 
 they have for some eighteen centuries been regarded by the most 
 enlightened of mankind as containing, along with the histories, a 
 divine ideal and an inspired rule of conduct for the whole human 
 race. On the other hand we have in the second century an age in 
 which the Christian Church, as far as we can judge from its history 
 and from the undisputed writings of the time, was decidedly 
 wanting in power and ability, not merely in comparison with the 
 first, but in comparison with most of the later centuries. Yet it is 
 in this feeble age that Baur and his followers have sought to find 
 the authors of the books which bear, and in the judgment of united 
 Christendom worthily bear, the great names of James, Peter, Paul, 
 and John. It is not one author of this inspired stamp they are 
 in search of, but four at least ; for there is no pretence that any 
 one individual could have produced works so diverse in doctrine, 
 thought and style ; nay, their separatist hypotheses make it 
 necessary for them to assume a fifth, a sixth, and even a seventh 
 author. And yet not a trace of one of them is to be found in 
 the history or literature of the second century. No one is bold 
 
ON THE DATE OF THE EPISTLE cxlix 
 
 enough to name a man whom he considers capable of having 
 written even the least of these works. Would it be at all a wilder 
 hypothesis if one were to assume that half the plays of Shakspeare 
 were written by an anonymous author or authors of the time of 
 Charles the Second ? 
 
 How are we to account for such extraordinary aberration Their axioms 
 
 ^^^ their 
 
 on the part of able and honest men ? It seems to me that method, 
 it is due partly to prejudice and partly to an error of method. 
 First, as to prejudice : they start with two assumptions, (1) that 
 the presumption is always against the truth of tradition ; 
 (2) that miracles are impossible. The former prejudice is a 
 natural reaction from the opposite extreme, that tradition is always 
 right ; and it falls in with the natural delight in novelty, and the 
 temptation to take the side which affords most scope for new and 
 startling combinations. There is also a natural impatience at the 
 tone of virtuous orthodoxy often assumed by the defenders of tradi- 
 tion, and a generous eagerness to take the side which has suffered 
 most from misrepresentation in the past, and which still finds it 
 necessary at times to resist attempts on the part of the champions 
 of authority to intimidate opponents and stifle discussion ; a feeling 
 too that, in order to the final ascertainment of truth, the negative 
 argument is as needful as the positive, and that up to the present 
 century the former has scarcely had justice done to it among 
 Christian writers. The second prejudice naturally leads to the 
 attempt to weaken the force of the evidence adduced in favour of 
 miracles. If the accounts of miracles proceed from eye-witnesses, it 
 is difficult, on this hypothesis, not to condemn them of deliberate 
 falsehood, which our opponents are unwilling to do, not simply 
 because they do not wish to give unnecessary offence, but because 
 they are themselves convinced of the honesty and high tone of the 
 writers. If, however, it can be proved that these writers lived a 
 hundred years after the events they record, then they are simply 
 the mouthpiece of tradition, which, without any deliberate falsifica- 
 tion, would spontaneously clothe the bare nucleus of fact with the 
 garment of the supernatural. 
 
 Next, as to the error of method. Men assume a priori 
 that the Christian Church and Christian theology must have 
 had such and such a development; that if we find one doctrine 
 especially prominent in a particular writer, he must have been 
 
cl THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 the author of that doctrine, which must therefore have been 
 unknown before him and denied by all but his immediate 
 school ; and again, that if we meet with any teaching which seems 
 inconsistent with such a doctrine, it must have proceeded 
 from a controversialist of the opposite school : so that we are 
 guilty, for instance, of an anachronism in assigning to Christ the 
 words, ' Think not that I am come to destroy the law and the 
 prophets,' ' One jot or one tittle shall not pass from the law ' 
 (Pfleiderer, page 492 foil.), since they involve the principles of 
 Paulinism and anti-Paulinism. But why cannot we act here as 
 we do in the parallel case of the disciples of Socrates ? We do not 
 dispute the genuineness of a Cynic or Cyrenaic or Academic 
 phrase attributed to Socrates, because he did not carry out these 
 different lines of thought to the full extent to which each was 
 carried by his disciples. Yet it is assumed a priori 'that James, 
 Peter, and John being typical of particular aspects of Christianity, 
 anything in their writings which appears to be inconsistent with 
 that special aspect must be pronounced spurious ; that even a man 
 so many-sided and so full of growth as St. Paul must be tied down 
 to the ideas which occupied him during a certain critical period of 
 the Church's development. If we were to impose the same rule 
 on Mr. Gladstone, how little we should leave him of all the books 
 and speeches which now bear witness to his incessant activity and 
 versatility of mind. 
 
 But perhaps the most mischievous manifestation of the a priori 
 method is when it seizes on some small side-incident, and makes 
 it the corner-stone of a huge theory, by which all the phenomena 
 are to be explained, or, in the event of a too stubborn resistance, 
 to be exploded. Such an incident is the difference between St. 
 Peter and St. Paul, of which passing mention is made in Galatians 
 ii. 11, 12, and in which Baur finds the key to the whole of the 
 early history of the Church as well as to the Christian literature 
 of the first two centuries. It might really seem as if to some of 
 his followers the main article of the Creed was ' I believe in the 
 quarrel between Peter and Paul, and in the well-meaning but un- 
 successful attempts of Luke and others to smooth it over and keep 
 it in the background.' 
 
 It may encourage those who are fearful as to the results of the 
 present attack on the integrity of the books ofthe New Testament, 
 
ON THE DATE OF THE EPISTLE cli 
 
 to call to mind the history of the same struggle in regard to the ''g^™?'^^' 
 writings of classical authors. There too a narrow a priori dogma- "^J^'"'™ A" 
 tism has in times past attempted to deprive us of half the dia f^y^^^ 
 logues of Plato and some of the noblest satires of Juvenal ; but in 
 the great majority of instances the result of the close examination 
 to which the classical writings have been subjected has only served 
 to establish more firmly the genuineness of the disputed books and 
 passages, and so we cannot doubt it will be with the New Testa- 
 ment."- Experience proves the truth of the maxim — Opinionum 
 commenta delet dies, naturae judicia confirmaU 
 
 ^ It is especially interesting to note how in both spheres we find the first thoughts 
 of youth corrected by the second thoughts of maturer age. Thus Zeller, who in 
 his Platonische Sttidien, 1839, had argued against the genuineness of Plato's De 
 Legibus, in his History of Greek Philosophy treats it as the undoubted work of Plato. 
 In like manner Kern, who in an article in the Tiib, Theolog. Zeitschr. for 1835, 
 part 2, had ascribed our epistle to an unknown writer of the 2nd century, argues 
 in his commentary, 1838, in favour of its genuineness ; De Wette, who in the 
 earlier editions of his commentary had denied the authenticity of the epistle, in his 
 5th edition (1848) regards it as probably authentic; Lechler, who in the 1st and 
 2nd editions of his book on the Apostolic and Post- Apostolic Times had made it a 
 post-Pauline production, treats it as pre- Pauline in his last edition of 1885 (Eng. tr. 
 1886) ; and from the preface to the 2nd edition of Ritschl's AUkaiholische Kirche, 
 1857, it would seem that Ritschl's views had developed in a similar direction. 
 
CHAPTER VIII 
 
 On the Grammar of St. James 
 Orthography 
 
 Instead of the more usual forms we meet with the following : 
 GonsoTiants. 
 
 a<j for TT is the ordinary use in the Greek Testament, as in 
 Trpaacyay, ^vXdcrerco, rapdaaco, and in our Epistle ^plaerovaiv ii. 
 19, avrtTaaa-eTai iv. 6 : see Hort G.T. App. pp. 148, 149, W. Schmid 
 Der Atiicismus ii. p. 82, s.v. dp/ioTTetv. 
 
 We find however the following exceptions, according to the 
 readings of the best MS. : 
 
 TO eXuTTOv Heb. vii. 7, eXarrov adv. 1 Tim. v. 9, iXaTTovaOai 
 John iii. 30, ^Xamuo-a? Heb. ii. 7 (from LXX.), rjXarrwfievov 
 Heb. ii. 9, rjXarrovqae 2 Cor. viii. 15 (from LXX.) ; but eXdaam 
 John ii. 10, iXda-aovi Rom. ix. 12 (from LXX.). 
 
 TjTTrjfia 1 Cor. vi. 7, Rom. xi. 12, rjTTqTat 2 Pet. ii. 19, rjTTOiv- 
 rat ib. ver. 20 ; but ^cra-coOijTe 2 Cor. xii. 13, ^<ro-£oj/ 1 Cor. xi. 17, 
 fja-cTov adv. 2 Cor. xii. 15. 
 
 KpelTTov 1 Got. vii. 9, 1 Pet. iii. 17, 2 Pet. ii. 21 and often in 
 Hebrews; but Kpeiaaov 1 Cor. vii. 38, ib. ix. 17, Phil. i. 23, Heb. 
 vi. 9, X. 34. 
 
 [The usage of Josephus varies like that of the N.T. Thus in 
 Ant. xix. (ed. Niese) we find eTaa-aov § 99, but BieTaTTero § 325 ; 
 Kpeicrawv § 112, but Kpetrrovtov § 211 ; fjaa-mv ^ 173, ■^craw/jLevoi 
 § 181, but eXarrov § 291; diraXXdaacov § 213, but e^aXXaTrmv 
 xvi. 12. The double sigma seems however to be constant in 
 Trpdaam.] 
 
 In fome words the aa is preserved in the later Attic also, as in 
 d^vaaof, jSaa-iXiaa-a, TTTijaaco, -TTTcoacro), ipeaaai. 
 
 V for <^v is constant in the N. T. in '^Ivofiat and •^vviixrKW. 
 
ON THE GRAMMAR OF ST. JAMES cliii 
 
 According to Meisterhans, Gr. d. Att. Inschr. p. 141, yiyvofiai is the 
 reading of the Attic inscriptions without exception up to 292 B.C., 
 and yivofiao, equally without exception, between 290 and 30 B.C, 
 
 Vowels. 
 
 I for et in abstract substantives: see Hort I.e. p. 153, and 
 compare ipi,dia{l) James iii. 16, aXa^oviai'^ iv. 16, KaicoiraQla'; 
 V. 10; but irepia-a-eiav i. 21, dprja-Keia i. 27 {ideXoOprjcrKia 
 Col. ii. 23). 
 
 irpoifio'i for irpmifio'i (v. 7), for which Hort compares •^peoifieiXi- 
 Ti}9, StoJko?. 
 
 irpavTrjii for the classical TrpaoTr]^ i. 21 ; the forms irpav^ and 
 7rpao<; are both classical, the former being preferred in the feminine 
 and generally in the oblique cases. 
 
 Siatus. 
 
 Hiatus is not shunned by the Hellenistic, as it is by the later 
 Attic writers. Thus in i. 4 it occurs six times ; and elision is pro- 
 portionably rare, the only words elided in our Epistle being dXXd 
 in ii. 18 aXX' ipet ti<; (but aXXa airarSiv i. 26, aXXd eTriyeioi; 
 iii. 15), i-TTc in ii. 7 i<j)' Vila's, v. 7 eV avrw, and v. 14 eV avTov; 
 diro in a^ vfimv iv. 7, v. 5 ; Trapd in irap cS i. 17 ; Kara in Ka6^ 
 eavTrjv ii. 17, Kad' ofiolwaiv iii. 9, Kar oKXrfKcov v. 9. On the 
 other hand we have vtto unelided in iii. 4 viro iXa'^luTov : in fact 
 the only word which is uniformly elided in the G.T. is irapd, 
 but the word is comparatively rare, and does not occur before a 
 proper name beginning with a vowel. Of unelided Kard we find 
 instances in Acts iii. 17 Kara d'yvooav, ib. xxii. 3 Kara uKpt^etav, 
 Kom. ii. 2 Kara dX'qOeiav, ib. iii. 5, 1 Cor. iii. 3, ix. 8, xv. 32 kuto, 
 dvdpeoTTOV, Rom. xiv. 15 Kara drydTrrjv &c. Unelided eVi is found 
 in Luke iii. 2 eVl 'Imdvmjv, ib. v. 36 ctti i/jbdnov, ib. xi. 17 eVt oIkov, 
 ib. xxi. 10 eVi e^i/o? &c. ; unelided utto in Luke viii. 43 dirb irmv, 
 ib. xiii. 21 diro dvaroX&v, ib. xvi. 18 diro dvSp6<; ; unelided vtto in 
 Luke vii. 27 vtto dvifiov, ib. xxi. 24 vtto iOvSiv &c. Unelided Sta 
 is found in Heb. v. 14 Sta e^i'V, 2 Cor. v. 7 hid eihovq and before 
 proper names. In general we may say that elision takes place 
 before a pronoun or word with which the preposition is habitually 
 joined, but not before a proper name or a word which it is 
 important to make distinct. 
 
cliv THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Other modes of avoiding hiatus are crasis, v icfteXKua-riKov, and 
 final ? in such words as ovtw?. 
 
 Of crasis we have two examples, Kayo) ii. 18, where see note, and 
 Kciv for Kal av (= edv) v. 15. For this use of dv see John xii. 32, 
 xiii. 20, xvi. 23, xx. 23; and for the .crasis Mark xvi. 18, Luke 
 xiii. 9, also Winer p. 51. 
 
 V 6(f>e\KvcrTiK6v and the final ? in ovtoj? are constant in St. James 
 as in the rest of the N.T. : ^ cf. i. 6 eotKev kXvBcopi, ii. 12 ovtco^ 
 XaXeire. 
 
 Inflexions. 
 (A) Nouns, (B) Verbs. 
 
 A. (a) Indeclinable Hebrew names, 'A^pad/M ii. 21, 'Vad^ ii. 25, 
 talSatoO V. 4, 'Im^ v. 11. 
 
 (b) Irregular, 'Irjcrov^ i. 1, ii. 1. 
 
 (c) Neuter nouns of third declension talcing the place of mascu- 
 line nouns of second declension, e.g. to ekeo<; James ii. 13 and 
 always in N.T. ; also in Test. Zab. 5, 7, 8, Clem. E. 9, 28, &c. 
 eXeo? always in classical writers, Philo M. ii. 44 eXeip, 52 eXeov : 
 so TO <TK6ro<; is regularly used in N.T. while it is rare in classical 
 writers : ^tjXo? and TrXovra, always masculine in classical writers, 
 as in James and the rest of the N.T., are sometimes used by St. 
 Paul as neuters in the nom. and ace, see Eph. i. 7 (but o ■yrXovTO'i 
 in Eph. i. 18), 2 Cor. ix. 2 to fijXo? (but tov ^rjXov in 2 Cor. vii. 7). 
 
 (d) Adjectives with two instead of three terminations, fiaTaici 
 i. 36, as in Tit. iii. 9, cf Winer p. 80. 
 
 (e) The dual is not used in the N.T, 
 
 B. (a) Indicative Mood of Verbs. 
 a. Futibre: 
 
 (1) Of verbs in -t^w (see Hort I.e. p. 163, Meisterhans I.e. p. 143). 
 
 -t'cro) for -tw usually, except in 2nd and 3rd pi., cf. iyyia-ei iv. 
 8 (?), yvcopicrei Eph. vi. 21, yvcopicrovaiv Col. iv. 9 (?), /SaTTTt'o-et 
 Matt. iii. 11 and elsewhere, 'xaypi<rei, Eom. viii. 35, Oepiaei 2 Cor. 
 ix. 6 {bis), Gal. vi. 7, 8 {bis), Oepia-ofjuev 1 Cor. ix. 11, Gal. vi. 9, 
 
 1 The best editors however have <So|c Kiiioi Luke i. 2, tKaxf rov ib. i. 9. See 
 Winer p. 44, Schmid ii. p. 250, Meisterhans, Oramm. d. Att. Inschr. pp. 88, 89. 
 
;- - ON THE GRAMMAE OF ST. JAMES civ 
 
 ■)^apia€Tai Rom. viii. 32, ^coTicrei Apoc. xxii. 5 (?), 1 Cor. iv, 5, 
 fieTaa-yr^fiariaei Phil. iii. 21,- ■^pruiariaet, Rom. vii. 3, ^(^poviaei 
 Heb. X. 37 (?), a(f>opicrei, Matt. xxv. 32 (but a^opiovaiv ib. xiii. 
 49), Ko/iia-erai Eph. vi. 8, Col. iii. 25 (?) (but Ko/iiela-Oe 1 Pet. v. 4) 
 The following are examples of the Attic form, 'n-apopyiw Rom. x. 
 19, fj-eroiKico Acts vii. 43, /caOapiei Heb. ix. 14, SiaKadapiel Matt. 
 iii. 12, '^povLet Sirac. vi. 20, eKinov/Mev Sirac. ix. 19, (fxoTVovaiv Ep. 
 Jerem. 67, a-rqpiet Sirac. vi. 36 (but a-Trjpt^ei, 1 Pet. v. 10 and aor. 
 a-rrjpi^are James v. 8 ; on the other hand we find aTrjpLaov Luke 
 xxii. 32), KaOiei Job xxxvi. 7, Kadiovvrai, Ps. cxxxii. 12, a-Kop'm.ei 
 Job xxxiv. 15 (but Siaa-Kopiriaei xxxvii. 11), d^aviei Job xxxix. 24, 
 Oepiovaiv Ps. cxxvi. 2, fiuKaptova-tv Luke i. 48, eXinovaiv Matt. xii. 
 21, fieroiKiw Acts vii. 43. 
 
 (2) KepSaivo), Kep^rjcrofiev iv. 13 (of which Veitch cites examples 
 from the fragments of Euripides and from an epigram of Mene- 
 crates Smyrnaeus) instead of the classical KepSavovfiev. The form 
 Kephrjam is related to KepSijcrofiao (found in Herodotus and 
 Josephus) as the forms aKovcra) Matt. xii. 19, ap.apT'^crca Matt. 
 xviii. 21, awavTriaoo Mark xiv. 13, yeXdao) Luke vi. 21, Sido^w 
 Matt, xxiii. 34, iTraivia-m 1 Cor. xi. 21, iirtopK'qaa} Matt. v. 33, 
 icXava-a) Lnke vi. 35, Kpd^co Luke xix. 40, peva-w John vii. 38, 
 a-TTovBda-o) 2 Pet. i. 15, to the middle forms in ordinary use. 
 
 (3) Xafi^dvco, \riii-\^oiiai i. 12 (cf. TrpocTuyTroXrj/iyjria ii. 1, Trpocras- 
 iroKriinrreiTe ii. 9), so Herod. Xd/^yjrofiai, eKdfi^driv. 
 
 (4) iffOlm, (jjdyeTai for eBerai v. 3, cf. Luke xiv. 15, xvii. 8 
 (fydyeaai Koi TrUaai, Gen. iii. 3 ov (jidyecrde, Ps. cxxviii. 2, Eccl. iii. 
 13, Sir. vi. 2, 18, xliii. 21. It seems to be used as a present in 
 Sirac. xxxvi. 23. 
 
 /3. Aorist, 
 
 First aorist used where the 2nd aor. was used by classical 
 writers, e.g. ^Xaardvay, i^Xda-rrjcra (v. 18) instead of 'i^Xaarov ; 
 so KareXeoyjfa (Acts vi. 2) for KaTeXiirov. We might be tempted 
 to suppose that the 1st aor. was here preferred by St. James, 
 as more suited to the transitive force which he gives to the 
 word ; but i^Xda-Trja-a is intransitive in Matt. xiii. 26, Heb. ix. 4, 
 and e^XaiTTov is transitive in Eurip. fr. inc. 269 Wagner, cited by 
 
clvi THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Veitch, who also gives examples of the use of the 1st aor. from 
 Empedocles, Theophrastus, &c. 
 
 7. Perfect. 
 
 (1) 3rd pi. -av for -aat : eiaeXrjXvOav v. 4, see examples cited in 
 note, and Hort Notes on Orthography {G.T. app. p. 166). 
 
 (2) ol^a, olBu'; for ola-ffa John xxi. 15, 1 Cor. vii. 16 and always 
 in N.T., also found in classical authors, e.g. Xen. Mem. iv. 6. 6, Eur. 
 Ale. 780. o'lhafjuev Matt. xxii. 16 and always in N.T., also in 
 classical authors, e.g. Xen. Anai. ii. 4. 6. o'ihaTe James iv. 4 and 
 usually in N.T., also in classical writers : 'iare is however found in 
 i. 19, Heb. xii. 17, perhaps in Eph. v. 5. o'iSaa-iv Luke xi. 44 and 
 usually in N.T., also in Xen. Oec. xx. 14 ; but 'icraaiv in Acts 
 xxvi. 4. Cf. Schmid i. pp. 85, 232. 
 
 (6) Imperative Mood. 
 
 (1) i]T(o for ecTTft) v. 12, where see note. Veitch cites Hippocr. 
 viii. 340, Aretaeus i. 2. 79. 
 
 (2) KaOov for Kadrja-o ii. 3, see note. 
 
 Syntax. 
 The Article. 
 
 The simplest use of the article when coupled with a singular 
 noun is to single out, as concerned in the assertion made, one 
 particular member of the class denoted bj' the noun, which 
 member is supposed to be at once recognized by the reader either 
 from his general knowledge, as o ©eo?, or from information supplied 
 in the context, as ttjv ea-Orjra, rS tttw^w in ii. 3, after previous 
 mention. Thus in ii. 14 [jlt] Svvarai rj TrierTi'; aatcrai ai/rov ; the 
 article marks that the faith spoken of has been already described in 
 the previous words ; in ii. 25 97 iropvr) refers to one particular harlot, 
 Kahab, of whom alone the assertion made holds good ; in iii. 5 and 
 the following verses -fj yXaxra-a refers to the human tongue exclu- 
 sively J in V. 9 o KpiTi]'; is the Lord who is shortly to appear in 
 judgment, Sometimes the class may consist, in the mind of the 
 speaker, of one member only : e.g. i. 7 TrapA tov Kvpiov of the one 
 God, i. 11 6 ■^Xto?...Ta5 Kavcreovi, i. 27 tov Koa/iov, v. 18 6 ovpav6<;. 
 On the other hand the absence of the article implies that the 
 
ON THE GRAMMAR OF ST. JAMES clvii 
 
 assertion made about the noun is not more true of one member 
 of the class than of another. This is naturally expressed by the 
 English indefinite article in such passages as i. 6 eoiKsv /cXvSwvi, 
 where the comparison is to a wave generally, not to any particular 
 wave ; so in iii. 12 /jlt) Svvarai crvKrj iXaiw; Troifja-ai ; and ii. 18 
 iav aBe\,<f)0'i rj aSeXcfjrj lyvfivol virdp'^mcnv, ii. 24 e^ epyeov BiKaiovrai 
 dv6pcoTro<;, i. 23 iv icroTrrpm. 
 
 When the class as a whole is spoken of, the article is used either 
 with the collective noun, as ■^ eKKXrja-ia v. 14 ; or with the plural of 
 the persons or things composing the class, as ol trXovaioi ii. 6, tSsv 
 Xinrciv iii. &, roii? avOpdoTrovi; iii. 9 ; or with one such person or 
 thing, considered as typical or representative of the class (the 
 'generic' article), e.g. 6 irXova-io'; i. 12, rj Trrjiyij iii. 11, d (yea)py6<; 
 V. 7. If the article is omitted, the plural denotes that some of the 
 class are concerned in the assertion, without saying anything as to 
 the rest of the class, as kuv d/j,apTia^ ■§ TreTrotijKtu? v. 15, ttX^^os 
 dfiapTiwv V. 20, e^ epycov SiKaiovrai dvdp(inro<; ii. 24, eXKovaiv 
 vfj.d'i ell KpiTijpia ii. 6. 
 
 If two or more nouns denoting different persons or things are 
 joined by Kai, the article is regularly repeated with each, as in iii. 
 11 TO yXv/cv Kal to iriKpov; but if the nouns taken together 
 are regarded as denoting or constituting one person or thing, the 
 article is only used with the first, as in iii. 9 eiXoyovfiev top ®eov 
 Kal JiaTepa. 
 
 One case in which the Greek use of the article agrees with 
 French and German in opposition to the English is that of 
 abstractions such as ?; So^a, r) Trt'crTt?, which are thus, as it were, 
 personified and looked at as something existing apart from the 
 person or action with which they are concerned, cf. ii. 17 r] iricrTit;, 
 iav firj e'XJ) epya, pexpd ecrTiv, ii. 20, 22 ^ ttlo'ti'; crvvrjpyei rot? 
 epyoii avTOV Kal ex t&v epycov r) iriaTi^ eTeXenudr/, where 
 R. V. has ' Faith wrought with his works and by works was 
 faith made perfect.' In the oblique cases the article is generally 
 omitted unless (as in i. 2 to BokI/mov vfi&v Trj<; Trt'o-Tetos, ii. 1 Trjv 
 irlaTiv Tov Kvptov rifi&v) the noun is defined by the context. 
 Thus we have ii. 14 edv •rrla'Tiv Xiyrj rt? e'x^eiv and i. 6 alTeiTW iv 
 iria-Tei, because it is not faith absolute, faith as a self- existent 
 idea, which is spoken of, but merely faith relative, a quality 
 attributed to an act or an individual. So ii. 24 i^ epycov 
 
clviii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 SiKaoovTai dvOpooTTO'; Koi ovk Ik irlaTewi tiovov ' from actions, not 
 from believing.' In v. 15 ^ ^^"X^ ''■^9 TrccrTeco'; a-dxrei rbv Kafivovra, 
 the article is used with ei)(ii because of the preceding -rrpoaev^- 
 dadaaav, and Trla-Teax; has the article by sympathy, unless we 
 prefer to translate ' Faith's prayer,' giving its full personifying 
 force to the article. It is not necessary however, either in 
 classical or Hellenistic Greek, for the abstract noun always to take 
 the article even in the nominative : thus we have ii. 13 Kara- 
 Kavya-rai eXeoi; /cpicrecoi;, where we might have expected to eXeo? 
 T'^? Kpia-ew; KaTaKavyarrai, but the absence of the article gives a 
 further point to the antithesis, first by bringing together the con- 
 trasted words, and second by calling attention to the connotation 
 of the words. So iii. 10 e'/c tov avrov arofiaro^ i^ip'^erai 
 evKorfla koi /cardpa ' out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing 
 and cursing,' which might of course also be translated ' a blessing 
 and a curse.' Such omission of the article is especially common 
 in proverbs or other familiar and sententious phrases. 
 
 We will now consider the case in which the Greek anarthrous 
 noun is represented in English by the noun with definite article. 
 A well-known instance is that of ^aaiKev<; standing for the king 
 of Persia. Here the intermediate ^tage would be 6 ^aa-iXev^ 
 ' the king par excellence,' as Englishmen were accustomed to 
 speak of ' the Duke ' meaning ' the Duke of Wellington ' ; then 
 after a time ^aaiKev^ by itself gets to be regarded as a 
 proper name. In our Epistle, we find the article regularly 
 used with Kvpto<; and ©eo? in the nominative (e.g. i. 13, ii. 5, 
 19, iv. 6, 15, V. 11, 15); but the oblique cases sometimes take 
 the article {e.g. iv. 4 ex^pc' tov ®eov...i')(^dpb<; tov &eov, ii. 1 
 TT)v iricTTtv TOV KvpCov, V. 7, 8 ^ irapovcyla tov K.vpiov his, 
 iv. 7 vTTOTdyrjTe t£ @ea3, iv. 8 i'yyi<Taf€ tw @6a5, ii. 23 iiriarev- 
 aev TW ©60), iii. 9 ev\oyovp,ev tov K.vpiov, i. 27 Trapd tw 
 @6w, i. 7 irapd TOV Kvpiov) and sometimes omit it (e.g. i. 1 
 @€ov Kol J^vplov Sov\o<;, i. 20 opyi) dvSpb<; hiKaioavvriv ©eoO ovk 
 epyd^sTai, iii. 9 Kad' 6fioio}ari,v @eov, ii. 23 i^tXos ©eou, v. 4 to. 
 MTU Kvpiov, V. 10 ev tq) ovofiaTi 'Kvpiov, v. 11 to t4\o<; Kvpiov, 
 i. 13 diro @6ow ireipd^o/jLai, iv. 10 evmiriov Kvpiov). The practice 
 of St. James in this respect is that of the other writers of the N.T. 
 The nominative ©ed?, when it stands as the subject of the sentence, 
 is rarely found without the article : St. Paul uses the anarthrous 
 
OlSr THE GEAMMAE OF ST. JAMES clix 
 
 form twice in Gal. ii. 6 irpoa-atirov @eo? avOpcoirov ov Xafi/Sdvei,, 
 where the absence of the articles gives a sharper point to the 
 antithesis, and vi. 7 ©eo? oi/ fiv/cTrjpi^eTai,: in both cases the 
 absence of the article brings into greater prominence the charac- 
 teristic quality and connotation of the noun, not so much ' God ' 
 simply, but ' He who is God.' The rule is less strict in regard to 
 Kuj0to9, because this was freely used without the article in the 
 LXX. for the Sacred Name : so we find it in quotations (Rom. iv. 
 8, ix. 28, 29, 1 Cor. iii. 20), especially in the phrase \eyei Kvpioi; 
 (Acts vii. 49, xv. 17), but also in other passages, as Mark xiii. 20, 
 Acts xii. 11. A similar word is X/jhtto?, which in the Gospels 
 usually has the article, meaning ' the Anointed One,' but in the 
 Epistles has become a proper name and drops the article. It has 
 been often debated whether v6/j,o<; is used in a similar way without 
 the article to denote the Mosaic law. It is used of this with the 
 article ii. 10 oXov tov v6/j.ov Triptja-rj, ii. 9 iXey^^ofievoi virb tov 
 vo/iov, but without the article in ii. 11 yiyova^ -Trapa^aTTji; vofiov, 
 iv. 11 oiiK el TroirjTTjf vofiov, in both which cases the R. V. has 
 ' the law,' but perhaps the Greek would be more exactly given by 
 a compound, 'law-breaker,' 'law-observer.' So iv. 11 o kutu- 
 \a\,a>v aSe\^ov...Kara\a\,ei v6/j,ov kuI Kpivei vofiov, where also 
 R. V. has ' the law,' but perhaps a more correct rendering would 
 be ' speaks against law and judges law,' the absence of the article 
 serving, as in the case of ©eo? above, to give prominence to the 
 connotation of the noun. A similar word is \0709, which is found 
 with the article in i. 21 rov efi^vrov Xoyov ; without it in i. 22 
 TTOirjTal \6yov, 23 aKpoarr)'; Xoyov, in both of which the R.V. has 
 ' the word,' but the more strict interpretation would be ' word- 
 doers,' ' word-hearer.' 
 
 A noun may be qualified by the addition of an adjective or 
 participle, or of a genitive, or an adverb or adverbial phrase. If the 
 article is used, a noun thus qualified may take one of three forms, 
 either (1) o Ka\6<; 7ral<;, 6 tov avBpb'; iraT'qp, or (2) o Trats o Ka\6<i, 
 TT]v SiKaioawriv Tr)v Ik tov vofiov Rom. x. 5, or (3) the less common 
 Trat? o KoXoii, iv irlaTei Trj tov Tlov tov @eov Gal. ii. 20. With the 
 genitive or adverbial phrase we find also, instead of the more 
 idiomatic (1) or (2), the loose collocation (4) ttjv iricrTiv tov 
 Kvpiov, where the article is attached to the governing substantive, 
 which is either followed or preceded by the genitive or adverbial 
 
clx THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 phrase. Of (1) we have the following examples : rbv rlfjuov Kup- 
 •JTOV V. 7, T'^? KaXrjt; dvacrrpo(f>r]<; iii. 13, rbv efiijjVTOv \6yov i. 21 ; 
 of (2) TTjv eaOfJTa rrjv 'Kafnrpdv ii. 3, TJj (f>viTei rrj dvOpwjrLvr) iii. 7, 
 vofiodeTr)<; 6 Bvvdp,evo^ iv. 12, rat? rakanrcopiaii; vfiuv rai<; 
 e7repy(^o/jLevai<; v. 1, o fiicrOo^ t&v ip'yarS)v t&v dfirjcrdvTcov ra? 
 T^copa?, d<pva-Tepi]fievo<; v. 4 ; of (3) aSeX^o? o Tairetvo'; (so 5) i. 9, 
 vofiov TeKeiov rbv t?)? eKev6epia<i i. 25, dTfil^; dare r/ tt/so? oXiyov 
 ^aivofiivr] iv. 14, where the article makes the tendency to appear 
 and disappear a quality of the vapour, and not a mere accidental 
 circumstance ; so in Heb. vi. 7 yfj yap rj inovaa, ix. 2 aKrjvr] 
 Karea-Kevdardr} 17 irpmrrj ; of (4) we have rd iTrtrijSeia tov 
 awfiaro'i ii. 16, tov rpo'^bv t^? yeveaeax; iii. 6, ^ ^iXia rov 
 Kocrfiov iv. 4, ^ op/MTj TOV evOvvovTO'i iii. 4. The loose construc- 
 tion (4) is more usual than the compact (1) in St. James and 
 the N.T. generally, especially where a pronoun is concerned, as 
 TO dvdo<; avTOV, iv Tip v'\jre(, avTov (very rarely the compact, as 
 in i. 18 Tcbv avTov KTiapudTosv} Phil. ii. 30 Tb vfimv vcrTeprjfia) : 
 sometimes the gen. precedes, as in iii. 3 twv iinrav tov<; ■xaXivov<;, 
 V. 12 ^TO) vfi&v TO vat vai, 1 Tim. iv. 14 "va uov rj rrpoKOTrrj 
 (fiavepd ■§. The loose construction also prevails in long or complex 
 phrases, cf. iv. 1 tS)v -^Bovcov tmv a-TpaTevo/ievcov iv Tot? fieXecriv, 
 where the more idiomatic form would have been t&v iv toi<! 
 fieXeaiv a-TpuTevofievtov rjBovwv, and i. 5 irapd tov BiSovto'; @eov 
 Traaiv aTrXw?) where we might have expected either ir. tov @eov 
 TOV Trdaiv aTrXai? SiB6vto<;, or tt. tov irdacv dirXSi'; BoBovTO'i @eov : 
 so i. 3 TO BoKLfiiov vfitbv Tj)? TTt'o-Teft)? might have been more com- 
 pactly expressed to ttj? -Troa-Teax; v/mmv BokIimov. Classical parallels 
 will be found in the note on i. 5. We find the compact construction 
 however in iii. 9 tovi^ kuO' o/ioiaxriv &eov yeyovoTai; and frequently 
 in both Epistles of Peter, as in the First i. 14 rat? irpoTepov iv Tfj 
 dyvoia v/jlwv iTTiOvfuao^, il. 9 tov ek (tkotov; vfid<; KaXe<ravTO<;, 
 ii. 15 TTjv Tcbv d^povmv dvOpcoirmv dr/veocriav, iii. 2 ttjv iv <j)6^a> 
 dylav dvacTTpocfirjv vfiwv, V. 1 Koi Tfj<s fjieXXovarj'; d-TroKaXviT- 
 TecrOai So^ij? koivcov6<; : in the Second i. 4 tjj? iv tw Koa-fjuip iv t^ 
 iTTiOvfiia ^dopd'i, ii. 7 t'^? t5)v dOea-fiwv iv da-eXyeia dvaa-Tpo^i]'!, 
 ii. 10 Toii^ oiricrco (rapK0<! iv iinOvfiia /j,ia(T/j,ov iropevofiivov^. 
 
 1 This shows that A. Buttmann, p. 102 (cited in Winer p. 193 n.), is wrong in his 
 limitation, 'The insertion of the personal pronoun occurs in Paul only, and with no other 
 pronoun than ijiSiv.' Cf. also 1 Joh. ii. 27 rh ocbtoO xp^<'I'-«'> 1 Th. ii. 19, Rom. iii. 24. 
 
ON THE GRAMMAR OF ST. JAMES clxi 
 
 If we wish to distinguish the shades of meaning attaching to 
 these different modes of qualifying the noun, (1) denotes the 
 final stage of thought by which the subject is combined with its 
 qualification so as to form one new complex subject; (2) gives the 
 definite subject first, and then adds its qualification as a second 
 thought; (3) gives an indefinite subject first, and afterwards defines 
 it by its qualification : this has still more the air of a second 
 thought. Both (2) and (3) may serve a rhetorical purpose by 
 giving prominence to the qualification, which is to some extent, 
 merged and lost in (1). The last (4) is the least artistic form, and 
 gives the mental impression in its first rough shape, unmodified by 
 the secondary action of the mind. 
 
 In these compound phrases the use of the article is also affected 
 by what may be called the Law of Correlation or Sympathy. If 
 one noun is dependent oq another, the article is, in general, used 
 either with both or with neither ; aud thus, if the one noun can 
 dispense with the article, it is sometimes omitted with the other 
 also, even when, if it stood alone, the latter would naturally have 
 taken the article. Thus we have avdo<; ■^opTov i. 10, not dv0o^ 
 Tov y(6pT0V, SovXo^ @£0V i. 1, not SouXos tov @eov, (iKpoaTrji; Xo-yov 
 i. 23, not d/cpoaT^'S tov Xdyov, '^fiepa cr<f>ay'r]<;, not ry Vf'^Pf 
 <7<f)ayrj<; or rfliepa Trj<i a-(j)ayfj'; , vo/iov tov ttJs i\ev0epia<s i. 25, Bia 
 vofiov eKevOepiwi ii. 12 ; so epya v6fx.ov or to, spy a tov vofiov, not 
 epya tov vofiov or to, epya vofiov. Apparent' exceptions may 
 sometimes be explained (as v. 10 in tc3 ovofiaTi K.vpiov, v. 11 to 
 reXo? Kvpiov) by the fact that K.vpio<} is a proper name, the con- 
 struction being the same as in ttjv VTro/iovrjv 'Ito/S. 
 
 From the above uses of the article in an attributive phrase we 
 must carefully distinguish its use in predication, of which the type 
 is dyado'; 6 dvijp, the subject being known by the presence of the 
 article, the predicate by its absence, as in i. 26 tovtov /juaTaiO'i fj 
 dprjo-Keia, iv. 4 17 cjjtXia tov Koafiov e^Opa tov €)eov eaTiv. Hence 
 we characterize fj,aKdpiQ<; dvrjp in i. 12 as a predicate (like TiXeio<; 
 dvnp in iii. 2), 'He is a blessed man who,' instead of dividing 
 them with the English Version and making dvrjp subject, 
 ' Blessed is the man.' The same phrase is shown to be predica- 
 tive in Eom. iv. 8 {fiaKdpto<; dvrjp ov ov /J,rj XoyiarjTai, dfiapTiav) 
 by the preceding /MUKapioi wv d^eBrja-av a! dvofilai. And so 
 0pri<7Keoa Kudapd in i. 27 ' this, viz. visiting widows and orphans, 
 
 I 
 
clxii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 &c., is pure religion,' cf. Acts ix. 15 crKevo<; c'/cXoy^? ia-ri fioi 
 ouToi;, John i. 19 avrrj ea-rlv rj jxapTvpia 'Imdwov. We have 
 examples of oblique predication in i. 27 dairikov eavTOV Trjpeiv, 
 V. 10 VTroBeiyfj^a Xo/Sere tij? KaKoiradia's roix; 7rpo(f)7jTa<}, and 
 ii. 5 oup^ o &eb<s i^eXe^aro Tov<i TrTco^oiit raJ Koa-fiip 'ir\ovcriov<; 
 ev irltnet, ; ' has not God chosen the poor to the world (to be) 
 rich in faith ? ' The article however may be used with the 
 predicative noun when it does not denote a class in which the sub- 
 ject is included, but a concept of equal extension with which it is 
 declared to be identical, as iii. 6 o /cotr/io? t'^s aSt/ct'a? rj yX&a-a-a 
 KaOia-Tarat, 'the tongue is (represents) the unrighteous world.' 
 
 The English possessive pronoun is expressed in classical Greek 
 by the article alone, except for the sake of clearness or emphasis. 
 So too occasionally in the N.T., e.g. Matt, xxvii. 24 d-n-eviyjraTo 
 ras ■)(elpa<;, Luke v. 13 i/creiva^ ttjv •^elpa, James ii. 15 Xetwofievoi 
 T^? i(j)7)fiipov Tpo(f)fj^ 'in lack of their daily food' [or perhaps 
 'the day's food'], ii. 14 iav iricrTiv Xeyrj rts ey(ecv, epya Se fir) e-XV, 
 fj,r) SvvaTai r) iria-nv a&aai avTov ; ' can his faith save him ? ' 
 [But perhaps it is better to take the article simply as referring to 
 the previous Tria-Tif, ' can the faith (spoken of) save him ' ?], v. 16 
 e^ofioXoyeiade aXXrjXoi'i ra? dfiapria^ ' confess your sins to each 
 other,' or perhaps ' confess the sins (spoken of in v. 15) '. The 
 latter however seems here less appropriate, as the sins spoken of in 
 V. 15 were those of the sick man alone. 
 
 Generally however in the N.T. the genitive of the demonstrative 
 or personal pronoun is added, e.g. i. 21 to,^ y}rvxa<; vfi&v, ii. 8 tov TrXrj- 
 crlov 170V, ii. 18 rrjv iriaTiv <rov., rcov epyayv fiov, iii. 6 rot? fxiXeaiv 
 vficbv, i. 8 rati; 6Sot<; avrov, i. 10 Tfi5 {!i|ref avTov...Tfi raireivwaei 
 avrov, i. 11 to dv6o<; avrov... tov irpoawirov avrov... ev rats 
 TTopeiai? avrov. Where two nouns are joined the genitive of the 
 pronoun may be stated only once, e.g. iii. 13 Set^dro) ex rrj<s KaXrj^ 
 dva(Trpo<^rj<; {avrov) rd epya avrov, iv. 9 d yeXco<i vfi&v el<; •jrevOo'i 
 /Mera<rrpa<j)7]rco koi rj X""?"- ipH'O'v) el<s Kari](j}eiav, ii. 18 Bei^o) eK 
 rS)v epycov fiov rfjv rrlanv (fiov). 
 
 Occasionally the article is omitted, and the possessive pro- 
 noun alone employed, as m i. 26 /jlt] xi^-^i-vaycoySiv yXSxrcrav 
 eavrov aXX' dvarwv Kaphiav eavrov, ii. 2 el<; crvvaytoyTjv 
 vficov if we translate ' into your synagogue ' instead of ' into a 
 synagogue (or 'meeting') of yours,' v. 20 d eVio-T/oei^as dfiap- 
 
ON THE GRAMMAR OF ST. JAMES clxiii 
 
 7mXov 6« TrXavij? oBov avTov aoxret ■^v')(i]v ainov. This is very 
 common in the LXK., and especially in the Apocrypha, e.g. 
 itrl Kaphiav ?j/awj/ Baruch iii. 7, of. Sir. ii. 17, v. 2, xiii. 19, Psalm. 
 Sal. vi. 7, jJ-r) fivqadfi^ dSiKiMV varipav rffimv, aXKa /xvija-Qrjrt 
 y(^etpoi <rov Baruch iii. 5, SiKaimfiara airov ovk eyvcoaav ovB^ 
 eTTopevdrja-av oSot? evroKwv @eoO ib. iv. 13, eVt r/aap^J^Xou? avrSiv 
 eTTi^^crri, V. 25, 1 Mace. ii. 10 irolov edvo<; ovk eKXrjpovofirjae ^aa-i- 
 \eiav avTt]^ ; (' her kingdom '), v. 44 iv opyy avrmv ' in their 
 wrath,' V. 70 eda^^av avrov ev rd<^oi<i irareprnv avrwv 'in the 
 sepulchre of their fathers,' Sir. i. 11 iv ■fifiepa reXeur^? avrov 
 evXoyrjd'^a-eTai ' in the day of his end,' iii. 5 iv '^fiepa Trpoaevyfj'; 
 avrov, iii. 10 iv aTifiia Trarpo's crov, Psalm. Sal. iv. 18 UTrb Kpord- 
 <^(ov avTov 'from his temples,' viii. 5 irapeXvdr] y 6v ar d fiov coxaing 
 between (rvverpi^r] tj oa(^v<; fiov and icpo^i^dr/ rj KapBla fiov. In 
 like manner the article is omitted with the possessive pronoun, 
 e.g. Prov. iii. 5 eVt a-fj aot^lq, /ifj iiraipov, v.*21 Tijprjcrov i/jirjv ^ovXijv. 
 
 Sometimes both article and genitive are omitted, as in iv. 8 
 KaOapiaare ')^elpa<; dfiaprcoXol xal dyviaaTe KapSiw; Zii^vyoi 
 'cleanse your hands ye sinners, and purify your hearts ye double- 
 minded.' Probably this is to be explained as a proverbial phrase 
 approaching to a compound, like our ' shake hands,' ' up-stairs.' 
 We may compare Sir. xxxviii. 10 evdvvov ■^etpa<; koI aTTO ■jrdarj'i 
 dfiapTiw; Kaddpiaov KapSiav, 1 Mace. xii. 39 i^TJrrja-e Tpv<f>wv 
 iKTSLvai %et/3a iirl 'Avtlo'x^ov. 
 
 I will now take in order, with one or two exceptions whicli 
 will be noted later, the remaining instances in which an 
 anarthrous Greek noun takes the deiinite article in the R.V. 
 These are i. 10 »? dvdo^ ')(ppTov irapeXevaeTai ' as the flower 
 of the grass he shall pass away.' I see no objection here to a 
 more literal rendering ' as a flower of grass,' i.e. ' as a wild 
 flower ' ; in v. 11 we have the article tw -^^opTov, rb dv6o<i because 
 they have been already referred to : i. 20 opyr] dvBpo<i Sikuio- 
 avvrjv @eov ovk ipyd^erat ' the wrath of man worketh not the 
 righteousness of God ' might perhaps be rendered ' a man's wrath 
 worketh not God's righteousness,' but I am disposed to think that 
 the absence of the article (which is facilitated here by the law of 
 correlation, SiKaiocrvvrjv dropping its article in order to conform 
 with the naturally anarthrous ®eov, and the phrase opyij dvBpo'i 
 being in like manner made conformable to the phrase B. @.) is 
 
 12 
 
clxiv THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 intended to emphasize the contrast by bringing together the con- 
 trasted nouns, as in ii. 13, of which I have spoken above : 
 V. 20 TToXv la'xvet Ser]cn,(s BiKulov evepyovfievr] ' the suppU- 
 cation of a righteous man availeth much in its working' 
 might perhaps be better translated 'a righteous man's suppli- 
 cation availeth much when actuated by the Spirit.' iii. 18 
 KapTro<; Se SiKaiocrvvqi; iv eipijvr) a-ireopeTai, here it is to be 
 noted that Kapir. Bik. is a phrase found in Phil. i. 11, Heb. xii. 
 11, as well as in Amos vi. 2, Prov, xi. 30, and is therefore liable to 
 the abbreviation which naturally attaches to all proverbial expres- 
 sions. Possibly also the writer may have felt that the proleptic 
 use of «a/>7ro? would have acquired additional harshness if the 
 article were prefixed. It would have been natural to say to 
 (Tirepfia cnreipeTai,, but Kapiro'i is not that which is sown, but 
 that which it is hoped will spring up. Peaceful sowing results in 
 righteousness as its fruit.' 
 
 I proceed to the case of anarthrous epithets where the English has 
 the definite article. Such are v. 3 iv ea-'^dTai'; ■^fj,ipai<i 'in the 
 last days,' which occurs also in 2 Tim. iii. 1 : it may be compared 
 with 1 John ii. 18 ia-)(arr) &pa ecrTiv, 1 Pet. i. 5 ev xaipm ia-xar^, 
 Sir. i. 11 ev ecrrai iir ea-')(a,T(ov, and even ii. 3 eV ecrxaTmv crov. 
 On the other hand we find iv Tal<i ia-xaTam riixepai,<s Acts ii. 17, 
 and rfi ecr;;^aTj7 rjfiepa seven times in St. John's Gospel. In James 
 v. 7 the R.V. ' until it receive the early and the latter rain ' stands 
 for the Greek ^m? Xa/3j7 irpolp.ov ical o-f^ifiov. In this last case 
 both article and substantive are dropped by colloquial abbreviation, 
 as we have ' Paul's ' in old writers for ' St. Paul's church.' 
 
 In English we join the article with the superlative, even when 
 it forms part of the predicate; whereas the Greeks always omitted 
 it in such cases (e.g. irdvToov ^iXofia6eaTaTo<; K.vpo<; r/v), and also 
 where the superlative denotes a high degree of any quality, as 
 James iii. 4 viro iXa')(ia-Tov irijBaXiov. Similarly the classical 
 writers omit the article with the ordinal numeral, as Thuc. v. 81 
 rerapTov ical BeKUTov ero? tS TroXefj,(p ijeXevra, and so, in Matt. 
 XX. 3 and elsewhere, we find expressions like irepl rpcTrjv &pav. 
 The omission is probably to be accounted for by the wish to 
 shorten familiar expressions where there is no danger of misunder- 
 standing being caused by it, just as we might say '7th Victoria,' 
 or ' Acts seven two.' 
 
ON THE GEAMMAR OF ST. JAMES clxv 
 
 I come now to the phrases which I had reserved before : i. 18 
 aireKvrja-ev rjiiai; \d7ft) aXriOeia^, with which may be compared 
 2 Cor. vi. 7 iv \6yqi a\r)0eia<;, ev Svvd/jbet @60u, and Col. i. 5 eV tm 
 Xoyft) TJjs aXr]deLa<; tov evayyeKiov. The meaning in the two 
 latter expressions is the same, but in Colossians it is stated at 
 length, whereas in Corinthians the Apostle just touches it in his 
 rapid enumeration of the different ways in which he showed him- 
 self a minister of God. Similarly we have Xoyov fwj)? Phil. ii. 16. 
 Both X6yo<; and aXtjdeia belong to the class of abstract words 
 which may either take the article or not, according to the pleasure 
 of the speaker ; and if one is made anarthrous, the other will 
 usually be so too by the rule of sympathy or correlation. A 
 precisely similar case is ii. 12 Sia vofiov eXevdepia'; ^eXXovres Kpl- 
 vecrOai. In both cases I think the qualifying noun gains additional 
 importance by the omission of the article. In ii. 8 we have the 
 anarthrous adjective vo/jlov reXeire ^aaiXiKov, where the adjective 
 comes in rather as an after-thought to complete the phrase vofiov 
 TeXeire. In my note I have compared irvevfjia ayiov, SiadijKr) 
 ay la Luke i. 72, 1 Mace. i. 15, 73. 
 
 The remaining case (i. 25) combines the adjective and the genitive 
 vofiov reXeiov tov t^? eXevdepia^. Here the addition would be 
 quite regular if reXeiov were absent. It is best, I think, to regard 
 vofjiov reXeiov as parallel to vojiov ^aaiXiKov above, being equiva- 
 lent to TOV reXeiov vofiov. 
 
 It must indeed be confessed that the Hellenistic writers are 
 very lax in their use of the article, with a noun qualified by 
 an attributive adjective or genitive. They may be said to have 
 introduced into Greek prose the freedom of Greek poetry, itself a 
 tradition handed down from the Homeric ages, before the use of 
 the article had been developed out of the demonstrative pronoun. 
 This freedom would naturally commend itself to foreigners 
 learning Greek, to whom Greek gender would be as great a 
 stumbling-block as German or French gender is to Englishmen 
 now, and who, as a matter of fact, did often confuse the 
 masculine and neuter gender, see above p. cliv. We find 
 examples in Baruch i. 3 iv &<ti iravro'; tov Xaov, where ev Sicri 
 may be regarded as a prepositional phrase (like e'/c cnop.aTO'i Xeov- 
 Twv 1 Mace. ii. 60), Bar. i. 8 to, a-KevTf oikov K.vpiov, where the 
 omission of the article before oikov is probably to be explained by 
 
clxvi THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 its forming a phrase with Kvpiov, Sir. i. 5 pi^a (To^la<i tIvi atre- 
 KoKv^Qy] ; (' the root of wisdom '), ver. 9 ^o^a JLvpiov Kavj^r/fia 
 ' the fear of the Lord is glory,' ver. 16 <ne^avo<; a-ocf>ca<; (f>6^o<; 
 Kvpiov ' the fear of the Lord is the crown of wisdom,' vii. 9 @em 
 v-^la-Tw 'to the most high God,' xxxi. 13 irvev/jba (fso^ovfievav 
 Kvpiov ^ijaerai,, Psalm. Sal. iii. 7 dXt^Oeia t&v SiKaieov vapa @eov 
 ' the truth of the just comes from God,' iii. 16 ^ ^corj avTwv iv (jxarl 
 Kvpiov,' xiii. 1 Se^ih Kvpiov ia-Keiraaiv fie followed by d Ppa')(l,tav 
 Kvpiov eama-ev fie, Job xxxi. 18 hia da-e0eiav Bwpwv &v iSe- 
 'X,opTo, xxxviii. 17 dvoijovTai irvXai davdrov, v. 31 Secrfibv IlXetaSo? 
 eyvcoi ; xxxix. 1 eyvco^ /caipbv TOKerov rpa'ye\d(f)a)v Trer/aa? ; Prov. 
 ii. 17 r] diroXtTTOVcra SiSaaxaKlav veorrfTO'i koI hiaOrfKTfv Oelav eiri- 
 XeXrfcTfievr), ver. 22 ohol dae^&v e/c 777? oKovvrai, iii. S3 Kardpa 
 ®eov iv o'l/coii dcre^Mv, 'the curse of God is on the houses of 
 the impious,' 2 Sam. xxiv. e-n-dra^e KapBla Aa^lS avrov, Jonah 
 ii. 4 direppii^d'; fie eU ^ddrj KapBla<; dakda-ari<;. We also find 
 the article omitted with the participle when used as a sub- 
 stantive, as in Prov. v. 13 ovk tjkovov (fxovrjv TraiSevovro'; fie. 
 For similar omissions in N.T. cf. Luke i. 15 ex Koi,\la<; fi7jTpb<; 
 avTov, V. 17 ev -jrvevfian koI Svvdfiei 'HXla, eiricrTpe'^ai, Kap- 
 St'a? irareptav eiil Teicva koI direi6el<; iv ^povrjcxei BiKaicov, 
 V. 35 Svvafii^ 'Tyfrlarov iiria-Kida-ei ere, v. 51 ZieaKopTncrev 
 vireprjipdvov'} Siavola KapSia<; avT&v, v. 78 Sid crTrXdy^^va iXeov; 
 ®eov rjfimv, ii. 9 ho^a Kvpiov, v. 13 irXrjOo'; a-Tpanat; ovpaviov, 
 V. 25 TrpoaSe'x^ofievo'; irapdKXrjaiv tov 'Icrpa-^X, Heb. iv. 3 dirb 
 KaTa^oXrji; Koafiov, v. 13 Xoyov SiKaiocrvvr)^, 1 Pet. i. 1 ixXeKroh 
 irapeiriB'^/ioi'} Stacnropd<;, v. 23 Sid Xoyov ^&vto<s ©eou koI fievov- 
 To<; ' by the word of God which liveth and abideth/ iii. 12 6<l>daX- 
 fiol Kvpiov iirl SiKalov<; koI ura avrov eh Serjcriv avrmv, -Trpoaeoirov 
 Be Kvpiov eiri, iroiovvra^ Kaxd, 2 Pet. ii. 5 dpyalov Koafiov ovk 
 i(j}elaaTO...KaTaKXv<Tfibv Koafim dcre/Sibv eVa^ay. It is curious 
 that the Apocalypse in spite of its startling solecisms of construc- 
 tion approaches more nearly to the classical usage as regards the 
 article than many other parts of the N.T. 
 
 The use of the article with 7ra? and 0X09 is the same in the 
 N.T. as in ordinary Greek. When Tra? is anarthrous, it is equiva- 
 lent to the Eng. ' every,' if joined to a common singular noun, as 
 in i. 17 irdv Bcoprifia reXeiov, i. 19 7ra? avOpcoTroi, iii. 7 irdaa 
 <f)vcri9 Orjplcov, iii. 16 irav (pavXov nrpdyfia : if joined to an abstract 
 
ON THE GRAMMAR OP ST. JAMES clxvii 
 
 noun, which properly denotes only a single subject, it is equiva- 
 lent to 'all,' as in i. 21 -n-aa-av pviraplav 'all filthiness,' i. 2 iraa-av 
 Xapav Tjr^iqa-aaOe ' think it entire joy ' ; so perhaps Tracra i6(TL<i 
 a7a^?? ' all good giving' in i. 17; in the phrase Traa-a Kavx'no-i<; 
 Toiavrrj iv. 16 it may be better to translate 'every such boasting,' 
 because the addition of Toiavjrf splits up the idea of xav^vo'i";, 
 while the absence of the article forbids us to make a new unit, 
 such as would be implied by 17 Toiavrrf Kaiyjqtri^. We find the 
 article in i. 8 iv Trao-tw? Toif oSoi? avrov ' in all his ways,' and 
 with oXo<; in ii. 10 oXov tov vo/jlov, iii. 2 6\ov rb (7&fj,a. More 
 rarely we find o\o<; placed after the article and substantive, as in 
 TOV Koa-fiov okov Mark viii. 36. In both these cases oXos is 
 properly in apposition, and is thus more forcible than when it 
 is placed between the article and substantive, as it sometimes is in 
 classical writings, but never in the N.T. Ha? however occurs in 
 this order in Acts xx. 18 tov irdvTa ^povov, Gal. v. 14 6 7ra? 
 vofio^, &c. 
 
 An adjective or participle may stand by itself as a substantive, 
 if its omitted subject is made sufficiently clear by gender, number, 
 and context, e.g. ©eos VTr6prj(f>dvot,^ dvTtTa.a-a'eTai iv. 6, elSoTi koXov 
 iroLelv...dfiapTla ia-Tiv iv. 17; and such a substantive may be 
 defined by the article like a proper substantive, e.g. i. 6 d BiaKpivo- 
 fievoi;, i. 11 o irXovcnoi;, ii. 16 to, einTijSeia, iii. 11 to jXvkv, to 
 ■KiKpov. In like manner the infinitive, which is used by itself as a 
 substantive in apposition in i. 27 6pr]a-Keia Kadapa avTTj ia-Tiv, 
 iTna-KeTTTecrdai, 6p(pavov^, may be defined by the article and thus 
 become capable of inflexion, as in tov fiij ^pe^ai, v, 17. The same 
 holds good of adverbs or any other indeclinable word or phrase, as 
 in V. 12 i]TO) vfi&v TO val vai, where the article serves to dis- 
 tinguish the first vai, which is subject, from the second val, which 
 is predicate. It has been stated above that a substantive may be 
 qualified by an adverb interposed between it and the article, as 
 ■f) dvmOev cro<f)ia in iii. 17. If the noun is such as can be easily 
 supplied in thought, from its being part of a common phrase or 
 any other reason, it is often omitted, as in j; avpiov {rfnipa) iv. 14. 
 Again the neuter article is often used with the genitive to express 
 the general conception of the person or thing denoted, and thus 
 we get the phrase to tjJ? avpiov in the verse referred to. 
 
clxviii THE EPISTLE OP ST. JAMES 
 
 Pronouns. 
 Demonstrative. 
 
 ovTO<; used to emphasize the apodosis in i. 23 et rt? aKpoarr)<;... 
 o5to9 eoiicev avBpi k.t.X., i. 25 o TrapaKv-ijra^ et? vofiov TeXeiov... 
 ovTof /laKapiof. See Winer, p. 199. As subject, attracted to the 
 gender of the predicative noun, i. 27 Oprjo-Keia Kadapa avrt] ia-riv, 
 iinaKeTnea-Oat 6p<^avov<;. 
 
 oSe, supposed to be used for o Seiva, seen, on 13, eh rijvSe rrjv 
 
 •TToXlV. 
 
 avTot = Lat. ipse, emphatic, (a) ordinary use i. 12 d ©eo? uTrei- 
 paaTO'i icTTiv, nreipd^ei Se avTO^ ovSiva, ii. 6 (pi irXovcriot) avrol 
 eXKOvaiv vfia<i : (&) special Hellenistic use ii. 7 ovk avrol ^Xaa- 
 ^rjfiovcriv, see notes on the two verses : (c) the nom. does not seem 
 to be used pleonastically, as by St. Luke in xxiv. 13, 14 hvo ef 
 avT&v ?i(Tav iropevofievov. . .KoX avrol &[jlIXovv tt/so? aKXrfKovi. 
 
 6 auTos iii. 10 e/e rov avrov a-r6fiaro<!, ver. 11 e* t^? avri]<i 
 oTTj}?, St. James does not use avros d in this sense, as St. Luke 
 does in the phrase airy rfj Spa (lit. 'at the very hour'), which 
 occurs in ii. 38, vii. 21, Acts xvi. 18 and elsewhere. 
 
 avr6<s = Lat. is, unemphatic in the oblique cases; but gaining a 
 certain emphasis by repetition, as in iii. 9 iv avrfj eiiXoyovfiev xal 
 iv avrfj KarapwfieOa : or by position as in St. Luke xxiv. 24 avrov 
 Be OVK elBov, ver. 31 avrwv Be Birjvoi'^dria-av ol 6(f)daXfj,oi. It is also 
 used pleonastically, not only in the genitive with the article, as 
 in the cases mentioned above ; but when occurring in apposition 
 to the noun, or participle equivalent to noun, as in iv. 17 elBort 
 Kal fiij iroiovvn afiaprla avrm ecrriv. 
 
 avrov instead of eavrov,^ in i. 18 anreKviqcrev rifui<i el<s ro elvat ij/ta? 
 aTrap'^riv t&v avrov xricrfidrcov (ACP have eaiirov); i. 26 Tregelles 
 and Tischendorf read (with Sin, AKL &c.) fir) 'x^aXivaywy&v yX&a-- 
 aav avrov aXXa airarSiv KapBlav avrov, where I have followed 
 WH. in reading (with B + ) eavrov. See also note on v. 20, where 
 some of the latest editors read ■y^vyi^v avrov. 
 
 eavrov is used for (reavrov in i. 22 yiveaOe iroirjral Kal fif/ 
 cLKpoaral fiovov trapaXoyi^ofievot kavrov<;, ii. 4 BieKpWijre iv eav- 
 Tots. We find however aeavrov in ii. 8. 
 
 1 Seo Lightfoot on Col. i. 20, Hort App. 144 nnd examples iu Schweighiiuser's 
 Lex. Polyh. s.v. 
 
ON THE GKAMMAE OF ST. JAMES clxix 
 
 The use of the article with the demonstrative pronoun is the 
 same as in classical writers, cf. i. 7 d avOpwiro's iK€cvo<;, iii. 15 avTrj 
 i) ao^ia, iv. 13 Tqvhe ttjv iroXiv. 
 
 Belative. 
 
 Attracted ii. 5 /cXr^povofiovi t^9 ^aa-iXeia^ ^9 i-n-rjyyeiTMTo. 
 Indefinite (with idv for dv) iv. 4 o? ehv ^ovXrjdfj ^i\o<s elvai 
 Tov Koafiov; ii. 10 ocrTi<s oXov top v6/iov Tripijarj, iv. 13 (pi Xeyov- 
 Te<}...KepB'^cro/j.ev) oiTtve<s ovk iTricrTaa-de to tjJs avpiov, 'whereas 
 ye know not,' see note. 
 
 Interrogative. 
 
 Tt? introducing hypothetical clause iii. 13 rt? 0-0^69 ev vfiip ; 
 Sei^aTco; with pregnant force iv. 12 crv rt? el; 'how weak and 
 ignorant ? ' 
 
 TToia 7) ^mr) ; iv. 14 : dependent i. 24 kireXdOero 6iro2o<s r)v. 
 Double question iii. 5 ■^XIkov irvp tjXIktiv vXr)v dvdirrei. 
 
 Indefinite with idiomatic force i. 18 et? ro elvai '^fid<; d'Trapyijv riva 
 
 TCOV aVTOV KTlCr/ldTCOV. 
 
 Number and Gender. 
 
 A singular noun is used for a plural in iii. 14 el epiOiav e-^ere ev 
 TJ] KapSia vfiwy, in contrast with v. 5 edpe-^are rd^ KapSla<; ifimv, 
 and v. 8 a-Trjpi^aTe ra? KapSia<i vfieop. 
 
 A singular verb precedes two subjects joined by kuc: iii. 10 e'« 
 TOV avTov a-TO/iaTOi; e^epj(eTai eiXoyla xal Kardpa. 
 
 First plural of verb used in courtesy : iii. 1 nel^ov Kpifia Xrj/j.'yjro- 
 fieda, iii. 9 ev avTy eiXoyoO/iev Kal iv aiiTrj KaTapu/iev. 
 
 A plural verb and adjective follow a subject consisting of two 
 nouns joined by a disjunctive conjunction in ii. 15 edv dSeX<j)0'i ^ 
 dSeX(f>rj yvfivol virdp'^ma-iv. 
 
 A plural verb follows a singular indefinite pronoun : ii. 16 edv 
 Tt? 6^ vfi&v e^c'7rr]...firj Swre Se. 
 
 The imperative 0176 is used as an exclamation with a plural in 
 iv. 13 dye vvv oi XeyovTe<;, and v. 1 aye vvv ol irXovcnoi. 
 
 The neuter plural referring to persons is used with a plural verb 
 in ii. 19 ra Satfiovia iriaTevovo'iv. 
 
clxx THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 The plural of abstract nouns is used to express the various 
 manifestations of the abstract idea, e.g. ii. 1. fji-rj iv Trpoa-amokrjfi- 
 yjciaiq 6T^6T6 rrjv irltrriv. 
 
 Cases. 
 
 (1) Nominative. 
 
 There is a tendency in the Hellenistic writings, notably in the 
 Apocalypse, to put the noun of apposition into the nominative, 
 even where the original noun is oblique ; thus we have in iii. 8 ttjv 
 yXaicraav ovBel<! Ba/J,dcra(, Swarai followed by aKaTaaTaTOV kukov, 
 fiea-TTj toil, which we can here explain as a new sentence with the 
 subject r) ryX&aa-d iariv understood ; but such an explanation fails 
 ia Apoc. iii. 12 rypdyjro) eV avTov to ovo/ia tt}? Kaivrji; 'lepovcraXijfi, 
 rj Kara^aivovaa dirb tov ®eov fiov, /cal rb ovo/xd /lov to Kaivov, 
 and in other passages referred to in my note. We have however 
 many examples of the ordinary apposition, as in the nom. i. 1 
 'Ia«(u/3o? hovKo'i, ver. 8 o dv6pwjTo<; iKeivo^...dvr)p St'i/rv^o?, ii. 21 
 'A^padfi 6 irarrjp rjixmv, ii. 25 'Paa^ rj iropvr), i. 27 6prf<TKela Kadapa 
 avrr} iarlv, eTria-KeTTTeadai, 6p<f>avov^, where avrri is in apposition 
 to the following infinitive : in the gen. i. 1 K.vpiov 'Irjaov X-picrrov, 
 and the harsh use in ii. 2 ttjv irLa-Tiv rov Kvpiov rifiSiv 'Irjcrov 
 'Kpia-Tov, rrji; S6^r]<!, where see note ; in the ace. ii. 21 'Itraa/c rbv 
 vlbv avTov : not to mention such cases as i. 1 ral'i SmSexa (jjvXaii; 
 rai<; iv Trj Siaa-iropa, iii. 6 57 jXcJa-cra fj (jirikovcra, V. 4 6 fii(Tdb<; o 
 d(j)vcrTepr)/j,evo^, which are treated of under the article. 
 
 (2) Accusative. See Prepositions. 
 
 Of Duration, v. 17 ovk ^^pe^ev iviavrov<; r/oet?. 
 
 Adverhial (defining the extent of the action), i. 6 /irjBep BictKpi- 
 vbp.evo<;, iii. 2 iroXXa inaUiv. 
 
 Subject of Infinitive : see below, under Pleonasm. 
 
 (3) Genitive. See Prepositions and Infinitive. 
 
 With substantives, (a) possessive, (a^ objective, (a^ subjective, 
 (b) of quality, (c) of material. 
 
 (ttj) i. 22 7roi7jT^9 Xoyov, iv. 11 TroirjTrji; vofiov, i. 25 TroirjTtji; 
 6/37011, iv. 4 (^tX,o? TOV Koafiov, ii. 1 Tqv tticttiv tov K.vpiov (repre- 
 senting the verbal phrase iriaTevm K.vpi^ or eis K.). 
 
ON THE GRAMMAR OF ST. JAMES clxxi 
 
 (a^ i. 20 opryr) avSp6<;, BiKatoa-vvrj @eov, v. 11 to reXos Kvpiov, 
 V. 15 17 ev'xr) Tfj<s TTiVrews. 
 
 (6) i. 25 and ii. 12 v6/xo<; iX€v6epia^, i. 25 axpoaTr}'; i-TrtXtja-- 
 fiovrff, ii. 4 KpiTol BiaXoyicr/jLtov Trovrjpo)!/, iii. 6 o Koafio^ rfjs dSi- 
 Kt'a?, and (unless these two had better be classed as ' possessive,' 
 yevea-i's and rpoir'q being personified) i. 23 to -irpoa-co-Trov rrj^ jevi- 
 (7eG)s aiiTov, i. 17 Tp07rrj<i airocrKiaa-fMa. 
 
 (c) i. 12 Tov iTri<j}avov rrjii ^o)^s 'the crown which consists in 
 life eternal/ iii. 18 Kapiro'; SiKaioavviTi ' the fruit which consists in 
 justice.' 
 
 With adjectives, (a) of possession and privation, (&) defining the 
 sphere. 
 
 (a) iii. 8 /lecrTT} lov, iii. 17 /lea-rr] eXeov?. 
 
 (&) i. 13 direlpacrTO'; Kaxwp, ii. 10 irdvTtov evo')(pt; (the latter 
 would come under the smaller category of judicial words). 
 
 With verls, (a) of attainment or its opposite, (6) of aim with 
 infinitive, (c) compounded with Kara. 
 
 (a) i. 5 XeiTrerai cro(f>ia^, ii. 15 Xei-Trofievoi Tpo<f)rj^. 
 
 (h) V. 17 irpooTrjv^aro tov fit) ^pi^at. 
 
 (c) ii. 6 KUTaBwaa-Tevovcriv vfiwv, ii. 13 KaTaKav^ciTai Kpicreax;, 
 iv. 11 KaToXaXei vofiov, dXX'^Xwv. 
 
 The Genitive Absolute does not occur in this epistle. 
 
 (4) Dative. See Prepositions. 
 
 General of Indirect Object, with transitive verbs (a), with intrans- 
 itive or passive verbs or adjectives (&). 
 
 (a) ii. 5 eTTTiyyetXaTO, iv. 6 SiSwaiv. 
 
 (b) i. 6 eoUev KXvhmvi, i. 23 eoiKev dvBpl, iv. 6 UTrepij^aj/ot? 
 aVTiTaa-aeTai, iii. 3 et? to ireideadai avTOV^ VH-'i'V, iv. 7 viroTdyrjTe 
 To3 @6c3, dvTla-TrjTe T<p Sia^oXm, iv. 8 iyyia-aTe to5 ©ecS, v. 17 
 6[ioio'ira6r]<; rjiMV. 
 
 Special Uses, expressing {a) contact, (&) person possessing, 
 ,(c) person to whose judgment or estimate reference is made, 
 (d) agent. 
 
 (a) i. 2 irepiiriTTTeiv weipaa/jLoi<;. 
 
 (b) V. 3 o t'os et? fiapTvpiov vfilv ecrTai, iv. 17 duapTia avTW 
 ecTTiv. 
 
clxxii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 (c) ii. 5 Tov; TTTCO'^oiK} t(S Koa-fi^. 
 
 (d) iii. 7 iraaa (f>vcn'; Safid^eTui tj} ^vaei, iii. 18 KapTro<j airei- 
 peTUi Tots TTOiova-iv elpijvriv. 
 
 . Instrumental. 
 
 i. 18 aireKvrjcrev \6yq), ii. 25 eTepa oSo3 iK0aXov(Ta, v. 14 aXei-i^- 
 avref iXaufi, v. 17 irpoaev^y -jrpocrrjv^aTo with intensive force, see 
 note. 
 
 Prepositions. 
 With accusative. 
 
 Eld. expressing the ground, iv. 2 o^k ej^ere Sta to ^i*^ alTelcrOai. 
 
 el<;. of place, i. 25 'irapaKV'\]ra<s et? vofiov, ii. 6 ets Kpirijpia eKKSiv, 
 iv. 13 'Kopevaofieda eh ttjv ttoKiv : of reference, i. 19 ^paSix; els 
 opyijv, Taj^i)'; eh to aKovaai : of result and purpose, iv. 9 d yeXax; 
 eh irevdos fieTacrTpa<f)7]Ta>, i. 18 direKV'qaev r)fJLa<i eh to elvai '^fia<; 
 dirap-yriv, V. 3 d to? eh fiaprvpiov earai, cf. Mark xiv. 55 e^^rovv 
 fiaprvplav eh to OavaTtoaai, Acts vii. 19 iroielv to, 0pe<j)rj exdeTti 
 eh TO fiTj ^(ooyoveccrOai, found especially in St. Paul's Epistles, but 
 also, though rarely, in classical authors, e.g. Xen. Mem. iii. 6. 2 eh 
 TO i0e\7]<Tai cLKoveiv, and Kiihner's n. on Anab. viii. 8. 20. The 
 use in ii. 23 eXoyiaOr) eh BcKaioa-vpr/v is unclassical. 
 
 em. of place, ii. 21 dveveyKai 'I<raaK eVl to QvaiaarT'qpiov, ii. 3 
 eirilSXeTreiv iirl tov (f>opovvTa, v. 14 Trpoarev^dadaxrav eir avTov, 
 111. 7 TO ovofia TO eTTiKATjOev e<p v/j,a<;. 
 
 Kwrd. 'according to,' iii. 9 «a^' bfiolmaiv %eov yeyovoTa';, ii. 8 
 KaTa TTJV ypa^riv, ii. 17 vexpd icTTiv xad' eavT'^v (' taken by itself). 
 
 77/309. of time, iv. 14 Trpo? oklyov (f)aivo/j,evrj (unclassical) : ' in 
 accordance with,' iv. S tt/so? (pdovov eirnrodel ('jealously'), see 
 examples of adverbial use in Schmid Atticismus ii. p. 242. 
 
 v-TTo. 'below' (i.e. 'on a lower level than'), ii. 3 viro to vttotto- 
 Siov: 'under' (tropical), v. 12 utto icpicnv irea-elv, cf Dem. 56. 59 
 TO, fieyiaTa inro tt/v tS>v StKacrTrjptwv epj(eTai, ■y^fji^ov. 
 
 With genitive. 
 
 ovtI. 'instead of,' iv. 15 ol Xeyoi/res ^ijfiepov vopevaofieOa... 
 avTi TOV Xeyeiv v/j-d^ 'Eav k.t.X., cf. Xen. Hier. v. 1 uvtI tov ayaa- 
 ffai ^o^ovvTai, Mem. I. 2. 64 clvtI tov (irj vofil^eiv Oeovs, ^avepo<; 
 r/v OepaTrevcov. 
 
 diro. (a) motion from, (b) separation, (c) origin and cause. 
 
ON THE GRAMMAR OF ST. JAMES clxxiii 
 
 (a) 1. li Kara^alvov airo rod TlaT/ao?, iv. 7 ^eyferat ckJ}' vjjlwv, 
 V. 19 irXavaaOai anro tjj? aX'qOela'i. 
 
 (b) i. 27 acrirCkov kavTov rrfpelv airo tov Koa-fiov, where diro 
 belongs to both rr)petv and aa'm'Kov, or rather to their joint effect 
 (cf. Luke xii. 15 ^vkdaaeaOe diro 7r\eove^ia<;, Acts xx. 26 Ka6apo<; 
 dvo TOV aifiaTO<;). 
 
 (c) i. 13 diro ©eow ireipd^ofiai, v. 4 o iJbi(r66<; 6 d(j)va-Teprj/ji.evo<; 
 a0 vfiajv. 
 
 hid. = instrumental dative, ii. 12 bid vofMov iXevOepia'; KpivearOai 
 (cf. Rom. ii. 12 hid vo/jlov KptOrjaovTai). 
 
 evdoTTiov (Hellenistic), iv. 10 raireivdiO'rfre ivoymov JLvpiov. 
 
 i^. local, iii. 10 ex o-TOfMaro'; e'fe/a^erat evXoyia, iii. 11 e'/c ttj<s 
 OTTjJ? ^pvei TO yKvKv : partitive, ii. 16 rt? i^ vfi&v ; causal, ii. 
 21, 24, 25 e^ epycov iSiKaicodr], iv. i. e/c t&ji/ ^Bov&v fidy^^ai, ii. 22 
 e« T(bv epycov r) Tr/crrts eTeXetmOrj, ii. IS Sel^co e« rtoz/ epytov fiov 
 rrjv irlcTTiv, iii. 18 Set^arcr) e/c ttj? khX^? dvaaTpo<f)fj<; rd epya. (In 
 the last three examples the force is nearly that of the instrumental 
 dative.) 
 
 eTTt. local, V. 17 oiiK e^pe^ev eirl t^9 777?. 
 
 ems (not used as a preposition before Aristotle), v. 7 fia/cpoOvfii]- 
 crare eto? tjj? irapovcria'i. 
 
 Kurd. ' against,' v. 9 aTevd^ere icar oiXKriKwv, iii. 14 -^evh^crQe 
 Kara Trj<; dXrfOela^. 
 
 irapd. i. 5 alrelv irapd @eov, i. 7 X'qfi'^erai irapd tov K.vpiov. 
 
 irpo. local, V. 9 irpo t&v Ovp&v ea-TrjKev : tropical, v. 12 irpo Trdv- 
 Tcov fjir] ofivveTe. 
 
 virep. V. 16 evj(,eo'de vtrep dXkriXmv. 
 
 VTTO. expressing the agent (used of inanimate things and abstrac- 
 tions), i. ] 4 viro Tii<; iTrtOvfiiag Treipd^eTai, iii. 4 vtto dveficav eXav- 
 vo/ieva, inro wrfhaXiov /jLeToyerat,, iii. 6 <f)Xoyi^o/j,ep'i^ viro yeevvrj<;, 
 ii. 9 iXeyx^ofj-evoi viro tov v6/j,ov. 
 
 'Xeopii;. ii. 18 %a)/3is t&v epywv, ib. 20, 26. 
 
 With Dative. 
 
 iv. (a) of place, ' in,' ' among,' hence of clothing, (6) of circum- 
 stances and accompa7iimenis of action, (c) of time, (d) of the sphere, 
 (e) of mental state, (J) of ground or cause, (g) of instrument : 
 
 (a) iii. 6 17 yX&aaa KadlcrTaTa,i iv Toi<i fiiXea-iv, i. 23 KUTavoeiv 
 TO irpocrmirov iv ia-oTTTpai (here it approximates to use g), iii. 14 
 
clxxiv THE EPISTLE OF ST'. JAMES 
 
 ipiOlav ex'sre iv rfj /capBia, iv. 1 Trodev fji'dxat iv vfiiv ; v. 13 t/? eV 
 vfilv ; V. 14 dcrdevet rt? eV iifilv ; ii. 4 SieKpWijre iv eavroit, ii. 2 
 TTTtUT^o? eV iardrjTi pvirapa. 
 
 (b) i. 8 dKaTdaTaTO<s ev rat? oSot?, i. 11 eV rats •iTopeiai<! fiapav- 
 dijaerai, i. 27 e-Tria-KeTTTea-Oai X'fpa? eV t^ OXl^^ei avr&v, v. 10 e'Xa- 
 Xrjo-av ev to3 ovS/juari Hvplov, v. 14 aXel'^^avTe's iv tw bvofiari (the 
 action is accompanied by the use of the Name). 
 
 (c) V. 4 61/ i(ryaTai,<; rfjjbipai'i. 
 
 (d) i. 4 ev firjBevl Xenro/ievot, i. 25 fiaicdpt,o<i iv ry iroiija-ei, ii. 5 
 TrXoiJo-tos eV iriaTei, ii. 10, iii. 2 eV ei/t, ei; Xo^p irraieiv. 
 
 (e) i. 21 eV nrpavT'qri Be^atxde tov Xoyov, iii. 13 Bet^drco to, epya 
 avTov iv rrpavTTjTi a-o(f)ca<;, ii. 1 iv Trpoa-WTroX'qfi'^yiai^ rr/v Tricrrtv 
 e^ere, ii. 16 virdyeTe iv elpjjvri, iii. 18 iv elpijvr) crireipeTac, i. 6 
 alrelv iv irLaTei, iv. 16 KavydaQa kv rac^ d\a^oviai<; avrov. 
 
 (/) i. 9 Kav')(aa-9a) iv tw v^jrei, i. 10 k. iv Trj Taireivoxrei, iv. 3 
 iv Toiii f]B6vai<; Bairavdv. 
 
 {g) iii. 9 eV ttj yXma-ay evXoyov/jbev tov K.vpiov, of. i. 23. 
 
 In i. 17 we find evi used for evea-Ti, Trap' m ov/c evC TrapaXXay^, 
 see note. 
 
 eVt. (a) ground, (b) the ohject of any emotion. 
 
 (a) V. 1 oXoXv^ovTei; iirl Tai<; TaXaiTrmpiaii;. 
 
 (b) V. 7 fiaxpoOvfiSiv eV uvtS (i.e. the crop), 
 
 'rrapd. expressive of (a) an attribute, (b) a judgment. 
 
 (a) i. 17 Trap' a> ovk evi irapaXXayij. 
 
 (b) i. 27 dprjcTKela Kadapa iraph Ttp ©6o5 avTiq iaTiv. 
 
 o-vv. i. 11 dvereiXev aiiv tS Kavaayvi. 
 
 Verb. 
 
 Voices, 
 
 Active and Middle combined iii. 3, 4, 5 'iBe t&v "inrtov Tov<i 
 '^aXivoi)'; ei<s ra crTOfiaTa ^dXXofi6v,...l Bo v koi to, irXoia fi6T- 
 dyeTai viro 'jT'qBaXiov . . .1 B o v rjXiKov irvp rfXiicrfv vXijv dvatrTei, 
 iv. 2, 3 OVK s'X^eTe Bth to fiy aiTeicrOai, vfidi}' alT elre kuI ov 
 Xa/j,/3dveTe BioTt KaKUf air ela 6 e. 
 
 Passive used impersonally, iv. 15 kuv dfiuprla^ y 7re7row;/ca)s 
 d^edrjaeTai avrm. 
 
ON THE GEAMMAR OF ST. JAMES clxxv 
 
 Doubt whether Passive or Middle, i. 6 BtaKpiv6fievo<i, iii. G and 
 iv. 4 KaOiararai, ii. 16 depfialvea-de Koi •x^oprd^ea-de, v. 16 evep- 
 jov/j,ivrj. 
 
 Under this head we may place the use of Intransitive Verbs in 
 a Transitive sense, e.g. ^pv<o iii. 11 where see note, fiXaardvco aor. 
 epXaarrfaa v. 18, but intr. in Matt., Mark., Heb. 
 
 Tenses. 
 
 Present (a) praesens historicum in connexion with aorist to express 
 a continued state, v. 6 i<^ovevaaTe tov Sikuiov ovk avrtrdaaeTai, 
 vfilv (= OVK avTiTaa-a-ofievov). 
 
 (&) in connexion with perfect to strengthen an assertion, iii. 17 
 iraaa (j)V(ri<; Safid^erai Koi SeBd/juaa-Tai. Compare examples in 
 Schmid Atticismus ii. p. 276, J. E. B. Mayor in J. of Phil. vol. xx. 
 p. 265. 
 
 Future, for imperative, ii. 8 dyairija-eis tov ttXijo-iov aov : for 
 opt. with dv, ii. 18 dW' epei ti^. 
 
 Aorist (a) gnomic, i. 11 dveretXev, e^rjpavev, i^i'Ketrev, dirdiKeTO, 
 1. 24 Karevorja-ev, iirekddeTO. 
 
 (b) referring to a point of time implied but not stated, i. 12 
 eTrrfyyelX.aTo, ii. 6 rJTifidaaTe. 
 
 (c) answering to Eug. perfect and so translated in R.V., v. 11 
 inrofiovrjv 'Icb^ '^KOvcraTe koX ethere, v. 3 edrjo-avpia-aTe, v. 5 erpv- 
 (j>i]aaTe, ecrTraraXricraTe, iOpi-^UTe, v. 6 /careBiKdcrare, e^ovevaare. 
 See Dr. Weymouth in Classical Bsview v. 267 foil. 
 
 Perfect (a) denoting immediate sequence, i. 24 Karevoiqae kuI 
 direXrj'kvOev, ii. 10 octtis irraiay yeyovev evoj^pij, ii. 11 et (ftovevei? 
 ryeyova^ 7ra/3a/3aT}j5. 
 
 (6) prophetic, v. 2, 3 <Te<rr]7rev, yeyovev, Karlcarai. 
 
 The periphrastic tense so common in St. Luke (cf. xxiv. IS ?i<Tav 
 iropevofievoi eh kw/jltiv, ver. 32 17 xapSia KaiofMevr) fjv) is found by 
 some in James i. 17, iii. 15 where see notes. 
 
 Moods. 
 
 Imperative present used thirty-one times, aorist twenty-eight 
 times; the latter used to express urgency without implying a mere 
 momentary action, i. 2 iracrav ■)(apav rjyrjo-aa-de, v. 7 fiaKpoOv/x,'^- 
 a-are eta? t^9 7rapova:ia<s tov JLvpiov (cf. Winer p. 395). 
 
clxxvi THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Subjunctive (a) hypothetical after idv ii. 2, 14, 15, 16, 17, iv. 15, 
 V. 19, after kuv v. 16; (h) of time after orai' i. 2, eoj? v. 7; (c) of 
 purpose after tVa i. 4, v. 9, 13, after oVo)? v. 16 ; {d) indefinite 
 after o? e'aj/ iv. 4, after oo-rts ii. 10 ; (e) of aorist with prohibitive 
 force ii. 11 jj^r) fiof^eva-rj^. 
 
 Optative not used. 
 
 Infinitive. 
 
 (a) Without article. Besides the ordinary use after Svvafiai, 
 Bvvaro^, OeXco, 'XP'h> /teA.X.6>, we find the infinitive after et'SoTt 
 iv. 17, the epistolary ')(aipuv depending on Xeyw understood i. 1, 
 and iina-KeirTeaOai used in apposition to the subject of the 
 sentence in i. 27. 
 
 . (h) With article (1) after preposition i. 18 direKvrja-ev ^fid'; eli 
 TO elvai, rifid<; dTrapy(^v, i. 19 tw^vi; et's to d/covcrai, /S/jaSu? et's to 
 XaXfjcrai, iii. 3 ^aXcvov<; eh to, aTOfiuTU ^dXXofiev etv to ireiOeaOai,, 
 iv. 3 ovK ep^ere hih, to firj alTeicrffai, iv. 15 dye vvv ol XeyovTei 
 T^epBi]a-ofj,ev...dvTl tov Xeyetv k.t.X. ; (2) in the genitive expressive 
 of aim, V. 17 Trpoa-rjv^aTO tov firj ^pi^ai, not used for simple 
 infin. as in Luke xxiv. 25 /SpaSet? tov -jria-Teveiv. 
 
 Participle. 
 (a) Without article. 
 
 Present, (1) describing a noun, either as attribute, e.g. i. 7 eoi- 
 Kev KXvBmvt dvefni^ofjLevq) ical purt^ofievo), i. 23 eoiKev dvSpl kutu- 
 voovvTi TO -TrpocrcoTTOv, V. 16 i<7')(vei her]<ri<; ivepyovfjievr) (that is if 
 we take this to mean ' an inspired prayer ' ; if we translate ' prayer 
 is of might if urgent,' it will come under a different head) ; or as 
 predicate, e.g. ii. 15 idv v'Trdp'^waiv Xeiirop-evoL, iii. 15 eernv avrq fi 
 <T0(f}ia dvadev KaTep^ofiivr] : (2) standing for a noun iv. 17 eiSon 
 KaXov TToielv koI firj ttoiovvti dfiapTua eaTiv 'to one knowing how 
 to do right and not doing it there is sin,' where in classical Greek 
 we should at least have had Tm fif) ttoiovvti, if not to firj nroieiv : 
 (3) explaining a preceding adjective i. 4 oXoKXrjpo';, iv fJiriSevl Xei- 
 TTOfievoi; : (4) explaining a preceding adverb or adverbial phrase 
 i. 17 TTciv Bd)pr]/j,a dvwdev e<nt,v, KUTU^alvov diro tov IlaT/oo?, 
 i. 6 iv iTicTTei, /jLrjS^v SiaKpiv6/j.evo<;, ii. 12 owtw? XaXeiTe &>? /liX- 
 XovTe<i Kpiveadai : (4) qualifying a verb, either by describing its mode 
 
ON THE GEAMMAE, OF ST. JAMES clxxvii 
 
 of action, as i. 14 Treipd^erai virb t^? iTridvfiia^ ef eXftO/uevo? a at 
 oe\ea^6/j,evo<s, v. 1 KXava-are oXokv^ovTei, v. 7 iKhe')(erai rbv Kap- 
 irov fji.aKpo6vii,S)v ] or by introducing some new consideration, which 
 may be causal, as i. 2 traaav ■)(a,pav ■fj'yria-acrOe yivaxTKovrei; k.t.X., 
 iii. 1 fir/ rfipecrde SiSdcrKoXoi elSorei; k.t.X. ; or concessive, as iii. 3 
 ra "TrXoia rrfKiKavra ovra Kolviro dvificov erKXrjp&v iXawo/ieva fieTO.- 
 yerai (' though so great'); or may describe the circumstances under 
 which the action takes place, as i. 13 firjSel'i ireipa^ofievof X67eTa) 
 1. 26 el' Tt9 SoKSi dprjO-Koi; elvai jirj •^aXivaycoy&v yXwcrcrav a\A,' 
 dvaTMv KapZiav ; or even denote the consequence, as ii. 9 d/jLapriav 
 epya^eade iXeyx^ofievoi viro rov vo/iov, i. 22 fir) ylvea-6e aKpoaral 
 /Movop irapaXoyL^ofjbevoi eavTovij (' ye commit sin and are convicted,' 
 ' be not hearers only and thus deceive yourselves '). 
 
 Aorist expresses priority of time, e.g. i. 12 B6ki/io<s yev6fji,evo<s 
 Xijfi^jrerai rov a-re^avov ('after being tried'), i. 16 ^ i-mdvfila <rvX- 
 Xa^ov(ra TiKTet d/iapriav, ■^ Se dfiapria diroTeXeaOeiaa aTroKvel 
 ddvarov ('when it has conceived,' 'when it has come to maturity'); 
 when joined with an imperative the aorist denotes that the action 
 expressed by it must be done before the action expressed by the 
 imperative, e.g. i. 21 aTrodifievoi pvvapiav Bi^acrde rov Xoyov ('lay 
 aside filthiness and receive the word '), v. 14 irpoa-ev^dadwa-av 
 dXei-\jravTe<! (' let them anoint and pray '). The prior action may 
 be the cause of what follows, e.g. i. 18 ^ovXrjOeU dirsKin^aev ^fid<;. 
 It may also explain a preceding adverbial phrase, e.g. ii. 21 e^ 
 epyeov iSiKaimOrj dveviyKas 'IcradK, ii. 25 e'^ epyeov iSiKaimOr] vtto- 
 8e^afiei/ri roix; dyyeXovg. 
 
 Perfect only found in the periphrastic subjunctive v. 15 y 
 7re'iroir]K(o<;. 
 
 Future does not occur. Instead we have the periphrastic jiiX- 
 Xwv KplveaOai ii. 12. 
 
 (6) With article. 
 
 Present as attributive adjective i. 5 irapa rov SiS6vto<s @£ov 
 irdaiv dirXw';, i. 21, ii. 3, iii. 6, iv. 1, v. 1 ; as substantive iii. 4 
 OTTOW r/ opfirj rov evOvvovro^ /3ovXeTai, v. 15 17 evxv a-ma-ei rov Kafi- 
 vovra, i. 6, 12, ii. 3, 5, iii. 18, iv. 11, 12. Often the reference is 
 not confined to present time, but is equally applicable to past and 
 future, as in the examples quoted. 
 
clxxviii THE EPISTLfi OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Aorist. Always used of something which precedes the main 
 action : as attribute in ii. 7 to ovofia to iiriKKrfOiv, v. 4 t&v epja- 
 'T&v t5)v a/jirjadvTcov ; as subject i. 25 d ivapaKiii^ai; eh vofiov, ii. 13, 
 V. 11, V. 20. 
 
 Perfect as attribute iii. 9 tov<; avdp(07rov<; tov<s yeyov6Ta<i, v. 4 
 d fiiaOo'i 6 a(f>va-Tepri/jLevo<;. 
 
 Compound ' Sentence. 
 
 (1) Substantival Glauses. 
 
 (a) Indirect statement. This is never expressed in this Epistle 
 by the infinitive, but only by oti with indicative. 
 
 OTi follows yivaa-Kco i. 3, ii. 20, v. 20 ; olSa iii. 1, iv. 1 ; opdco 
 ii. 24, V. ii. ; ^Xiira) ii. 22 ; Sokeq} ix. 5 ; o'lofjiai i. 7 ; ■jria-Tevm, ii. 19. 
 
 (&) Indirect question, i. 24 iireXddeTO oirolo^ rjv. 
 
 [The direct statement is frequently used in quotations by St. 
 James, being introduced once by a pleonastic oti in i. 13 Xeyerto 
 oTi, Treipd^ofiai ; but generally appended immediately to the verb 
 of saying, as in ii. 3, 11, 23, 18, iv. 5, 13, 15, or to the noun 
 <ypa<l)ri, as in ii. 8.] 
 
 (2) Adjectival clauses introduced hy relative pronouns. 
 i. 12 Us, i. 17, ii. 5, iv. 5, 13, v. 10. 
 
 (3) Adverbial claitses. 
 
 (a) Causal clause. 
 
 i. 10 Kav^dcrdo) . . . oTi irapeKev&eTai, i. 12 fiaxdpio^ , . . oti 
 X'^fi'yfreTai, i. 22, 23 'yiveade iroiriTol . . . oti eoiKsv, v. 8 o-Tfjpi^aTe 
 KapSia<; on 'ijyjitcev, iv. 3 ov Xufi^dveTe 8i6ti KaxSi^ alTelade, 
 
 (&) Temporal (a), Local (/S), and Modal (jy) clauses. 
 
 (a) i. 2 %«/»«!' r^yrjo-aade otuv TreptTria-rjTe, v. 7, iiaKpodvfimv 
 60)9 Xd^y. (/3) iii. 4 fieTdyeTUi oirov rj oppJq /3ov\eTai, iii. 16 o-rrov 
 ^■fjXo';, i/cei aKaTaaTacria. (y) ii. 26 axr-Kep to <T&(ia vexpov, ovtcoi; 
 Kol rj TTt'o-Tt?. 
 
 (c) Final clause. 
 
 i. 4 ■^ v-TrofiovT) epyov reXeiov i')(eTco, Xva jjre TeKetoi, iv. 3 
 
ON THE GRAMMAR OF ST. JAMES clxxix 
 
 alreia-de, iva BaTravqa-rjTe, v. 9 /j,rj a-Tevd^ere, 'iva //.^ KpiOrJTe, 
 V. 12 7jT(o TO val val, Xva firj Treo-Tjre, v. 1(T ev-y^eaOe oirax; laOfjre. 
 
 (d) Oonditional clause. 
 
 el with pres. ind. in both protasis and apodosis ii. 8 el vofiov 
 reXeire KaXax; iroieiTe, i. 23, i. 26, ii. 9, iii. 2, iv. 11 ; with pres. ind. 
 in protasis and perf. ind. in apodosis ii. 11 et <j>ovevei'}, yeyova'; 
 Trapa^drrji; ; with pres. ind. in protasis and pres. imperat. in 
 apodosis cf. i. 5 e'i ri<s Xelirerai, alrelrm, iii. 14. 
 
 edv with pres. suhj. in protasis and pres. ind. in apodosis ii. 17 
 r] TTto-Tt?, iav fir) 'i'^rj epya, veKpd ea-riv, ii. 14 to oc^eXos {icrrlv) eav 
 iria-Tiv Xeyrj rt? exeiv, ii. 15; with fut. ind. in apodosis iv. 15 iav 
 Ki5/3to? OeXy (al. deXrja-rf) l^-qaofiev ; unth aor. subj. in protasis and 
 aor. ind. in apodosis ii. 2 iav ela-eXdrj, ov BieKpWriTe ; with pres. 
 imperat. in apodosis v. 19 iav tk TrXavrjOrj, yivaxTKeTa. 
 
 0(7Tt9 with aor. suhj. in protasis and ferf. ind. in apodosis ii. 10 
 ocTTt? Tov vofjLov TijpTjcrr] TTTaia-r) Se iv evl, yiyovev evo')(p<s. Other 
 examples both from classical and Hellenistic writers are given in 
 my note. 
 
 o? idv with aor. subj. in protasis and pres. ind. in apodosis iv. 4 
 o? iav ^ovkrjdy <j>i\o<; eivai, i'^ffpo^ kuO la-TaTat. Other examples 
 both from classical and Hellenistic writings given in note. 
 
 Without conditional particle. 
 
 Imperative in protasis followed by icai and future indicative i. 5 
 alTeiTw Kal Sodrja-eTai. 
 
 Interrogative in protasis followed by imperative in apodosis iii. 13 
 Tt'? cro<pois iv vfjuv ; Bet^drm Th ipya, v. 13 KaKoiraOel rt? ; irpoa- 
 evjfiaOo). 
 
 Negatives.^ 
 
 oil after el i. 23 e'l Tif dicpoaTr)<i \6yov ea-Tov Kal ov iroiriTi]!;, 
 see note. 
 
 ii. 11 el Se ov fioi'^^evei'i (j>ovevei<; Be, see note, 
 iii. 2 e'i Ti<i iv X6y<p ov ir-Talei, after ttoXXo, Tnalofiev. 
 fj,7] after el i. 25 el' rt? Soxel 0pr]a-Ko<} elvai fj,r) '^aXivaymywv 
 yX&aa-av. 
 
 1 Cf. "W. Sehmid Attieismus i. p. 50, 99 foil., -243 foil., 260 foil. 
 
 m 2 
 
clxxr THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 jjirj with imperative i. 22 r^lveade iroir^Toi koI fxrj aKpoaral: 
 
 fii] loith participle in imperative clause i. 5 alreiTO) firjSev Bta- 
 Kpiv6/j,evo<s. 
 
 fit] with participle implying condition iv. 17 eiSort icaXov iroieiv 
 Kai fxrj TTOiovpTi dfiapria icrriv. 
 
 firi with participle in subjunctive clause depending on iva i. 4 ha 
 rjT6 riXeioi iv firjSepl Xei-rro/jievoi. 
 
 fj,T] with participle preceded by article ii. ] 3 ij Kplcrt^ ave\eo<; rrp 
 ixr] TTOiija-avTi eXeo^, where the reference is not to a particular 
 person but to a class, see Winer p. 606. 
 
 1. 5 aireiTO) irapa tov BlSovto^ &eov Traaiv Kal firj ovetSi^ovro':. 
 Here we might suppose fi^ to be used with the participle because 
 the principal verb is imperative, as in Luke iii. 11 6 eycov Bvb 
 p^tTwi/a? /leTaSoTO} rw /irj e'^^ovTi (but this too is better explained 
 as generic, not huic qui nan habet, but ei qui non habeat), ih. xix. 27 
 roi)^ 6^dpov<; fiov tovtov^ tov^ /irj de\rjcravTd<; /x.e /3acn\eva-at 
 dydyere wSe (but here too I should rather take it as a clause in 
 apposition, referring tovtov; to a certain type of men, ' the fellows 
 that would not have me reign over them,' not simply 'these men 
 who would not ') ; but I think it is better explained as in 2 Cor. 
 V. 21 TOV fir) yvovra dfidpTiav virep rjfj,S)v dfiapriav i-Troirjaev eum qui 
 non nosset peccatum pro nobis peecatum fecit, ' one whose character- 
 istic was sinlessness he made sin' ; so here, 'let him ask of God 
 whose characteristic it is to give to all without upbraiding.' 
 
 /lit; interrogative expecting negative answer ii. li firj Bvvarai r) 
 •rrlaTt,<; crmaai avrov ; iii. 11 lirjTi rj 'irr]'yr]...^pvei royXvicv ; iii. 12 
 /jlt) Bvvarai crvK'rj iXaiw; -rroifjcrai ; 
 
 ovre used for ovBe iii 12 ovre dXvKov jXvkv nroirjaai vBmp. 
 
 Other Adverbs and Particles. 
 
 dye interjectional, not found elsewhere in N.T., occurs in the 
 LXX. and classical authors, see note on iv. 13. 
 
 dXXd. In four passages it has its ordinary force of contrasting 
 a positive with a negative conception, as in i. 25 ovk aKpoar^i;... 
 dXXd TToiriTij'i, i. 26, iii. 15, iv. 11. In the remaining passage, 
 ii. 18 dXX' epel Tt?, it appears to have the unusual force of the 
 Latin immo, adding emphasis to what has been already said ; cf. 
 1 Pet. iii. 14 dXX' el Kal Trda-x^oire Bid BiKaioavvrjv, /xaKapioi, and 
 see note in loco. 
 
ON THE GEAMMAR OF ST. JAMES clxxxi 
 
 a V (see above under subjunctive and compound sentences) is not 
 used by our author with the past indicative, though this is common 
 enough in other books of the N.T. e.g. Heb. xi. 2, 9, Gal. iv. 15, 
 Matt. xi. 21, or with the optative, a construction which is found 
 only in Luke and Acts. It is omitted with oo-tii before a sub- 
 junctive in ii. 10, and likewise with em? in v. 7. The former 
 construction is very rare in the N.T. but is found occasionally in 
 classical Greek, both verse and prose : the latter is not uncommon 
 in the N.T. and is found in classical poetry and in Aristotle. 
 Instead of dv we find edv used with the relative in classical Greek 
 as well as in the N.T., see note on 09 edv iv. 4. 
 
 ivrevdev, pleonastic use before e/c r&v rjZovSsv iv. 1. 
 
 eireira used, as in classical authors, after irparov fiev without 
 an accompanying he in iii. 17. 
 
 OTT o V, used for ?nrrj or oiroi iii. 4. 
 
 o V T ax;, generally used with reference to a preceding com- 
 parison, as in i. 11, ii. 17, but in ii. 12 explained by what follows, 
 ouTta? XaXetre to? fiiWovre's KpiveaOat,, seemingly pleonastic in 
 iii. 10, v/here see note. 
 
 w 8 e is used, as in the N.T. generally and in Theocritus and the 
 post-classical writers, of place,i for the classical ivravda or ivddSe, of 
 which the former is not found in the N.T. and the latter only in 
 Luke (including Acts) and John. 
 
 7] interrogative, = Latin an, implying a negative answer, iv. 5. 
 
 Ellipsis. 
 
 Of substantive in agreement with adjective or adjectival phrase : 
 v. 7 ea)? Xa/3j7 Trpoifiov Koi oyjrifiov (veTov), iii. 12 ovre dXvKOv 
 {vBcop) yXvKV TTOirjcrai vS(op, iv. 14 to t?)? avptov (rifiepasi). 
 
 Of substantive depending oh previous substantive : v. 14 eV r^ 
 ovofiaTi (jov Kvpiov), see note. 
 
 Of subject to verb : i.l2ov iirr^'y^etKaro (o Kvptos) rolii dp/airmcnv 
 avTov, iv. 6 Sto Xeiyet (d @e6?), ii. 23 iXo'yiiydri dvra et? Biicaiocrvvrjp 
 (to iria-Teveiv understood from previous clause), iii. 8 quoted below 
 
 ' It is denied by most, grammarians following Aristarchus that the local seiise is 
 found in Homer and the earlier authors, but in many passages its use seems to 
 approach very near to that of our ' hither,' e.g. II. xviii. 392 "H(^aio-T6 irp6iw\' SSc, 
 Soph. 0. T. 7 £5' ^\^A.ufla, and other passages quoted in EUendt's Lex., Plato Prot. 
 328 SSe a^i/ceV^ai. 
 
clxxxii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 under Substantive Verb, i. 5 e'l tii XelirsTao a-o(f>ta<; alreiTO) . . . Kal 
 hoOrjaerai aiir^ (<70cj)ca), iv. 10 TairetvwOrjTe ivdairiov K.vptov Kal 
 (Kuptos) vyfrdxrei v/j,d<;. 
 
 Of object or adverbial clatose : i. 19 to-re (tovto) aBe\(l>oi, i. 25 
 TrapaKvylrw; eh vofJLov Kal Trapafiecvaf (eV ainp), cf. John viii. 31 
 iav /MelvrjTe iy roS \6'^<p toS ifim aXTjd&v fJba9r]Tal fxov iare, 
 2 John 9 fir) fievcov iv ry htha'yrj tov ^pia-rov. 
 
 Of substantive verb : ii. 14 and 16 ri 0(/)eA.o? {ia-riv) ; iii. 2 ovto<! 
 re\eto<; dvjjp, iii. 6 rj yXwtro-a trvp, iii. 8 aKaTaaraTov kukov (t) 
 yX&a-a-d iaTiv) fiea-T^ lov, iii. 13 rt's cro(j)o<s iv vfuv ; iii. 16 oirov 
 ^rfKoi, iKel dKaraa-Taaia, iv. 1 iroOev fidyeu ; 
 
 Of verb governing infinitive : iii. 12 firj Svvarai avKfj i\aia<s 
 TToirjaai ; ovre dXvKov yXvKv (SvvaTai) Troifjaat [or is iroii^aet, the 
 right reading here ?] 
 
 Pleoj^asm. 
 
 Of dvri p, with Si'\jrvxo<! i 8 (as in Herm. Hand. ix. 6), fiaKdpio<! 
 i. 12, Karavoovvrt, i. 23, ■)(^pvcrohaKTvXio<i ii. 2, cf. Luke xxiv. 19 
 (\r]aov<i) iyevero dvr/p •7rpo(f)'>]Tr)<;. 
 
 Of dv 6 ptoTT o<;, with iKelvof i. 7, with ttS? i. 19. 
 
 Of the subject of the infinitive : iii. 3 t&v Xirirav tov<; yaXivoii^ 
 6t9 ra (TTofiara ^dXXofiev eh to Treideadai avT a it <; rjfuv, 
 iv. 4 ovK e)(^eTe Sid to firj acTeia-dac v/j,d<!, iv. 13-15 dye vvv oi 
 XeyovTe<; . . . dvTl tov Xeyeiv v fi, d<i. 
 
 Of the possessive pronoun or its equivalents : iv. 1 ix t&v rjhovatv 
 V fjL&v T&v aTpaTevo/jLevwv ev Toi<i fieXeaiv vfiSiv, see above, under 
 Article. 
 
 Of the demonstrative pronoun, added immediately before or after 
 the verb, in apposition with a remote noun, for the sake of clear- 
 ness or emphasis: i. 23 e'i rt? uKpoaTrj'; iaTiv...ovToii eoiKev : or 
 introducing an explanatory phrase or noun in apposition : i. 27 
 dprja-Kela KaOapd eo-rtc avrr) iiricTKe'irTeadai op^avov^. 
 
 Of aiiToi; in other cases beside the genitive : iii. 17 elSoTi Kal fit] 
 TToiovvTi dfiapTia avTw iaTiv. 
 
 Of (l)vcn<; with gen- : iii. 7 irdcra (^va-if 6ripi<ov Safid^eTai, 
 common in the Stoic writings, see note in loco. 
 
 Of KapSla with gen. : i. 26 dTraT&v xapSiap eavTov. 
 
ON THE GBAMMAH OF ST. JAMES clxxxiii 
 
 Order of Words. 
 
 (1) of substantive and attribute ; (2) of governing and governed 
 nouns ; (3) of subject and predicate ; (4) of governing verb and 
 case. 
 
 (1) The adjective generally follows immediately on its sub- 
 stantive, as in i. 4 epyov reKeiov, i. 8 avrjp Si'\jrv'^o<;, ii. 2 dvrjp 
 Xpv(roBaKTv\io^, ii. 2 eadfjTi XafiTrpa, but we find also the 
 adjective preceding in i. 12 ixaKdpio<i dvijp, iii. 2 reXeto? dvrjp, 
 ii. 2 pvirapa icrdfJTi, &c., and always in the case of 7ra?. It is 
 unusual for the substantive to be separated from the adjective by 
 an intervening verb, as in i. 2 oTav Treipaafioi'i irepnria-rjTe 
 TTotKcXoi'i, iv. 6 /xei^ova SlSwcriv ')(apiv, iii. 13 yXvKv iroi.rjaai liBcop, 
 iv. 12 el<i eaTiv vofioderrji;, v. 17 'HXet'a? dv6pco7ro<; fjv ofJioioiraOi]'; 
 fifuv [here, however, it is possible to make a pause between dvOpcovo'} 
 and ofioioiradrj^ 'Elijah was a man, of like passions with us']. In 
 these cases the adjective is -made more prominent by separation, 
 though it is probable that a feeling of rhythm had a good deal to 
 do with the departure from the usual order. 
 
 (2) Omitting the genitive of the pronoun, which has been 
 already dealt with, we find the genitive placed immediately after 
 the governing noun in 50 cases as compared with three in which 
 it precedes, the latter being i. 1 ®eov hov\o<;, iii. 3 Totv "Trirmv tou? 
 ')(cikivov<;, i. 17 TpoTTJj? diToa-Kiaa-fi.a. In one instance the governing 
 noun is separated by an intervening verb from the governed, rr^v 
 ykaxra-av oiSet? hafidaai Svvarai, dvOpmircov, where greater 
 emphasis is given to dvOpmirmv by its position. 
 
 (3) Where the subject (not being a relative pronoun) is 
 expressed, it precedes the predicative verb in about 55 cases, and 
 follows it in about 20. When the predicate is expressed by the 
 substantive verb and complement, the subject precedes the verb in 
 about 16 cases and follows in about 8. I do not here take note of 
 cases in which the verb is omitted, for which see Mllipsis above. As 
 a rule the subject precedes the complement (predicative substantive 
 or adjective), but we have the following exceptions : i. 26 yttarato? 
 T) dprja-Keia, i. 27 OprjaKeia Kadapd avr-q eariv, ii. 19 et? i<TTlv 
 6 @eo9, iii. 6 o Koo'/jiO'; ttj? dSiKca<; r) yXcoaa-a KaOlararai, v. 11 
 ■n-oXva-irXayX"^'^ eVrt!/ 6 Kvpio<;. In oblique predication, where 
 subject and complement come under the government of a 
 
clxxxiv THE EPISTLE OF ST, JAMES 
 
 causative verb, we find the predicative noun preceding in i. 27 
 da-iriXov eavrov Trjpeip, v. 10 viroSety/ia Xd^eTe Tr]<; KaKoiraOia^ 
 Toii'i ■7rpo(f)')jTa<i : the subject precedes in ii. 5 6 @eos i^eXe^aro 
 Tovi; TTTCo'^ov'; tw KocrfKo ttXovo'Iov's iv irlcrTei, and in i. 18 
 aireKvr)<Tev '^fid's eh to elvai rjixa'; airap'y^'qv. Sometimes an 
 adverbial phrase supplies the place of an oblique subject, as in 
 i, 2 x°'P"'^ '^yija-aa-de oTav ireipaa-iMol^ TrepnrearrJTe, which might 
 have been expressed j(. ^7. Treipacrfiovi} or to ireipaafiol<; Trepo- 
 Trea-eiv: sometimes of an oblique predicate, as in ii. 1 fiij iv 
 irpoa-m'TroXrjfi^frtai'; e^eTe ttjv jria-Tip, which might have been 
 expressed firj irpoa-coTroXrjfiirTova-av e^. t. tt. 
 
 (4) The verb usually precedes the case it governs unless the 
 speaker intends the substantive to be emphatic, as in ii, 14 ri 
 o(j)eXo^ iav wiamv Xiyy rts e^eiP, epya Be fiij e^rj, where Xeytf th; 
 intervening between nricTTiv and its verb gives additional force to 
 the former. In this Epistle the verb precedes in 88 cases and 
 follows in 32, omitting relative clauses. 
 
CHAPTER IX 
 On the Style of St. James 
 
 The last chapter contained a survey of the grammatical usages 
 of our Epistle. In the present chapter I propose to consider what 
 conclusions may be drawn from that survey, as well as from an 
 examination of the vocabulary of the Epistle, from its use of 
 rhetorical figures, rhythm and arrangement of words, in reference 
 to the Author's command over the resources of the Greek language 
 and the distinctive qualities of his style. 
 
 To deal first with any peculiarities of Inflexion, he adheres to 
 classical usage with the majority of the writers of the N.T. as 
 regards the gender of -ttXovto'; and ^•vA.os, which are sometimes 
 made neuter by St. Paul. 
 
 As regards the Future, the reading Keph-qaofiev is not quite 
 certain in iv. 13. It is not found elsewhere in the Bible, but the 
 only trace of the Attic KepBava is the doubtful reading in 1 Cor. 
 ix. 21, while the aor, iKepSr/a-a is common. Again, <l>d'yofj,ai in 
 V. 3 is the only future of iaOio) employed in the N.T. In the 
 LXX. ehofjuai and (fidyofiai are both common, and are sometimes 
 used in the same passage without any difference of meaning, 
 e.g. Numb, xviii. 10 ^ayofjiai, ver. 11 eZofiai, Deut. xii. 20 and 24 
 ^dyofiai, ver. 22 e'Serat, so too KaTa<f>dryofj.at and KareSofiai. 
 
 As to the Perfect, we find parallels to ela-eXrfkvOav in John, 
 Luke, Paul, and Laconian inscriptions. As there is no instance of 
 the 3rd pi. either of the imperfect or 2nd aor. in our Epistle, 
 there is no evidence to show whether James would have used such 
 barbarous forms as et')(paav with John, or TrapeXd^odav with Paul, 
 see Hort Appendix, p. 165. 
 
 As to the Imperative, jjrm occurs twice in the LXX. and only 
 in one-other place of the N.T. (1 Cor. xvi. 22). It is also found in 
 inscriptions from Asia Minor. Kadov occurs elsewhere in the N.T. 
 only in quotations from the LXX. : it is said to have been used by 
 
clxxxvi THE EPISTLE OP ST. JAMBS 
 
 Aristophanes and Menander, but does not occur in their existing 
 remains. See below, notes on ii. 3, v. 12. 
 
 I go on now to Syntactical Uses. 
 
 The Article. We found James omitting this, contrary to classical 
 usage, where the noun was defined by a possessive pronoun, as in 
 i. 26 'x^aXivayayatv yXwcrcrav eavTov, aTrar&v KapBiav iavrov, v. 20 
 a-coaei ■\jrvy(r]v avTov. This license, common in LXX., is very rare 
 in the other books of the N.T. except in the first two chapters of 
 St. Luke and in quotations from the LXX., cf. Matt. xix. 28 eVt 
 dpovov So^r]'; aiiTov, Luke i. 15 e'/c KoiXia<; firjTpo<} avTov, ver. 25 
 afpeXeiv ovetSoi fiov, ver. 51 eV ^pa'^iovi avrov . . .hcavoia Kaphia<; 
 avTMv, Heb. X. 16 iirl KapBia<; avr&v (fr. LXX.), Jude 14 iv aylaii; 
 fivpidcriv avTov. See above, p. clxii. foil. 
 
 A similar license found in our Epistle is the omission of the 
 article when the noun is defined by a genitive other than a 
 pronoun, as in i. 18 direKvrjcrev r/fici'; Xoyca aX'qOela';, ii. 12 hia 
 vofJLOv eXev6epia<; KplveaOab, i. 20 opyt) avhpo'i BiKaioavvrjv @eov 
 ovK epyd^sTai. This is very common in the LXX. and occurs, I 
 think, in all the books of the N.T., especially after a preposition, 
 e.g. 1 Cor. i. 1 hta OeXtjiiaTo^ ®eov, ib. ii. 15 rt? eyva vovv Kvpiov, 
 vi. 9 @eoO ^aaiXeiav, x. 21 iroTijpiov Kvpiov, Heb. x. 39 eh irepi- 
 iroirjo'tv '^vy^rj';, x. 28 adeT'^a-av vofiov Mavo-eo)?, xii. 22 ttoXsi 
 &eov foJi'TO?, eKKXrfcria •RpwToroKwv diroyeypafi/ievrnv iv ovpavoh. 
 The omission of the article with the attribute, as in ii. 8 vop-ov 
 ^aa-iXiKov, is less frequent except in the combination vvevfia 
 dyiov : we find it however in 1 Pet. i. 23 Bid Xoyov ftoi/To?, 2 Pet. 
 ii. 5 dp'X^aiov Kocrfiov ovk i(f>eia-aTO, ver. 8 ■yfrv'xrjv BtKaiav i^acrdvi- 
 ^ev, ver. 15 KaTaXeiirovTei; eidelav oBov. See above p. clxiv. foil. 
 
 St. James' use of the Pronoun is more idiomatic than is usual in 
 the N.T. I cannot call to mind any other example of rt? used, 
 like quidam, to soften what might seem a harsh or exaggerated 
 expression, as in i. 18 dirapx^v riva. We have also the double 
 interrogative rjXiKov irvp rjXUrjv vXrfv dydirrei, ; and the pregnant 
 use of oo-Tt9 = ' whereas ' in iv. 13, for which compare Acts xvii. 
 11 oiiToi rjaav evyevetrrepoi r&v iv ©eacraXoviKri, oi.Vti'e? iBe^avTO 
 Tov Xoyov K.r.X. ' in that they received the word,' ib. vii. 53, 
 Rom. i. 25, Phil. iv. 3 with Lightfoot's note, Winer p. 209 n., and 
 for examples from classical, writers Isaeus vi. 43 ei? tovto dvaiBeia<; 
 
OK THE STYLE OF ST. JAMES clxxxvii 
 
 ijKovtnv mare Bie/iaprvpovv ravavria oh avrol ewpa^av, o'lTuvef 
 aTreypayjrav auTous k.t.X., Xen. Ages. i. 36 a^iov dyaaOai avTov, 
 ocrri^ vir oiiSevo'} ixpar'^dr], Ellendt, Lex. Soph. s.v. ii. 3. The 
 only unclassical use is the modified Hellenistic emphasis on avTol 
 in ii. 7 = ' is it not they who ' ? We do not find St. Luke's avTO<i 
 o for 6 auTo?, nor 09 nor Troto? for rt'?, as seems to be the case in 
 Matt. xxvi. 50, xxiv. 43, Acts xxiii. 34. 
 
 None of the examples mentioned under Number and Gender are 
 contrary to classical usage, while some are idiomatic, e.g. aye vvv with 
 plural verb, a use of aye which is not found elsewhere in the N.T. 
 
 Cases. — The use of the Nom. in apposition to an oblique case 
 (iii. 8 Tr)v y\S)(T<rav...fjiea-Trj iov) is certainly harsh, but admits of 
 some explanation, which distinguishes it from the solecisms quoted 
 in the note from St. Mark and the Apocalypse. 
 
 Perhaps the point in which our Epistle departs most from 
 classical usage is in regard to the Genitive of Quality, such as 
 dKpoaTi]<; eTTiXTjafiovf}^ i. 25, xpiral Sia\oyia-/Ma)v irovqpSiv ii. 4, 
 Koa/io'} Tfj<i dSiKca^ iii. 6. Vorst explains this by the comparative 
 paucity of adjectives in the Hebrew language (Heir. pp. 244 foil.), 
 comparing Acts ix. 15 aKevo^ eKXoy^i;, Heb. i. 9 97 pd^So'; t^? 
 ev0VTrjro<!, Hosea xii. 7 where the Heb. 'balance of deceit' is 
 expressed by fi'70? dBiKoa<i of the LXX., but in Prov. xx. 23 by 
 fuyo? 86Xio<;. 
 
 The only use of the Dative which seems to call for notice here 
 is the Hebraistic use of the cognate with intensive force in v. 17 
 Trpoa-evxTJ irpoarjv^aro. This is found in several books of the 
 N. T. but apparently not in St. Paul's writings. 
 
 Prepositions. — The constructions 6 to? eh fiaprvpiov earai, and 
 eKoyiaOrj eh BtKaioavprjp are Hebraistic and not found in classical 
 authors, though common in the N.T., see notes on ii. 23, v. 3. 
 The distinction between eh and ep is never lost in St. James, as it 
 is in some of the writers of the N.T. 
 
 eiri : used with ace. where we might have • expected either the 
 simple dat. or dat. with em, e.g. iii. 7 after iiviKaXelp (cf. 2 Cliron. 
 vii. 14 €0' ov<s iiriKeKXrjTai to ovofid fiov, Acts xix. 13 6pop,d^eip 
 eVl Toil's e^oi/ra? rd irpevfiaTa ro opofia tov TLvpiov, but Plato 
 Tim. 60 u> yepei KepapLov iirapop,dKap,ep, Hep. vi. 493 6vop,d^eip 
 Tavra -irdvTa e-jrl rah tov p-eydXov fmov Bo^ai'}, Stallb. on Sep. 
 
clxxxviii THE EPISTLE OP ST. JAMES 
 
 V. 470) ; V. 14 after trpoa-iv'^oyi.ai (cf. Mark xvi. 18 eVt appwa-rov; 
 Xetpag eirtd'rjerovcnv. Acts viii. 17, Acts ix. 17, but more usually 
 ■with dat. as iu Mark v. 23, vii. 30). 
 
 7r/509 : for the post-classical phrase tt/^o? oKiyov iv. 14, cf. Plut. 
 Mor. 116 A, Justin M. Apol. i. 12 ovk av rt? rrjv KUKiav irpix; 
 6\iyov ripeiTo. There is only one instance of tt/oo? with gen. in 
 N.T. (Acts xxviii. 34), and six with the dat. ; but the ace. is some- 
 times used where we might have expected •jrapa with dat., as in 
 Matt. xiii. 56 al dSeX(j)al irpb<; ^/^a? elalv. 
 
 iv : the following are unclassical, \aXelv and aXei(j>eiv ev t£ 
 ovofiaTi, V. 10, 14, irXova-io's iv irla-Tei i. 6 (where a classical writer 
 would rather have used the simple gen. or dat.), Kav-j^aaQai iv tc3 
 {i-\|r6t i. 9 (where a classical writer would rather have used iirC), iv 
 Ty yXcoa-arj evXoyeiv iii. 9 (instead of the simple dat.). These 
 uses are shared by the other writers of the N.T. 
 
 Tenses and Moods. — We have examples of the idiomatic use of 
 these in the gnomic aorist, i. 11, 24, and the juxtaposition of aor. 
 and perf. in i. 24 Karevorjo-e kuI aireKrjXvdev and of the pres. and 
 perf. in iii. 17 Sa/ji,d^eTai koX SeSd/xaa-rat. The use of the moods 
 also conforms to the classical standard except that the optative is 
 absent, as it is also in Matthew, Mark, the Gospel and Epistles of 
 John, and the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Apocalypse. We 
 have no instance in our Epistle of such constructions as p/a 
 followed by a fut. ind., which we find in John xvii. 2 iva Sdxrei, 
 1 Pet. iii. 1 iva KephrjGrjaovTM, and frequently in the Apocalypse ; 
 still less of "va with pres. ind. as in 1 Cor. iv. 6 'iva ^vcnovaOe, 
 Gal. iv. 17 'iva ir]\ovTe, though it is possible that these forms may 
 be used by mistake either for pres. subj. or fut. ind. (Winer p. 363). 
 A similar license is the use of idv with indie, in 1 Thess. iii. 8 iav 
 vfiei^ a-T^Kere, Acts viii. 31 idv firj t(<? oBrjy^a-ei, Luke xix. 40 idv 
 ovTOi crtcoirija-ovcnv, 1 John v. 15 idv o'iBa/iev ; of OTav with indie. 
 Apoc. iv. 9 orav Scoaovcriv, Mark xi. 19 otuv iyevero, ver. 25 orav 
 aTTiKere, Mark iii. 11 orav iOecopovv. Again, St. James affords no 
 instance of unclassical uses of the infinitive, such as iyevero... 
 iXOelv, so common in Luke ; nor of the gen. of the article with inf. 
 instead of the simple inf. as in Luke xvii. 1 dvevSexTov ia-Tiv tov 
 rd cTKavBaXa p^r) iXOeiv, Acts iii. 11 TreTroiijKoai tov •jrepnraTelv ; 
 nor of 'iva with subj. instead of simple inf. as in Matt, xviii. 6 
 (rvp,(^epei avrm 'iva Kpep^acrOrj Xi6o<;, John iv. 34 ip,ov ^pa>p,d, icrriv 
 
ON THE STYLE OP ST. JAMES clxxxix 
 
 tva iroiS) TO Qekrifia, Luke i. 43 irodev fioi tovto Xva eXOrj rj fii^Trjp, 
 1 Cor. iv. 3 ifiol et? iXd'^ia-Tov iariv 'iva v(j)' vfi&v avuKpidco, or 
 instead of the inf. with art. explaining the purport of what pre- 
 cedes, as in Phil. i. 9 tovto irpoo'ev'^ofiai, iva -q ar/dirr) Trepia-aeixirj, 
 1 John iv. 17 ev TOVTCp TSTeKeicoTat, tj arjdirt], 'iva irappiqaiav 
 e'Xfo/jLev, or where we should have expected the inf. with ua-Te, 
 e.g. Gal. V. 17 TavTa dWnjXoii} dvTCKeiTai, iva pJr) a eav QekrjTe 
 TroirJTe; 1 Th. v. 4 ovk ia-Te iv a-KOTei, Xva rj rjfiepa vfia<} cas 
 KXeTTTai KaTaXd^rj. 
 
 On the whole I should be inclined to rate the Greek of this 
 Epistle as approaching more nearly to the standard of classical 
 purity than that of any other book of the N.T., with the exception 
 perhaps of the Epistle to the Hebrews. The author of the latter 
 has no doubt greater copiousness, and more variety of constructions; 
 he is also occasionally very idiomatic, as in the phrase e/xa6ev d<f 
 mv iiraOev v. 8 ; but while the distinction between firj and ov is 
 carefully preserved in our Epistle, we find in the Hebrews (jltj used 
 incorrectly after eVet ix. 17 eVet fir) tots (al. fiijiroTe) la)(vet, ore 
 ^y 6 Siadefj.evo'i, and with the participle xi. 8 e^rfKdev firi iiriaTd- 
 fj,evo9, ver. 13 /cara irlaTiv direOavov fj,r) K0fiieravT6<;, ver. 27 nriaTSL 
 KaTeKiirev AiyvTTTOv fir) ^o^r)9el<; top dvfiov tov ySao-iXeoj? (in con- 
 trast with James i. 25). Again, the latter writer is less accurate in 
 his use of the moods and tenses than our author. Thus we find the 
 aor. with ovtrco in xii. 4, where a classical writer would have used the 
 perfect, ovirai fie^i<s aifiaTo<; dvTtKaTe(rTr)ie...Ka\ ixXeKrjcrBe rij? 
 'n-apaKXr)a-6(o<i : we find oTav with the aor. subj. followed by pros, 
 ind. in i. 6 oTav -TrdXiv elcraydyrj tov TrpcoTOTOKOv et9 Tf)v oiKOVfievrjv 
 \e76t, where oTav i^a/ydyr) seems to be equivalent to eladyiov : we 
 find irregular uses of the inf. in ii. 3 dp'^rjv Xa^ova-a XaXeiaOai, 
 ii. 15 Sid iravTOf tov ^rjv, ix. 24 et's ovpavov eicrfjXdev vvv efK^aviaOr)- 
 vai T(o TrpocrcoTra) tov &eov, vi. 10 ov yap d8iKo<; 6 ©609 e7nXa0e<r0ai 
 TOV epyqv : we find post-classical uses of the prepositions, e.g. Trapd 
 after the comparative in i. 4, iii. 3 and elsewhere ; et? used with 
 persons, ii. 3 eh '^fid<; i^e^aiwOr}, eh to used of the consequence 
 xi. 3 iriaTei voovfiev KaTrjpTiadai Toii^ aimvaf prffiaTi %eov eh to 
 fir) ex ^aivofiivav yeyovevai; diro used where a classical writer 
 would have written hid with ace. v. 7 ela-aicova-Oeh diro Tfj<; evXa- 
 ^et'a<; ; not to mention the use of such a Pauline anacoluthon as 
 xiii. 5 d^iXdpyvpot; 6 Tpoiros, dpKovfievoi Toh irapovaiv. 
 
cxc THE EPISTLE OP ST. JAMES 
 
 I do not of course assert that St. James writes with the same 
 facility as St. Paul. The former was evidently a slow and careful 
 writer, while the latter speaks as he is moved, without regard to 
 accuracy or ornament, in the provincial Greek which was familiar 
 to him from childhood. Nor again is it meant that the Greek of our 
 Epistle is such as could be mistaken for that of a classical writer. 
 There are undoubtedly harsh phrases, such as i. 17 rpoTrfji; airo- 
 tTKiaa-fia, i. 23 to "Kpoa-aiirov tj}? yeveo'ea)^, ii. 4 Kpnal SiaXoyiafieov 
 irovrjpSjv, and awkward and obscure sentences, such as ii. 1 fir) ev 
 irpoato'n-oXrjii'y^iai,'; e'X^ere rrjv tricmv tov Kupt'ou rjfiSyv 'Irjcrov ILpicr- 
 Tov T^9 8o^»j9, iii. 6 o Koo-^09 rrj'i dSt^ta? r/ yXaxrcra KaOimarat, 
 ev Tot? fiiXeaiv rjficbv r] . . . (fyXoyi^ovcra, tov Tpoj^ov rij? yeveaeax;, 
 iii. 12 (IT) SvvuTai avKrf i\a!,a<; 'rroirjaai ; ovTe aXvKov yXvKV 
 TToirjaai, vhoap, also iv. 5, 6, 17. But Schleiermacher and Dr. S. 
 Davidson are entirely mistaken when they allege as proofs that 
 ' the author was not accustomed to write Greek ' such thoroughly 
 idiomatic phrases as i. 2 otuv ireipacrfioLi; -Trepnrea-rjTe iroLKi\oi<i, 
 and the admirably energetic Pov\r)6el<; in i. 18 (^ovXrjdel^ 
 aireKvrja-ev rjfia,'; Xoyp aXr]deoa';). Nor can I see that there is any 
 ground for stumbling in the use of iropeiai,^ in i. 11 or of aireKvriaev 
 in i. 18. The latter, it is true, is not a classical word, but the 
 question is not, of course, about classical, but about post-classical 
 Greek, in which this word was of general use. If it is objected 
 that St. James uses, in the sense of ' begetting,' a word which 
 properly means ' to bring forth,' the answer is that both here and 
 in i. 15 the word is used metaphorically, and that in the Hebrew 
 Scriptures terms properly employed of the mother are used to 
 denote God's relation towards mankind. 
 
 VOCABULAEY.I 
 
 I proceed now to examine the vocabulary of St. James, giving 
 lists (1) of the words which are apparently used for the first time 
 by him, (2) of words used by him alone among biblical writers, 
 (3) of LXX. words employed by him alone among the writers of 
 the N.T. It might be useful to draw up similar lists showing the 
 percentage of classical and post-classical words employed by each 
 of the N.T. writers. 
 
 ' In making this list I have boon materially assisted by the lists given in Thayer's 
 licxicon and in Studia Bihlica, i. p. 149, 
 
ON THE STYLE OF ST. JAMES cxci 
 
 Thirteen words are apparently used for the first time by St. 
 James : see notes in loco. di^eXeo? ii. 13 not found elsewhere ; 
 avefM^6/jLevo<; i. 6 only found in Hesychius, Schol. to Homer and 
 Joannes Moschus, 620 A.D. ; aireipa(rTo<; i. 13 used by Clem. Al. 
 and other fathers in the same sense, probably with reference to St. 
 James, by Josephus in a different sense ; aTroa-Kiaa-fia i. 17 used 
 by Basil (vol. i. p. 17 in Migne P. G.), where he speaks of the world 
 as airoa-Kiaa-fia ttJ? Bwd/iem'; tov @eov, and Cyril Alex. i. 189 
 wTrfv&v atroaKiacriia volucrum adurnbratam. formam ; BaifioviwBri<; 
 iii. 15 only found in Schol. to Arist. JRanae and Symmachus' 
 version of the Psalms ; Sti/ru^o? i. 1 and iv. 8, found in the Didachs, 
 and quoted from an unknown apocryphal writing by Clem. Rom., 
 used by the latter and by Hermas and subsequent writers with 
 evident reference to St. James ; dpijaKOi i. 26 only found in 
 Theognostus Can. (fl. 820) ; iroXva-n-Xcvyyvo'; v. 11 only found 
 elsewhere in Hermas; irpoa-coTroXrifj.TrTeiv ii. 9 only found elsewhere 
 in Orig. Proverb, c. 19 ; irpoa-mTroKrjix-y^ia ii. 1 used also by St. 
 Paul and by Polycarp ; pvirapia i. 21 found also in Plutarch, &c. ; 
 ■X^aXtvaycoyelv i. 27, iii. 2, used also by Polycarp, Hermas, and 
 Lucian ; '^vaoSaicTvXio^ ii. 2, not found elsewhere. 
 
 Besides, these there are six words used by St. James which do not 
 occur either in the LXX. (including the Apocrypha) or in the N.T. : 
 ^pvoa iii. 11 used intransitively by classical writers, transitively, as 
 here, by some of the Fathers ; evaXtoi, iii. 7 classical ; evTreidij'i iii. 
 17, cl. and Philo, ev-TreiSem and evireideia occur in 4 Mace. ; i^ij/iepof 
 ii. 15 post-classical ; KaTi]<f>eia iv. 9 classical and Philo ; pnri^m^ 
 i. 6 cl. and Philo. 
 
 One word arfTO^ptoro^ (v. 2) is found elsewhere only in LXX., 
 Job. xiii. 28, and in Sibyll. Orac. quoted in note. 
 
 The following occur in the LXX. but not in the rest of the N.T. : 
 dSidKpiTo<; iii. 17, post-classical and rare in this sense, has a 
 different sense in Prov. xxv. 1 ; aKarda-TaTo^ i. 8, iii. 8, classical, 
 Isa. liv. 11 ; aXu/eds iii. 12 cl, and in Numb. iii. 12, Deut. iii. 17 ; 
 dfida V. 4 cl. and in Lev. xxv. 11, Deut. xxiv. 19, Isa. xvii. 5 ; 
 ~ dirXm i. 5, cl., Prov. x. 10 ; dvoKvea) post-cl. and in Philo and 
 4 Mace. XV. 14 ; d^v<Trepieo v. 4, post-cl., Polyb., Diod., Neh. ix. 10, 
 Sir. xiv. 14 ; jSoj; v. 4, cl, Ex. ii. 23 ; e^ekKm i. 14, cl. Gen. xxxvii. 
 28 ; i'7riTJ]Beio<; ii. 16 cl., and in 1 Mace. iv. 46, Wisdom iv. 5 ; eirt- 
 
 1 Sohleusner's Lex. V. T. gives a wrong reference to Daniel, 
 
cxcii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Xrjo-fiovr] i. 25, only found besides in Sir. xi. 25 ; eTncrTrjfMCov iii. 13, 
 cl., Deut. i. 13, &c. ; yeKax; iv. 9 cL, Gen. xxi. 6 ; eotxe i. 6, 23, cl.. 
 Job. vi. 25; efi^vroi i. 21 cl., Wisdom xii. 10; evirpeTreia i. 11, cl., 
 Ps. 1. 2 ; OavaTi](f)opo<} iii. 8, cl., Numb, xviii. 22 ; KaKoiraOia v. 10, 
 cl., Mai. i. 13 ; Kajidw v. 3, post-cl.. Lam. iv. 1 ; kutoikIi^o) iv. 5 
 cl., Exod. ii. 21 4 ; Kevcos iv. 5, cl., Isa. xlix. 4 ; [lapaiva i. 11, cl., 
 Job XV. 30; fierdyco iii. 3, 4, cl., 1 Kings viii. 48 + ; fieyaXav^em (or 
 fieydXa avy(^eco) iii. 5, cl., Ezek. xvi. 50 + (the simple avxefo is class., 
 but does not occur in LXX.) ; vofioderrfi iv. 12, Ps. ix. 20 ; 
 oKokv^w v. 1, cl., Joel i. 5 + ; oy}nfio<s v. 7, cl., Deut, xi. 14 + ; 
 ivapaXkayri i. 17, cl., 2 K. ix. 20 ; Trpolfioi v. 7, cl., Deut. 
 xi. 14 ; eri]Tro) v. 2, cl.. Job. xl. 7 ; raXaiiraipea) iv. 9, cl., Mic. 
 ii. 4 + ; rpoTT^ i. 17, cl., Deut. xxxiii. 14+; rpo'x^o'i iii. 6, cl., 
 Ps, Ixxxiii. 13 + ; rpvcfxia v. 5, cl.. Neb, ix. 25 + ; ^Xoyi^co^ iii. 6, 
 cl., Ps. xcvi. 3 ; cppia-aeo ii. 19, cl., Job iv. 14 + ; ofioicoeri'; iii. 9, cl., 
 Gen. i. 26 + : •mKpo'i iii. 11, 14, cl., Gen. xxvii. 34 + ; Trotrjora i. 25, 
 cl.. Sir. xix. 18; Ta'yv'i i. 19, cl., Prov. xxix. 20 + ; vX't) iii. 5, cl., 
 Isa. X. 17 + ; ^CKia iv. 4, cl., Prov. xix. 7 + . 
 
 Of the unusual words mentioned above it is to be noted that 
 some are of a technical nature, connected with fisliing, as avefjii^to, 
 piTTi^a), ivakioi;, i^ekKOt, ttijBoXiov, oKvkov. Possibly the last may 
 have been a local expression for a salt spring. Others are con- 
 nected with husbandry, as dfidco, ^pvco, iinT.riheia, KaTioa, /lapaivai, 
 o-^ifio'i, irpo'ifio's, crea-rjTre, arjTojSpwToi;. Others however are per- 
 fectly general, as dve\eo<;, 'jro\vcnTXayjQio<s, direipaaTO';, BprjaKO'i, 
 €inrei0i]<;. Then there are others, very common in classical writers, 
 which we wonder not to find used in the other parts of the N.T., 
 such as XPV' 7^\(»?, eoiKe, v\rj, aTrXw?, inKpo'i, 'rai^i;?, XeiireaOai 
 to be wanting in.' In some cases this absence may be due to 
 accident, since we find other forms of the same stem commonly 
 used. Thus we have many instances of ev Ta%6t, and we find also 
 ra'y^ivo';, rw^^ea';, tw^v, rd-^iov, TaytcyTa. In like manner we find 
 ■micpla, •jriKpalvfo, ■jnKp5)<;, yekav and Karayekav, aTrXoO? and 
 dirXoTij'!. There is no mention of forests in the N.T. except in St 
 James, which accounts for iiXi] not being found : but ■y^pij and eoiKe 
 stand on another footing. For the latter we always have ofioio'; 
 ecTTt, in the other books ; and for the former either Set (used some- 
 times where a classical writer would certainly have preferred ypv) 
 or 6<f)ei\Q). It appears then that, so far as the use of these two 
 
ON THE STYLE OF ST. JAMES cxciii 
 
 words is concerned, St. James is more idiomatic than the other 
 canonical writers, and for the rest that he uses with freedom rare 
 words and compounds, all of them correctly formed and some of 
 them possibly formed by himself. He is however a purist in 
 regard to those combinations of prepositions and adverbs which are 
 so marked a feature of late Greek, e.g. vvepXiav 2 Cor. xi. 5, e<f}dira^ 
 Heb. vii. 27, eKTraXai 2 Pet. ii. 3, cltto tots Matt. iv. 17, airb irepvai 
 2 Cor. viii. 10, cf. Winer, p. 525. 
 
 Another point deserving notice in St. James, which might seem 
 to denote limited acquaintance with the language, is his use of 
 general instead of special terms ; though, as regards ■iroielv and 
 SiBovai, Vorst {Eehr. pp. 158 — 163, 167, 59) considers that this 
 extended use is derived from the corresponding Hebrew words. 
 
 IT o lelv. eXeos ii- 13, elpijvrjv iii. 18, d/Mapriav v. 15, aVKfj iXaiai; 
 oil iroiel iii. 12, oXvkov ov Bvvarai jXvkii Troifja-ai vScop iii. 12, 
 iroirjcrop.ev ixei iviavrov iv. 13, Troieiv koXov iv. 17, tt. /eaXws ii. 8, 19, 
 cf. irotrjTrj<; Xoyov i. 22, ttoiijt^? vofiov iv. 11, ttoji^t^? -epyov 
 i. 25. 
 
 ipryd^ea6ac. d/MapTiav ii. 9,SLKaio<Tvvr]vi. 20, to SoKLfiiov ifiav 
 T?}? 7rio"T60)9 KaTepyd^erat vtto/jlovijv l. 3. 
 
 \a fi ^ dv eiv. ti irapd rou K.vptov i. 7, tov crritjiavov t^? fea^s 
 i. 12, Kpifia \i]fj,'\]retT6e iii. 1, alreire koL ov Xafi^dvere iv. 3, ews 
 av (o Kaptro's) Xd^rj Tj-pot/Mov v. 7, vTroSeiyfia Xd^ere roi)9 irpo<f>ri- 
 ra<; v. 10. 
 
 eve IV. rj virofiovrj epyov reXeiov eyerm i. 4, /at; ev irpovwTroX-qyt.- 
 ■^iaK e^ere Tr]v iria-Tiv ii. 1, ttIo-tiv, epya ej(ei Tt? ii. 14, 18, Trt'o-rt? 
 e-)(ei epya ii. 17 (cf. Clem. R. ii. 6, 9 epya e'x^ovre^), ^rjXov e^ere ev 
 Ty KapBia iii. 14, e-mdvp-elre Kal ovk e'X^ere iv. 2. 
 
 S I S d V a i. 6 ovpavix; verov eBwicev v. 18. 
 
 I go on now to speak of the style of the Epistle, as exhibited in 
 the writer's use of rhetorical figures and of rhythm. Though 
 we do not find here the oratorical power of the epistle to the 
 Hebrews or the rapid and impassioned eloquence of St. Paul ; 
 though there is no attempt to build up a number of sub- 
 ordinate clauses into elaborate periods; yet there is something 
 too of rhetorical skill, and at times of idiomatic phraseology 
 which is very telling. The sentences are short, simple, direct, 
 conveying weighty thoughts in weighty words, and giving the 
 
cxciv THE EPISTLE OE ST. JAMES 
 
 impression of a strong and serious individuality as well as of a 
 poetic imagination. 
 
 Use of metaphor and simile : 
 
 (1) derived from rv/ral life, i. 10 the transitory nature of earthly 
 prosperity is illustrated by the flower which withers away and 
 loses all its beauty under the burning sun and wind ; iii. 11 the 
 right use of speech is illustrated by the spring which only gives 
 forth sweet water, by the tree which produces only its own proper 
 fruit; iii. 18 righteousness is a fruit whose seed is sown in peace; 
 iv. 14 man's life is like a shifting mist; v. 7 patience under 
 persecution is inculcated by the example of the husbandman who 
 waits patiently for the rains which shall bring the crop to 
 perfection ; iii. 5 a careless word is compared to the spark which 
 sets on fire a forest ; iii. 3 as the horse is turned by the bridle, so 
 man's activity is controlled by putting a check on the tongue ; 
 iii. 8 the tongue is like the deaf adder which refuses to hear the 
 voice of the charmer. 
 
 (2) derived from sea and stag's, i. 6 a man who cannot make up 
 his mind is compared to a wave driven by the wind and tossed ; 
 iii. 4 the control which a man is enabled to exert over his actions 
 by learning to bridle his tongue is compared to the steering of a 
 ship by the rudder; i. 17 God the source of all light is compared 
 to a sun which never suffers obscuration or change. 
 
 (3) derived from domestic life, i. 15 the development of sin is 
 compared to conception, birth, growth and death ; i. 18 the renewal 
 of man's nature by the reception of the Divine Word is compared 
 to conception and birth ; i. 23 a careless listener is compared to 
 one who gives a hasty glance at a mirror; ii. 26 the relation 
 between the acceptance of a dogma and practical goodness is 
 compared to that between the body and the animating spirit of 
 life ; iv. 4 unfaithfulness to God is compared to adultery ; v. 2 the 
 decay and rust to which stored up wealth is liable is a symbol of 
 the disease which eats away the unjust and covetous soul. 
 
 (4) derived from public life, i. 12 the future happiness of the 
 righteous is described as ' the crown of life,' iv. 1 pleasures are like 
 a hostile arm}' encamped in our body, v. 4 wages which are kept 
 back cry to God for justice. 
 
ON THE STYLE OF ST. JAMES cxcv 
 
 Paronomasia : ^ 
 
 (1) It is a marked feature of the writer's style to liak 
 together clauses and sentences by the repetition of the leading 
 word or some of its cognates: compare i. 3-6 to hoKifiiov ti}? 
 TT t o" T 6 « 9 KUTepya^eTai virofiov^v f) Se v tt o fiovrj epyov 
 TeXeiov i'X^eTO), Xva rjTe r e\e to i iv firfhevX Xenro/jtevoi,' 
 ei Se Tiii Xe iweT a I ao<pia<;, alTelra>...aiTelTa) Se 
 iv IT i (7 T e I /MrfZev SiaKpiv6fievo<;- 6 yap SiaKpipo- 
 fievo<} K.T.X.; i. 13-15 /iijS^l? it e l p a^o ixev o<; XeyeTot oti, 
 airo %eov tt e ip d^o fia c 6 yap ©eo? a-ir e i p aaro <; eariv 
 KaKcov, IT e I p a^e I 8e avTo<i oiiBiva' eKacrro's Be it e t p d^e- 
 ra I VTTO Trj<; iBia<; eirtOvfiia^- elra r) eTridvfiia TLKTei 
 d fjLa pr i av, 7} hk dfiaprta d-Troicvel ddvarov ; i. 19, 20 
 /3 p aBii <; el's to aKovaai, ^ p ahv<; et? 6 py-qv 6 pyrj yap 
 dvBpb^ @6oi) BiKaioavvrjv oiiK ipyd^eTai ; i. 21-25 Be^acrOe top 
 efi^vTOv Xoy ov...yivecr6e Be iro irj t al Xoyov Kal fir/ 
 a K po aT a\ fiovov...OTi et rt? d k po aTrj <; Xoyov eanv Kal 
 ov TT o irjTri <;...o\iK d k po aTT] <; e'7riXr]cr/xovri<; yevofievo'; dXXd 
 IT o irjTTj li epyov, ovtoi; fiaKdpio<; iv ttj iro f^ <r e i avrov eaTai ; 
 i. 26, 27 e'i rt? BoKel prj a ko <; elvai...TovTov /idTaio'; rj 
 OprjcTKeia- pr) a k e ia Ka0apd avTij eaTiv k.t.X. ; ii. 2-7 edv 
 elcr eX0 rj dvrjp ■^pvaoBaKTvXio^ iv i a 0'fJT i Xa fiir pa, el cr- 
 eXdjj Be Kal tttoj^jjjo? iv pvirapa ia-0r]Tt, eVt/SXei/^re Be 
 eTrl Tov (f)opovvTa t rj v i a tjt a ttjv Xa fiir p dv ... Kal Tm 
 ITT (o 'x^m ecTTTjTe K.T.X. . . . ov'^ @60s i^eXe^aTO tovs ttt to ^ o u 9 
 . ..v/j,ei<; Be rjTifidaaTe tov 7rTCO'^ov...oi TrXovcrioi avT ol eXKova-iv 
 ...avT ol ^Xacr^rjfiovcrtv ; ii. 8-12 the word v 6 fio<s occurs in each 
 of these verses ; ii. 12 ovt co <; XaXelre koI o 1/ t <» 9 iroieiTe ; ii. 13 ^ 
 Kpia-ig dv eXe o <; tS p.r) -Troiija-avTi eXeo<;, KaTaKav^^aTai 
 e X e o 9 Kpia-ewj; in ii. 14-26 t i o (f>eXo<; begins 14 and ends 
 16, the phrase tt i o-t iv e%en/ occurs twice, epya e^^eiv thrice, 
 i ^ 6 py (o V B I K a lov (T a I occurs thrice and i k it i <tt ew <; 
 B i Kaiov a ai once, it I a- t i. <; ia found eight times, and epya 
 five times in other collocations, tt 1. cr t e u m thrice, ^(^(o pl<; epycov 
 twice, (fi TTLaTisi) V e K p d iaTiv twice, we have also to (xm/ia 
 yco pl<i TTvevfiaTO^ v e k p ov and Bet^ov /jlo c ttjv ttIcttlv 
 <TOV...Kdya> a o i Bei^co k.t.X.; iii. 2-4 vroXXa ttt a to p-ev 
 
 1 I use this terni in the loose sense in which it is employed by Schmid in his 
 Atticismus^ to express the repetition of the same word or root. 
 
cxcvi THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 airavre^' ei rt? ev \6y(p ov nrr a le i, ovro? Sui'aTO? ^aXivaya- 
 yrj a a I k al oXov to cr to fia- 'i S e tcov ittitcov Tovt ^ a X t - 
 
 V ov<; 6t? ra a-Tofiara ^dWo/Mev k al oXov to ct co fia 
 /Merdyofiev 18 oil xal to, TrXola fueTdyeTai; iii. 5-8 ^ 
 j\& a- (7 a fM/cpov fie\ o <; iarlv IS o ii ■^Xixov irv p rfXl icy]v 
 iiXr/v avdirref Koi rj yXS) <r a a ttv p, 6 /cotr/to? rfj<; dStKiW} i; 
 yXca (7 a a KaOlararai ev TOi'i fieXe a iv ^fi&v...^ (fiXoyl- 
 ^ovcra Tov Tpoyhv rrji; yevea-eco^ Kal (jjXcy i ^o fievrj virb rrji; 
 yeevvrj'!. iraa-a <^vcri<; Orjpioiv t e k al •jrereiv&v epirerwv r e 
 re Kal evaXicov S d fj, a ^ e r a i Kal SeBd/iaarat Trj <f> v a- e i 
 TTJ dvOpfOTrivt)' ttj v Be yXco a- a av opSel<; Sa fidcr a i 
 Svvarai av 6 p diir a> v; iii. 9 ev avTjj evXoyovfiev Kal i v 
 avTrj KaTapwfie6a...eK TOV avT ov arofiaTO'; e^ep^erai evXoyla 
 Kal KUTapa ; iii. 11-18 to yXvKV Kal to -tt i k p ov ... crv ktj 
 iXata<;, a/^TreXo? a v k a...dXvKOv yXv k v...el ^rjXov iriKpov 
 e;j^6Te Kal i p id i av...0VK ecrTiv avTrj rj cr o cf> i a dvcoffev 
 KaTep'X^ofievr) . . . ottov yap ^rjXo <; Kal i p t 6 I a, aKaTaaTaaia . . . 
 7] he dvcoOev ao(f>la irpSiTov jxev dyvij eaTiv, eireiTa eiprj- 
 vtKT], jMeaTr] Kapit Siv dya6S)v...K a piro <; Be StKaLoavvr)<; ev 
 elprjvr) airetpeTai TOi? iroiovcriv eipijvrjv; iv. 1—3 iroOev 
 •JT oXe fJLo I Kal IT o 6 ev /i d'^a i ; ovk evTevOev 6« toiv rj B ov u>v 
 .../ji d'x^e (T e Kal it oXe fielT e. ovk eyeTe Bid to fj.rj ai - 
 T ei <T a f aiT eiT e Kal ov Xafi^dveTe Boon KaKox; alT el cr e, 
 "va ev Tai^i rj Bov aiv BaTravrja"rjTe ; iv. 4-10 rj ^iXia tov 
 Kocrfiov e')(^0pa tov ©eot)* o? edv ovv ^ovXrj0fj ^£Xo<i 
 eivai TOV Kotrfiov e'^0pb<; t ov @ e ov Ka0iaTaTai...6 @ e o <; 
 v7reprj(pdvoi^ dvTiTd<T<7eTai t air e iv oi<; Be BiBwaiv j^dpiv 
 
 V IT OT dyr)T e oZv too @e(£...eyyicraTe too @6c5 Kal 
 iyycaei vfuv...T air e iv (ia0 rjT e evdnriov K.vpiov ; iv. 11, 12 
 jj,Tj K aT aXaXeiT e dXXrjXaJv dB eX<p o i' 6 KaT aXaXcbv 
 dBeX<p ov rj k p iv tov tov dB eX^ ov avTov k aT aXaXei 
 
 V 6 fiov Kal K p IV e I v 6 fiov el Be v6/mov k p iv e i<; ovk el 
 TTOirjTrji; v 6 fiov dXXd k p it rj <;. el? eaTiv v o /mo eTrj <; Kal 
 K p iTrj i;' (7V Be Ti^ el, o k p ivcov tov "irXrjaiov ; iv. 13-17 av p lov 
 ...TO Tfjt; av p lov, v o iij cro fiev . . . ir o irj a o fiev, (j} a iv o- 
 fievrj...d<j)avi^ofievrj, Kav^d er e ... k av ■^r] a- 1(;, KaXov 
 7roieiv...7roiovvTi; v. 3-11 o dpyvpo<; k aT i (ot a i Kal 6 16^ 
 ^dyerai Td<; (rdpKa<;. ..p^aKpo0vfjLrjaaTe eo}<; ttj <; irapovaiai; 
 TOV Kv p i ov ... p,a K po V (jbSiv ... fiaKpo0v(irjaaTe Kal 
 
ON THE STYLE OF ST. JAMES cxcvii 
 
 u/iet?, on Tj Tvapovaia t ov K.v p o ov ■S^yyiKsv. firj (TTevdteTe 
 tva fit) K p i 6 fj T e' ISav 6 Kpirrit; irpo tSjv dvpuiv ea-TrjKev' viro- 
 Seiyfia Xd^ere tjj? fia k po 6 v fi La<; tou? •7Tpo(f)'i]Ta'i- /jLUKapi^ofiev 
 Ton? VTTOiMelvavTa';- ryv viro fJLovrjp 'Io)/8 i^KovcraTe; 
 V. 17-20 IT po cr evy^y ir p o (yr) v ^ aro tov fir/ ^pe^ai, Koi 
 ovK e/3/9 6 ^e v...Kal ttoXlv it po ar]v^ ar o...idv rt? TrXavrj 6 ij 
 KUb STT I (TT p iyjfp Tt? avTov, ryivaia'KeTe on 6 e it lar p e^jr a<; 
 afiapTtoKov e/c irXdvrj^ ohov avTov <rd)aei, ■\jrv^i]v. 
 
 I have quoted all the examples of the recurrence of a word or 
 stem under one head for convenience sake ; but it will be easily 
 seen that the recurrence is not always due to the same cause. It 
 is partly owing to the preference for short sentences, which require 
 the noun to be repeated for the sake of clearness ; whereas in a 
 complex sentence the relative pronoun or some connecting particle 
 might have answered the purpose. But it is plain that the 
 repetition is often intended to give emphasis, as in i. 19 ySpaSus, 
 ii. 6, 7 avToi, iii. 6 (ftXayi^ovcra — (j}Xoyi^ofj.evr], iii. 7 Safid^eTai koi 
 SeSdfiacTTat, iii. 9 eV avrfj, iv. 1 irodev, iv. 12 dtek^6<; and v6fio<;, 
 V. 17 Trpoa-evxfj irpoarjv^aTo. It is probable however, as we may 
 judge from the following section, that the recurrence of the same 
 sound was iu itself pleasing to the writer and contributed, along 
 with his love of definiteness, to produce repetition where there is 
 no special reason to be found in the circumstances of the case. 
 
 Alliteration and Homoeoteleuta : 
 
 With the letter d : 
 
 i. '1 8oi)A,o? rat? haiheica (f>v\al<; rats ip ry hiaairopS,. 
 
 i. 6 alrelro) he fir/Sev SiaKptv6fievo<;, 6 yap 8i,aKpivofievo<! 
 
 eoiKe kXvScdvi. 
 ii. IQ fjirj B&re Se ra iiriTr)Zei,a. 
 iii. 8 Trjv he yXmcrcrav ovhel<; Safidcrai SvvaTai. 
 d and p : i. 21 Sto dtroOefievoi, iraa-av pvirapiav KaX irepicraeiav 
 KaKia<i iv irpai'Trjrc Se^aade tov efi(pVTOv Xoyov tov 
 Bvvdfievov K.T.X. 
 p : i. 2 irdaav ■^apav TjyrjaaaOe OTav ireipaa-fioli; trepi' 
 irecT'qTe ttookiKoii;. 
 i. 17 vda-a Soo-ts uyaOr] koX ttclv hmprffia TeXeiov-.-airb 
 TOV iraTpos t5)v <f>mTa}v, irap" a> ovk evi TrapaXXayri 
 fj TjOOTTJj? diroaKiaa-fia, cf. also i. 3, 11, 22, iii. 2. 
 
oxcviii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 p, I, th : i. 24 avekijXvffev Kal iireXadero. 
 
 I: i. 4 reXeiov, reXeiot, oXo/cXrjpoi,, Xenr6/j,evoi. 
 
 iii. 4 -TrXola Ti^XiKavra. . .vtto dveficav aKKrjpmv iXav- 
 vofieva fierdyeTat viro iXa')(i(TT0V 7rr)8aXi,ov owov. . . 
 ^ovXeTUi. 
 m : iii. 5 fiLKpov fieXof ea-Tiv koX /leydXa aup^et. 
 k : i. 26, 27 BokeI Oprjo-Ko^ elvai, jfoXiva'^ai'^Siv jXaxra-av 
 . . . Kaphiav. dprja-xeia Kadapd . . . eTntrKeirTeaOai 
 y(^pa<;...da-'7nXov eavrov TTjpeiv aTro rov Koafiov. 
 ii. 3 Kddov aSe KaXwg. 
 
 iv. 8 KaOapla-are ')(elpai...a/^vlaaTe Kaphla<s. 
 n and o : ii. 10 oo-rt? 'ydp oXov tov vofiov rrjpijarj, TTTaicry Se evi 
 ryejovev -TrdvTcov eVo^os. 
 
 Alliteration is the more marked when it affects the prominent 
 words as in i. 21 Si,b...Ee^aa-de...Svvdfji,evov. 
 
 Sometimes we have the recurrence not of one letter only but of 
 a syllable, as in v. 2 o ttXovtoi; cria-rjTrev, rd Ifidna trrjro/SpcoTa 
 yiyovev, ii. 4 oii SieKpiffrjre koL iyeveaffe KpiTol SidXojia-fi&v, i. 24 
 cited above ; or of several syllables (ofioioTeXevra) as i. 7 dvejMi^o- 
 jJievip Koi piTTi^ofievq), i. 14 e^eXK6/j,evo^ xal SeX€a^6/ievo<!, ii. 16 
 Oepfiaivea-Oe koX '^oprd^ea-Oe, ii, 19 iriaTevovaw koX (f>pi(r(rovcriv, 
 iv. 9 raXaiirmpTja-aTe koi irevOrjaare Kal KXavcruTe, v. 5 erpn^?;- 
 a-are Kal ecnraraX'TjcraTe, v. 6 KareSiKda-are, i<^ovevaaTe, iii. 17 
 dBidKpiTO<i, dvviroKpiTO'i, v. 4 Ttov dfii]advTcov...Ta)v depicravTrnv, 
 ii. 12 ovra)<; XaXeire Kal ovrco^ Troielre. Sometimes there is a 
 recurrence of the same preposition in compounds, as d-jro in i. 15, 
 and i. 18 direKvr)(76v...d7rap'^'i]v, "Trapd in i. 25 o Be 'irapaKV'<}ra<; 
 619 vofJLOv Kal TT apafj,e iv a<;, and i. 17 irap' (S...TrapaXXay'^. 
 This similarity of sound is often used to mark a correspondence or 
 give point to an antithesis, as in i. 10, 11 where the former sentence 
 ends with irapeXevcreTai,, the latter with (lapavQ'qaeTai, v. 2, 3 6 
 trXovToii v/j,a)v...6 y^pvcrbi v/jumv. Often this is combined with 
 balancing of clauses (IcroKcoXa) asini. 19 ra^ii? et? to d kov- 
 (T a i, ^ paB i) <i 6i9 TO XaXij a- a I, iv. 7 vir ot dyqr e tw 
 @ea), dvr I crrr) T 6 Be tw Sta/SoXp, iv. 8 Kad ap la ar e 
 •^elpai; d fia pr coXol Kal dyv La aT e KapB i a^ Bli^vx^ot, 
 i. 15 ^ eiridvfjLia avXXa^ovaa tIktsi dfiaprlav, i? 
 Be d/ia pr i a dv or eXea 6 ela a dtr o kv el 6 dv ar ov, iv. 
 
ON THE STYLE OF ST. JAMES cxcix 
 
 13 TTopeViTOfieOa el<; T'^vSe rrjv iroXtv Koi v o iij a- o fiev 
 eKsl iviavTov kuI efnropeva-ofieda koL icepSijaofiev. The 
 frequency of these parallels in St. James does not require us to 
 suppose that he had been trained in the use of their figures of 
 speech by the Greek rhetoricians, but is probably to be traced 
 to his familiarity with Hebrew poetry, which is founded on the 
 principle of parallelism.^ 
 
 Asyndeton : 
 
 This figure is most commonly used in enumeration (1) and 
 antithesis (2). Of the former we have examples in iii. 15 ovk 
 ecTTiv ayrr) 7} ej-o^ia avatOev Karep'^o/J.evr), dWa eiriyeio';, ■<JrV')(^iKij, 
 8 a I fiov I coBt] <;, and 17 17 civwOev ao^ia vp&Tov fiev ar^vr) ecmv, 
 eweiTa elprjviKi^, iir le i kt] <;, evTr e iO r/ <;, fie arr) e\eov<; koi 
 KapirSiv ayad&v, dS t d k p ir o<;, dvv ir 6 k p it <;, i. 19 /SpaSus 
 6t9 TO XaXrja-air ^ paS v <; et? opyrjv, v. 6 KaTeSiKacraTe, i ij)ov ev- 
 er aTe Tov SiKaiov. Of the latter we have an example in the 
 verse last quoted, i^oveva-aTe tov hiKaiov being followed by ovk 
 avTiTacrcreTai vfuv, where it would have been more usual to 
 insert o Se before ovk; also in i. 19 TU'ypt; et? to aicovcrai, ^ p a- 
 Sii <; et? TO XaXrjcrai, i. 27 iincrKeivTeaOai 6p<f)avov<! Koi ')(ripa<;, 
 acr IT iXov eavTOV Trjpelv, ii. 13 17 yap Kpiai'; dve\eo<; tw ft-q iroii]- 
 cravTi e\6o<s' k aT a k avy^d.T ai eKeo<i Kpiaea'i, where again we 
 might have expected to Se e\eo9 KaTaKavyuTai. But the writer 
 also uses asyndeton to express a result, iv. 2 ovk. e-)(eTe- (povevsTe (or 
 <f)6oveLTe if that is the true reading) ...ov SvvaaBe eVtTu^eti'' 
 fj,d')(^e(T0e. 
 
 Ehythm : 
 
 I have mentioned that St. James makes no attempt at elaborate 
 periods. There are I think only two sentences in his Epistle which 
 exceed four lines : one is ii. 2-4!, where the construction is clearly 
 defined, idv elaeXOrj dvrjp y^pv<ToSaKTv\io<; . . . eiaeXdri he kuI 
 TTTay^o^ . . . eiTipKe'^Te Be eVt tov (popovvTa . . . kuI e'iirrjTe . . . 
 Kal Tm -TTTco^m e'iwqTe .. . oil BieKplOrjTe iv edvrol<; ; the other 
 (iv. 13-15) 1x76 vvv oi XeyovTe'i "Zijfiepov Tropeva-ofieffa . . . oirivei 
 OVK kiria-Tao-de . . . dvTL tov Xeyeiv 'Eav 6 Kv/ptos deXT}, ^i]<T0/j,ev 
 
 ^ See Jebb's Sacred Literature, Lond. 1820, in which James i. 9, 10, 15, 17, 22, 25, 
 iii. 1-12, iv. 6-10, v. 1-6, are analysed as specimens of parallelism. 
 
cc THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 K.T.X. contains, it is true, an anacoluthon, but the mind is not kept 
 in suspense; each clause is intelligible in itself. On the other 
 hand, we find sentences of ten lines in the 1st epistle of Peter, of 
 twelve lines in the epistle to the Hebrews, and of more than 
 twenty in the epistle to the Ephesians. The complexity of the' 
 sentences in these epistles and in St. Paul's writings generally 
 arises from the accumulation (1) of relative clauses, one depending 
 on another, as in Col. i. 24-29 vTrep rov aca/j-aToi; avrov, o ecrnv r) 
 eKKKrfaia, ij? iyevofiriv StaKovo'; . . . rot'; dyioi'; aiiTov, ol<; 
 r]6eki](rev o Kvpio^ yvcopierai rl to ttKovto'; Tf)<; So^rj'i . . . o ianv 
 X/it<rTO? . . .hv ^fiei<; KaTayyeWo/Mev . . . et? o Kal koitim, (2) of 
 participles, including genitives absolute, as in Heb. ix. G-IO.toi/twv 
 Se oiiTox; KareaKevaa-fievtov . . . elaiacriv ol iepel<i ra^ 'karpeia^ 
 i-rriTeXovvre'i . . . tovto SrjXovvro'i rov irvevfiaTO'; . . . en ttj^ ttjOcbttji; 
 aKijvr]<; e'^ova-r)<; rd^iv . . . Kad' rjv dvaiat irpocr^epovTai fir) 
 Svvd/Mevai reKeiwaai tov Xarpevovra, Col. ii. 13-15 crvve^coowoirja-ev 
 T^fiat avTtS, ')(apiadfievo^ ra TrapaTrTafiaTa, e^aXeoyfra'i to Kad 
 rjfi&v j^eipoypa^ov . . . koX uvto rjpKev etc tov fiiaov TTpoa-rfKcoaat; . . . 
 UTreKSvcrd/jievo'; . . . kuI eSeiyfidTicrev . . . dpi,afi^evcra.<; avTov^, (3) of 
 prepositional phrases, as in Eph. i. 3 evXoyr\TO<i o ©eo? . . . o eiXoy^aai; 
 r][x,d<i 6 V irda-rj evXoyiq, i v toI<; lirovpavloi'i i v ^picTTm Kadcb<; 
 i^eXe^aro fjfjba^ ev avTw irpo KaTa^oXrj^ Koafiov, elvai r)iid<; 
 dfimfiov; kut ev cott i ov avrov e v aydirr), irpoopicra^ '^fici^ e t 9 
 vloOecriav Sid 'Irjaov 6 1 9 avTOv, k aT d rr^v evBoKiav . . . el <; 
 'iiraivov t^9 ^(dpiTO'i ^9 i-^^aplroia-ev ^fid^ ev t a> rjya-TrrjfjLevo), i v 
 S eyofiev t^v aTroXvTpaxriv Sid rov a'tfiarot; avrov, rrjv a<f>€aiv 
 r&v TraparrTafidrcov, /card to 7rXovTO<; rfj^ ■ydpiro's avrov, ^^9 
 eirepicraevaev el<; '^p.d^ e v •wdarj a-o(j)ici . . . yva)piiTa<; ro fivcrrrjplov 
 ...Kara Trjv evSoKlav avrov fjv irpoeOero i v avrm e I 9 oiKovofiiav 
 . . . dvaKe(f>aXaiwa'aa6ai ra irdvra e v rm ^picrrw, rd eiri T0i9 
 ovpavoi^ Kal rd e-7rl TJy9 7^9 ev avrS, ev 3> k.t.X. This sentence 
 may stand as an epitome of the other ways in which St. Paul fills 
 out his sentences : e.g. (4) with nouns in apposition, as ttjv d^ecriv ; 
 (5) with epexegetic infinitive, as elvai rjixdi;, dvaKet^aXaiaxraaOai. 
 St. James, on the other hand, never doubles the relative, never 
 uses genitive absolute, does not accumulate prepositions, or use the 
 epexegetic' infinitive — in a word, never allows his principal sentence 
 to be lost in the rank luxuriance of the subordinate clauses. 
 This appears plainly from the following statistics. The number of 
 
ON THE STYLE OF ST. JAMES cci 
 
 simple sentences, i.e. sentences having no subordinate finite verb, 
 in the Epistle is 140 according to my reckoning. I include in 
 this all co-oixlinate clauses. The number of sentences with a 
 single subordinate clause is 42. I include here subordinate clauses 
 of direct narration ; but, where a subordinate clause contains two 
 or more verbs under the same government, as ii. 10 oart^ Trjprja-r} 
 . . . TTTata-rj Se, I only reckon one clause. The number of sentences 
 with two subordinate clauses is 7. They are the following : i. 2, 3 
 yapav TjiyrjaaaOe, brav ■jrepnreo'rjTe . . . yivtocTKovTe^ on to Soicifiiov 
 Karepyd^eTai, VTrofiovrjv, ii. 2-4 eav eitreXOr) . . . koL etTTJjre %v 
 KaOov . ..ov SieKpi0r)Te ; ii. 8 el vo/xov reXelre Kara ttjv ypa^rjif 
 'A.7*7rjJo-6ts . . . «aXw? iroielTe, ii. 15, 16 iav . . . etirri n<; 'Tirayere . . . 
 Tt o(f>e\o<; ; iv. 3 ov Xajx^dveTe Sion KaK&><; alreia-Oe, Zva . . . 
 SaTTavijcrijTe, v. 19 idv rt? irXavrjdfj . . . yivaxTKeTe oti acocrei yjrv^ijv. 
 The following three sentences have three or more subordinate 
 clauses : i. 1 2 fiaKapio<; 09 virofjiivei . . . on Xi]/j,ylreTai rbv (7T€<j)avov 
 ov eTrrjyyetX.aTo, iv. 5, 6 SoKelre on Kevco<; Xeyei Upoi ^dovov 
 iirnrodel to -irvevfia o KaTwicicrev ev r^fuv ; iv. 13-15 dye vvv ol 
 ~keyovTe^ %rjp,epov iropevaoiMeOa . . . oiTtve^ ovk eTrlcnacrde to, riji; 
 avpiov . . . dpTL rov Xeysiv 'Kdv o KvjOto? 0eXr} l^rjcrofiev. 
 
 Short however as are the sentences of St. James, they are, I 
 think, better formed and more rhythmical than are to be found 
 elsewhere in the N.T. except in the 15th chapter of the 1st 
 epistle to the Corinthians. To my ear there is something of the 
 Miltonic ' organ- voice ' in sentences such as'- i. 11 dvereiXev yap 
 6 ^\t09 (7VV To3 Kavawvi \ Kol i^ripavev rov ■)(ppTOV \ koI to dvOo^ 
 avTov e^eirecrev\Ka'i fj evirpeireia tov TrpocrMirov avTov aTrcoXeToW 
 ovTCOi; Koi o TrXoDcrto? | ev Tai<; wopeiai'i avTov ) fiapavOrjaeTai | , 
 i. 13 nr]hel'i\ireipa^6p,evo'i\XeyeTa)\{pTC) diro ®eov\'irei,pd^ofJLai\\ 
 6 yap Oeos I aTrei'paCTTO? ecTTiv KaKa>v]Treipd^ei, Se avToiilovSeva], 
 iii. 17 ^ Se dvcoOev <TO^ia\'rrpwTov fJLev dyvr\ eVrt v | eVetra elp'V)viKr)\ 
 eirtet*??? 1 evTret^Tj? I yu.6o-T^ eXeov<i koI icapTr&v d,yadS)v] dSodKpi,TO<;\ 
 dwrroKpiTo^ll 21, 25-27. iii. 6-9, 15, 17, 18, iv. 13, 14, v. 1-6. 
 The weight and harmony of the rhythm seem to depend partly 
 on the balance of clauses, partly on the recurrence of sounds, 
 partly on the length of syllables, as in /cavacovi, e^rjpavev, irpocrdi- 
 TTOv, airelpacTTO';, and partly on the careful selection of the closing 
 
 ' I have divided the sentences so as to show what seem to me the natural pauses 
 in reading. 
 
ccii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 words, cf. fiapavOqaerat, 7rei,pd^o/j,ai above, Se\ea^6fJ,evo<; i. 14, 
 a-TroaKlacrfJLa i. 17, fidraio^ rj dpijcTKeia i. 26, i-jTYiiyyeiXaTO Toi<; dya- 
 TToxTiv avTov (where observe the alliteration in g and p) ii. 5, fiearr] 
 lov davaT7](j)6pov iii. 8, i-jrlyeio^, ■^vj^iK'q, SaifiovicoSrji; iii. 15, d<f)av- 
 o^ofievrj iv. 14, Kvplov Sa/SamO eicreXrfKvdav v. 4. 
 
 St. James employs this strong weighty rhythm in poetical and 
 prophetical passages, such as we find chiefly in the 1st and 3rd 
 chapters and the beginning of ch. v. In argumentative or col- 
 loquial passages, such as we find in chapters ii. and iv. and the 
 latter part of chapter v., the rhythm employed is very different, 
 generally plain and unlaboured, and often crisp, sharp, abrupt, 
 running much into interrogations, as in ii, 14 rt 6<^e\o<; dheX^nl 
 fjLov iav TTiernv Xeyrj ri? e')(eiv, epya Se fir] exi? ! f^V ^vvarai t] 
 TTKTTt? arSxrai, avTov ; v. 13 KaKoiradel Tt? iv v/uv ; Trpocrevj^eaOta' 
 ■ evOvjxel Ti,<; ; tlraWirco. 
 
 If we are asked to characterize in a few words the more general 
 qualities of St. James' style, as they impress themselves on the 
 attentive reader, perhaps these would be best summed up in the 
 terms, energy, vivacity, and, as conducive to both, vividness of 
 representation. By the last I mean that dislike of mere abstrac- 
 tions, that delight in throwing everything into picturesque and 
 dramatic forms, which is so marked a feature in our Epistle. This 
 is seen partly in the use of metaphorical expressions of which I 
 have spoken above. Thus the thought of an undecided character 
 calls up the image of some light object tossing on the surface of the 
 wave ; the development of sin in the heart and life takes the form 
 of the birth and growth of a living crea.ture ; the conviction pro- 
 duced by the Word is figured by the reflexion of the face in the 
 mirror and so on. And often the figure becomes more realistic by 
 the way in which it is introduced, as an actual narrative of a past 
 event: so in i. 11 of the withering of the flower, in i. 24 of the 
 man looking into the mirror, ' he beheld himself, and is gone, and 
 straightway forgot what manner of man he was.' In like manner, 
 abstract qualities are exhibited in concrete shape. Is it respect 
 of persons, or an unreal profession of philanthropy which calls for 
 rebuke ? St. James at once dramatizes the scene ; particularizing 
 the place — the synagogue; the persons — the rich with his fine 
 clothes and gold ring, the poor in his shabby attire ; the opposite 
 treatment of the two — the fawning on the rich a-i/ KdOov uSe 
 
ON THE STYLE OF ST. JAMES cciii 
 
 «aXw?, the supercilious neglect of the poor av a-TrjOi e«et ?; kciOov 
 VTTO TO v-n-OTToBiov fiov. With a similar fine irony he paints the 
 behaviour of the soi-disani philanthropist, ' If a brother or sister 
 be naked and in lack of daily food, and one of you say to them. 
 Go in peace, be ye warmed and filled, and yet ye give them not 
 the things needful to the body ; what does it profit ? ' Even error 
 of doctrine receives the same dramatic treatment, e.g. i. 13 ' lict 
 no man say when he is tempted Sri diro ©eoO Treipd^ofiab' ; and so 
 in ii. 18 foil, where the vanity of faith without works is exposed ; 
 and iv. 13 foil, where the worldly feeling on one side, and the reli- 
 gious feeling on the other, are embodied in the contrasted speeches, 
 ' To-day or to-morrow we will go to this city, and spend a year 
 there, and trade and get gain,' and again ' If the Lord will, we 
 shall live and do this or that.' In further illustration of what I 
 understand by the quality of vividness I will only instance the 
 frequent reference to examples, such as Abraham, Eahab, Job, 
 Elijah; and the personification of the Law in iv. 11, of the Tongue 
 in iii. 1 — 8. Suffice it to say that it pervades the whole of the 
 Epistle, and is markedly seen in the detailed particularity of the 
 descriptions, such as that of the oppression of the rich in v. 1 — 6. 
 All this tends to give vivacity and energy to the style. Other 
 causes of vivacity are the appealing dS6X(j>ol fiov, and the very 
 frequent use of interrogation and of the imperative mood. It is 
 scarcely worth while to quote, but I will just refer to v. 13 ' Is 
 any among you suffering ? let him pray. Is any cheerful ? let 
 him sing praise. Is any among you sick ? let him call for the 
 elders of the church ' : for the imperative, compare i. 2 and 
 following verses, iraaav •^^apav •^yi^a-acrOe — ^ Be v-Trofiovr) epyov 
 TeXeiov i'^ero) — aireiTm — /i^ oleaOco — KavyacrOco. Compare too 
 the sudden apostrophes, /t^ nrXavda-Oe — 'la-re — aKovawre — Qekei<; 
 Se <yv&vai — ;8\67r€ts — opare — iSe — ISov — dye vvv. 
 
 In specifying energy as the prominent feature of St. James' 
 style, I mean that, whatever he says, he says forcibly, with the 
 tone of one who is entirely convinced both of the truth and of 
 the importance of the message which he has to deliver. He 
 wastes no words ; he uses no circumlocution ; at 'times, as in ii. 
 1, he even becomes obscure from over-condensation ; he pays no 
 more regard to the persons of men than did Elijah or John the 
 Baptist. We feel, as we read, that we are in the presence of a 
 
cciv THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 strong, stem, immovable personality, a true pillar^ and bulwark^ 
 of the Church, one in whom an originally proud and passionate 
 nature, richly endowed with a high poetical imagination and all a 
 prophet's indignation against wrong-doing and hypocrisy, is now 
 softened and controlled by the gentler influences of the wisdom 
 which cometh from above. Still in its rugged abruptness, in the 
 pregnant brevity of its phrases, in the austerity of its demand upon 
 the reader, in concentrated irony and scorn, this Epistle stands alone 
 among the Epistles of the New Testament. Take for instance the 
 language used of those who place their reliance in the holding of 
 an orthodox creed, crv Tna-revei^ Sti, eh ia-rlv 6 ©eos* «a\w9 Troteiy 
 Kal TO, haifiovLa irLo-revovcriv koI t^pla-aovaiv : compare this, not 
 with the writings of a weakling like Hermas, whom some have 
 ventured to name in the same breath with St. James, but with the 
 writings of St. Paul himself. The flashes of irony, which break 
 through St. Paul's splendid vindication of his apostolic authority in 
 the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, seem passionless and pale, 
 contrasted with the volcanic energy which glows beneath the denun- 
 ciations of St. James. Or take the woes pronounced on the rich 
 in the fifth chapter of our Epistle : would it be possible to find 
 anywhere a nobler example — I will not say of Demosthenic, but 
 of Hebraic Setz^or???, than where the rust of the unused coin is 
 first made to witness to the defrauding of the labourer, and then 
 avenges his ill usage by eating away the heart of his oppressor.? 
 And what energy there is in the pathetic close, KareBcKaaare, 
 6d)ovev(raTe tov BoKaiov ovk avTiTacrcreTai v/uv ! 
 
 1 StCXos, Gal. ii. 9. 
 
 2 ' Oblias' in Hegesippus ap. 
 
 Bus. B.E. ii. 23. 
 
CHAPTER X 
 
 Did St. James write in Greek or in Aramaic? 
 
 In the First Series of Shidia JBiblica, p. 144 Ml., Bishop John 
 Wordsworth adduces the following arguments to show that our 
 Epistle was probably written in Aramaic:^ — (1) This was the 
 language usually spoken by our Lord. (2) It was used by St. 
 Paul in his address to the mob of Jerusalem. f3) We are told by 
 Papias that the Gospel of St. Matthew was originally written in 
 Hebrew (i.e. Aramaic) and interpreted by each as he was able.^ 
 (4) Papias also states that St. Mark acted as interpreter to St. 
 Peter, and Glaucias, claimed by the Gnostics as the teacher of 
 Basilides, is named as another interpreter of the same Apostle.^ 
 Jerome takes it for granted that the Epistles of St. Peter were 
 not originally written in Greek, and thinks that the difference 
 between them was due to the employment of different men as 
 interpreters.* (5) Some of the Fathers supposed the Epistle to 
 the Hebrews to have been written in Hebrew.^ Josephus wrote 
 his book on the Wars of the Jews in ' his national language ' and 
 
 ' According to Wold. Schmidt (Lehrgehalt d. Jakobus-Briefes, p. 10) the Aramaic 
 origin of the Epistle had been previously maintained by Faber (Obs. in epist. Jacobi 
 ex Syro, Coburg, 1770), Schmidt {ffistorisch-Krilisc/ie Hinleitung in N. T., Giessen, 
 1818), Bertholdt {Einleitung, Erlangen, 1819). 
 
 ^ Eus. S.E. iii. 39 Morflaios /xec oZv 'E^paiSt SmAe/cr^ to \iyia ffweypdiparOj rjp^u^- 
 v^vffe 5* ai/ra ais ^v Zwarhs cKaaroSt k.t.A. 
 
 ' Eus. ib. MapKos epfiTjvevrijs Ilerpov yevS/xevos 'offa ^^VTjfiSvevirei' aKpi^us fypai^ev, 
 Clem. Al. Strom, vii. 17, p. 898 6 Bao-iAefSijs /c&y r\avKlav iTriypi,(pi\Tai SiSdffKaXov, 
 us avxoviTiv avTolj Thv Herpov epfi7)y4a k.t.\. 
 
 * Hieron. Ad Hedibiam ep. 120, 12 Denique et dtio epistolae quae ferimtur Petri 
 stilo inter se et charactere discrepant structuraque wrborum. Ex qiu> intelligimus pro 
 necessitate rerum diversis eum usum inlerpretibus. Bp. W. suggests that, if Glaucias 
 was the translator of the Second Epistle, this might account tor the doubt as to its 
 canouicity. 
 
 ^ See Clem. Al. ap. Eus. H.E. vi. 14 t))V irphs 'E$paiovs iirunoX^v TlaiXov ii.lv 
 eivai (priffij yeypd.(^dai te 'K$paioii 'E^paiK^ <l>av^, AovKai/ Be <j)i\oTifius avriiv fieSep- 
 finveiaai/ra iKSovvai Toii "EAA-ijiriy, also Jerome and others cited in Alford's Prolego- 
 mena, vol. iv. 1. p. 76. 
 
cevi THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 sent it to the ' upper barbarians/ whom he explains to be the Jews 
 beyond the Euphrates, &c. ; he afterwards made a translation into 
 Greek, ■^prjo-dfj.evo^ Ticn tt/jo? ttjv '^XkrjviSa (fxovfjv ervvepyoi^} 
 
 The Bishop considers that these parallels make it probable 
 a priori that the Epistle was written in Aramaic. He support? 
 this conclusion by the assumption that St. James could not 
 have written such Greek as that in which the Epistle has come 
 down to us, containing, as it does, many words with classical rather 
 than biblical associations, and implying a wide range of classical 
 reading.^ 
 
 ' This rich vocabulary is not unlike that which may have been 
 possessed by a professional interpreter, but is very remarkable if 
 we attribute it to an unlearned Jew writing perhaps the earliest 
 book of the N.T.' 
 
 Lastly the hypothesis of an Aramaic original is supported by a 
 comparison between our present Greek text and that which must 
 have been the parent of the Corbey version (pp. 136-144). The 
 most remarkable of these divergences are tlie omission of TJ79 
 TTt'o-Tea)? in i. 3 ; the translation of t/sott^? aTroa-Kiacr/ia by 
 'modicum ohumbrationis' ( = poTrri aTroa-Kida-fiaTO';) in i. 17; 
 blasphemant in bono nomine for 0\aa-(j)'rifiov(ri, to koXov ovofia 
 ii. 7, which Bp. W. compares with v. 10 and v. 15, where the 
 genitives tt}? KaKOTraBia^ and t^s ■jria-reai; are also expressed by 
 prepositional phrases, de malis passioniius, in fide, such as might 
 be used in Hebrew or Syriac ; exploratores for tous dyyiXovi ii. 25 
 as in the Syriac and other versions ; et lingua ignis seculi iniquitatis 
 for Kal r] yX&cra-a irvp 6 Koafioii Trj<; dBiKia<; iii. 6, where the 
 Peshitto has ' the tongue is a fire ; the world of iniquity is as it 
 were a wood ' ; fornicatores for /iotp^aXt'Se? iv. 4 agrees with the 
 Peshitto ; inconstans for dKaracrTacria iii. 16, emd /rater for dBe\<jioi 
 iv. 11, are said to be easily explicable as renderings of the same 
 Hebrew word. Qui araverunt for tmv dfjLtjcrdvTcov v. 4, frcquens 
 
 ''■ c. Ap. i. 9, B. J. Prooem. 1. 
 
 2 This argument ia founded on certain lists of words, whick I found very helpful 
 in drawing up my own lists in Ch. IX. They contain however some inaccuracies : 
 e. g. among ' classical non-Septuagint words ' wo find b.\vKis, &ij,ia, a.iT0Kv4a>, 
 which occur either in the 0. T. or Apocrypha in the passages indicated in mv list ; 
 we find also Sl\livxos, which, as far as I know, is never used in profane Greek of any 
 epoch, and fSiwapio, for which the earliest authority is post-classical. To the ' very 
 rare words ' should be added iTriKrianov^, iroKiavKayxvos, ■npoaanroKi\imTfiv, xoA'>''<- 
 ywystv. \ 
 
DID ST. JAMES WRITE IN GREEK OR ARAMAIC ? ccvii 
 
 for ivepyovfievT) v. 16, the omission of /eei/w?, and the translation 
 of i-mirodel by convalescit in iv. 5, are also cited as evidences of a 
 different original.^ 
 
 Before dealing with these arguments it may be well to turn to 
 the Greek text itself and see whether it reads like an original or a 
 translation. It must be granted that this is not altogether an 
 easy matter to decide. There are no doubt many translations 
 which tell their character at once; translations from Oriental 
 languages, which seem to make it their aim to exhibit in the 
 crudest colours the contrast of eastern and western thought and 
 speech ; translations from the German, which faithfully preserve 
 the heavy prolixity of the original ; or translations which betray a 
 different origin by their affectation of French elegance and light- 
 ness. The case however even here would be complicated, if it were 
 a question whether a particular book were an original, written, 
 say, by an Anglicized German, or a translation from the German 
 by an Englishman ; and this is really the question before us ; for 
 all that could be claimed for our Epistle, supposing it not to be a 
 translation from the Aramaic, is that it was written by a Greek- 
 speaking Jew. So much is plain from the style and vocabulary, 
 even if we were entirely in the dark as to the writer. There is 
 however nothing in it of the scrupulous anxiety of a translator 
 cautiously treading in the footsteps of his author. On the con- 
 trary, it is written in strong, simple Greek, used with no slight 
 rhetorical skill by one who has something of his own to say, and 
 says it with perfect freedom. If a translation, it is a translation of 
 the stamp of our authorized English version, or of Luther's German 
 version, which have become the recognized standards and models 
 of excellence in their respective languages. But the frequent use 
 of the different figures of speech, alliteration, homoeoteleuton, &c., 
 to which attention has been called in a previous chapter, is an 
 ornament which a translator is hardly likely to venture upon for 
 himself, and which it will often be impossible to reproduce in a 
 
 1 Bp. W. also quotes the Corbey version , res veslrae for linina in v. 2, as pointing 
 to 'the double sense of the Syriao and Chaldee mdn,' which stands here in the 
 Peshitto for 'garment,' but is commnnly used for 'goods' of any kind. In the 
 Classical Review T. 68 I have adduced a parallel from Rufinus' version of Euseh. 
 S.E. ii. 23 (a fuller) Ao;8iii' rb ^v\ov iv $ aireiricfe tA I ixAt ta fullo arreptofuste in quo 
 res exprimere solent, -which may suggest that this use of res was not more uncommon 
 in the later Latin than the colloquial use of ' things ' for ' clothes ' in English. 
 
ccviii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 different language. If we compare yaipeiv and ^apdv^ in i. 1, 2, 
 with the Vulgate salutem and gaudium, or 7rei,paa-fiol<; Trepiirea-tjTe 
 TToiKlXoit; with the Vulgate in tentationes varias incideriiis, none 
 could doubt that the former in each case was the original. A still 
 stronger argument will be supplied if we hold with Ewald that 
 i. 17 Traaa Socn'i ajadrj koI irav Bcoprifia reXeiov is a quotation 
 from a hexameter poem. Another test of a translation is the 
 obscurity arising from a misapprehension of the meaning of the 
 original. Examples of this may be found even where the translator 
 has a consummate mastery of his own language, e.g. Ps. xlix. 5 
 (P.B.) ' Wherefore should I fear when the wickedness of my heels 
 compasseth me about,' ib. lix. 8 ' Or ever your pots be made hot 
 with thorns, so let indignation vex him even as a thing which is 
 raw,' which have at last been made intelligible to English readers 
 in the R.V. Compare also 1 Tim. vi. 5, ' supposing that gain is 
 godliness ' where the R.V. has ' supposing that godliness is a way 
 of gain,' or in our Epistle i. 21 'superfluity of naughtiness' where 
 the R V. has ' overflowing of wickedness.' When we meet with 
 an unmeaning or difficult expression of this kind in a translation, 
 we naturally turn to the original to see how it arose. The ques- 
 tion is then : Do we meet with any difficulty in our Epistle such as 
 might suggest that it is due to the misunderstanding of an 
 assumed original ? Perhaps there are two passages as to which, if 
 they occurred in an undoubted translation, we should be curious 
 to know what was the original intended by them. The first is the 
 phrase (fiXoyc^ovcra tov rpo'xpv ttJ? '^eveaeax; in iii. 6, and the 
 second tt/OO? <f)d6vov eirnToOel to •jvvevp.a o KarcpKicrev iv v/ilv. It 
 hardly seems likely that St. James would have used the obscure 
 phrase ' wheel of existence ' if it sounded as strange to those whom 
 he was addressing as it sounds to us now. The more probable 
 supposition is that it had got into familiar use among Greek- 
 speaking Jews. And this is confirmed by the parallel passages 
 quoted in my note. The second difficulty turns simply on the use 
 of the phrase tt/oo? ^66vov for 'jealously,' to which no precise 
 parallel has been adduced ; but <j)66vo<; and <j)6ove(o being some- 
 times used of jealousy rather than envy, there seems no insuper- 
 
 ^ The use of x«^pf '" in itself ia strongly opposed to the idea of an Aramaic original, 
 which would naturally have used the word meaning ' Peace,' as the Peshitto does ; 
 aud this would have rendered impossible the play on words contained in x"?^"- 
 
DID ST. JAMES WRITE IN GREEK OR ARAMAIC ? ccix 
 
 able objection to a similar use of the adverbial phrase. In any 
 case the difHculty would not be lessened by the supposition of its 
 being a translation from Aramaic. On the whole we may safely 
 say that the general impression produced by a study of the Greek 
 is much in favour of its being an original. 
 
 But can we suppose that the son of a Galilean carpenter would 
 have been capable of writing such idiomatic Greek ? We have 
 seen above (p. xli.) that Galilee was studded with Greek towns, 
 and that it was certainly in the power of any Galilean to gain a 
 knowledge of Greek ; even if he were, as Prof. Neubauer holds, 
 brought up in ignorance of any language but Aramaic, and not, as 
 Prof. T. K. Abbott is inclined to believe, speaking Greek as freely 
 as Aramaic.^ We know also that the neighbouring town of Gadara 
 was celebrated as an important seat of Greek learning and litera- 
 ture, and that the Author of our Epistle shows an acquaintance 
 with ideas and phrases which were probably derived, mediately or 
 immediately, from the Stoic philosophers.^ If we call to mind 
 further that he seems to have paid particular attention to the 
 sapiential books, both canonical and apocryphal, and that a main 
 point in these is to encourage the study of ' the dark sayings of 
 the wise ' ; that the wisdom of Edom and Teman is noted as 
 famous by some of the prophets,^ and that the interlocutors in 
 the book of Job are assigned with probability to this and neigh- 
 bouring regions; — taking into account all these considerations, we 
 
 ^ See Neubauer in Studia Biblica i. pp. 39-74, Abbott Essays on the Original 
 Texts of the Old and New Testaments, p. 162, where he argues that the iuhabitauts 
 of Palestine at the time of the Christian era were bilingual, and illustrates the 
 occasional use of Aramaic by our Lord from the parallel case of Irish phrases in the 
 mouth of Irishmen who habitually speak English. The Kev. G. H. Gwilliam, 
 whom I had consulted as to the relation of the language of the Peshitf o to Aramaic, 
 writes that ' he prefers to speak of the vernacular of Palestine, rather than to use 
 the term Aramaic, ' because the vernacular of Palestine in the first century of the 
 Christian era ' included many dialects, some of which were extremely corrupt. In 
 centres of Jewish life and influence, I believe a knowledge of Hebrew was cul- 
 tivated : in Samaria we know from the literary remains that a form of Ghaldee was 
 spoken : in Galilee, it appears that the common tongue was a veiTi mixed dialect, 
 and according to Deutsch (Bemains, The Talmud, p. 42) Palestinian patois was a 
 mere jargon. Amongst these many forms of speech I find no place for Syriac pro- 
 perly so called. The language of the Peshitto was the language of Edessa. It 
 was closely related to Chaldee and Samaritan, and indeed not very far removed, 
 after all, from Hebrew. It is a curious question, which I am not prepared to answer, 
 whether one who habitually spoke one of these dialects, could easily understand a 
 speaker in another of them. I suspect there were considerable differences of pro- 
 nunciation which are now lost for ever.' 
 
 ? See above pp. Ixxx. foil. 
 
 3 Obad. 8, Jer. xlix. 7. 
 
ccx THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 may reasonably suppose that our author would not have scrupled to 
 avail himself of the opportunities within his reach , so as to master the - 
 Greek language, and learn something of Greek philosophy. This 
 would be natural, even if we think of James as impelled only by a 
 desire to gain wisdom and knowledge for himself, but if we think 
 of him also as the principal teacher of the Jewish believers, many 
 of whom were Hellenists, instructed in the wisdom of Alexandria, 
 then the natural bent would take the shape of duty : he would be 
 a student of Greek in order that he might be a more effective 
 instructor to his own people.^ The use of rare compounds, to 
 which the Bishop calls attention, is certainly remarkable ; but I 
 am not sure that it is most easily explained by his supposition of 
 the employment of a professional interpreter. A man of ability, 
 who has to express himself in a foreign tongue, which he has 
 learnt partly from books, is not unlikely to be insensible to the 
 distinction between the language of poetry and prose, and to eke 
 out his limited resources -by combining familiar roots. I think 
 this might be illustrated from the style of the Book of Wisdom, 
 and from the English writings of foreigners, e.g. Kossuth's Speeches. 
 It appears to me then (1) that the phenomena of the Greek 
 epistle, which goes under the name of St. James, are strongly 
 against its being a translation ; (2j that the writer was acquainted 
 with the Greek books of the Apocrypha and with the principles of 
 the Stoic philosophy; (3) that the balance of probability is in 
 favour of St. James having been able to write Greek, but that this 
 need not preclude us from supposing that he may have availed 
 himself of the assistance of a Hellenist ' brother ' in revising his 
 Epistle. A fourth reason which indisposes me to accept the 
 hypothesis of an Aramaic original is the fact of its disappearance 
 without leaving any trace behind. The existing Syriac version of 
 St. James is generally supposed to be a translation from the Greek ; 
 and 'it is significant that the Edessene scribes do not seem to 
 recognize any tradition that the Epistle was written in any language 
 
 ^ It may be worth while to note that James is mentioned by an ancient writer as 
 the translator of the original Hebrew of St. Matthew's Gospel into Greek, see the 
 Synopiis Scripturae Sacrae included in the writings of Athanasius (Migno, vol. iv. 
 p. 432) rb ^^v oZv Ko/rk Mardaiov ivayyeKiov iypd(pri vir' avrov tov yiarOalov rri 
 'E^paiSi SLaKfKTip . . .TipfiTtvevBTj 5^ vnh 'laiciii^ov tov aSGK(j>ov tov Kvpiov t!) /caret ffapKa, 
 %5 KaX trpwTos ixeipoTovi\67i iirlffKoiros virh Tuv aylotv aTro(TT6Ku)V 4^ 'lepoffoAu/xois. 
 Probably this was only a guess suggested by the resemblance between our Epistle 
 and St. Matthew's Gospel. 
 
DID ST. JAMES WEITE IN GEEEK OR ARAMAIC J ccxi 
 
 but Greek. As far as I know, they content themselves with the 
 title " Epistle of James the Apostle." One ancient MS. however 
 in the Brit. Mus. adds to the subscription "which he wrote from 
 Jerusalem"' (G. H. Gwilliam). 
 
 With regard to the inferences drawn from the peculiarities of 
 the Corbey version, it may be worth while to compare the varia- 
 tions in the Peshitto, whether regarded as witnessing to the 
 contents of an original Greek or an original Aramaic text. I 
 quote the Latin translation given in Leusden and Schaaf s Nov. 
 Test. Syr. 1717. 
 
 i. 3 KaTepyd^erai v-jrofiovijv, facit vos jpossidere patientiam. 
 
 i. 4 9j Se v-rrofiovr) epyov reXeiov e-^kT(o, ipsi autem patientiae erit 
 opus perfectum. 
 
 1. 6 eoLKev KXvBeovi OaXda-arjii dve/M^o/jievp fcal piTri^ofieveo, 
 si'milis est Jluctiims maris quos commovet ventus. 
 
 i. 7 yap omitted. 
 
 i. 11 criiv Tc3 Kavamvi, in colore suo. 
 
 i. 14 e^eXKOftevo^ koL SeXea^ofievoi;, et cupit et attrahitur. 
 
 i. 17 iraaa Boa-if dyadrj koI irdv Sdoprjfia TeXeiov, omnis donatio 
 hona et completa. 
 
 i. 18 64? TO elvai ruia.'; dirapj(i^v riva, ut essemus primitiae. 
 
 i. 19 I'o-Te dSeX(f)oi fj,ov dyaTrrjToi' ecrTco Se Tra? dv6p(OTro<; rayt/?, 
 et vos fr aires mei dilecti, quisque ex vohis sit velox. 
 
 i. 21 irepiaaelav KaKla<;, multitudinem malitiae. 
 
 i. 25 aKpoarr/t; eTriXrja-/j,ovriii auditor auditionis quae ohlivioni 
 traditur. [Here the Peshitto gives a more exact parallel to the 
 corresponding clause (implying as the Greek original aKpoar^i; 
 dKorj<; in contrast with ■jtoiijtt]^ epyov). Is this to be regarded as 
 an explanatory addition ?] 
 
 ii. 4 KpiTol BiaXoyicr/M&v Trovrjpmv, interpretes cogitationum 
 malarum. 
 
 ii. 8 jMevToi, et. 
 
 ii. 13 KaTaKavyoLTai eXeoi; Kpiaeco^, exultalimini supra judicitim} 
 
 iii. 2 ^aXivaywyija-ai, in servitute continere [destroying the con- 
 nexion with the yaXLvoii; of the following verse].^ 
 
 ' ' The Syriac is a little vague perhaps, but I hare no doubt that the preseTii is 
 the tpnse intended.' — G. H. G. , 
 
 ^ ' The connexion of the verses is however maintained by the use of the same verb 
 in different conjugations : ver. 2 "\vho is. able to subjugate all his body"; ver. 3 
 " that the horses may subjugate themselves to us." The metaphor is also lost in i. 26, 
 where the Peshitto has "hold" (not "bridle") "his tongue." '— G. H. 6. 
 
 o 2 
 
coxii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 iii. 4 vTTO eXa-^flaTov irrjhaXlov, a ligno exiguo. 
 
 iii. 5 ihov, etiam. 
 • iii. 6 Kal rj ryX&a-cra trvp, 6 koct/jlo^ rfj^ aBiKiw; rj yXmaa-a 
 Kadlcnarai, iv Tot? fieXeaiv rjfi&v, 'j crTriXovaa o\ov to (TS)p,a Koi 
 (f>\,oyi^ova-a top rpovbv Trj<; ryeveaeco';, kol ^Xoyi^o/jLevi] viro rrji; 
 yeevvr}<;, et lingua ignis est, et mundus jpeccati veluti silva est, et ipsa 
 lingua, cum sit inter membra nostra, maculat totum corpus nostrum 
 ec incendit series generationum nostrarum quae currunt veluti rotae, 
 ac incenditur ipsa igne} [On the interpolation veluti silva I have 
 said something in my note. The interpretation of the phrase 
 <f>\o'Yi^ovaa...rrj<; jevecreo)^ seems to be an explanatory paraphrase, 
 like that in i. 25.] 
 
 iii. 17 dpvTTOKpiTo^, vultum non accipit.^ 
 
 iv. 9 raXanroipija-aTe Kal TrevdijaaTe Kal KXava-are, humiliate vos 
 et lugete. 
 
 iv. 16 iraaa Kavy(r)aii; roiavrr) irovripd eariv, omnis gloriatio 
 quae est ejus modi a malo est. 
 
 V. 2 a-earjTrev, corrupta sunt et fetuerunt. 
 
 V. 6 ovK avTiTuaaeTai, et non restitit. 
 
 In these variations I do not see that there is anything to sug- 
 gest that the Peshitto represents more truly than the Greek the 
 thought of the original author. On the contrary we find that the 
 force of the Greek is often lost or blurred by the disappearance of 
 a metaphor, as in i. 14, i. 26, iii. 2, or by the substitution of a 
 weaker for a more vigorous phrase, as in i. 6, i. 17, i. 21, ii. 8, iii. 6, 
 V, 6. The variations of the Corbey Latin seem to me to belong 
 generally to the same category ; and to be due either to want of 
 ability or want of conscientiousness on the part of the translator. 
 Where they appear to be confirmed by the variations of the Peshitto, 
 it is possible, as Prof Rendel Harris has shown in his brilliant 
 study on the Codex Bezae, that the Latin was directly influenced 
 by the Syriac. ' The Syriasms found in the Latin text of several 
 ancient MSS. exceed in harshness the Syriasms of the Greek text.' 
 He considers that the Latin text of the Codex Bezae dates from 
 the second century and arranges its constituents (prior to the end 
 of that century) in the following order : 
 
 ^ ' The relative qiioe here refers to series.' — G. H. G. 
 
 " ' This is the regular Syriac rendering of iiroRpniis and its cognates.' — G. H. 0. 
 
DID ST. JAMES WEITE IN GREEK OR ARAMAIC ? ccxiii 
 
 (1) Original Greek Text. 
 
 (2) Original Latin Text. 
 
 (3) Poetical Glosses interpolated from tlie popular Homeric 
 
 centos which had been used to dress up the Gospel 
 narrative. 
 
 (4) Primitive Syriac version. 
 
 (5) Montanist Glosses. 
 
 If this at all represents the true state of the case, it is evident 
 that these early possibilities of corruption make it extremely pre- 
 carious to argue from the minute particularities of any existing 
 form of the Latin text to the actual original of the Epistle as it 
 left the hands of the author. 
 
CHAPTER XII 
 
 Bibliography 
 (See the following chapter on the Apparahos Criticus) 
 
 I. Text. 
 
 Tischendorf, N.T. ed. 8 (Ti.). 1869—1872. -' 
 
 Tregelles, N.T. (Tr.). 1887. 
 
 Westcott and Hort, N.T. (WH.). Camb. 1881. 
 
 Sabatier, Bihliorum Sacrorum Zatinae Versiones. 1749. 
 
 Leusden and Schaaf, Nov. Test. Syr. 1717. 
 
 Norton, Translation of the PesMtto text of Hebrews, James, 
 
 1 Pet., 1 Joh. 1889. 
 Speculum, ed. Weihrich. 1887. 
 Priscillian, ed. Schepss. 1889. 
 Codex Amiatinus, ed. Tischendorf. 
 Codex Fuldensis, edi Eanke. 1868. 
 Codex Vaticanus, photographed by Cozza-Luzi. 
 
 II. Commentaries, 
 A. Ancient. 
 
 Didymus Alex. In Mpistolas Catholicas Ervarratio, Migne Patr. 
 
 Gr. vol. S9, p. 1750 foil. 
 Chrysostom, Fragm, in Epist. Gaihol., Migne P.G. vol. 64, pp. 
 
 1039—1052. 
 Cramer, J. A., Gatena in Ep. Gath., pp. 1 — 40.^ Oxf. 1840. 
 Matthaei, C. F., Scholia in Ep. Jaeobi, -pTp. 183 — 195. Riga, 
 
 1782. 
 Oecumenius, Migne P.G. vol. 119, pp. 455 — 510. 
 Theophylact, Migne P.G. vol. 125, pp. 1134—1190. 
 Euthymius Zigabenns. Athens, 1887. 
 Bede, Migne Pat. Eat. vol. 93, pp. 10—41. 
 
 ' The list in large print contains the books which I have myself consulted. I 
 have not seen the books contained in the subsequent list. An asterisk is prefixed 
 to those editions of St. James which, from one cause or other, I thought most useful. 
 
 ^ I hoped to have included in my Introduction an essay on the relations between 
 the various Caienae on the Epistle, but abandoned the design in consequence of the 
 delay which I found it would cause. 
 
BIBLIOGRA.PHY ccxv 
 
 B. Modern. 
 
 a. Special on St. James. 
 
 *Bassett, F. T., Catholic Epistle, of St. James. 1876. 
 Benson and Micha.elis, Paraphrasis et Notae. 1756. 
 *Beyschlag, W., pp. 239. Gottingen, 1888. [A much improved 
 revision of Huther. Take it all in all, the most useful 
 edition for students.] 
 Bouman, H., pp. 273. Utrecht, 1865. 
 
 Briickner, Br., and de Wette, pp. 192 — 270. Leipzig, 1865. 
 *Cellerier, J. E., Etude et Commentaire, pp. xxv., 200. Geneva, 
 1850. 
 Erdmann, D., 383 pp. Berlin, 1881. 
 Ewald, H., pp.- 176—230. Gottingen, 1870. 
 *Gebser, A.E., pp. xiii., 418. Berlin, 1828. [Gives full extracts 
 from the patristic commentaries.] 
 Gloag, Popular Commentary. 1883. 
 *Heisen, Novae Hypotheses interpretandae Epistolae Jacohi, 
 pp. 951. 4to. Bremen, 1739. [Notes on the more 
 difificult verses in ch. i. — iv. 5, a monument of learning 
 and industry.] 
 von Hofmann, G. Ch. K., pp. 179. Nordlingen, 1876. 
 Herder, Briefe zwecner Brud.er Jesu. Stuttgardt, 1852. 
 Hulher in Meyer's Critical and Exegetical Handbook, Eng. tr. 
 
 Edinb. 1882. 
 Johnstone, R., Lectures Exegetical and Practical, ed. 2. Edinb, 
 1889. 
 *Kern, F. H., 242 pp. Tubingen, 1838. [An able and original 
 writer. Introduction very interesting.]" 
 Neander, Eng. tr. 1851. 
 Peile, T. W. 1852. 
 *Pluramer, A., Expositor's Bible. 1891. 
 .*Plumptre, E. H. (Cambridge Series.) 1878. 
 Pott, D. .J., Latin Notes. Gottingen, 1816. 
 *Price, J. (Pricaeus) in Critici Sacri. [Learned.] 
 Punchard, in Ellicott's N. T. Commentary for English Beaders. 
 1884. 
 *Scott (Dean), in Speaker's Commentary. 
 Semler, Paraphrasis cum Notis. 1781. 
 
ccxvi THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 *Schegg, P., pp. 279. Mlinchen, 1883. [Roman Catholic.] 
 *Schneckenburger (Lat. notes). Stuttgardt, 1832. [Sensible 
 and independent ; illustrates freely from Philo.] 
 von Soden, H., Hand-Commentar. Freiburg, 1890. 
 *Stier, R, Eng. tr. 1859. [Horailetic] 
 *Theile, C. G. G., Comm. in Epistolam Jacobi. 1833. [A 
 condensed variorum edition.] 
 de Wette, see Bruckner. 
 *Wiesinger, Aug., pp. 211. Konigsberg, 1854. 
 
 h. General, in which St. James is included. 
 
 Alford's Greek Testament, vol. iv. 1864. 
 
 Bengel's Gnomon. 1860. 
 
 Bloomfield, S. T., Gr. Test. 1855. 
 
 Cajetan, Notae in JE^istolam S. Jacohi (contained in his 
 
 Bpistolae S. Pauli, vol. ii. pp. ccvii. foil.). 
 Calvin, ed. Tholuck, vol. vii. Berlin, 1834. 
 Cornelius a Lapide. Paris, 1648. 
 Erasmus, in Poole's Synopsis. 
 Estius, pp. 1095—1148. Paris, 1661. 
 Grinfield, Nov. Test. Editio Hellenistica. 1843. Scholia Helle 
 
 nistica. 1848. 
 Grotius, in Poole's Synopsis. 
 
 Hammond, Paraphrase and Annotations on the N.T. 
 Lange, Theologisch-homiletisches Bihelwerh, 1862, Eng. tr. 
 
 Edinb. 1870. 
 Macknight, A New Translation of the Apostolical Epistles, 
 
 with a Commentary and Notes. 1809. 
 Voo\e{?o\\),' Synopsis. 1669. 
 Wetstein, Gr. Test, with Latin Notes. Amst. 1751. 
 Wordsworth, Chr., Gr. T. with Eng. Notes. 1870. 
 
 c. Of other books of the New Testament. 
 
 Lightfoot, J. B., Ep. to the Galatians. 1890. 
 
 Ep. to the Colossians. 1875. 
 
 — ■ — Ep. to the Fhilippians. 1879. 
 Westcott, B. F., Ep. to the Hebrews. 
 
 Gospel of St. John. 
 
 Epistles of St. John. 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY ccxvii 
 
 III. Illustrative Works. 
 
 A. Grammars and Dictionaries. 
 
 Bruder, Concordance. Lips. 1842. 
 
 Buttmann, A.., Grammar to the N.T. (German). 1859. 
 
 Cremer, Bihlico-theological Lexicon, Eng. tr. Edinb. 1878-1886. 
 
 Goodwin, Moods and Tenses. 1889. 
 
 Green, Gr. of the New Testament Dialect. 1842. 
 
 Herzog, Beal-EncyhlopMie f. protest. Theologie. 
 
 Krueger, Gr. Sprachlehre. Berlin, 1852. 
 
 Meisterhans, Grammatih der Attischen Inschriften, ed. 2. 1888 
 
 Middleton, On the Article, ed. Rose. 1841. 
 
 Schleusner, Lexicon in LXX. Lips. 1820. 
 
 Sclimid, W., Der Atticismus von Dionysius Halih. his auf den 
 
 zweiten Philostratus. 1887 — 1889. 
 Sophokles, Greek Lexicon of the Roman and Byzantine Periods. 
 
 New York, 1888. 
 Smith, Dictionary of the Bible. 
 
 Dictionary of Christian Biogra'phy. 
 
 Dictionary of Christian Antiquities. 
 
 Stephani Thesaurus, ed. Hase. 
 
 Suicer, Thesaurus. Utrecht. 1746. 
 
 Thayer, Greek-English Lexicon to the N, T. 1888. 
 
 Trench, Synonyms of the N. T. 1855. 
 
 Trommius, Concordance to the LXX. 
 
 Veitch, Irregular Greek Verbs. Oxf. 1887. 
 
 "Winer, Grammar of the N. T., Eng. tr. by Moulton. 1870. 
 
 B. Editions of Ancient Writers.'^ 
 Apocrypha — 
 
 Acta Apostolorum Apocrypha, Tischendorf. 1851, ed. 2 by 
 
 Lipsius and Bonnet. 1891. 
 Acta Johannis, Zahn. 1880. 
 
 Apocryphal Gospels, ed. Thilo {Cod. Apocr. N. T.). Lips. 1832. 
 Acts and Revelations, Eng. tr. (in Ante-Nicene Libr.). Edinb. 
 
 1870. 
 Codex Apocryphus Nov. Test. ed. Fabricius. 1703. 
 Codex Pseudepigraphus Vet. Test. ed. Fabricius. 1722. 
 
 1 Patristic references are generally toj the pages in Migne's Patrologia except in 
 the case of the editions specified ip the text. 
 
Gcxviii THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Apocrypha — 
 
 Gospel according to the Hebrews, Nicholson. Lond. 1879. 
 Lilri Apocryphi Vet. Test. ed. Fritzsche. Lips. 1871. 
 Nov. Test, extra Ganonem receptum, ed. Hilgenfeld. 1866. 
 Psalms of Solomon, ed. Ryle and James. Camb. 1891. 
 Apostolicae Gonsfitutiones. Ultzen, 1853. 
 Barnabas, ed. Hilgenfeld. 1877. 
 Clemens Alexandrinus, Klotz. Lips. 1831. 
 Clemens Romanus, Lightfoot. Camb. 1877. 
 Clementina, Dressel. 1853. 
 
 Eng. tr. in the Ante-Nicene Library. Edinb. 1870. 
 
 Didachd {Doctrina Duodecim Apostolorum), F. X. Funk. 1887. 
 
 R. Schaff. 1885. 
 
 C. Taylor, Lectures on. 1886. 
 
 Epiphanius, ed. Oehler. Berlin, 1856. 
 
 Eusebius, H. E. and Praep. Evang. Heinichen. Lips. 1827, 
 
 1842. 
 Hermas, ed. Gebhardt and Harnack. Lips. 1877. 
 Jewish Fathers (J. F.), ed, C. Taylor. Camb. 1877. 
 Josephus, Antiquit. ed. Niese. 1887 foil. Bell. Jnd. Bekker. 
 
 1856. 
 Ignatius, ed. Lightfoot. Camb. 1885. 
 Irenaeus, ed. Stieren. Lips. 1853. 
 Justin Martyr, ed. Otto. Jena. 1847. 
 Patres Apostolici, Jacobson. 1847. Lightfoot and Harmer. 
 
 1891. 
 Philo, ed. Richter. Lips. 1828. 
 Pirke Ahoth, ed. Taylor. See Jewish Fathers. 
 Testamenta XII Patriarcharum, ed. Sinker, 1869 ; also in 
 
 Fabricius' God. Pseud. V. T. (sometimes referred to under 
 
 the name of the particular patriarch). 
 
 G. Miscellaneous. 
 
 Abbott, T. K., Essays on the Original Text of the Old and New 
 
 Testaments. 1891. ' 
 
 Bigg, C. Ghristian Platonists of Alexandria. Oxf. 1886. 
 Bingham, Antiquities of the Ghristian Church. 1852. 
 Bruckner, W., Die Ghronologische Beihenfolge in welche die 
 
 Briefe d. N. T. verfasst sind. Haarlem, 1890. 
 
BIBLIOGEAPHY ccxix 
 
 Butler's Analogy, ed. Fitzgerald. 1849. 
 
 Chase, The Lord's Prayer in the Uarly Church. Camb. 1891. 
 
 Credner, JEinleitung. Halle, 1836. 
 
 Daille, Be Sacramentali sive Auriculari Gonfessione. Geneva, 
 
 1661. 
 Davidson, Sam., Introduction to the N. T. 1868. 
 Ewald, Paul, Das Hauptjproilem d. Evangelienfrage. Leipzig, 
 
 1890. 
 Farrar, Early Bays of Christianity. 1882. 
 Field, Otium Norvicense. Oxf. 1886. 
 Gfrorer, A. Urchristenthum. Stuttgardt, 1831. 
 Gloag, IntrodvAition to the Catholic- Epistles. Edinb. 1887. 
 Gregory, CSi., Prolegomena to Tischendorfs N. T. Lips. 1884- 
 
 and 1890. 
 Harris, Rendel, A Study of Codex Beeae. Camb. 1892. 
 Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek. Oxf. 1889. 
 Hausrath, Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte. Heidelberg, 1873. 
 Holtzmann, Einleitung. 1885. 
 Jebb, J., Sacred Literature. Lond. 1820. 
 Lardner's Credibility of the Gospel History. 1788. 
 Laurent, Neutestamentliche Studien. Gotha, 1866. 
 Lechler, Apostolic and post-Apostolic Times, Eng. tr. 1886. 
 Lewin, Fasti Sacri. Lond. 1865. 
 Lightfoot's Horae Hebraicae. 
 Loesner, Adnotationes ad N. T. e Philone. YlTI. 
 Mangold's ed. of Bleek's Einleitung in das N. T. 1886 
 Mart^ne, Be Antiquis Ecclesiae Bitihis. Antw. 1736. 
 Meuschen, Nov. Test, ex Talmude illustratum. 1736. 
 Mill, W. H., Pantheistic Principles. 1861. 
 Mommsen, History of Rome, The Provinces, Eng. tr. 1886. 
 Neander, History of the Planting of the Christian Church, Eng. 
 
 tr. 1842. 
 Pearson, On the Creed, ed. Chevallier. Camb. 1849. 
 Pfleiderer, Urchristenthum. 1887. 
 Resch, Agrapha. Leipz. 1889. 
 
 Reuss, Hist, of the Saered Scriptures, Eng. tr. Edinb. 1884. 
 Ritschl, A., Altkatholische Kirche, ed. 2. Bonn, 1857. 
 Eyle and James, Psalms of Solomon. Camb. 1891. 
 Salmon, G., Introduction to the N. T..qA. 4. 1889. 
 
ccxx THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Schmid, C. F., Biblical Theology, Eng. tr. Edinb. 1870. 
 Schmidt, Wold., LehrgeJialt d. Jakohos-Briefes. Leipz. 1869. 
 Schottgei), Horae Ilebraicae. 1733. 
 Schiirer, Jewish People in the Time of Christ, Eng. tr. Edinb. 
 
 1880 : ed. 2 (of vols. i. ii.), 1890. 
 Scrivener, Introduction to the Criticism of the Ii. T. 1883. 
 Siegfried, Philo als Ausleger d. Alten Testaments. Jena, 1875. 
 Stanley, A. P., Sermons and Essays on the Apostolic Age. 1874. 
 Studia Bihlica, vols. i. — iii. Oxf. 1885 — 1891. 
 Texts and Studies, ed. by J. Armitage Robinson. Camb. 1891-2. 
 Vorst, de Eebraismis N. T. Lips. 1778. 
 Weiss, B., Binleitung. Berlin, 1886. Eng. tr., 1888. 
 Westcott and Hort, iV^. T. Introduction and Appendix. Camb. 
 
 1881. 
 Westcott, On the Canon of the N.T. 1866. 
 Wilke, Ch. G., Neutestamentliche Bhetorik. Dresden, 1843. 
 Wolf, Curae Philologicae. Basil, 1741. 
 Zahn, Forschungen. 1881 — 84. 
 Geschichte d. Neuiestamentlichen Eanons, vols. i. ii. 
 
 1888—1890. 
 
 [Unless otherwise stated, the books which follow are commentaries 
 on the Epistle of St. James.] 
 
 Alexander Natalis, In Epist. Cathol. Lyon, 1621. 
 
 Alsted, J. H., Pleias Apost. e. notationibus. 1640. 
 
 Althamer, In Epist. Jacobi. 1527. 
 
 Aretius, B., Comm in Epp. Oath. 1589. 
 
 Aiigusti, Catholic Epistles. With German notes. 1801, 1808. 
 
 Bengel, Erhldrende Umschreibwng der Briefs Joe. Pet. &c. Gottingen 
 
 1776. 
 Blom, A. H., Der Brief van Jaliobus. 1869. 
 
 Boon, A., De Epistolae Jacubi cum lib. Sirac. convenientia. Gion. 1866. 
 Brochmand. 1706. 
 
 Baumgarten. (Germ, notes.) Halle, 1750. 
 Carpzof, Epistolae CathoUcae c. schoUis. Hal. 1790. 
 Damm. (Germ, notes.) Berlin, 1747. 
 Faber, Observ. in Ep. J. ex Syro. Cob. 1774. 
 Flachs, S. A., To aira^ "Ktyoiieva Epistolae Jacobi. Lips. 1730. 
 Gans, E. A., tjber Gedankengang im Br. d. Jahobus. 1874. 
 Gcipfert. (Germ, notes.) 1791. 
 Grashof. (Germ, notes.) 1830. 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY ccxxi 
 
 Grynaeus, Epistolae CathoUcae. Basil, 1543. 
 
 Hensler. (Germ, notes.) 1801. 
 
 Horneius, In CathoUcas Epistolas Expositio. Brnnsv. 1652. 
 
 Hottinger. (Lat. notes.) Lips. 1815. 
 
 Jachmann. (Germ, notes.) Leipz. 1838. 
 
 Jiistiniani, Explanationes in Epiat. CathoUcas. Lyon, 1621. 
 
 Kaiser, C. F., De nonnullis epist. Jac. viriutibus. Halle, 1797. 
 
 Kiichler, C. G., De Rhetorica Epist. Jac. indole. 1818. 
 
 Lisco, N. T. Berlin, 1840. 
 
 Messmer, Al., Erkldrung d. Cathol Briefe. Brixen, 1863. 
 
 Morus. (Lat. notes.) Lips. 1794. 
 
 Kosenmiiller. (Germ, notes.) Leipz. 1787. 
 
 Scharling. (Lat. notes.) Copenhagen, 1841. 
 
 Scherer, J. L. W. (Germ, notes.) 1799. 
 
 Schirmer. (Germ, notes.) Bresl. 1778. 
 
 Schneckenburger, Beitrage zur Einleitimg ins N. T. Stuttg. 18.32. 
 
 Schultess. (Lat. notes.) Zurich, 1824. 
 
 Schulze, D., -D. Schri/tst. Char. u. Werth des Petr. Jud. u. Jac. Lips. 
 1802. 
 
 Seemiller. (Lat. notes.) Nuremb. 1783. 
 
 Storr, Diss. Exeget. in. ep. Jac. 1784. 
 
 Weber, M..,De Ep. Jac. cum. ep. atque oratlone Act. xv inserta utiliter com- 
 paranda. Vitb. 1795. 
 
 Winer, Ohsero. in epist. Jac. e Versione Syriaca. 1827. 
 
 Zachariae, Erkldrung der Briefe Jacobi, Petri, <&c. Gottingen, 1776. 
 
CHAPTER XII 
 APPARATUS CEITICUS^ 
 
 Greek Manuscripts 
 
 I. Manuscripts written in large capitals (Uncials) 
 
 Fourth Century 
 
 B. Codex Vaticanus. No. 1209 in the Vatican Library at 
 Rome. Written continuously without breathings .or accents. 
 Stops are rare, but a full stop is sometimes represented by a vacant 
 space. Probably contained all the canonical books of the Old and 
 New Testament ; but almost the whole of Genesis, part of the 
 Psalms, the later chapters of Hebrews, the Pastoral Epistles, Phile- 
 mon, and the Apocalypse are now wanting. It is generally 
 regarded as the most valuable of all the MSS. containing a pure Pre- 
 Syrian text (WH. Intr. p. 150) and is not unfrequently followed 
 by Westcott and Hort against the other chief MSS., compare 
 i. 9, 22, ii. 3, 19, 26, iv. 8, 9, 14, v. 7, 14, 20. Errors from 
 itacism are frequent, especially the confusion of at and e (as in ii. 
 14 KaraKav^are, 24 oparai B^, iv. 6 avrnaa-a-eTe, rv. 8 (fjev^ere 
 B^, V. 7 e'«Se^6T6 B^, v. 16 e^o/ioKoyeicrdaL W, "Trpocrev^ecrOai W) 
 and the writing of eo for t (as in i. 6 BiaKp€ivofj,evo<!, penri^o/Mevq), ii. 
 6 yTet/j.acrare, iii. 7 dvOpmireivr}, iv. 8 vfieiv, iv. 14 arfieii}, v. 3 et'o? 
 B^, V. 7 rei/jLiov). The codex has at length been made accessible to 
 
 1 The materials for ray Apparatus Criticus have been found mainly in Westcott 
 and Hort's Introduction and Text, the Greek Testaments of Alford and Tregelles, 
 the articles by Bishop Wordsworth and Professor Sanday contained in Studia Biblica 
 for 1885, the Introduction to Textual Griticism by Home and Tregelles, Scrivener's 
 Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament, 1883 ; above all, in Tischen- 
 dorf, eighth edition, published 1869 and 1872, together with the still incomplete 
 Prolegomena by C. E. Gregory, of which Part I. appeared in 1884, Part II. in 1890. 
 I have also compared, throughout, the photograph of Godex B, Sabatier's Latin 
 Versions, the Codex Amiatinus by Tischendorf, the Godex Fuldensis by Eanke, 
 together with Weihrich's edition of the Speculum, and Schepss' edition of 
 Priscillian. 
 
APPARATUS CRITICUS ccxxiii 
 
 all by the beautiful photographic reproduction brought out under 
 the direction of Signer Cozza-Luzi, the Librarian of the Vatican. 
 
 Sin. (or t^). CoDKX Sinaiticus, discovered by Tischendbrf in 
 the convent at Mount Sinai on Feb. 4, 1859, and published by 
 him in 1862. It is now in the library at St. Petersburg. It is 
 written continuously without stops or breathings. Contained 
 originally the whole of the Old Testament, including the Apocrypha 
 (of this a large portion is now wanting) ; the New Testament (still 
 entire) ; the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas 
 (of this last a large part is lost). Errors from itacism, such as the 
 confusion of at and e, ei and i, are frequent. Westcott and Hort 
 consider it the most valuable MS. after B, giving in the main a 
 Pre-Syrian text but to a certain extent corrupted by Western and 
 Alexandrian readings. Tischendorf, as was natural, codicem su,um re 
 vera fraestantissimum fortasse plus aequo miratus est (G. E.. Gregory 
 Prol. to Tisehendorfs N.T. p. 353), and has in some instances been 
 thus induced to prefer what seems to me an inferior reading. See 
 especially iii. 6, 6, where his text is ISov rjXiKov irvp fj\Ur}v vXrjv 
 avdirrei rj yXcaa-a-a. iTvp, 6 Koa/MO^ ttj? ahlKia^, r) ryKSxrcra KuOlcr- 
 TaraL ev toI'; fieXeffiv rfiMmv, Kal crTriKovaa oKov to aSsyua Koi <f>\o- 
 rfi^ofievr) K.r.X.) iv. 2 /cta^ecr^e koI iroXefieiTe, Kal ovk e^^ere Sia 
 TO fj.r] alrelcrOai vfid<;- atTelre k.t.X. 
 
 Fifth Century. 
 
 A. Codex Alexandeinus in the British Museum. Contains 
 the Old and New Testaments, together with two epistles of 
 Clement. It is written continuously with occasional stops and, 
 very rarely, a breathing or accent. A photographic facsimile of 
 the N.T. was brought out by the authorities of the British 
 Museum in 1879. 
 
 C. Codex Epheaemi. No. 9 in the Library at Paris. This is a 
 palimpsest containing fragments of the Old and New Testaments, 
 over which were written in the 12th century some treatises of 
 Ephraem the Syrian. About three-fifths of the N.T. are pre- 
 served. The writing is continuous, with occasional stops, and 
 spaces left at the end of a paragraph. It was printed by Tischen- 
 dorf in 1843. The end of St. James (iv. 3 to v. 20) is wanting. 
 
ccxxiv THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Ninth Century. 
 
 K. (also marked Kj, to distinguish it from Codex Cyprius 
 the K of the Gospels). Codex Mosquensis in the Library of the 
 Holy Synod at Moscow. Contains the Catholic Epistles with a 
 catena and St. Paul's Epistles with the schoUa of Damascenus. 
 The text is written in square uncials with breathings, accents and 
 stops, the comment in round letters. Collated by Matthaei for his 
 edition of the Catholic Epistles published in 1782. 
 
 L. (Lg). Codex Angelicus Komanus in the Angelican Library 
 of the Augustinian monks at Rome. Contains part of the Acts, the 
 Epistles of St. Paul, and the whole of the Catholic Epistles. Col- 
 lated by Tregelles and Tischendorf. 
 
 P. (Pj). Codex Poefieianus, a palimpsest belonging to Bishop 
 Porfirius of St. Petersburg : first printed by Tischendorf in Mon. 
 Sacr. Insd. vol. 5, 1865, written in a slovenly hand with accents, 
 breathings and stops. Contains the Acts, Catholic Epistles, 
 Epistles of St. Paul, the Apocalypse. Wanting in St. James ii. 
 13—21. 
 
 Besides the above uncial MSS., C. R. Gregory describes three 
 which have not yet been collated (Tischendorf 's N.T. vol. iii. p. 445 
 foil.). 
 
 '2.Vatic. Gr. 2061 (= Cod. Patiriensis), of the 5th century, con- 
 taining James iv. 14 — v. 20. Shortly to be published by Batiffol. 
 
 ^. AthmtiS Laurae, of the 8th or 9th century, containing James 
 i. ii. iii. 
 
 S. Athous Laurae, of the 8th or 9th century, contains all the 
 Catholic Epistles. 
 
 n. Manuscripts written in cursive letters (Minuscules). 
 
 C. R. Gregory (Tisch. N.T. Froleg. p. 617—652) gives a list of 416 
 MSS. of the Acts and Catholic Epistles belonging to this class, the 
 greater part being still uncoUated. They range from the 9th to 
 the 16th century. They are usually referred to by their number, 
 but Scrivener in the appendix to his edition of the Codex Augien- 
 sis denoted a certain number by the use of small letters a, b, c, to p,^ 
 
 ' These have now had numbers assigned to them by Gregory, pp. 638 foil., 
 795 foil. ; and by Scrivener himself, p. 269 f., ed. 3. 
 
APPARATUS CRITICUS ccxxv 
 
 and has been followed in this by Tischendorf. Those of most value 
 appear to be 13 (see W H. Intr. p. 192), 9, 29, 36, 40, 4(3, 61, 66 
 69, 73, 78, 133, 137. 
 
 III. Lectionaries. 
 
 These are books containing the lessons read in church, mostly 
 from the Gospels. C. E. Gregory (Tisch. Proleg. pp. 778 — 791) gives 
 a list of 265 Lectionarii Apostoli containing lessons from the Acts 
 and Epistles, some in uncials, some in cursives, ranging from the 
 9th to the l7th century. They are referred to as lect.^ &c. 
 
 Ancient Versions. 
 
 [As may be seen from the Latin versions which follow, the 
 resemblance between the ancient versions and the original is often 
 so close as to represent not simply the words, but even the order 
 in which the words occur ; they are therefore of the greatest value 
 in determining the readings of the Greek text.^] 
 
 A. Latin. 
 
 I. Pre-Hieronymian, or Old Latin. 
 
 1. Corb. (/). The Corbey MS. of the Old Latin Version of St. 
 James now in the Imperial Library at St. Petersburg, collated by 
 Prof. V. Jemstedt in 1884 and printed with the original spelling 
 and punctuation, accompanied by the valuable notes of Bishop 
 John Wordsworth, in pp. 115 — 123 of Studia Biblica, 1885. 
 Compare, too, the paper by Professor Sanday in the same volume, 
 pp. 233 — 263. The transcript given below is from Sabatier's 
 JBibliorum Sacrm-um. Latinae Versiones Antiguae, 1749. I have 
 not thought it necessary to adhere strictly to his spelling or 
 punctuation, but any other divergence is mentioned in the notes. 
 I have also stated where Sabatier's reading is unsupported by the 
 MS., and on one or two occasions have noticed the punctuation of 
 the MS., which is however in general too capricious to build 
 upon.^ 
 
 1 On the use of versions and eaily quotations see an Essay in Stud. Bibl. ii. p. 
 195 foil. 
 
 2 Tischendorf mentions the Vienna Codex Bobiensis of the fifth century, as contain- 
 ing the following fragments of St. James : i. 1-5, iii. 13-18, iv. 1, 2, v. 19, 20. This 
 must be distinguished from h the Cod. Bob, at Turjn, which contains the Gospels of 
 
 P 
 
ccxxvi THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 2. Specuhim (m). This is a commpn-place book of texts arranged 
 under different heads, wrongly ascribed to St. Augustine. First 
 printed by Cardinal Mai in the Nova Fatrum BiUiotheca vol. i. pt. 2. 
 The latest edition is that by Weihrich in the Corp. Scr. JUccl. Lat. 
 Vienna, 1887, from which the transcript below is taken. Prof. 
 Sanday in his review of Weihrich {Glass, liev. iv. 414 foU.) notices 
 the close resemblance between the readings in the Speculum and 
 those in the writings of Priscillian edited in the same series by 
 Schepss in 1889 from a MS. of the 6th century. I have therefore 
 placed in the same column with the quotations from the Speculum 
 those from 
 
 3. Priscillian (died 385 a.d.). Dr. Sanday is of opinion that 
 the Speculwm, ' was put together somewhere in the circle in which 
 Priscillian moved, and from a copy of the Bible, which, if not 
 exactly his, was yet closely related to it.' I have distinguished 
 the quotations from those in the Speculum by inclosing them in 
 square brackets. Dr. Schepss (p. 17) had already compared Pris- 
 cillian's version of James v. 1 foil, with that given in the Speculum. 
 
 II. Vulgate (Vulg.). 
 
 1 Codex Amiatinus. Written probably at Jarrow about the end 
 of th§ seventh century,^ and sent as a present to Rome by Ceolfrid 
 in 716 A.D. ; printed by Tischendorf in 1850 and 1854. Contains 
 the whole Latin Bible with the exception of the book of Baruch. 
 In the notes I have mentioned where it dififers from the Codex 
 Fuldensis, written in the same century, and from the genuine 
 Speculum of St. Augustine, edited with the other Speculum by 
 Weihrich. 
 
 Zatt. denotes the consensus of the Latin versions. 
 
 B. Syriac. 
 
 1. Pesh. The Peshitto (i.e. ' simple ') version contains the whole 
 Bible with the exception of- the 2nd epistle of Peter, 2nd and 3rd 
 
 St. Matthew and St. Mark, and is transcribed by Tischendorf in the ' Anzeige-Blatt ' 
 to the Wiener JahrbUeher of 1847, 8, 9. I have not been able to see any transcript 
 of the fragments from St. James, which Tischendorf denotes by the letter (s) ; but 
 it would seem from his critical notes that it is generally in agreement with the 
 Vulgate against Corb. and Spec. [Since the above was written, I have been enabled, 
 through the kindness of Prof. Sanday, to make a copy of Belsheiin's transcript of 
 this Codex. See postscript below.] 
 * See Studio, Biblica ii. p. 273 foil, 
 
APPARATUS CRITICUS ccxxvii 
 
 of John, Jude and the Apocalypse. It is ascribed to the 2nd cen- 
 tury, but was probably revised in the 4th century. 
 
 2 Syr. The recension by Thomas of Harkel in the 7th century 
 of the version made by Polycarp, a Chorepiscopus, in 508 a.d., for 
 Philoxenus, bishop of Hierapolis. 
 
 ^rr. denotes the consensus of the Syriac versions. 
 
 C Egyptian Versions. 
 
 1. Ccpt. Coptic or Memphitic, the version of Lower Egypt, made 
 probably not later than the 2nd century ,i contains the whole of the 
 N.T. 
 
 2. Sah. The Sahidic or Thebaic, the version of Upper Egypt, of 
 about the same antiquity, also contained the entire N.T. 
 
 D. Aethiopic Version. Assigned to the 4th century. 
 Aet'hl°^ denotes the text as given in the Koman edition of 1548. 
 Aeth?^ the text in Pell Piatt's edition 1826—30. 
 
 E. Armenian Version. 
 
 Arm. made early in the 5th century. 
 
 [P.S. — I print below a copy of Batiffol's collation of the Codex 
 Patiriensis, and of Belsheim's Codex Bobiensis, for both of which 
 I am indebted to Prof. Sanday. 
 
 LECTIONES COD. PATIRIENSIS 
 (=3) Va,t. 2061, Gregory Proleg. p. 447 f.) ad Ep. Jac. iv. 14— v. 17. 
 
 iv. 
 
 14. 
 
 eirevra 8e. 
 
 iv. 
 
 15. 
 
 f7tro>[/i€i'] . . . 7roi^(r<B/i€i/. 
 
 V. 
 
 3. 
 
 KOTiWat Koi 6 apyvpos. 
 
 V. 
 
 3. 
 
 6 16s as wvp. 
 
 V. 
 
 4. 
 
 el<r€KrjKv6(i.(Tav. 
 
 V. 
 
 5. 
 
 as iv riiiipa. 
 
 V. 
 
 7. 
 
 ems &v Xa^n- 
 
 V. 
 
 7. 
 
 Trpoifiov tantum, cum B. 
 
 V. 
 
 8. 
 
 /laKpo^Vfiria-aTe (sine oSv). 
 
 V. 
 
 9. 
 
 a8fX0oi iwv Kwr aWriKav. 
 
 So Lightfoot in Scrivener's Introd., p. 371. Some Coptic scholars would assign 
 a later date, at all events to the version of the Catholic Epistles. 
 
CCXXVlll 
 
 V. 
 
 9. 
 
 V. 
 
 10. 
 
 V. 
 
 10. 
 
 V. 
 
 10. 
 
 V. 
 
 10. 
 
 V. 
 
 11. 
 
 V. 
 
 12. 
 
 V. 
 
 12. 
 
 V. 
 
 14. 
 
 V. 
 
 15. 
 
 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 KaraxpiB^Te. 
 
 viroheiyiia hi. 
 
 'Kd^fTe . . . Koi T^s iiaKpo6vjj.Las f'x*" {lectio ex duahus cov/usa). 
 
 TO) owd/ian {sine iv). 
 
 Tov Kvpiov. 
 
 iirofievovTas. 
 
 <iSeX<j)oi {om. jjiov), 
 
 cts inroKpicnv. 
 
 TOV Kvpiov. 
 
 riv 'pro rj. 
 
 CODEX BOBIENSIS. 
 
 In the Imperial Library of Vienna there is a MS. volume, numbered 16 in 
 the Catalogue, which contains, among a variety of other treatises, fragments of 
 a pre-Hieronymian Latin version of the Acts, the Epistle of St. James, and 
 the First Epistle of St. Peter written on palimpsest. The volume originally 
 belonged to the Monastery of Bobbio, founded by Columban, and was brought 
 from Naples to Vienna in 1717. The fragments were partially published by 
 Tischendorf in the Anzeigeblatt to the Wiener Jahrbiicher der Literatur of 
 1847, and more completely by J. Belsheim, Christiania, 1886.1 The text of 
 the Epistles, not of the Acts, approaches very nearly to the Vulgate. It is 
 difficult to read, and in some passages (here printed in italics) could not be 
 determined with certainty. I have preserved the capitals and punctuation of 
 the original. 
 
 I. (1) Jacobus dl et dni ihu xpi servus duodecim tr...sunt in dispersione 
 salutem. (2) omne gaudiiim existimate fratres mei. cum in temtationibus 
 variis incideritis. (.3) scientes'quod probatio fidei vestrae patientiam operatur. 
 (4) patientia autem opus perfeotum habeat ut sitis perfect! et integri in nullo 
 deficientes. (5) Si quis enim vestrum indiget sapientia petat hie a do qui dat 
 omnibus affluenter et non improperat et dabitur ei. (6) postulet autem fide 
 nihil dubitans quoniam qui duhitat similis est ftuctui maris qui a vento fertar 
 ac defertur (7) ne speret homo ille quid accipit a do. (8) homo duplici corde 
 inconstans in omnibus viis suis. (9) glorietur autem frater humUis in altitudine 
 sua (10) et dives autem in humilitate sua quoniam sicut flos faeni transibit 
 (11) exortus est enim sol cum ardore arescit faenum et flos ejus decidit et decor 
 vultus ejus deperdit ita et dives in itineribus suis marescit. (12) beatus vir 
 qui suffert temptationem quia cum probatus fuerit accipiet coronam vitae quam 
 repromisit ds dUigentibus se (13) nemo cum temptatur dicat quia a do 
 temptatur. ds enim non temptator malorum est. ipse autem neminem 
 temptat. (14) unusquisque vero temptatur a concupiscentia abstractus et 
 illectus. (15) deinde concupiscentia cum, conceperit parit peccatum vero cum 
 consummatum est generat mortem. (16) nolite errare fratres mei dilectissime 
 (17) omne donum bonum et omne donum, perfeotum descendens desursum a patre 
 
 luminum apud quern non est transmutatio (18) voluntarie generavit nos 
 
 verbo veritatis ut simus initium aliquid creaturae ejus. (19) scite fratres mei 
 dilectissime. si autem omnis homo velox ad audiendum tardus avitem ad 
 loquendum et tardus ad iram (20) quod iracundia enim viri justitiam dl non 
 operatur (21) propter quod abicientes omnem inmunditiam et abundantiam 
 malitiae in mansuetudine suscipite insitum verbum quod potest salvare animas 
 vestras. (22) Estote autem factores verbi et non auditores tantum fallentes 
 vosmet ipsos. (23) quia si quis auditor est verbi et non factor hie aestimabitur 
 
 1 The above particulars are taken ftom Belsheiin's volume 
 
APPAEATUS ORITICFS ccxxix 
 
 viro consideranti vultum nativitatis suae in speculo. (24) consideravit enim 
 se et abiit statim et oblitus est qualis fuerat. (25) qui autem perspexit in legem 
 perfectum libertatis et permanserit in ea non auditor obliviosus factus sed factor 
 operis Mc salvatur opere suo. 
 
 II. (14) ...cordia judicium, quid proderit fratres si Mem quis se dicat... 
 non habet. numquid fides... eum. (15) si autem f rater et soror...et indigeant 
 victum quo. ..(16) dicat autem aliquis...calefacimini et saturamini non dederitis 
 autem ei quae necessaria sunt corpori quid proderit. (17) sic et fides si non 
 habet opera mortua est in semetipso (18) sed dicet quis tu fldem habes et ego 
 opera habeo ostende miM fidem tuam sine operibus. et ego ostendam tibi ex 
 operibus meis fidem meam. (19) tu credes quia unus est ds bene facis et 
 daemonia credunt et contremiscunt. (20) Vis autem scire o homo inanis 
 quoniam fides sine operibus otiosa est (21) abraham pater noster non ex 
 operibus justificatus est offerens isac filium (super) altare. (22) videte 
 quoniam fides (coope)ratur operibus iUius et ex (oper)ibus fide consummata 
 est. (23) (sup)pleta est scriptura dicens (cre)didit autem abraham do repu- 
 tatum est illi ad justitiam (ami)cus di. (24) videtis autem (ex op) ere 
 justificatus est. Videtis quoniam ex operibus justificatur homo et non ex fide 
 tantum (25) similiter et raab meretrix nonne ex operibus justificata est sus- 
 cipiens nuntios et alia via eiciens (26) sictit enim corpus sine spiritu mortuum 
 est ita et fides sine operibus mortua eat. (III. 1) nolite mtilti magistri fieri 
 fratres mei scientes quoniam majua judicium sumitis. (2) in multis enim 
 erramus omnes. si quis in. verbo non offendit hie perfectus est vir etiam postens 
 se infrenare corpus totum. (3) si autem equis freno in ora mittimus ad 
 consentiendum nobis et omne corpus illorum circumferimus. (4) ecce naves 
 quam magnae sint et a ventis validis feruntur circumferuntur a niodico guber- 
 naculo ubi impetus dirigentis voluerit. (5) ita et lingua modicum quidem 
 membrum et magna exaltat. ecce quantus ignis quam magnam sUvam incendit 
 ...inter vos (13) ostendat ex bona conversatione operationem suam in man- 
 suetudine sapientiae (14) quod si zelum amarum habent et contentiones in 
 cordibus vestris nolite gloriari et mendaces esse adversum veritatem. (15) non 
 est ista sapientia desursum descendens sed terrena animalis diabolioa (16) ubi 
 enim zelus et contentio ibi inconstantia et omne opus pravum (17) quae autem 
 desursum est sapientia primum quidem pudica est deinde pacifica modeste 
 siiadibilis plena misericordia et fructibus bonis non judicans sine simulatione. 
 (18) fructus autem justitiae in pace seminatur facientibus pacem. (IV. 1) Et 
 unde bella et lites in vobis. nonne hinc ex concupiscentiis vestris quae 
 militant in membris vestris (2) concupiscentes et non habetis... 
 
 V. 19. Fratres mei si quis ex vo...a veritate et convertit quisquis eum 
 (20) scire debet quoniam qui converti fecerit peccatorem ab errore viae suae 
 solvat animam ejus a morte et cooperit multitudinem pecoatorum.] 
 
 Quotations in Eaely Wbitees. 
 
 On the importance of these quotations compare especially West- 
 cott and Hort, Intr., pp. 83, 87-89, 112-115, 159-162, Kesch's 
 Agrapha § 3. Bishop Wordsworth states that the Epistle of St. 
 James is not cited at all hy TertuUian^ or Cyprian, and rarely 
 
 • Ebnsch (Das Neue Testament Tertullians, 1871) agrees with this statement. 
 In my note on ch. v. 16, iroAi tax^^', I have quoted a passage from Tert. De 
 Oratione which seems to be a reminiscence of St. James, but it must be allowed 
 that neither Tertullian nor Cyprian cites him as an authority where they might well 
 have done so. 
 
ccxxx THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 cited by Latin writers before the time of Jerome and Augustine, 
 the former of whom has 123 quotations, the latter 389 {Stud. JBibl., 
 pp. 128, 129). 
 
 The following writers are referred to in the critical notes. The 
 exact references will be found in Tischendorf : — 
 
 Aug. Augustine, 4th century. 
 Cass. Cassiodorius, 6th. 
 Cyr. Cyril of Alexandria, 5th. 
 Dam. Joannes Damascenus, 8th. 
 Did. Didymus of Alexandria, 4th. 
 Eph. Ephraem Syrus, 4th. 
 
 Epiph. Epiphanius, 4th century. 
 
 Jer. Jerome, 4th. 
 
 Oec. Oecumenius, 11th. 
 
 Oiig. Origen, 3rd. 
 
 Thl. Theophylact, 11th. 
 
 Zig. Euthymius Zigabenus 12th 
 
 Other Abbreviations. 
 
 ins. = Insert. 
 om. = omit. 
 rec. = textus reeeptus. " 
 ■vi. appended to the sign of a MS. 
 implies a marginal reading. 
 
 + means that the preceding reading 
 is found in other MSS. besides 
 those particularized. 
 
 &c. means that the preceding read- 
 ing is found in the majority of 
 
 MSS. 
 
THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES 
 
 THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES. 
 
 Though tlie word KaOdXiKrj does not form part of the Title ot 
 the Epistle of St. James in any of the older MSS., yet the fact 
 that this Epistle was included from an early period in the collec- 
 tion known as the Catholic Epistles, which followed the Acts and 
 preceded the Epistles of St. Paul, seems to call for a short note on 
 the history and meaning of the term. 
 
 Eusebius is the first to mention the fact in the words roiavTa 
 TO. KUTa Tov 'laKfo^ov, ov ri TrpcoTrj t&v ovofia^oftevrnv KadoXlK&v 
 iiria-ToX&v elvai 'Kejerai {E.E. ii. 23), and we find the same 
 asserted in the Catalogues of the Canonical Books ratified by the 
 Councils of Laodicea and of Carthage, as well as in the lists given 
 by Cyril of Jerusalem, Athanasius, Gregory Nazianzen, and Am- 
 philochius before the end of the fourth century.^ Earlier uses of 
 the term may be found in Clement of Alexandria {Strom, iv. 15, 
 p. 605 P), where, in speaking of the Epistle put forth by the 
 Apostolic Council recorded in Acts xv., he says Kara rijv eiria-TO- 
 Xijv Trjv KadoXiKrjv tcov airoaToKmv airdvrwv ; and in Origen, with 
 reference to the Epistle of Barnabas (c. Gels. i. 63) 'ye'^patrTai iv 
 rfj 3apvd^a KadoXiKfj iwicrToXy, as well as to the Epistles of St. 
 John, St. Peter, and St. Jude.^ ApoUonius (c. 210 A.D.) reproached 
 Themison the Montanist with writing a catholic epistle in imita- 
 tion of the Apostle (St. John).^ 
 
 The meaning of the term is thus stated by Oecumenius in his 
 Preface to our Epistle : KaOoXiKoi Xeyovrai avrai olovel eyxvK- 
 \ioL' oil yap d(f)mpi(Tfievtoi; hdvei evX rj TroXei, cos o deto<; UaOXo? 
 Tot9 'Peofiaiot^ rj K.opiv6ioi9 irpoa-^oavel tuvtuv ra? eVto-roXa? v 
 TOiv roiovrwv tov K.vpiov /iadrjr&v 0iaa-o<;, dXXa KaffoXov Toi'i 
 ■Ki<nol<i ■qToi 'lovSaioi<; tois iv ry hiaairopa, co? koI o IleT/ao?, rj 
 Koi iraat Toi'i viro Tf)v avTrjv -nrlcrTiv X.pi(rTiavoi<i TeXovcriv. Thus 
 understood, the term is not properly applicable to the 2nd and 
 
 1 See the quotations in Westoott's History of tM Ganon, App. D. 
 ^ For the references see Pott's Commentary, p. 3. 
 
 3 See Eus. H.E. v. 21. On the supposed mention of Cfttholjc Epistles in the 
 Murstoriam Fragment, see 2ahn N. K. II. i. p, 93, 
 
ccxx THE EPISTLE OE ST. JAMES 
 
 3rd Epistles of St. John, which would, however, naturally be 
 regarded as appendages to the First Epistle. 
 
 A secondary and later meaning of the term is derived from its 
 use in reference to the Church. An epistle came to be called 
 catholic as being ■ catholic in spirit and accepted by the Catholic 
 Church : hence it is sometimes equivalent to ' canonical.' ^ 
 
 1 See Diet, of Oh. Ant. s.v., AVestcott, Canon, p. 477 n. 
 
THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
lAKOBOY Eni2TOAH 
 
 KE*. 
 
 1 IctKaj/Sof, Qeov Koi Kvpiov 'Irjcrov ^purrov dovXos, 
 Tois ScoSeKa (j)vXaLs rais eu ry Siaairopa )(aLpeiv. 
 
 2 Uacrau ^apav rjyrjaacrde, a5eA0o/ fiov, orav ireipacr- 
 fioig TrepnrecrrjTe ttoikiXois' 
 
 3 yLvaaKovres on to SokI/jllov v/hSv rrj^ iriaTecos 
 Korepyd^eTai v7rofiovr}v. 
 
 4: 'H Se VTTO/jLOVTj epyov reXecou e)(eToo, 'iva rfre reXetoi 
 Koi oXoKXrjpoi, ev fJLr]8evl XwirofxevoL. 
 
 5 Ei 8k TLs vfiSv XenreraL aortas, alreiTco irapa tov 
 BcSovTos Qeov TToiacv dirXas koI ixtj ovciSl^ovtos, koi 
 SodrjaeraL avT^. 
 
 6 AiTeLTco 8e ev iricrTei, ixr]8ev SiaKpLvofJievos' o yap 
 SiaKpiuo/xepos eoiKev kXvScovi OaXcuTarjs dvepn^op-evco kcll 
 pan^op^evc^. 
 
 7 M?7 yap oleadm a avOpcoTTOs eKelvos on Xrjp.yj/^eTai n 
 irapa tov K.vp[ov, 
 
 8 avrjp Si'^V)(09, aKaTaaraTos ev iraaais Tals o8ols 
 avTOv. 
 
 9 Kav)(aada} 8e [o] d8eX(j)os 6 TaireLvos ev r^ v^ei 
 avTOv, 
 
 I. — 9. Tiis vurreas Sin. AB'CKLP &c. XriifieToi KLP &c. | n : om. Sin. + | kv- 
 
 peah., om. B'81 corb. syr. piov, Ti. xvpiou. Treg. Kvptov WH. 
 
 5. TOV SiSoi/Tos Seov : A tou Beou tov 9. om. 6 bef. oBeA^os B arm. (WH. 
 
 SiSo^Tos. bracket). 
 
 7 (and ver. 12). \7iiJ.if/eTai Sin. AB, 
 
1 1-9] LATIN VERSIONS ; 3 ■ 
 
 Vulgate. Coebby MS. Quotations from 
 
 Codex Amiatintjs {«). «^e Speculum. 
 
 and Priscillian.i 
 I — 1 laootus dei et domini I — 1 lacobus dei et domini 
 i • T rt\. ■ 4.- T rtT. ■ ^- •• i -1, 1 The oldest MSS. of 
 
 nostri lesu (Jnristi seruus lesn Cnristi seruus xii tnbu- the former are (F)F1o- 
 
 duodecim tribubus (|3) quae bus »■ quae sunt in dispersione tjfe end of the Itit'oen'- 
 
 stint in dispersione saliitem. salutem. 2 Omne gaudium tury Ipalaeogr. Sod.- 
 
 2 Omne gaudium existimate, existimate fratres mei quando 3ori'anus!'(M)MichaeUr 
 fratres mei, cum in tempta- in uarias temptationes incur- ^hl'ocluipw'alfMonS 
 tionibus uariis inoideritis, ritis, 3 scientes quod pro- ing to the 'sth or 9th 
 
 3 scientes quod probatio fidei batio uestra operatur suffer- tfons"^from'%'ryson- 
 
 nestrae patientiam operatur. entiam. 4 Suflerentia autem i'*" ""^J '°'''?^^''„,'" 
 , ^^ .. .. , , r J. 1 1 i square brackets. The 
 
 4 ratientia (y) opus perleot- opus consummatum nabeat, figures denote the pa- 
 
 um habeat, ut sitis perfecti et nt sitis consummati et integri loheps JediSonsf ""'* 
 
 integri, in nullo deflcientes.- in nullo deflcientes. 5 Et si 
 
 5 Si qnis autem uestrum in- cui uestrum deest sapientia, 
 diget sapientiam (S), postidet petat a deo, quia dat omnibus 
 a deo qui dat omnibus afflu- simpliciter et non improperat, 
 enter et non improperat, et et dabitur illi. 6 Petat autem 
 dabitur ei. 6 Postulet autem in fide niliil dubitans : qui 
 in fide, nihil baesitans : qui autem dubitat similis est 
 enim (f) haesitat, similis est fluctui maris, qui a uento 
 fluctui maris, qui a vento fertur et defertur : V nee 
 mouetur et circumfertur. 7 speret se homo ille quoniam 
 Non ergo (f) aestimet homo accipiet aliquid a domino.'' 
 ille quod accipiat aliquid a ft Homo duplici corde incon- 
 domino, 8 uir duplex (t;) stans in omnibus uiis suis. 
 animo, inconstans in omnibus 9 Glorietur autem frater hu- 
 uiis suis. 9 Glorietur autem milis in altitudine sua ; 
 frater humilis in exaltatione . ,,„ . ., 
 
 ^ MS tribuB. 
 sua ; * Full stop in MS. 
 
 (a) I have taken this from Tischen- 
 dorf s edition of 1854, but have not 
 thought it necessary to preserve such 
 spellings as mechaberui, merorem^ 
 ■praetioaum. I have compared the 
 readings of the Codex Fuldensis 
 (Banke's ed. 1868) andalso those of the 
 genuine Speculum Auguatini (edited 
 by Weihrich, along with the spurious 
 Speculum, which follows in the 3rd 
 col.). The genuine Speculum is usually 
 so close to the Vulgate that it has 
 been thought that Augustine himself 
 only gave the references, and that the 
 passages were copied from the Vulgate 
 by a later scribe. 
 
 (fi) F. trihus. 
 
 (v) F. ins. autem. 
 
 h- ■ - 
 
 (e) F. autem. 
 
 Ui 
 
 (1)1 
 
 F. sapientia. 
 
 {Q Spec. Aiig. enim. 
 F. duplici. 
 
 B 2 
 
4 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 10 o 8e TrXovartos eu Ty raTreivcocrei avrov, on cos 
 avOos xoprov TrapeXevaerai. 
 
 11 AveretXev yap 6 rjXios <tvv t<^ Kavacovt, kcu e^rjpavev 
 Tov ^opTov, KCU TO oLvOos avTOV k^eir€(T€v, Kou 7] evirptTTCia 
 Tov Trpocrcoirov avrov aTrcaXeTo' ovtcos koI 6 irXovaLos iv 
 TOLs TTopeiais avrov fiapavdrjcrerai. 
 
 12 ^aKapios avrjp os UTTo/xej'ei ireLpaafiov, on SoKifXOS 
 yevo/jieuos Xrjfiyj/erai rov (rre(f)avov rrjs C^tjs, ov eTnjyyei- 
 \aro roif ayairmcnv avrov. 
 
 13 MiySeiy ireipa^ofievos Xeyirco on Atto Qeov Treipa- 
 Qyfiat' 6 yap 0eo? aireipacrros kcrnv KaKav, ireipd^ei Be 
 avros ovSiua. 
 
 14 E/caoToy 8e Treipd^erai viro rrjs ISias kiriOvfiias 
 t^eXKOfievos koI SeXea^o/xevos' 
 
 15 eira rj eiriOvfiLa avXXa^ovcra riKrei afiaprlau, rj 8e 
 afxapna airoreXecrBeicra airoKvei Oavarov. 
 
 16 Mi; irXavacrOe, dSeXcpoi fiov dyaTrrjroi' 
 
 17 irdcra Socris ayadrj kou wdv Scopr/fia reXeiov avaOev 
 (crnv, Kara^alvov airo rov iratpos rcav ({)cotcov, Trap a ovk 
 evi TrapaXXayr] r) rpoTrys aTTOcTKiacr/JM. 
 
 18 BovXr}0ecs aireKvyjaev rjjxas Xoyoo aXrjdeias, els to 
 fivai rj/xds aTrap')(rjv nva rmv avrov Kncrfidrcov. 
 
 19 lore, a8eX(j)oi fiov ayaTrrjroi' ecrrco 8e irds avOpcoTtos 
 
 11. om. avrov aftpr irpoaamov B | iro- sive (40) and two Syriac texts.' Intr. 
 ptiais BCLP &c. iropiois Sin. A + Thl. p. 218. Bp. Wordsworth would prefer to 
 
 12. avTjp: A avdpcoTTos \ fiirojuei/ex KLP, read either ^ott^ oTrotrKicCrr/MXToj implied in 
 ivoneivri IZ siistinuerit corh. + | eirnyyei- modicum obumbrationis corb., or ^oirijs 
 Aaro Sin. AB cotb. + , eir. & Kvpios KLP •atroffKlafffia implied in momcnti obum- 
 syr. Thl. Oec. &c., cir. icvpios C, eir. S deos bratio Ang.). 
 
 vulg. copt. aeth. pesh. + 18. Povhrieeis : vulg. + $ov\n9eis yap, 
 
 13. OTTO ABCKLP &c., iiro Sin. 69. 40 auras yap ^ouXTjflew | avrov Sin.^ BKL 
 15. om. ri before enSvfua C. | aToxiei kc, Treg. Ti. WH., iavrov Sin.* ACP. 
 
 Ti. Treg. WH." See below ver. 26. 
 
 17. fO-Tw, WH. eo-Tiv Ti. Treg. \ Kara- 19. nrre Sin.' ABC 73 83 (saioic corb. 
 
 $aiv<iiv A 13 I airo ; K + wopo | evi : Sin. copt. syr.™ arm., scitii vulg.), ixm KLP 
 
 P + eiTTiy I rpovris avoo'Ktaafia Sin.' syr. Thl. Oeo. &c., ttrru Sin.* [koi vvv 
 
 ACKLP vulg. &c., rpoTTTjs avocTKiafT- aSe\<pot Tjiiuv eirrai aeth.PP etrrc aSeX. Tjfi, 
 
 liar OS Sin. B (Dr. Hort suggests that 4iro- koi co-to) aeth.™ et voa fratren mei dilecti 
 
 aKiiaiiaros may be caused either by i.v6 quiaque ex vobis sit pesli.], after lo-rt ins. 
 
 bcin^ regarded as a separate word, or by 8c A | ccrra 8e Sin. BCP* latt. copt., xat 
 
 the incorporation of an original avrds ttrra A 13, etrru KLP^ syr. arm. Thl. 
 
 which precedes 0ou\rieeis ' in a good cur- Oec. &c. 
 
I 10-19] LATIN VERSIONS 5 
 
 Vulgate. Coubey MS. Speculum and 
 
 Priscillian. 
 
 10 diues aiitem in liumilitate 10 locuples aiitem in hiimili- 
 
 sua, quoniam sicut flos faeni tate sua, quoniam sicut flos 
 
 transibit (a). 11 Exortus est feni transiet. 11 Orieturenim 
 
 enim sol cum ardore et arefe- sol cum aestu suo et siccat 
 
 cit faenum et flos eius decidit fenum et ilos eius cadit et 
 
 et decor uultus eius deperiit : dignitas faciei "■ ipsins perit : 
 
 ita et diues in itineribus suis sic et locuples in actu suo 
 
 marcescet (0). 12 Beatus uir marcescit. 12 Beatus vir 
 
 qui sufFert temptationem, qui*" sustinuerit temptatio- 
 
 quia (y) cum probatus fuerit nem : quoniam probatus fac- 
 
 accipiet coronam uitae, quam tus accipiet coronam uitae 
 
 repromisit deus diligentibus quam promittit" eis qui eum 
 
 se. 13 Nemo cum temptatur diligunt.* 13 Nemo qui temp- 
 
 dicat quoniam (6) a deo temp- tatur dicat quoniam a deo 
 
 tatur. Deus enim intempta- temptatur : deus autem malo- 
 
 tor maloTum est, ipse autem rum temptator non est : temp- 
 
 neminem temptat. 14 Unus- tat ipse neminem. 14 Unus- 
 
 quLsque uero temptatur a quisque autem temptatur a 
 
 concupiscentia sua abstractus sua concupiscentia, abducitur 
 
 et inlectus ; 15 dehinc (e) et eliditur." 15 Deinde con- 
 
 concupiscentia cum conce- cupiscentia concipit et parit 
 
 perit parit peccatum, peoca- peccatum : peccatum autem 
 
 tum uero cum consummatum consummatum adquirit mor- 
 
 fuerit generat mortem. 16 tem.' 16 Nolite errare fratres 
 
 Nolite itaque errare, fratres mei dilecti. 17 Omnis datio 
 
 mei dilectissimi. 17 Omne bona et omne donum perfec- 
 
 datum optimum et omne tum desursum descendit a 
 
 donum perfectum de sursum ■ patre luminum apud quem j j^g /y^ 
 
 est descendens a patre lumi- non est permutatio uel mo- ^^g g^^j ^oa) au 
 
 nam, apud quem non est dicuni obumbrationis. 18 ^^j.^ omius homo 
 
 transmutatio nee uicissitu- Uolens peperit nos uerbo gjtatus audire et 
 
 dinis obumbratio. 18 Uolun- ueritatis ut simus primitiae tardus loqui piger 
 
 tarie (f) enim(7;) genuit nos conditionum eius. 19 Scitote j„ iracundia. 
 
 uerbo ueritatis, ut simus fratres mei dilecti. Sit autem 
 aliquod initium (B) creaturae „^ ^ . 
 ems. 19 Scitis, iratres mei b ms. quia as in ver. 6. 
 dilecti. Sit autem omnis homo I Srrrelsluoted almost in the 
 
 uelox ad audiendum, tardus same words by Chromatius (a con- 
 temporary of Jerome), Tract, in S. 
 Matt xiv. 7. See Stud. Bibl. p. 18&. 
 (a) Spec. Aug. transiet. e Probably a misreading for elici- 
 
 (p) P. marcescit. tur or eluditur. 3p. Wordsworth 
 
 (y) F. quoniam. liowever suggests that it may repre- 
 
 (6) F. quia. sent a Greek reading cKKpoud/iei/o; or 
 
 (e) F. dein. wapaxpov6iJ.evos. Cf. Cassian. Coll. 
 
 (f) MS. voluntariae, xii. 7, primus pudtcitiae grades estne 
 (ij) F. cm. enim. uigilans impugnatione camaK 7/iono- 
 (e) F. init. aliq. chus elidatur. 
 
 f The remarkable rendering adqui- 
 rit m.ortem is also found in Cl»i'oni. 
 I.e. ix. 1. 
 
6 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 To^vs eif TO aKovaai, ^paSvs els to XaKrjcrai, I3pa8is eh 
 opyrjv' 
 
 20 opyrj yap auSpos diKaiocrvvrjv Qeov ovk epyd^eTai. 
 
 21 Ato aTToOepievoi iraaav pvirapiav Kcd irepLcraetav 
 KaKiaf ev TrpavTrjri Sf^aaOe tov efi^VTOv Xoyov top 
 Bvvajxevov crmaaL Tas '^v^as vp.cov. 
 
 22 YiveaOe 8e TronjTal Xoyov koL p,y} uKpoaTai /xoi^ov 
 irapaXoyi^ofievoi eavTOis' 
 
 23 oTL el TLs aKpoaTTjs Xoyov tarlu koI ov iroirjTrjs, 
 ovTOs eoLKev avhpl KUTai/oovuTi to irpoaairov Trjs yeve- 
 crect)? avTOv ev eaoTTTpm' 
 
 24 KareuoTjcreu yap eavTov koH aireXriXvOev koX evOecos 
 eireXadeTO oirolos rjv. 
 
 25 O 8e TrapuKV^ag eh vofxou TeXeiov tov ttjs 
 eXevOepias Ka\ Trapafieli/as, ovk aKpoaTrjs eiriXTjcriJiOvris 
 yev6p.evos aXXa TroLrjrrjs epyov, ovTps fiaKapios ev Trj 
 TTOiTjcrei avTov earat. 
 
 26 El Tis 8oKet BprjaKos eivai, fir] ^aXivaycoyav 
 yXvioraav eavTov aXXa air'aTCov KapSlau tavTov, tovtov 
 fxaTaLOs r] OprjCTKeLa. 
 
 27 QprjaKela xadapa Kal ap-iavTos irapa tw Qea> Ka\ 
 riarjOi avTrj eaTiv, eTriaKeiTTea-dai 6p(f)avovf Kal x^qpas ev 
 Tfj dX'u\Jlfei avTcov, aairiXov eavTOV TTjpelv aivo tov Koafiov. 
 
 20. OVK epya^erai Sin. ABC^ + , ov Kar- Tr.™ | Bprja-Kos Treg. | ewai Sin.ABCP 
 epyo^ETOi C'KLP &c. 13 latt. syrr. copt. Bede, eivat €i> u/itv KL 
 
 21. ■n-epiffffevfi.a A 13. 68. | irpauTijTi &c. Thl. Oec. | X"^"""" B. | y\. laurou 
 ffocfitas P, Trp. KapSias Thl. | v/iav Sin. BPc 101. latt. Thl. WH., y\. avrov Sin. 
 ABCKP &o. v/ji.ai' L +. ACKL Oec. &o. Ti. Treg. WH." | kodS. 
 
 22. \070w: 0= 38. 73. 83. +aeth. Thl. eaurov BC latt. Thl. WH., icapS. avrov 
 vo/jiov I o/cpooToi I1.0V0V B latt. syrr. copt. Sin. AKLP Oeo. &c. Treg. Ti. WH. "' | 
 arm. aeth. Thl. Treg. WH., /novov axpoa- ep-nnKeia ABCKLP &c. Treg. WH., Amo-- 
 Tai Sin. ACKLP Oeo. &o. Ti. km Sin. Ti. 
 
 23. om. 6ri A 13 | tijs yivfatios : om. 27. 9pitaKfia as in preceding verse : A 
 pash. + 70. 83. 123 pesh. add yap, syr. latt. copt. 
 
 25. vapaiieivas : vulg. syrr. arm. + add 5e | irapa rep Scip Sin.' ABC'P 13 + Treg. 
 
 cc avTo I OVK axpoaTTis Sin. ABC + latt. WH., irapa fle^j Sin.^ C-ICL 40. 73. &c. Ti. 
 
 pesh. copt. Aug. Cass. Bede, ovtos ovk \ ins. rtp bef. irarpi A. | ora. koi bef. 
 
 axp. KLP &c. syr. arm. Thl. Oec. Trorpi 99, 126. pesh. aeth. +, cf. Corb. | 
 
 26 61 Sin.ABKL &c; syr. arm. Thl. iavTov : A. aeth. aeavrov \ airo : CP €/(. 
 Dec, 61 Se CP 13 + latt. pesh. copt. Bede 
 
I 19-27] 
 
 LATIN VERSIONS 
 
 Vulgate. 
 
 autem ad loquendumet tardus 
 ad iram (a) : 20 ira (a) enim 
 uiri iustitiam dei nonopera- 
 tur. 21 Propter quod abici- 
 entes omnem inmunditiam et 
 abundantiam malitiae in man- 
 suetudine suscipite insitum 
 uerbum dei (j3), quod potest 
 saluare animas uestras. 22 
 Estote autem factores uerbi, 
 et non auditores tantum fal- 
 lentesuosmetipsos. 23Quiasi 
 quis auditor est uerbi et non 
 factor, hie conparabitur uiro 
 consideranti uultum natiui- 
 tatis suae in speculo : 24 con- 
 siderauit enim (7) se et abiit 
 et statim oblitus est qualis 
 fuerit. 25 Qui autem pers- 
 pexerit in lege perfecta(6) 
 libertatis et permanserit in 
 ea(e) non auditor obliuiosus 
 factua sed factor operis, hie 
 beatus in faeto suo erit. 26 
 Si quis autem putat ee re- 
 ligiosum esse, non refrenans 
 linguam suam sed seduoena 
 eor suum, huius nana est re- 
 ligio. 27 Religio autem (f) 
 munda et inmaculata apud 
 deum et patrem haec est, uisi- 
 tare pupUlos et uiduas in tri- 
 bulatione eorum, et (rf) in- 
 maeulatvim se custodire ab 
 hoc saeculo. 
 
 (a) Spec. Aug. iracundiam and -dia 
 for iravi and ira. 
 (;3) r. om. dei. 
 (■y) F. autem, 
 
 (6) Spec. Aug. legem perfectam.'< 
 (e) Spec. Aug. and F. om. in ea. 
 \q F. om. autem. 
 (tj) F. om. et. 
 
 COEBEY MS. 
 
 omnis homo uelox ad audi- 
 endum ; tardus autem ad 
 loquendum, tardus autem ad 
 iracundiam. 20 Iraoundia 
 enim uiri iustitiam dei non 
 operatur. 21 Et ideo ex- 
 ponentes omnes sordes et 
 abundantiam malitiae, per 
 clementiam excipite genitum 
 uerbum, qui potest* saluare 
 animas uestras. 22 Estote 
 autem factores uerbi et non 
 auditores tantum, aliter con- 
 siliantes. 23 Quia si quis 
 auditor uerbi est et non factor, 
 hie est aimilis homini respi- 
 cienti faciem natalis* sui in 
 speeulo : 24 aspexit se et 
 recessit et in oontinenti obli- 
 tus est qualia erat. 25 Qui 
 autem reapexit in legem con- 
 summatam libertatis et per- 
 aeverana, non audiens ob- 
 liuionia factua, aed factor 
 operum, hie beatus erit in 
 operibus suis. 26 Si quis 
 autem putat se religiosum 
 esse, non infrenans linguam 
 suam, sed fallens cor suum, 
 huius uana est religio. 27 
 Religio autem munda et im- 
 maculata apud dominum haec 
 est : uisitare orphanos et 
 uiduas in tribulatione eorum, 
 seruare se sine macula a sae- 
 culo. 
 
 A MR. poteatis. 
 IJ MS. natali. 
 
 Speculttm and 
 Priscilman. 
 
 20 Iracundia 
 enim uiri iustiti- 
 am Dei non ope- 
 ratur. 
 
 26 (W. p. 524) 
 Si quis putat su- 
 perstitiosum ' se 
 esse, non refre- 
 nans linguam su- 
 am, sed fallens 
 eor suum,2 huius 
 uana religio est. 
 27 (W. p. 411) 
 Sanctitas autem 
 pura et incontam- 
 inatahaec estapud 
 Deum patrem, ui- 
 sitare orfanos et 
 uiduas in angustia 
 ipsorum et inma- 
 eulatum se seruare 
 a mundo. 
 
 1 So S ; religiosum 
 M+. 
 '•^ Om. sed — suum M +. 
 
8 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 KE*. /3'. 
 
 1 'A§eA0ot fiov, iir) kv Trpoo-wTroXTjfi^iats tX^re tttjv 
 Tri(rrtv tov Kvplov t^/jlcov 'Irjaov X-picrTOV, ttjs So^vs- 
 
 2 'Eaf yap ela^XOy els rrju avvaycoyrjv vjxcov avrjp 
 Xpva-odaKTvXLOf kv kadrjTL Xapm-pa, elareXOrj 8e kol 
 TTTCo^os €v pvTrapa ecrdrjTi, 
 
 3 iTri^Xe\f/r)Te 8e Itti tov (popovvra rrjv eadrjTa ttjv 
 Xapnrpav, koi eiTrrjTe Su KaOov aibe KaXms' <cu rep TrrtB^o) 
 etTTJ^re ^v crT^di eKei, rj Kadov vtto to vttottoSiov fiov, 
 
 4 ov SieKpiOrjre ev eavTOis Koi eyeueerde KpLToi 8ia- 
 XoyicTfiai' TTOVTjpav; 
 
 5 ' AKOvcrare, aSeA^Oi p-ov ayaTrrjTOL' ov^ o 0eoy 
 e^eXe^aTO tovs Trroj^ouy tui Kocrp-cp TrXovcnovs €V wiaTei 
 Koi KXT)povop.ovs TTjs iSaatXeias 17s eTrrjyyeiXaTO TOis 
 ayairoocrip avTOv ; 
 
 6 'Yp,eLS 8e rjTipacraTe tov iVTCoypv. Ov^ at TrXovaioi 
 KaTa8vvaaTevov(riv vp,av Koi avTol eXKOvaiv vp.as els 
 KpiTrjpia ; 
 
 7 ovK. avTo\ l3Xacrcl)r)p,ovaiv to koXov ovopa to 
 eTTiKXrjdev e(ji vpas', 
 
 8 Et pevTOi vopov TiXelre ^aatXtKOV Kara ttjv 
 ypa(j)r)v 'Ayairrjcreis tov irXrjcriov aov (os aeavTov, KaXas 
 TTOieiTe' 
 
 II. — 1.7rpo(rm7roA?;/ii^mirSin.ABC,Trpoiif- 4. ov SiE/fpiflrjTC Sin.AB^C 13. 14. 36. 
 
 fflTToAijifiais ELP &c. I xp'ffTou, WH."" 69. 73 + syrr. vulg. copt. Treg. Ti. WH., 
 
 XpuTTov WH. Treg. Ti. | t»)s SoJr)s koi ov Sie/c. KLP &c. Thl. Oec, Sie/c. B^ 
 
 bef. TOV Kvpiov 69. 73. a c, om. 13. sah. corb. WH." (without interrogation). 
 
 Cass. (t. So|t)s. Treg. Ti. t. So|r)s ; WH. ). 5. ry Koaiuf Sin. A^BC^ syr., ev nf 
 
 2. eij avvayaiyTtv Sin.^BC, eis Tijc a. KoaiJ.<f 27. 43. 64, c.t.k. Tovrtf 29 vulg., 
 Sin.'AKLP &c. TM. Oec. tou Koafiov A-C'^KLP &c. pesh., tou koct- 
 
 3. 67ri|3\ci)<7jTe 8e BGP + corb. syr. Thl. /lov rovrov Aeth. Oec.'"-, om. 113. | 
 Treg.™ WH., Kut ctti^AeiI/t/tc Sin.AKL ^acrAeias : Sin.^ A eTrayye\ias of. Heb. 
 &c. Oec. Ti. Treg. | eiTrijTe (1st) Sin.ABC vi. 17. 
 
 + corb. syr. Thl., eiir. out^ KLP vulg. 6. ovx '■ AC^ a e 69. 180 oux' I icara- 
 
 &c. Oec. I Eitfi 11 KaBov Sin. ACKLP &c. SwaaT^vovatv ifiav Sin.'BCKLP &c. 
 
 Treg. Ti. WH.™, v xaBov ekei B corb. Thl. Oec. Treg. WH., ,c. ifias Sin.^ A 19. 
 
 WH. I iSe ins. (after 2nd KaBov) Sin. 20. 65 Ti. 
 
 C^KLP &c. Thl. Oec., om. ABCi 13. 65. 7. ow : A c 13 syi-. aeth. koh. 
 
 69 a c latt. pesh. WH. Ti. Treg. | iiro 8. tov fiaaiXiKov P, ^aaiMKov bef. 
 
 Sin. AB'CKL &c., eiti B^P a c d 13. 29. teAeite C syr. | its treavrov : B as aav- 
 
 69 + pesh. arm. | aft. iTrovoSiov ins. Tajv tov, 4. 25. 28. 31 + Thl. Sis eoutov, a us 
 
 TToSav A 13 vulg. syrr. aeth. Aug. Ibutous. 
 
II 1-8] LATIN VERSIONS 9 
 
 Vulgate. Coebey MS. Speculum and 
 
 Peisscillian. 
 II — 1 Fratres mei, nolite II — 1 Fratres mei, nolite 
 
 in personarum acoeptione (a) in acoeptione personarum 
 
 habere Mem domini nostri habere Mem domini nos- 
 
 Jesu Christi gloriae. 2 Et- tri lesu Christi honoris." 
 
 enim si introierit in conuentu 2. Si autem intrauerit in 
 
 iiestro uir aureum anulum synagogam uestram homo 
 
 habens in ueste Candida, in- anulos aureos in digitos ha- 
 
 troierit autem et pauper in bens in ueste splendida, intret 
 
 aordido habitu, 3 et inten- autem pauper in sordida 
 
 datis in (/3) eum qui indutus ueste ; 3 respiciatis autem 
 
 est ueste praeclara et dixeritis qui uestitus est ueste Candida 
 
 ei(y) Tu sede hie bene, pan- et dicatis, Tu hie sede bene, 
 
 peri autem dicatis Tu sta et pauperi dicatis, Tu sta, 
 
 iUio aut sede sub scabiUo aut sede illo sub scamello 
 
 pedum meorum, nonne iudi- meo ; 4 diiudicati estis inter 
 
 catis apud uosmet ipsos et uos, facti estis indices cogita- 
 
 facti estis iudices cogita- tionum malarum. 5 Audite rjj 5 (gcjj^ p_ 
 
 tionum iniquarum ? 5 Au- fratres mei dilecti, nonne 17) (jg^g elegit 
 dite, fratres mei dilectis- deus elegit pauperes saeculi pauperes mundi 
 simi ; nonne deus elegit pan- locupletes in Me et heredes diuites Mei here- 
 peres in hoc mundo diuites in regni quod expromisit dili- ,jes re<mi.] 
 Me et heredes regni quod pro- gentibus eum 1 6 Uos autem 
 misit (S) deus diligentibus se ? frustratis pauperem. Nonne 
 6 Uos autem exhonorastis diuites potentantur in nobis, 
 pauperem. Nonne dilutes et ipsi uos tradunt ad indicia ? 
 perpotentiam opprimunt uos, 7 Nonne ipsi blasphemant in 
 et ipsi adtrahunt(e) uos ad bono nomine quod uocitum 
 indicia 1 7 Nonne ipsi bias- est in nobis ? 8 Si tamen 
 phemant bonum nomen quod lege consummamini regale •> 
 inuocatum est super uos 1 8 secundum scripturam, Dili- 
 Si tamen legem perficitis re- ges proximum tuum tanquam 
 galem secundum scripturas te ; bene facitis. 
 DD-igis proximum tuum sicut „„ ^ 
 
 . '^ , ,...,« " MS. honeris. 
 
 te ipsum, bene lacitis (g : t So MS. ; Sab. regali. 
 
 (a) F. -tionem. 
 
 (p) F. oin. ire. 
 
 (y) F. om. ei. 
 
 (S) Spec. Aug, and F. re^omUit. 
 
 (e) F. trahunt. 
 
 (0 F. faais. 
 
10 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 9 el de TrpoacoTroXrjfnrrelTe, dfiapTiav epya^ecr&e, 
 eXey^^ofievot viro tov vo/jlov cos Trapa^arai. 
 
 10 OoTiy yap oXov tov vofiov Trjpr}(rrj, TTTalcrr) 8e eu 
 J evl, yeyoveu TravTcov evo-)(os. 
 
 11 O yap eliraiV M?; fjLOL^evcrrjs, ei-mv kul Mr} 
 (povevarjf el Se ov fjLoi)(€veis, (poveveis 8e, yeyovas 
 irapa^arrjs vop.ov. 
 
 12 OvT(os AaAetre koX ovTcas iroLelre as 8ia vo/xov eXev- 
 Sepias /xeXXovres KplueaOai. 
 
 13 H yap KpicTLS aveXeos rm fxr) noirja-avrt eXeos' 
 KaTaKav)(aTai. eXeos Kpiaecos. 
 
 14 Ti o0eAoy, a8eX(j)o[ p.ov, eav iriaTLV Xeyr] tis ^X^'''' 
 fpya 8e fiT) €-)(rj ', fir) Svfarai rj ttlcttls araxrai avrou; 
 
 15 Eau a8eX(f)os rj a8eX(pr] yvp.v6l V7rap-)(a>atv Ka\ 
 XeiTTop.ei'oi Trjs e(prjp.€pov rpo(f)rjs, 
 
 16 eiTrr) 8e ns avrols e^ v/xau 'YTrayere eu elprjvrj, 
 OepiiaiveaOe kol ^^opra^ecrde, fxrj Scare 8e avrols to. 
 eiriT'^Seia tov acofiaTOS, ti (XJjeXos ', 
 
 17 OvTCos Kcu Tj TTiCTTLS, (uv fir) e^ij '^pyoL, v€Kpa eo-Ti 
 Kaff eavTr)v. 
 
 18 AAA' epel tis 2i; ttIcttlv e^eiy Kayco epya exm* 
 
 9. TTpoffanro\riiJ.TrT€iTe Sill. ABC (as in Oec. (Ti. compares rh IlKeov ap. Herodian 
 ver. 1). Spim. p. 235). 
 
 10. Tripjia-ri Sin.BC + latt. Thl. Oec, 14. ti o(/)e\oi BC^ arm. (as in ver. 16) 
 Tjjpno-ei KLP &c., irXnpaiirei A a e 63. 69 Treg.™ "WH., ti to o(peKos Sin. AC'KL 
 syr., irKripoKras T5)pr|<rei 13, T€A.ei7ei 66. &c. Treg. Ti. | tis bef. A.e7j) AC Treg."' 
 73 I TtTaiffri Sin.ABC latt. Thl. Oec, | ri ttuttis : corb. spec, fides sola, sah. 
 ■nTaiaei KLP &c. adds sine operibus. 
 
 11. €Hros A I //.ri jiOLX^varis : Sin. L+ 15. cac Sin. B + eorb. spec. eopt. arm., 
 fxfl-aets I <liovsv(T7is — ^oixf'^o'??s(transp. )C eav Se ACKL vulg. &c. | \€LTrofi€voi Sin. 
 69 + syr. arm. Thl. | iJ,oix^veis (poveveis BCK syrr. arm., KeiT. a<nv ALP &c Oec. 
 Sin.ABC, <j>oveufis /xoix^veis (transp. ) Thl. 
 
 15. 70. arm., ^otx^vtreis <l>oveviTeis K &c. 16. eitrri Set A-i- Kai etirri \ o^e\os BC* 
 
 Thl., iioix^vffris <povfv(Tris LP+ \ irapa- (as in ver. 14). 
 
 $aT7is : A OTTOffTaTr/s. 17. exjj epya ; L arm. Thl. Oec. &c. 
 
 13. o!i'eA.eosSin.ABCKP&c.,o>'r)A.60sl3. epya exv- 
 
 38 + , ociAews L + Chrys. Thl. | e\eov 18. irio'TH' exeis, Treg. Ti. ir. ex^is 
 
 K. + Chr. I icaraitavxaTai Sin.'' KL &c., WH. tt. ex^ir; WH."" | epyaex"' Treg. 
 
 KantaTaK. aeth. Thl. +, /caTa/c. 5e Sin.' 40 Ti. e. exai. WH. | x""?" ''■'"'' Sin. 
 
 + corb. vulg. syi\ Oec. , /coTottauxao-floi 27 ABCP + latt. syrr. oopt. arm. aeth., 
 
 + copt., /taTOKai/xa(r8<<jSf A 13, (coTaKa«x- «K toij' KL &c. Thl. | epyiav (1st) 
 
 OT6 B (cf. avrvraaaete iv. 6, ^ev\ere iv. Sin.ABP + latt. syrr., epyaiv aov CKL 
 
 8), KaTaitavxa(r0e C (in eras.) pesh. | &c. aeth. Thl. | <roi Sei^ai Sin. B + 
 
 6A60S (2nd) Sin.AB + Thl, e\eoy CKL+ WH. Treg. Ti., Seijco ffoi ACKL syrr. &c. 
 
II 9-18] 
 
 LATIN VERSIONS 
 
 11 
 
 Vulgate. 
 
 9 si autem personas aocipitis, 
 peooatum oporamini, redar- 
 guti a lege quasi transgres- 
 sores. 10 Quiciunqiie autem 
 totam legem seruauerit, of- 
 fendat autem in uno, factus 
 est omnium reus. 11 Qui 
 enim dixit Non moechaberis, 
 dixit et Non occides : quod 
 si non moechaberis, occides 
 autem, factus es transgressor 
 legis. 12 Sic loquimini et 
 sic facite, sicut per legem 
 libertatis incipientes iudicari: 
 13 indicium enim sine miseri- 
 cordia illi qvii non fecerit (a) 
 misericordiam, superexal- 
 tat (|3) autem misericordia iu- 
 dicio. 14 Quid proderit, 
 fratres mei, si Mem quis dicat 
 se habere, opera autem non 
 babeat? numquid poterit fides 
 saluare eum ? 15 Si autem 
 frater aut soror nudi smt (y) 
 et indigeant (y) uiotu coti- 
 diano, 16 dicat autem ali- 
 quis de nobis illis Ite in 
 pace, caleficamini (8) et sa- 
 turamini, non dederitis autem 
 eis quae necessaria sunt cor- 
 poris (c), quid proderit? 17 
 Sic et fides, si non habeat (f) 
 opera, mortua est in semet 
 ipsa (i;). 18 Sed dicet ali- 
 quis {6). Tu fldem babes, et 
 
 (a) ¥. fecit. 
 
 (P) r. -exultat. 
 
 (y) F. swnt... indigent 
 
 (S) F. -Jiciemini. 
 
 (e) F. corporis 
 
 (0 F. hahet. 
 
 (tj) F. ipsam, 
 
 (e) F. quis. 
 
 Corbet MS. 
 
 9 Si autem personas acci- 
 pitis, pecoatum operamini, a 
 lege traducti tanquam trans- 
 gressores. 10 Qui enim totam 
 legem seruauerit, peccauerit 
 autem in uno, factus est om- 
 nium reus. 11 Nam qui 
 dixit, Non moechaberis, dixit 
 et, Non occides. Si autem 
 non moechaberis, occideris 
 autem, factus es " transgressor 
 legis. 12 Sic loquimini et 
 sic facite quasi a lege libera- 
 litatis indicium sperantes. 
 13 Indicium autem non 
 miserebitur ei qui non 
 fecit misericordiam, super- 
 gloriatur autem misericor- 
 dia indicium. 14 Quid 
 prodest fratres mei si quis 
 dicat se fldem habere, opera 
 autem non habeat ? numquid 
 potest fides eum sola saluare ? 
 15 Sine frater sine soror nudi 
 sint, et desit eis uictus , coti- 
 dianus, 16 dicat autem illis 
 ex uestris aliquis, TJadite in 
 pace, calidi estote et satulli ; 
 non dederit autem illis ali- 
 mentum corporis ; quid et 
 prodest ? 17 Sic et fides, si 
 non habeat opera, mortua est 
 sola. 18 Sed dicet aliquis, 
 Tu operam *• habes, ego fidem 
 
 » MS. est. 
 ^ Sab. opera. 
 
 Speoultjim and 
 Prisoillian. 
 
 TI— 13 (W. p. 
 
 411) Indicium e- 
 nim sine miseri- 
 cordia ei^ qui non 
 fecit misericordi- 
 am ; quoniam mi- 
 sericordia praefer- 
 tur iudicio. 14 
 Quid prode est 
 fratres, si fldem' 
 quis dicat in semet 
 ipso manere, opera 
 autem non habe- 
 at? Numquid po- 
 test fides sola sal- 
 uare eum? 15 Si 
 frater aut soror 
 nudi fuerint et 
 defuerit eis coti- 
 dianus cibus ; 16 
 dicat autem eis 
 aliquis nestrum : 
 Ite in pace et ca- 
 lefaciminiet satie- 
 mini, et non det 
 eis necessaria cor- 
 poris, quid prode 
 est haec dixisse 
 eis? 17 Sic et 
 fides quae non ha- 
 bet opera, mortua 
 est circa se. 
 
 1 S, his. 
 
12 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Sel^oy fJLOi TT]v TricTTiv aou x^pi? tSv epycov, Kayco aoi 
 Sel^co eK Tcov epycov fiov ttjv ttlcttiv. 
 
 19 1,v TTiareveif otl elf icrriv 6 Geoy" KoXms iroieis' 
 Kai Ta Sai/jLOVia iriaTevovaLV kou ^piaaovcriv. 
 
 20 QeXeis Se yvmvai, co avOpcoire K€ve, otl tj iricms 
 Xa>p).9 TUiv epyav apyj] eariv ; 
 
 21 Afipaafi 6 Trarrjp t^/xcov ovk e^ epycov 'e8iKaicodrj, 
 aveveyKas laaaK rov vlov avTov eTrl to OvcriacrTrjpiov ; 
 
 22 BAevrety otc t] iTLaTLs avvrjpyet roty epyoLS avTOv 
 Kol eK Tav epycov t) irlcrrLS eTeXeLcoOrj, 
 
 23 K(u tTrXrfpcoOrj -q ypacpT] rj Xeyovaa ETTiaTevaev 
 8e AjSpaa/J. tco Qeco, kou eXoyicrOr] uvtS elf SiKaiocrvvrjv, 
 KOI (f)lXof Qeov eKXrjdr]. 
 
 24 OpaTe otl e^ epycov SiKaiovTaL avOpcoiros kou ovk 
 eK TTLCTTeCOf fiovov. 
 
 25 OfioicDf de kol Paa^S t) iropur) ovk e^ epycov 
 (SLKatcodrj, V7ro8e^ap,evr) tovs dyyeXovs kol eTepa 68a> 
 (K^aXovcra ; 
 
 26 Q.airep yap to croofia ^coplf irvevfiaTOs veKpov ecTTLv, 
 ovTcof Kol 7] TTLatLf \copif epycov veKpa eoTiv. 
 
 KE$. y . 
 
 1 Mt; TToAAot SLSaaKuXoL yivecrBe, d8eX(j)Qi ptov, etSorey 
 OTL fxei^ov Kplpia Xr]p/^opeda' 
 
 Thl. Oec. Treg."", o-oi corb. aeth. | om. Sin.^ A corb. Ti. Treg. | cTe^enuflij ; Treg. 
 
 fiov after epytov (2) latt. syr. | ttio-tii/ (3rd) 23. eiria-Tevaev Se ; L + latt.' om. 5e. 
 
 Sin. BC. + corb. arm., tio-tiv |Uow AKLP 24. Spare Sin. AB^ (by corr. fr.-Toi) 
 
 vulg. syrr. copt. aeth. &c. TM. Oec. CP latt. syrr. copt. arm. aeth. Thl., ipure 
 
 19. eir fanv S Beos Sin. A 68. vulg. roivvv KL &c. Oec. | /iovov ; Treg. 
 pesh. copt. arm. aeth.PP Cyr. Ti. Treg., 26. Sfioims : pesh. copt. arm. aeth. 
 6IS 6 8eos eariv C syr. WH.™, ti's Beos oiras \ Se kbi : C pesh. copt. arm. xai \ 
 e(TTiv B 69 a c Thl. WH. Treg.", cis S fleoj a77e\ous : OLK"' + pesh. corb. arm. koto- 
 corb. aeth.''° Cyr., 6 6eos els effriv K"-'L fficoirovs. 
 
 &c. Did. Oec. (with interrog. Ti. WH.). 26. ixrirtp yap Sin.ACKLP &c. Ti. 
 
 20. apyn BC^ + corb. fuld. sah., vcKpa Treg. WH.", affrep Se corb. Orig., iiirirep 
 Sin. AC-KLP &c. vulg. syrr. copt. arm. B pesh. arm. aeth. WH. | epyav Sin. B 
 aeth. Oec. 69 a Orig. Treg. Ti. WH., rav tpyuv 
 
 22. ffvvnpyii Sin.= BCKLP &c. vulg. ACKLP kc. Thl. Oec. Treg." 
 
 syrr. Thl. Oec. WH. Treg.", ffwepyei III. — 1. Ai)/in)(0jue8a Sin. ABC as above. 
 
II 18-III 1] 
 
 LATIN VERSIONS 
 
 13 
 
 Ttjlgate. 
 
 ego opera habeo : ostende 
 miM fidem tuam sine operi- 
 bus, et ego ostendam tibi 
 ex operibiis fidem meam. 
 19 Tu credis quoniam unus 
 est deus. Bene facis : et 
 daemones credunt et contre- 
 miscunt. 20 Uis autem scire, 
 o homo inanis, quoniam fides 
 sine operibiis mortua (a) est ? 
 21 Abraham pater noster 
 nonne ex operibus iustifica- 
 tus est offerens Isaac filinm 
 suum super altare ? 22 Uides 
 quoniam fides cooperabatur 
 operibus illius, et ex operibus 
 fides consummata est, 23 et 
 suppleta est soriptura dicens 
 Credidit Abraham deo, et re- 
 pntatum est ei (/3) ad iusti- 
 tiam, et amicus dei appellatus 
 est. 24 Uidetis quoniam ex 
 operibus iustificatur homo et 
 non ex fide tantum 1 25 Simi- 
 liter autem et Raab meretrix 
 nonne ex operibus iustificata 
 est, suscipiens nuntios et alia 
 uia eiciens 1 26 Sicut enim 
 corpus sine spiritu mor- 
 tuum (y) est, ita et fides sine 
 operibus moi-tua est. 
 
 Ill — 1 Nolite plures magis- 
 tri fieri (S), fratres mei, scien- 
 tes quoniam maius indicium 
 sumitis. 
 
 (a) By correction oHoaa as in F. 
 
 h) K. Uli. 
 
 (7) F. emortuum. 
 
 (S) Spec. Aug. e£ici. 
 
 COEBEY MS. 
 
 habeo : ostende mihi fidera 
 sine operibus : et ego tibi de 
 operibus fidem. 19 Tu cre- 
 dis quia unus deus : bene 
 facis : et daemonia credunt et 
 contremiscunt. 20 Uis au- 
 tem scire o homo uacue, quo- 
 niam fides sine operibus 
 uacua est ? 21 Abraham 
 pater noster, nonne ex operi- 
 bus iustificatus est, offerens 
 Isaac filiuni suum super 
 aram ? 22 Uides quoniam 
 fides communicat cum operi- 
 bus suis, et ex operibus fides 
 confirmatur, 23 et impleta 
 est scriptura dicens, Credidit 
 Abraham domino et aestima- 
 tum est ei ad iustitiam, et 
 amicus dei uocatus est. 24 
 Uidetis quoniam ex operibus 
 iustificatur homo et non ex 
 fide tantum. 25 Similiter 
 et Eaab fornicaria, nonne ex 
 operibus iustificata » est, cum 
 suscepisset exploratores ex xii 
 tribuftus* filiorum Israel et 
 per aliam uiam eos eiecisset ? 
 26 Sicut autem corpus sine 
 spiritu mortuum est, sic fides 
 sine opera mortua est. Ill — 
 1 Nolite multi magistri esse 
 fratres mei, scientes quoniam 
 maius indicium accipiemus. 
 
 ^ MS. iustificatus. 
 
 i» MS. and flab, tribits. as in 1. 1. 
 
 Speculum and 
 Pkiscillian. 
 
 [11—19 (Sch p. 
 27) credes quia 
 unus deus est : 
 hoc et daemonia 
 faciunt et perhor- 
 rescunt] 
 
 26 (W. p. 411) 
 Sicut enim cor- 
 pus sine spiritu 
 mortuum est, sic 
 et fides sine operi- 
 bus mortua est. 
 
 Ill— 1 (W. p. 
 524) Nolite mul- 
 tiloqui esse fratres 
 mei ; scientes ' 
 quia maius indici- 
 um aocipietis : 
 
 1 S. om, scientes. 
 
14 
 
 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 2 TToXXa yap iTTaiofiev airavT€s- Et tls eu Xoym ov 
 TTTaiii, ovTos TiXeios oivqp, SvvaTOf xaXivaycoyrja-ai koI 
 
 OXOV TO (TCOfMa. 
 
 3 I5e tSv lttttcov tovs X'^^''^'^^^ ^'^ ^" o-rofiaTa 
 ^aXXo/xeu ety to Treidecrdai avTOVf rjpuv, koll oXov to 
 cr^jxa avTav jxeTayofxev. 
 
 4 \8ov Kol Ta irXola, TrjXLKcuvTa ovra /cat vwo 
 av€fi(ov akXrjpaiv eXavvo/xeva, peTayerat vtto iXa^io'TOv 
 TTfjSaXLOv oTTov 7) oppt) Tov €v6vvovTOs jBovXcrai, 
 
 5 OvTcos KOL rj yXaarcra piKpov p,eXos kaTiv kol 
 p,eyaXa av)(€l. 18ov tjXckov wvp rjXUrju vXrjv dvuTTTet. 
 
 6 Kal 7] yXoacr&a irvp, o Kocrpos ttJs aBiKias rj yXcoaaa 
 KadtcTTaTai €v rois peXecrcv TjpSv, rj cnriXovaa oXov to 
 aa)p,a Kal ^Xoyi^ovaa tov Tpo^ov Trjs yeveaeoDS Kal 
 (j)Xoyi^op,ei>r} vtto Trjs yeevvrjs. 
 
 7 Uaaa yap ^vctls drjpicov re Kal ireTeivav, epireTCov re 
 Kal ei/aXicov, 8ap,a^€TaL Kal SeSapaaTai Trj (pvaei Ty 
 avdpanrivrj' 
 
 8 Trju Se yXaxraav ovSels Safiaaai SvuaTai avdpcoTrcou' 
 aKaTaaTaTOV KaKOv, pecrTrj lov 6avaTr](j)opov. 
 
 2. Svvaros : Sin. + C3t:. Thl. Svva- 
 fievos. 
 
 3. iSe CP 'al. plus 40' arm. syr. sah. {et 
 ecce aeth.PP) Zig. Thl. (see Notes), ei 8e 
 Sin.' ABKL 'al. 25' latt. copt. Oec. Dam. 
 Treg. Ti. WH., eiSe yap Sin.^ peah., 
 quare ergo spec, et insuper aeth.™, sicut 
 autem Bede | eis to (rro/uaTo : A + arm. 
 syrr. eis to (rrofia | eis to iretOeiTBai Sin. 
 BC, irpoj T. X. AKLP &c. Oec. Thl. | 
 ouTous riiiiv Sin. BKLP &0.,' ri/uv avrovs 
 AC + Treg."" | lierayoiiev auTwc A 13. 
 
 4. iSou ; 24 eiSe | ins. to bef. ttjXi- 
 KouTO B I ffKK'opiav avefjLwv AL &c. | birov 
 Sin. B sah., inrov av ACKLP &c. Tree.'" | 
 8oi;A.6Toi Sin.BL, Pov\riTai ACKP &c. 
 Thl. Oec. 
 
 5. oiras: &ffttvTws A+ \ iieya\a ouxfi 
 ABC'P latt. Eph., jueyoAouxei Sin.C-^KL 
 &c. Thl. Oec. f iSou spec, et aicut cf. Bode 
 on V. 3. I TiXiKov Sin.A'^BC'P vulg. Oec, 
 a\iyov A'C-'KL &.c. corb. syrr. sah. copt. 
 arm. aoth. 
 
 6. KOI i\ yXaaaa Sin.^ ABCKLP &c. 
 WH. Treg., ri yKiaaaa Sin.^ Ti. (punc- 
 tuating i>'a7rTei^7\So'o'o.) I oSiKiosWH. 
 oSiKios. Treg. aSi/cios, Ti. (et mundua in- 
 iquitatis sicut silva est pesh.) | outms ins. 
 bef. 2nd ^ 7ASo-o'o P &c. Thl. Oec, oiras 
 KOI L 106, om. Sin,ABCE + latt. syrr. 
 sah. copt. arm. Dam. | ri airiKovaa : km 
 ffir, Sin.^ Ti. I TOV Tpoxov ttjs yeveffeas : ■ 
 after yeveinas ins. iinwv Sin. 7. 25. 68 
 vulg. pesh. (series generationnm nostra- 
 rum qv/oe currunt veluti rotae), aeth. (for 
 yevcaeas, yeevvus Thl. Oec). 
 
 7. om. 2nd ts A + arm. | Bo/iofeTOi 
 KOI SaSo/tao'Tai : om. icat SeSajuaffrai 
 
 SaMOtrai ivvarai avQptoTruv BC syr, 
 WH. Treg., Sui/otoi iaitaaai av6p. Sin. 
 AKP a c 69. 133 + Treg.™ Ti., Sui/otoi 
 avBp. Sa/ittirai L &c. arm. Cyr. Thl. Oec. 
 I a/toToo'TOToi' Sin.ABP latt. + , aKarair- 
 X6T0V CKL &c. Epi'ph. Cyr. Dam. Thl. 
 Oec 
 
Ill 2-8] 
 
 LATIN VEESIONS 
 
 15 
 
 Vulgate. 
 
 2 In multis enim offend- 
 imus omnes : si qiiis in 
 uerbo non offendit, hie per- 
 fectus est uir : potest etiam 
 circumducere freno (a) totum 
 corpus. 3 Si aiitem equis (/3) 
 frenos in ora mittimus ad con- 
 sentiendum nobis, et omne cor- 
 pus iUorum circumferimus. 
 4 Ecce et naues, cum magnae 
 sint et a uentis ualidis minen- 
 tur(7), circumferuntur (8) a 
 modico gubernaoulo uM im- 
 petus dirigentis iioluerit. 5 
 Itaet linguamodicum quidem 
 membrum est et magna exal- 
 tat(€). Ecce quantus ignis 
 quam magnam sUuam in- 
 cendit. 6 Et lingua ignis est, 
 uniuersitas iniquitatis lin- 
 gua constituitur in membris 
 nostris, quae maculat totum 
 corpus et inflammat rotam 
 natiuitatis nostrae, inflam- 
 mata a gehenna. 7 Omnis 
 enim natura bestiarum et 
 uolucrum et serpentium cete- 
 rorumque (f) domantur et 
 domata (r)) sunt a natura 
 humana : 8 linguam autem 
 nullus bominum domare 
 potest : inquietum malum, 
 plena ueneno mortifero. 
 
 (a) F.fr. cir. 
 
 (B) F. equorum. 
 
 (y) Passive from mino, 'are driven.' 
 
 (6) F. adds autem. 
 
 (e) F. exultat. 
 
 (0 Possibly a corruption of cetor- 
 uijit or it may represent a Greek mis- 
 reading oKX^av or ef oAAtov for ei/oAitoi'. 
 F. reads et uolucrum et repentium 
 etiam ceterorum. 
 
 (ij) F. domita. 
 
 COEBEY MS. 
 
 2 Multa autem erramus om- 
 nes. Si quis in uerbo non 
 errat, hie erit consummatus 
 uir : potens est se infrenare, 
 et totum corpus. 3 Si autem 
 equorum frenos in ora mitti- 
 mus ut possint consentire, et 
 totum corpus ipsorum conuer- 
 timus. 4 Ecce et naues tam 
 magnae sunt et a uentis tam 
 ualidis feruntur, reguntur 
 autem paruulo gubernaculo 
 et ubicumque diriguntur uo- 
 luntate* eorum qui eas guber- 
 nant. 5 Sic et lingua paruu- 
 lum membrum est et magna 
 gloriatur.^ Ecce pusUlum 
 ignis in quam magna" silua 
 incendium faeit ! 6 Et lin- 
 gua ignis saeculi iniquitatis : 
 lingua posita est in membris 
 nostris, quae maculat totum 
 corpus et inflammat rotam 
 natiuitatis et inoenditur a 
 gehenna. 7 Omnis autem 
 natura bestiarum siue uolati- 
 lium, repentium et natantium 
 domatur et domita est : 8 
 naturae autem humanae lin- 
 guam nemo hominum domare 
 potest : iaconstans malum 
 plena ueneno mortifero.* 
 
 ^ By corr. from uohimjtiate. 
 ^ MS. glorvxntur. 
 c So MS. ; magnam eilmam Sab. 
 See below, ver. 13. 
 ^ MS. mortifera. 
 
 Speculum and 
 Pbiscillian. 
 2 multa enim om- 
 nes delinquimus. 
 Si quis in uerbo 
 non delinquit, hie 
 perfectus uir est ; 
 potest 1 frenare to- 
 tum corpus et di- 
 rigere. 3 Quare 
 ergo 2 equis frena 
 in ora 3 mittuntur, 
 nisi in eo ut sua- 
 deantur a nobis et 
 totum corpus cir- 
 cumducamus ? 4 
 Ecce et * naues 
 quae tam* inmen- 
 sae sunt sub uen- 
 tis duris feruntur 
 et circumdueun- 
 tur a paruissimo 
 gubernaculo ubi 
 impetus dirigentis 
 uoluerit. 5 Sic 
 et lingua pars 
 membri" est, sed 
 est magniloqua. 
 Et sicut paruus 
 ignis magnam sil- 
 uam incendit, 6 
 ita et lingua ignis 
 est : et mundus 
 iniquitatisper lin- 
 guam constat in 
 membris nostris, 
 quae maculat to- 
 tum corpus et in- 
 flammat rotam 
 geniturae' et in- 
 Sammatur a geni- 
 tura. 7 Omnis 
 enim natura bes- 
 tiarum et auium 
 et serpentium et 
 beluarum mariti- 
 marum domatur 
 et subiecta est 
 naturae humanae : 
 8 linguam autem 
 
 ^ M + ins. etiam. 
 
 2 M + uero. 
 
 3 M -f ore. 
 
 ^ M -I- om. et. 
 
 5 For quae tam S 
 has quiaetam. 
 
 ^ 'M. + ins. parua. 
 
 ' The words rot. 
 gen. are found in Prise, 
 p. 26. 
 
16 THE EPISTLE OE ST. JAMES 
 
 9 Ei/ avT^ evXoyovjxev tov Kvpiou koI Uarepa, koL ev 
 avrrj Karapcofieda tovs avOpcowovs tovs nad ofioiaxTLu 
 Qeov yeyovoras' 
 
 10 e/c TOV avTov arofiaros e^ep^erai evXoyla koI 
 KUTupa. Ov XPV} o.8eX^oi fiov, ravra ovtcos yivtaOau 
 
 11 y[r]TL r) Trrjyr] eK rrjs avrrjs oirrjf fipvei to yXvKv /cat 
 TO iriKpov ; 
 
 12 Mr; SwuTui, a8€X(f)oi fiov, (tvkt] eXaiay 7roLr]aai, i] 
 afjLTreXos avKa ; OvTe aXvKou yXvKv iroLyjcraL vScop. 
 
 13 Tif (ro(j)os Koi €7ri(rTT]/jL(i}u ev vplv ; Sei^aTco e/c ttjs 
 KaXrjs auacTTpocprjf ra fpya avTov ev TrpavTijTi cro^la^. 
 
 14 Et 8e ^rjXov iriKpov e^ere /cat epiOiav ev ttJ KapSia 
 vpwv, jxrj KaTaKav)(aa6e /cat ■^evdeaBe kutu ttJs aXrjdeias. 
 
 15 OvK ecTTLV avTT) 7] ao<j)ia avcoOev icaTep)(0fiev7], aAAa 
 eiriyeios, '*\rv)(LKrj, BaLp.oviabrjs- 
 
 16 Oirov yap ^rjXos kol (pidia, eKet aKUTacTTaaia koI 
 irav (f)avXov Trpayp,a. 
 
 17 H 8e avcodev (ro(f)La irpaTov fiev ayvrj ecTTiv, eireiTa 
 elprjVLKr], eTTieiKrjf, evTreidys, fieaTt) eXeovs kol Kap-jroav 
 ayaOav, adiUKpiTOf, avviroKpiTos. 
 
 18 Kapiros 8e dtKaLOO-vvrjf ev elprjvr) airelpeTai tok 
 TTOiovaiv elprjvrjv. 
 
 9. TOV Kvpiov Sin.ABGP corb. pesh. koi ^evSetrSe Kara, ttjs a\Ti$eias ABCKLP 
 
 copt. arm. + Cyr., toc flcoc KL vulg. syr. &c. Treg. "WH., ttjs o\i)9emr koi t\/evSeir9f 
 
 &c. Epiph. Thl. Oeo. Sin.^ Ti., koto t. u. k. \fi Sin.^ pesh. ne 
 
 12. e\oioj : Vulg. Jicus \ oure a\vicov inflcmini adverstis veritatem nee mentia- 
 
 yKvKu ABC^ + arm. {neque salimi^ locus mini. 
 
 aquam dulcem facere), oirus oute a\uK. 15. aWa Sin. B, aXK' ACKLP. 
 
 yX. C? latt. pesh. (and reading ouSe for 16. epiflm 101. 13'=", epifleio B^, epei- 
 
 ouTc) Sin. 13, ovrus ovhe/xia (outc fita Pc) Beta B^, epeis C, epis P. | cke: BCKLP 
 
 'ir7}yr] aXvKov kui yXvRv KLP &c. Thl. Oec. &c., eK€t ko: Sin. A +. 
 
 14. ci Se : AP + addopo. | epiBiav 101. 17. orairoKpiTos Sin. ABCP + latt. syr. 
 
 13.'=" Dam. WH., Epeiflioi' W, epcieet- copt. arm. Did. Eph., koi ocuir. KL &c. 
 
 av A, cpiBetav Sin. B'CKLP &c. Ti. Thl. Oec. 
 
 Treg. I TTi KopSif : tois KopSiais Sin. + 18. S Kapwos Sin. | ttjs StKaioavvris K 
 
 latt. syrr. copt. arm. | KavxaaBe A + | Oec. + . 
 
Ill 9-18] 
 
 LATIN VERSIONS 
 
 17 
 
 Vulgate. 
 
 9. In ipsa benedicimus deum 
 et patrem, et in ipsa male- 
 dicimus homines qni ad simi- 
 ILtudinem dei facti sunt : 10 
 ex ipso ore proceditbenedictio 
 et maledictio. Non oportet, 
 fratres mei, haec ita fieri. 
 11 Numquid fens de eodem 
 foramine emanat dulcem 
 et amaram aquam ? 12 Num- 
 quid potest, fratres mei, 
 ficus uuas facere aut uitis 
 ficus ? Sic neque salsa dul- 
 cem potest facere aquam. 
 13 Quis sapiens et discipli- 
 natus inter uos ? ostendat ex 
 bona conuersatione operatio- 
 nem suam (a) in mansuetudi- 
 nem (/3) sapientiae. 14 Quod 
 si zelum amarum habetis et 
 contentiones (y) in cordibus 
 uestris,nolite gloriari et men- 
 daces esse aduersus ueritatem. 
 
 15 Non est (8) ista sapientia 
 de sursum descendens, sed 
 terrena animalis diabolica. 
 
 16 XJbi enim zelus et con- 
 tentio, ibi inconstantia et 
 omne opus prauum. 17 Quae 
 autemde sursum est sapientia, 
 primum quidem pudioa est, 
 deinde pacifica, modesta, sua- 
 dibilis (c), plena misericordia 
 et fruetibus bonis, non iu- 
 dicans (f), sine simulatione. 
 18 Frnctus autem iustitiae 
 in pace seminatur facientibus 
 pacera. 
 
 (a) F, oiiera sua. 
 (;3) P. -tiidine. 
 
 (y) P, adds sunt. 
 
 (5) F. adds enim. 
 
 (e) Spec. Aug. and F. add Jjonis 
 consentiena, doubtless a gloss on 
 suadibilis. 
 
 (^ Spec. Aug. diiudicans ; F. joins 
 with the following words, omitting 
 non; Augustine inaestimahilis. 
 
 COEBEY MS. 
 
 9 In ipsa benedicimus domi- 
 num et patrem, et per ipsam 
 maledicimu.'! homines qui ad 
 similitudinem dei facti sunt. 
 
 10 ex ipso ore exit benedictio 
 et maledictio. Non decet fra- 
 tres mei haec sic fieri. 11 
 Numquid fons ex uno fora- 
 mine buUit dulcem et salmaoi- 
 dum? 12 Numquid potest, fra- 
 tres mei,flcus oliuas facere, aut 
 uitis ficus 1 Sic nee salmaci- 
 dum dulcem facere aquam. 
 13 Quis sapiens et discipli- 
 nosus in nobis demonstrat de 
 bona conviersatione opera sua 
 in sapientiae dementia »■ ? 14 
 Si autem zelum amarum ha- 
 betis et contentionem in prae- 
 cordiis uestris ; quid alapa- 
 mini* mentientes contra ueri- 
 tatem 1 15 Non est sapientia 
 quae descendit desursum, 
 sed terrestris, animalis, dae- 
 monetica. 16 Ubi autem 
 zelus et contentio, incon- 
 stans ibi et omne prauum 
 negotium. 17 Dei autem 
 sapientia primum sancta est, 
 deinde pacifica et uerectm- 
 diae oonsentiens, plena mi- 
 sericordiae et fructuum bon- 
 orum, sine diiudicatione, ir- 
 reprehensibilis," sine hypo- 
 crisi. 18 Pructus autem iu- 
 stitiae in pace seminatur qui 
 faciunt pacem. 
 
 i* So MS. ; clementiavi, Sab. and W, 
 iinal m being often omitted in MS. 
 
 b Martianay suggested eleuamini^ 
 but Bp. Wordsworth refers toDucange 
 for the gloss alapator = KauxijT^?. 
 
 c Probably a gloss on s. di. which 
 has got into the text. 
 
 Speculum and 
 
 PmSOILLIAN. 
 
 hominum domare 
 nemo potest nee 
 retinere a male, 
 quia plena est 
 mortali veneno. 
 
 13 (W. p. 463) 
 Quis prudens et 
 sciens uestrum ? 
 Monstret de bona 
 conuersatione op- 
 era sua in mansue- 
 tudine et pruden- 
 tia. 
 
18 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 KE4>. 8'. 
 
 1 Ilo^ej' TToXe/xoi, kcu iroOev fia^ai ev v/xlv ; ovk tv- 
 Tevdev, eK rav r]dovwv vfjbmv rcov arpaTevojxevav €v toIs 
 fieXecriv vfjLcov ; 
 
 2 l^TndvfieLTe, /cat ovk e^ere' (fjovevere. Kat ^r/Xovre, 
 Koi ov Svvaade e-KLTv^uv' fia^eade kcu TroXe/JLeire, Ovk 
 e^^ere 8ia to fir] alreladaL vfias' 
 
 3 alT€LT€ KCU OV Xafi^aveT€, Sloti KaKa>s aireto-Be, 'iva 
 €u TOLS r]8ovals v/xcov SairavrjcnjTe. 
 
 4 Moi^aAtSey, ovk otSare on 77 ^iXia tov Kocrfiov 
 e^^^a TOV Qeov hcrTLv ; os eav ovv fiovXr]0fj (piXos elvai 
 TOV Kocrixov, €-)^6pos tov Qeov KaOiaTaTai. 
 
 5 'H 8oK€iT€ oTi Kevms r] ypachrj Xeyei Upog (bOovov 
 eTTLiroUei to irvevp-a o KaTcoKiaeu ev rjpiu ; 
 
 6 fiel^ova 8e B'lScoctlv ^apiv' 810 Xeyet 'O Qeos 
 virepTf^avoLs auTiTacrcreTat, Taireivoif 8e 8i8co(riv -)(apiv. 
 
 7 YiroTayrfTe ovv tw Qeco' avTiaTrjTe 8e rw StajSoXco, 
 Kol ^ev^eTai acj) v/xav' 
 
 8 eyyicraTe tw Qea>, kol eyyicrei vpiv. KadapicraTe 
 ■)(€Lpas, afiaprcoXoi, koi ayviaaTe Kap8ias, 8l^v)(oi. 
 
 IV.— 1. iroe^v (2nd) Sin. ABCP corb. . eo-tii/ ABKLP &o. WH. Treg., ernv rif 
 
 spec. +, om. KL vulg. &c. e^cf Sin. copt. Ti. | 6s eoi/ BP + WH. Ti., 
 
 2. (povevere MSS. and vv. (followed by eav Sin.i, bs av Sin.' AKL &c. Thl. Oec. 
 full stop WH.™), (poveiTt Oeo.'"'-, <l>eo- Treg. | ovv om. L + | ex^pos, ex9pa Sin.^ 
 veiTe Eras. Calv. Bez. Ewald | ovk €xeT6 5. K^vas om. corb. | Xc'yei joined with 
 ABKL + WH. Treg., koi ovk fx^re Sin. irpos ipBovov in A 4. 10. 11. 14. 15. 16. 21. 
 P + latt. syrr. copt. arm. aeth. Thl. Oec. 38. + arm. ((xuestion after ti/uv WH. Treg. 
 Ti., OVK ex^'''^ 8* i'6c. Here G comes to after A€7ci with comma after fi/uv Ti.) 1 
 an end. KOTOj/cKrev Sin. AB 101. 104, KOTcu/triffej' 
 
 3. 5o7rav)7<r7)Te Sin.' AKLP (with full KLP &o. latt. syrr. copt. Thl. Oec. 
 stop Treg. WH. with comma Ti. ), Kara- 6. 5io \t76i — StSaxnv X"?'" o™- ^^ + I 
 So»ov7)(rr)T6 Sin.^, SanavnireTe B (without 6 Seos : 5. 16 + Kvpios | avTiTaffaere B of. 
 following stop). ver. 7. 
 
 4. /xoixoAiSesSin.^ AB 13 (joined with 7. ovTio-TjjTe Se Sin. AB ab 13 + latt. 
 what precedes in Sin. B Ti.), /j.oixot Kai copt., avrKTr-rire KLP &c. Th. Ceo. | 
 /uoiXaAiS6jSin.'KLP&c.,/*oixoilatt.pesh. ((>cu|eT6 B', -toi B." 
 
 copt. aeth. arm. | after 1st Kotr/iov Sin. 8. eT^io-ei B WH., 677151 Alf. Treg. Ti. 
 
 vmg. arm. aeth. pesh. add tovtov | Hx^p" (without specifying MSS. ). 
 LP &c. syrr., ix9p<^ 1^**- aeth. | tou 9eov 
 
IV 1-8] 
 
 LATIN VERSIONS 
 
 19 
 
 Vulgate. 
 
 IV— 1 Unde bella et lites 
 inter vios (a) ? nonne O) ex 
 concupiscentiis uestris quae 
 militant in inembris uestriin ? 
 2 Coneupiscitis, et non 
 habetis : occiditis et zela- 
 tis, et non potestis adipisci : 
 litigatis et belligeratis, et (y) 
 non habetis propter quod non 
 postulatis : 3 petitis et non 
 accipietis (8), eo quod male 
 petatis, ut in concupiscentiis 
 uestris insumatis. 4Adulteri, 
 nescitis quia amioitia huius 
 mundi inimica est dei (e) 1 
 Quicumque ergo uoluerit 
 amicus esse saeculi huius, 
 inimicus dei constituitur. 5 
 An(f) putatis quia inaniter 
 scriptura dicat Ad inuidiam 
 conciipiscit spiritiis qui habi- 
 tat (rj) in nobis ? 6 Maiorem 
 autem dat gratiam : propter 
 quod dicit, Deus superbis re- 
 sislit, humilibus autem dat 
 gratiam. 7 Subditi igitur 
 estote deo : resistite autem 
 diabolo, et fugiet a uobis: 
 8 adpropinquate (d) deo (t), 
 et adpropinquaWt (k) uobis. 
 Emundate manus, peccatores, 
 et puriftcate corda, duplices 
 
 (a) F. in uobis. 
 
 (P) Spec, Aug. and F. insert hine. 
 
 (y) F. om. et. 
 
 (S) F. accipitis. 
 
 (e) F. deo. 
 
 (f) F. aut. 
 
 (t)) F. inhabiiat. 
 
 (d) Spec. Aug. adpropiate. 
 
 (t) F. domino. 
 
 (k) MS. and F. ~uit. 
 
 COEBEY MS. 
 
 IV — 1" Unde pugnae et 
 iinde rixae in uobis 1 Nonne 
 hinc ? ex uoluptatibus ues- 
 tris quae militant in mem- 
 bris uestris t 2 Coneupis- 
 citis et non habetis ^ : occi- 
 ditis : et zelatis, et non potestis 
 impetrare : rixatis et pngna- 
 tis et non habetis, propter 
 quod non petitis. 3 Petitis 
 et non accipitis, propter hoc 
 quod male petitis, ut in libi- 
 dines uestraa erogetis. 4 For- 
 nicatores, nescitis quoniam 
 amicitia saecnli inimica dei 
 est 1 Quicumque ergo uolu- 
 erit amicus saeculi esse inimi- 
 cus dei perseuerat. 5 Aut 
 putatis quoniam dicit scrip- 
 tura, Ad inuidiam conuales- 
 cit spiritus qui habitat in 
 uobis ? 6 Maiorem autem 
 dat gratiam. Propter quod 
 dicit, Deus superbis resistit, 
 humilibu s° autem dat gratiam. 
 7 Subditi estote deo : resis- 
 tite autem zabolo, et fugiet 
 a uobis. 8 Accedite ad domin- 
 um, et ipse ad uos accedet.* 
 Mundate manus peccatores, 
 et sanctiflcate corda uestra 
 duplices corde. 
 
 a In verses 1 — 5 the only stops in 
 MS. are after impetrare, fornicatoi^es, 
 and dei est. 
 
 ^ MS. habebitis. 
 
 c MS. humilis. 
 
 *1 MS. aeeedit. 
 
 Speculum and 
 Prisoillian. 
 IV— 1 (W. p. 
 526) Unde bella, 
 unde rixae in uo- 
 bis 1 nonne de uo- 
 luntatibus '■ ues- 
 tris quae militant 
 in membris ues- 
 tris^ et sunt uobis 
 suauissima ? 
 
 [IV— 4 (Sch. 
 pp. 57, 90, 94) 
 
 omnis 
 mundi 
 est dei.] 
 
 amicitia 
 inimica 
 
 7 (W. p. 465) 
 Humiliate uos 
 Deo et resistite 
 diabnlo et fugiet^ 
 a uobis : 8 proxi- 
 mate Deo etproxi- 
 mabit nobis.* 
 
 1 This word being 
 sometimes spelt uo- 
 lumptm, as in Gorb. 
 iii. 4, was easily con- 
 fused with uoluptas. 
 
 2 The words from 
 unde to uestris are 
 found in Prise, pp. 63, 
 96. 
 
 3 Fugiet omitted by 
 all the MSS. 
 
 4 Adpropiate domi- 
 no et adpropinquahit 
 uobis ix. 
 
 c 2 
 
20 THE EPISTLE OP ST. JAMES 
 
 9 TaXanrcopria-aTe kcu ir^vOrjo-are koli Khavaar^' o 
 yeXcos vfiatv els irkvOos fJL€Ta(rTpa(l)T]TCO kcu tj X"j°" ^'^ 
 KarrjCJieiav. 
 
 10 TaTreivcodrjTe kvcoinov Kvpiov, kcu v^j/cocrei vjxas. 
 
 11 M?7 KaraXaXeiTe aXXrjXaiv, a8eX(j)oi' 6 KaraXaXwu 
 a8eX(f)ov T) Kpivcou tov d8eX(j)ov avrov KaTaXaXel vopov 
 Kat Kpivei vofjLOv' el 8e uo/jlov KpLveLs, ovk ei TTOirjTrjf 
 vofJLOv aXXa Kpirrjs- 
 
 12 El? ea-TLu vop,o6eTrjs /cat KpiTrjs, 6 8vvap,evos aScrai 
 Koi airoXeaai' av 8f tls el, o Kpivcov tov TrXrja-iov; 
 
 13 Aye vvv ol Xeyovres ^rjfiepov i] avpiov iropev- 
 aofieOa els rrjvSe ttjv ttoXiv kcu iroirjo-ofiev CKel eviavTOv 
 Koi efjuiropevaop^eOa kou Kep8r](T0ixev' 
 
 14 [oLTives OVK eTTLaraade to ttjs avpiov' Troia yap 
 Tf] Qar) vpMV ; aTpXs yap eaTe -q irpos oXiyov ^aLvopLevrj, 
 eireiTa koi a(j)ai/i^ofxei'r}') 
 
 15 avTL TOV Xeyeiv vp,as Eau o Kvpios ffeXrjcrrj, Kal 
 ^rjcropiev Kal iroLrjcrop.ev tovto rj eKeivo. 
 
 9. «oi KXauo-oTc BK.LP &c. Treg. "WH. , arm. Cyr. Thl. Oec. | E/uTropeuo-ofiEfla Sin. 
 KKavffare Sin. A Ti., oiu. pesh. +Aug. | ABP + , -ffafieBa KL+ | KepSria-o/iep Sin. 
 iueTO<rTpo(()r(Tffl Sin. AKL &c. Oec. Ti. ABP, -(Tw^uev KL + . 
 
 Treg. WH.™, iierarpainiTa BP 69. a c 14. eTurraaBe : P 68 6«ffTovToi | to 
 
 Thl. WH. Trjs mpiov Sin. KL &o. latt. pesh. sah. 
 
 10. TaTTEivaflTjTe : Sin. adds ovr \ tou copt. Thl. Oec. Treg. Ti., to ttjj avpiov 
 bef. Kvpiov h+ \ . AP 7. 13. 69. 106 a c syr. Treg.mWH."", 
 
 11. a\A7;\et?i/ adeKtl>oi : a56\(/)oi fiov a\- tt]s avpiov B WH ] iroia yap rj ^wtj Sin.^ 
 \n\uv A + I r) Kpivav Sin. ABP syrr. AKLP &c. Treg."" WH.™, irom ^ (ati 
 sah. oopt. arm. +, koi icp. KL &c. | ovk ei Sin.^ c syr. aim. aelh." (aeth.PP corb. 
 TTOiTjTTjs ; P + ou/ceTi 61 7r.,E + ou/ceTf TT. 6(. Qiioe autcm) WH., TTota ^wTi B I vfiwv : 
 
 12. vofioBeTris BP WH., d vofi. Sin. Ti/iav 13. 69. + syr. Thl. | ar/jus yap care 
 AKL &c. Ti. Treg. WH." {els Icrnv B + syr. arm. aeth. Oec, ar/us yap 
 WH., fls iiTTiv d WH.") I KOI KpiTTjs Sin. ea-Tiv L (L ot/htj) corb. + Jer. Dam. Thl., 
 ABP &c., om. KL+ | ffu Se : om. Se sah. ar/iis yap earai KP + , ar/iis ((rnv vulg. 
 syr. arm. + Oec. \ 6 Kpivwv Sin. ABP + , copt. , arfus earai A {arixis eo-te WH'"), 
 bs KpivdsKLkc. I Toj' ir\»)(rioy Sin. ABP om. Sin. | ^ TrposSin. AKL&c.Ti.WH.", 
 latt. syrr. copt. arm., tov ir^pov KL &c. irpojBPWH. | Eircira KoiSiu.ABKcorb., 
 [K + add &Ti OVK ev avBpanip aW ev Q^cp etteitc 5e sah. Thl. Oec, etteito ^e koi LP 
 TO Bia^TjfjiaTa avOpajTrov KanvOvvcTai]. &c., etteito 36. 38. 69 + copt. syr. 
 
 13. J) avpwv Sin. B 13. 27. 29. 40. 69 15. fle\7)(rji Sin. AKL latt. Cyr. &o. 
 + latt. pesh. sah. copt. aeth. Jer., koi Treg. Ti. WH.", SeAji BP a d 69 Ti'eg." 
 aupiov AKLP &c. Cyr. Thl. Oec | vopsv WH. | Cvrofiev Sin. ABP + (Ti. makes 
 (To/iiBa Sin. BP + latt. Cyr. Oec, tudeu- it a part of the protasis), fijirw/iEi/KL&c. 
 aaufBa AKL + Thl. | ironiaoii.ev BP+ Cyr. Thl. Oec. | koi Troiriffopiev Sin. 
 WH. Ti., -aa/xev Sin. AKL + Treg. | ekei ABP + , Troirjiro/iEv vulg. sah. copt. pesh. 
 om. A 13 Cyr. | ecioutoi' Sin. BP 36. latt. arm. aeth. Cyr., koi iroHjffw/OEc KL &c. 
 copt. Jer., EviauTo;/ ha AKL &c. syrr. Thl. Oec. 
 
IV 9-16] 
 
 LATIN VEESIONS 
 
 21 
 
 Vulgate. 
 
 9 Miseri estote et lugete et 
 plorate: risusuesterinluctum 
 conuertatur et gaudium in 
 maerorem. 10 Humiliamini 
 in oonspectu domini et exalt- 
 aJit (a) uos. 11 Nolite detra- 
 here alterutrum O), fratres 
 mei (y). Qui detraMt fratri 
 aut qui iudicat fratrem suum, 
 detraMt legi et iudicat legem : 
 si antem iudicas legem, non 
 es (8) factor legis sed iudex. 
 12 Unus est legislator et 
 index, qui potest perdere et 
 liberare : tu autem quis es 
 qui iudicas proximum? 13 
 Ecce nunc qui dicitis Hodie 
 aut crastino ibimus in illam 
 ciuitatem el faciemus quidem 
 ibi annum et mercabimur et 
 lucrum faciemus, 14 qui 
 ignoratis quid sit (e) in crasti- 
 num : quae enim est uita 
 uestra? uapor est ad modi- 
 cum parens et (f) deinceps 
 exterminabitur (?;) : 15 pro eo 
 ut dicatis Si dominus uoluerit 
 et (6) uixerimus, faciemus 
 hoc aut illud. 
 
 (a) MS. -uit. F. -bit. 
 ()3) Spec. Aug. de alterutro. 
 (y) F. om. mei. 
 (6) P. est. 
 
 (e) Spec. Aug. and F. erit. 
 
 (f) P. om. et. 
 (v) F. extermiTiatur. 
 (9) Spec. Aug. and F. add si. 
 
 COEBEY MS. 
 
 9 Lugete miseri et plorate : 
 risus uester in luctum con- 
 uertatur et gaudium in tris- 
 titiam. 10 Humiliate uos 
 ante dominum et exaltabit 
 uos. 11 Nolite retractare 
 de alterutro, fratres." Qui 
 retractat de fratre, et iu- 
 dicat fratrem suum, retractat 
 de lege et iudicat legem. Si 
 autem iudicas legem, non es 
 factor legis sed iudex. 12 
 Unus est legum positor et 
 iudex, qui potest saluare et 
 perdere : tu autem quis es 
 qui iudicas proximum ? 13 
 lam nunc qui dicunt : hodie 
 aut eras ibimus in illam ciui- 
 tatem et faciemus ibi annum 
 et negotiaSJmur "^ et lucrum 
 faciemus : 14 qui ignoratis 
 crastinum. Quae autem uita 
 uestra ? momentum " enim 
 est, per modica uisibilis, dein- 
 de et exterminata. 15 Prop- 
 ter quod dicere uos oportet ; 
 Si dominus uoluerit et uiue- 
 mus et faciemus hoc aut* 
 illud. 
 
 » MS. /rater. 
 
 ^ MS. negotiamur. 
 
 •= So MS. ; Dr. Hort suggests fia- 
 mentum ; Dr. Sanday thinks the-trans- 
 lator mistook arjULo? for arojiAOff (Stud. 
 BiU. pp. isr, 140). 
 
 4 So MS. ; et Sab. 
 
 Speculum and 
 Pkiscillian. 
 
 10 (W. p. 448) 
 Humiliaminiante 
 conspectum Do- 
 mini et exaltabit 
 uos. 11 Fratres 
 nolite nobis 1 de- 
 trahere. Qui 
 enim ^ uituperat 
 fratrem suum et 
 iudicat, legem ui- 
 tuperat et iudicat. 
 Si legem iudicas, 
 iam non factor 
 legis sed indexes. 
 12 Unus-est enim 
 legum dator et iu- 
 dex qui potest sa- 
 luare et perdere.^ 
 Tu autem quis es 
 qui iudicas proxi- 
 mum? 
 
 1 F. itoMs, S. V08. 
 
 2 S. enm, F. autem. 
 
 3 Prise, p. 66 (deus) 
 solus potens ^ saluare 
 perdere. 
 
22 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 16 Nui' 5e Kavyaade hv Tois aXa^oviais vfiau' iracra 
 Kav^Tjcrts Toiavrr} irovrjpa eariv. 
 
 17 EtSori ovv KaXov Troceiv /cat /jlt] ttolovvti, a/xapria 
 avT^ ka-TLv, 
 
 KE*. e'. 
 
 1 ' Aye vvv ol TrXovcrioi, KXavaare oXoXv^ovres ew). tois 
 TaXaLTroapiaLS v/xau rats eirep'^ojxevaLS. 
 
 2 O irXovTos vfjLcov aearjireu, kcu ra Ifxaria v/jmv (ttjto- 
 ^pcoTa yeyoveu' 
 
 3 o \pv(ros vfimv kcu o apyvpos Karmrai, kou 6 log 
 avTwv els fiaprvpiov vplv 'earrai Koi (payerai ras crapKas 
 vp.mu (OS irvp' eOrjcravpiaaTe ev fax^Tais yjfiepais. 
 
 4 ISov pLiados Twv epyarav tcov a/XTjaavTCou ras 
 ^(copas Vfjiwv, o a(j)V(rT€p'r]fj.tvos a(p vficou, Kpa^ei' kou at 
 fioaX Tcov OepiaavTcov els rd cora Kvp[ov ^ajSacod ela- 
 eXrjXvdav. 
 
 5 'ETpv(j)r]craTe em ttjs yrjs koi eairaraX'qaaTe' 
 edpe'^are ras Kap8ias vp,Su ev rjfiepa (r(l)ayris. 
 
 6 KareSt/cacrare, e(j)ovev(raTe tov diKaiov' ovk avri- 
 TaaaeraL vfuv. 
 
 1 MaKpoOvfi'^aare ovv, a.8eX(pol, ecos rrjs irapovcrias 
 TOV K.vpiov. 'l8ov 6 yecopyos e/c5e)(erat tov Tifuov 
 Kaptrov TTjs yrjs, /JLUKpodvpMv eir avTa ems Xal3y 
 
 TTpoi/XOV Koi O'^lflOV. 
 
 16. Kouxafffle : Sin. + (caTaKKuX- I a\a- \ii\veav BP, -Auflep A + , etaeX-n^vSaaiv 
 
 foj/mis Sin. AB^LP + WH. Ti., a\ofo- Sin. KL &c. 
 
 veiois B'K &c. Treg. | -iraaa : airaira Sin. 5. om. koi A 73. copt. | ev V«P? Sin.' 
 
 V._l. eTrepxonevcus ABKLP &c., €ir. BP 13. latt. +, ev ritiepats A, i>s ev V^P? 
 
 u/iiv Sin. 5. 8. 25 Tulg. pesh. copt. arm. Sin.' KL &o. 
 
 aeth. 6. SixaLov Ti. SlKawv. WH. | imv. Ti. 
 
 3. KaTUDTai bef. koi i apyvpos A 13 | Treg. i/iiv; WH. 
 
 <l>ayeTai: ^cuvere Sin.^ | dis irvp Sin.' 7. ctt buti)) : eirouToi'KL&c. Thl., om. 
 
 BKL &o., i los i)s TTup Sin. 3 AP + (full vulg. arm. | Iws \a$v ABKL + , lus av 
 
 stop after &s wp Ti. Treg. WH.™, bef. A. Sin. P 13 &c. | rpoinov Sin. AB'P, 
 
 iis irvp AL + pesh. Treg." WH.), aeth. itpmiiov B'KL &o. | iterov bef. ■Kpoiii.ov 
 
 spec. Thl. add 8 after Trup | eaxarcus v/ie- AELP &o. pesli., om. B 31. vulg. sah. 
 
 pais ! A rifiep. ecrx- arm. WH. Treg. Ti., KapTTov bef. vpoi/iov 
 
 4. apvffTepriiievos Sin. B', anfarepTifif- Sin.' {xapTtov tov Sin.') oorb. copt. +. 
 vos AB'P &o., aTotTTeprifi.evos KL | eitre- 
 
IV 16 V 7J 
 
 LA.TIN VERSIONS 
 
 23 
 
 VlTLGATB. 
 
 16 Nunc autem exultatis in 
 superbiia uestris. Omnis ex- 
 ultatio talis maligna est. 17 
 Scienti igitur bonum facere 
 et non facienti, peccatum est 
 illi. 
 
 V — 1 Agite (a) nunc, di- 
 uites, plorate ululantes in mi- 
 seriis quae aduenient nobis. 2 
 Divitiae uestrae putrefactae 
 sunt, et uestimenta uestra a 
 tineis comesta sunt : 3 aurum 
 et argentum vestrnm aerugin- 
 avit, et aerugo eoium in testi- 
 monium nobis erit et man- 
 ducabit carnes uestras sicut ig- 
 nis. Thesaurizastis iram (j3) 
 in nouissimis diebus. 4 Ecoe 
 merees operariornm qui mes- 
 suerunt region es uestras, qui 
 fraudatus est a uobis, cla- 
 mat (-y), et clamor ipsorum 
 in aures domini sabaoth in- 
 troiuit. 5 Epulati estis super 
 terram et in hixuriis enutris- 
 tis corda uestra in diem (8) 
 occisionis. 6 Adduxistis (e), 
 occidistis iustum, et (f ) non 
 resistit (j;). uobis. 7 Patientes 
 igitur estote, fratres, usque 
 ad aduentum domini. Ecce 
 agricola expectat pretiosum 
 fructum terrae, patienter fer- 
 ens donee accipiat tempora- 
 neum (6) et serotinum : 
 
 (a) Corrected in MS. fr. age^ which 
 is read by Spec. Aug. and F. 
 • (jS) Spec. Aug. and F. omit iram. 
 
 (y) Spec. Aug. fraudati sunt... 
 clamant. 
 
 (S) F. die. 
 
 (e) F. addixistie. 
 
 {0 Spec. Aug. and F. om. et. 
 
 (tj) F. restitit. 
 
 (0) F. temporiuum. 
 
 COKBET MS. 
 
 16 Nunc autem gloriamini 
 in superbia uestra. Omnis 
 gloria talis mala est. 17 
 Scientibus autem bonum fa- 
 cere et non facientibus, pecca- 
 tum illis est. V — 1 lam 
 nunc locupletes plorate ulu- 
 lantes in miseriis uestris 
 aduenientibus. 2 Diuitiae 
 uestrae putrierunt,res uestrae 
 tmismexunt.'- 3 Aurum ues- 
 trum et argentum aeruginauit, 
 et aerugo ipsorum erit uobis 
 in testimonium et manduca- 
 bit carnes uestras tanqiiam 
 ignis. Thesaurizastis et in 
 nouissimis diebus. 4 et ecce 
 mercedes operariornm, qui 
 arauerunt ^ in agris uestris, 
 quod abnegastis, clamabant, 
 et uoces qui messi sunt ad 
 aures domini sabaotb introie- 
 runt. 5 Fruiti estis super 
 terram et abusi estis : cibastis 
 corda uestra in die occisionis. 
 6 Damnastis et occidistis ius- 
 tum : non resistit uobis. 7 
 Patientes ergo estote fratres 
 usque ad aduentum domini. 
 Ecce agricola expectat bono- 
 ratum fructum terrae, patiens 
 in ipso usquequo accipiat 
 matutinum et serotinum fruc- 
 tum. 
 
 » MS. tiniauer. Sab. tinea uero. 
 
 b * The contrast between plough- 
 men and reapers makes the picture 
 more complete. ..but no extant Greek 
 MS. or other authority has ploughed.' 
 — Bp. Wordsworth, in loe. 
 
 Speculum and 
 
 Pkiscillian. 
 
 V — 1 (W. p. 
 395) Age^ nunc di- 
 lutes plangite uos 
 ululantes^ super 
 miserias uestras 
 quae superueni- 
 unt 2 diuitiis 
 uestris. Putruer- 
 unt et tiniauerunt 
 uestes 2 uestrae. 3 
 Aurum et argen- 
 tum uestrum quod 
 reposuistis in no- 
 uissimis diebus 
 aeruginauit et 
 aerugo eorum in 
 testimonium no- 
 bis erit et come- 
 dit* carnes uestras 
 sicut ignis. 
 
 [V-1 (Sch. p. 
 17) age nunc di- 
 uites pi angite ulu- 
 lantes super mise- 
 rias uestras quae 
 superueniunt di- 
 uitiis uestris ; pu- 
 truerunt et tini- 
 auerunt u e s t e s 
 uestrae ; aurum 
 uestrum et ar- 
 gentum uestrum 
 quod reposuistis 
 in nouissimis die- 
 bus aeruginabit et 
 aerugo eorum in 
 testimonium uo- 
 bis erit et comedet 
 carnes uestras si- 
 cut ignis.] 
 
 5 (W. p. 639) 
 Et uos deliciati 
 estis super ter- 
 ram et luxori- 
 ati estis : creastis 
 autem corda ues- 
 tra in die ^ occisi- 
 onis. - 
 
 1 age M, agite S. 
 
 2 M + om. ululan- 
 tes. 
 
 3 M; -f uestii^enta 
 uestra. 
 
 4 coviedit S, comedet 
 M+. 
 
 B Midicm. 
 
24 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 8 M-aKpoOvfi-qa-are kcu Vfieis, aTrjpl^aTe ras KUpBias 
 vjxcov, OTL 7] irapovaia tov K.vpiov rjyyiKev. 
 
 9 M17 a-T€vd^€T€, a5eA0oi, Kar aXXi^Xcov, ha p-rj 
 
 KpidrJTe' I80V 6 KpLTTjS TTpO TWV dvpCOU eCrTT]K€l^. 
 
 10 'Yir68eLyp.a Xd^ere, d8eX(f)oi, rrjs KaKoiraOlas kcu 
 TYjs paKpodvp,[as tovs 7rpo(])r]Tas oi eXaXrjaav tv tco 
 ovop,aTL Kvpiov. 
 
 11 'I80V p.aKapi^op,€v TOVS inrop,etvavTas' rrju vtto- 
 /Jiovijv 'Ift)/3 rjKov<TaT€, koI to tcXos Kvpiov elSere, oti 
 7roXv(r7rXay)(vo5 ecrTiv 6 Vivpios kcu OLKTippxav. 
 
 12 YIpo iravTcav 8e, aSeXcpoi p.ov, p.r] opwere, p^rjTC tov 
 ovpavov p-rjTC ttjv yrjv p,y]Te aXXov Tiva opKOv' tjtco 8e 
 vpMv TO vcu vai, kou to ov ov' tva p,r) viro Kpiaiv TrecrrjTe. 
 
 13 KaKOTradet tls €v vfxlu ; irpocrevf^ea-Ooi' evdvp,ei tis', 
 yj/aXXeTco. 
 
 14 A<T$ev€L Tis ^v vpiv ; irpoa-KaXeaacrOco tovs Trpea- 
 fivTepovs Ttjs eKKXrjalas, koj, irpocrev^aadcocrav eir avTov 
 aXeiyJAavTes (Xaico ev rra ovopMTi' 
 
 15 Kcti rj €V)(r] Trjs TrtVrecoy acocrei- tov KapvovTa, Koi 
 eyepel avTOv 6 Kvpios' kuv dp-apTias rj Tve-Koiy^Kcos, 
 dcjiedrjaeTUi avTW. 
 
 16 'E^o/AoAoyeifr^e ovv aXXrjXois Ta irapairTcop.a.Ta, Ka\ 
 
 8. (laKpoBv/iriaare ABKP &e., ^axp. 12. irpo wavTuv Se Sin.' ABLP &c., it. 
 ovv Sin. L +. TravTOJi' ovv Sin.^, ir. iravrtDV K + | ins, 
 
 9. aSe\(poi : (A 13 + add /iov) bef. kot i \oyos bef. A^eoc (from Matt. v. 37) Sin.' 
 aWiiKav ABP 5. 13. 69. + Treg. WH., copt. aetli. + | koi : om. latt. copt. | Tb 
 after icut a\X. Sin. L syrr. &c. Thl. Oec. NaE vol koI rh OS oS, WH. rh vol val, 
 Ti., om. K 15. 16 + f KpiBrire : Oec. + ical rh at) oS, Ti. | viro Kpitiiv Sin.AB 8. 
 KaraKpieriTe. 13. 25. 27. 29. 36. latt. syrr. copt. aeth., 
 
 10. AojScTc : om. A 13 aeth. (adding eis iiroKpiaiv KLP &c. 
 
 ex^TC after /^affpoflu/iias "with Sin.' +) I 14. 67r avTov \ Sin.^ eir avrovs \ a\ei- 
 
 aSe\<l>oi ABP +, o8. /tow Sin. KL &c. | tfiavres BP a corb. Dam. WH. Ti., a\. 
 
 KOKoiroflias B^P WH., KUKOiraBems AB'L ouToi' Sin.AKL &c. Treg. | ora/UOTi tou 
 
 &c. Treg. Ti., KaXoKayaBtas Sin. I ev rep Kvpiov Sin. KLP &c. Treg. Ti., ov, Kvpwv 
 
 ovo/xa-n BP +, ev ovo/iari Sin. Clir., ti)j A + Orig. Treg."", ov. Cv X" 6, ov. t. kv- 
 
 ovofiaTi AKL &o. piov ill 7.'=", ovo/iari B (WH. bracket 
 
 11. ujro/ieii'avTasSin. ABP latt. syrr. +, tov Kvpiov). 
 
 woinevovTus KL copt. arm. aeth. Thl. 15. a(()€6j7(r€Tai : P + a<j>e6ii<T0VTai. 
 
 Oec. &c. I eiSere Sin. B'K &c., iSere AB' 16. ovv Sin.ABKP+ vulg. copt. syr. 
 
 LP + I voKuffirKayxvos : Thl. + 7ro\i/cu- Se 107 pesh., om. L &c. corb. arm 
 
 ffvhayxvos \ 6 Kvpios Sin.AP + Treg. Ti. aeth. | to vapairTunaTa KL &c. pesh 
 
 WH., KupiosB WH.i", cm. KL H-. Orig. Aug. Thl. Oec, ras a/iaprias Sin 
 
V 8-16] LATIN VEESIONS 25 
 
 Vulgate. Corbby MS. SPEcuLtrM and 
 
 Peisoillian. 
 8 patientes estote et uos (a), 8 Et uos patientes estote, 
 
 confirmate oorda uestra, qao- confortate praeoordia uestra, 
 
 niam aduentua domini adpro- quoniam aduentus domini 
 
 pinqnaiiit (;3). 9 Nolite in- adpropiatiit. 9 Nolite in- 
 
 gemiscere, fratres, in alteru- gemiscere fratres in alter- 
 
 trum, utnoniudicemini: ecce utrum, ne in indicium in- 
 
 iudex ad (y) ianuam adsistit. cidatis. Ecce iudex ante 
 
 10 Exemplum accipite, fra- iannam stat. 10 Acoipite 
 
 tres, laboris et patientiae experimentum fratres de 
 
 per (8j prophetas qui locuti malis passionibus et de pa- 
 
 sunt in nomine domini. 11 tientia prophetas qui locu- 
 
 Ecce beatificamus qui austin- ti sunt in nomine domini. 
 
 uerunt : sufferentiam lob an- 11 Ecce beatos dicimus qui 
 
 distis,et flnem domini vidistia, sustinuerunt. Suflferentiam 
 
 quoniam misoricors est domi- lob aiidistis et finem domini 
 
 nus et miserator. 12 Ante uidistis, quoniam uisceraliter 
 
 omnia autem, fratrea mei, dominus misericors est. 12 
 
 nolite iurare, neque per cae- Ante omnia antem, fratres 
 
 lum neque per terram neque mei, nolite iurare neque per 
 
 aliud quodcumque iuramen- caelum neque per terram, nee 
 
 tuni. Sit autem sermo alterutrum iuramentum. Sit 
 
 uester (e) Est est, Non non, autem apud uos, Est est, Non 
 
 ut non sub iudicio decidatis. est non est ; ne in indicium 
 
 ISTristaturaliquisuestrum? incidatis. 13 Anxiat aliquis 
 
 oret aequo animo et psallat. ex uobis ^ 1 oret ; bilaria 
 
 14 Infirmatur quis in (f) est ? psalmum dicat. 14Etin- 
 
 uobisl inducat presbyteros flrmas^ eat aliquis in uobia ? - 
 
 eccleaiae, et orent auper eum, uocet presbyteroa, et orent 
 
 ungentea eum oleo in nomine super ipsum ungentes oleo in 
 
 domini. 15 Et oratio fidei nomine domini : 15 et oratio 
 
 saluabit infirmum, et alle- in Me saluabit laborantem, 
 
 uabit eum dominus ; et si in et suscitabit " ilium dominua, 
 
 pecoatis sit, dimittentur (ij) et si peccata fecit, remittun- 
 
 ei. 16 Confltemini ergo al- tur ei. 16 Confitemini al- 
 terutrum peccata uestra, et terutrum peccata uestra et 
 
 (a) F. adds et. a So MS.; ex uobis aliquia, Sab. 
 
 (3) MS. adpropinquaiit with F. i^ MS. infirviis. 
 
 M F. ante. o MS. -uit. 
 
 (S) F. om. per. 
 
 (e) Spec. Aug. ueetrum, omitting 
 aermo. 
 (0 F. aliquii ex. 
 (t)) F. remittetvr 
 
26 
 
 THE EPISTLE OP ST. JAMES 
 
 ebxeo-de VTrep dXXrjXo)}/, ottcos laffrJTe. HoXi) io-^net SerjaK 
 SiKaiov evepyovfievr]. 
 
 17 HAeiaf avOptoiros r)v 6fx.oioTra6r]S rjfilv, kol Trpocr- 
 evxy irpocnqv^aTO tov fj,rj ^p'e^ai' kol ovk el3pe^ev eiri 
 T^y yr]9 eviavrovf rpels kou jxrjvas e^' 
 
 18 KOL iraXiv irpoar/v^aro, kou o ovpavos verou 
 edcoK€v Kol 7] yrj e^Xaarrjaev tov Kapirov avrrjs. 
 
 19 'A8eX(j)o[ /xov, €ai> rtf ev vplv TrXavrjdrj airo rffs 
 aXrjOeias kou eTriaTpe^rj tls avTov, 
 
 20 yii/co(TK€Te otl o eTnarpe'^as ajxaprcoXov eK irXavrjs 
 oSov avTOv (Tcoa-ei '\j/V)(r}v e/c Oavarov, koX KaXv^ec 
 irXrjOos afxapTimv. 
 
 ABP 5. 6. 13. 43. 65. 73. a c d syr. latt. 
 Eus. Ephr. Dam. WH. Treg. Ti., add 
 iiJLwv L. 69. a c latt. syrr. copt. aeth. | 
 fuxeo-fle Sin. KLP &c. Thl. Oec. Treg. 
 Ti. WH.", TrpoaevxeaBe AB 73 Ephr. 
 Treg.™ WH. (altered to suit irpoaevx. in 
 ver. 17 ?). 
 
 17. 7)\6ioj B^ (and Sin. B in Matt, 
 xvii. 3, 4, 10, 11, 12, Luke iv. 26, ix. 
 8, Mk. Tiii. 28), ijXios Sin. AB^KLP &o. 
 
 18. v^Tov €Sa>Keu BELP &o. Treg.™ 
 WH., iSuKiv ucToj/ A 13. 73. latt. + 
 Treg. Ti. WH.", eS. tov i^rov Sin. 
 
 19. aSe\<l)oi fiov Sin. ABKP syrr. latt. 
 + , oScX^oi L &0. Did. Oec. | airo ttjs 
 aXiiSeias ABELP &0. latt. syr. aeth., airo 
 T7/S ddov 7T]$ a\ri6etas Sin. pesh. copt. +. 
 
 20. ytvoKTKsTe 6ti B 31 o syr. aeth. 
 
 Treg.™ WH., yivaxTKCTa Sti Sin. AKLP 
 &o. Treg. Ti., WH.™ om. corb. sah. | 
 <Tu>aeL : corb. Orig. <rw(et, fuld. saluauit j 
 ^vxv^ O.VT0V e/c QavaTov Sin. P. 5. 7. 8. 13. 
 15. 36;syrr. copt. aeth. Ti. WH., T-qv tj,. 
 a. e. 6. A 73. arm., \I'VXW ^« Bavarov KL 
 &o. sah. Orig. Thl. Oec. Treg., >f/. ex 
 BavaTov avTov B corb. aeth. WH.™ | xa- 
 Avifici : vulg. Orig. Dam. KaXvitTti, 
 
 Subscription. — K with most MSS. 
 has none, B laKco^ov, Sin. einffToKTi LaKoi- 
 (8ou, A 40. 67. 177 laKieffov eirio-ToXij, P 
 63 laKte^ov aTro(rro\ov eirtffro\7i Kado\tKrif 
 L TsKos TOV ayiov a-KOffToXov laKw^ov eirl- 
 (TToKri KaBoKiK% 38 reAos ttjs iiriuToKiis 
 TOO a-yiov a-noffToXov laKoi^ov tov aSeXipo- 
 Beov. 
 
Y 16-20] LATIN VERSIONS 27 
 
 Vulgate. Corbey MS. Speotjltjm and 
 
 PiilSOILLlAN. 
 
 orate pro inuieem, ut salue- orate pro alterutro \\t remit- 
 mini : multum enim ualet tatur uobis : multum potest 
 depreoatio iusti adsidna. 17 petitio iusti frequens. 17 
 Helias homo erat similis Helias homo erat similis no- 
 nobis passibilis, et orations bis, et oratione orauit ut non 
 orauit ut non plueret super plueret, et non pluit in terra 
 terram, et non pluit annos annis tribus et mensibus sex. 
 tres et menses sex ; 18 et 18 Sed iterum orauit, et oae- 
 Tursus orauit, et caelum dedit lum dedit pluiiiam,'' et terra 
 pluuiam et terra dedit fruc- germinauitfructum suum. 19 
 turn suum. 19 Fratres mei, Fratres mei si quis ex uobis 
 si quis ex uobis errauerit errauerit a ueritate et aliquis 
 a ueritate et conuerterit quis eum reuocauerit ; 20 qui 
 eum, 20 scire debet quo- reuocauerit peccatorem de er- 
 niam qtii conuerti fecerit roris uia, saluat animam de 
 peccatorem ab errore uiae (a) morfce sua et operiet multitu- 
 suae, saluabit (/3) animam dinem pecoati. — Explicit 
 eius a morte et cooperit (y) Epistola Jacobi filii Zae- 
 multitudinem peccatorum. — bedei. 
 Explicit Epistula Jacobi . ^s. 2,i»™«.. 
 apostoli. 
 
 (a) MS. uitae. 
 
 (^) F. saluauit 
 
 (y) Spec. Aug. and F. operit. , 
 
NOTES 
 
 Ver. 1. IdKu^os.] See Introduction, 
 
 0eoS Kal KvpCov 'Ii\<rov Xpurrou SovXos.] It is only here and in the 
 epistle of St. Jude that we find the writer announcing himself as 
 simply SoCXos. St. Paul joins d7rd<7To\os with 8ovA.os in Eom. i. 1, Tit. 
 i. 1 ; more commonly he styles himself simply arroaroXo^ 'I. X., as in 
 1 Cor. i. 1, 2 Cor. i. 1, Gal. i. 1 (here Sik 'I. X.), Eph. i. 1, Col. i. 1, 
 and in both epistles to Timothy ; in Philemon i. 1 he is Secr/j,ios X. 'I. ; 
 in his earliest epistles (1 Th. i. 1, 2 Th. i. 1), where he joins Silvanus 
 and Timothy with himself, he makes use of no distinctive title ; in 
 PhU. i. 1 he speaks of himself and Timothy as SoCXot X. 'I. St. Peter 
 styles himself ama-ToXoi 'I. X. in his 1st, SoBXos koX oltt. 'I. X. in his 2nd 
 epistle. St. John's 1st epistle is anonymous ; in the 2nd and 3rd he 
 calls himself o irpecrfivTepo?. So far as it goes, this peculiarity of the 
 epistles of the two brothers, James and Jude, is (1) in favour of the 
 view that neither of them was included in the number of the Twelve ; 
 (2) it shows that the writer of this epistle was so well known that it 
 was unnecessary alike for him and for his brother to add any special 
 title to distinguish him from others who bore the same name ; (3) if 
 we hold, as there seems every reason for doing, that the writer is the 
 James whom St. Paul speaks of as the brother of the Lord, we find 
 here an example of the refusal ' to know Christ after the flesh ' which 
 appears in ii. 1 ; the same willingness to put himself on a level with 
 others which appears in iii. 1, 2. The phrase SoCXos ®eov is used of 
 Moses (Dan. ix. 11, Mai. iv. 4), who is also called 6cpd.7r(ov (Ex. xiv. 31, 
 JSTumb. xii. 7, Jos. i. 2) and irats (Jos. xi. 12, xii. 6). AoBXos is also used 
 generally of the prophets (Jer. vii. 25, Dan. ix. 10, Apoc. x. 7, &c.). 
 
 The combination 0. iv. K. 'I. X. is found in almost every epistle. 
 That ®£oC is used here for the Father is evident from 2 Pet. i. 2 iv 
 kwiyvuMTu Tov ©eoC Koi 'Irjcrov ToC Kvpiov tjixSiv. Por the absence of the 
 article see Essay on Grammar. 
 
 Tois 8(6S€Ka <j>v\ats.] The chosen people are still regarded as consti- 
 tuting twelve tribes by the writers of the N.T. So St. Paul (Acts 
 xxvi. 7) speaks of to Sa>8cKa<f>v\ov -^/juHv waiting for the promised 
 
30 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 kingdom ; and in Matt. xix. 28 it is said that the twelve apostles 
 shall hereafter ' sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of 
 Israel ' : comp. also Rev. vii. 4 foil. The prophets looked forward to 
 the reunion of Israel and Judah (Isa. xi. 12, 13, Jerem. iii. 18), and 
 under Hezekiah and Josiah many of the remnant of the Ten Tribes 
 came up to worship at Jerusalem (2 Chr. xxix. 24, xxx. 1, xxxiv. 9). 
 So twelve goats were offered as a sin-offering for the twelve tribes at 
 the dedication of the second Temple (Ezra vi. 17). There would be no 
 reason for keeping up the old feud between the tribes in the captivity ; 
 and while it is probable that some of those who were carried away by 
 Shalmanezer may have adopted the manners and religion of the neigh- 
 bouring heathen, many would no doubt attach themselves to the later 
 captives from Judah, and either return with the minority of these to 
 Judaea, or continue to live in Assyria with the majority. The book 
 Tobit professes to give the story of a religious captive of the tribe of 
 Naphtali ; and Anna (Luke ii. 36) is an instance of a resident in 
 Judah belonging to the tribe ofAsher. See D. of B. under Captivities. 
 This form of address is one among many indications of an early date 
 for the epistle, the Christian Jews not being yet definitely marked 
 off from their unbelieving countrymen. [Hermas (Sim. ix. 17) however 
 includes all the nations under heaven in his Twelve Tribes. C.T.] 
 
 Iv Txj Siacnrop^.] See Introduction on the readers to whom the 
 epistle is addressed, and of. 1 Pet. i. 1 J/cXektois TrapeiriS-^fioK Stao-xopas 
 IlovTOv, TaXarla^, KainraSofcias, 'Acrt'as Koi Bt^wi'as (if St. James, as is 
 probable, is here addressing the Jews of the eastern dispersion, this 
 may have suggested to St. Peter his letter to the western dispersion), 
 John vii. 35 eis Trjv Siaa-Tropav tS>v 'EW-^viov, Deut. xxviii. 25 cot; 8ia- 
 (TTropa iv Trdcrai's jSacriXetiug rrjq yijs, ib. xxx. 4, Ps. cxlvii. 2 ras Stao-iropas 
 Tov 'laparjX eiricrui/afet, Isa. xlix. 6, Jer. xv. 7, Neh. i, 9, Tobit xiii. 3, 
 Judith V. 19 im(TTpiij/avTK ivl tov ®eov avruiv avi^rjcrav ex t^s SiaoTropas 
 ov Siea-Trdprjo-av, 2 Macc. i. 27 ; and Westcott, art. on Dispersion in 
 D. of B. 
 
 Xatpttv.] x^'P^ ^^ ^^^ regular form of Greek salutation, as in Luke i. 
 28, 2 John 10 ; like salve in Latin. In letters it takes the form 
 Xa^p^i-v (Xeyci), like salutem {dicit). Horace (Up. i. 8. 1 and 15) uses the 
 more literal translation gaudere et bene rem gerere {x.aipav koX ev trpar- 
 ruv). It is said to have been first used by Cleon in sending news of the 
 capture of Pylos (Luc. Laps, inter Salut. 3, Suidas s.v.). Aristophanes 
 in his latest play speaks of it as already old-fashioned, Plut. 322 
 yaipav p-ev vpS.'s i<TTiv, avSpes SrjpoTcu, ap^aiov ^Sij Trpocrayopeveiv koi (ratrpov 
 cuTirdif)p.ai 8 '. Plato is said to have preferred the phrase eS irpd-mw in 
 writing to his intimates (PL Ep. 3, p. 315). The Pythagoreans used 
 vyiaivciv (see Menage on Diog. L. iii. 61). In the N.T. the epistolary 
 Xaipiiv is only found here and in Acts xxiii. 26 (the letter of Lysias 
 to Felix) and xv. 23 (the letter, probably drawn up by St. James, 
 from the Church at Jerusalem to the brethren in Antioch, Syria and 
 Cilicia). In 2 Macc. ix. 19 we find the above forms of salutation com- 
 bined, Tois XP'?""'''''* 'lovoatois Tots iroXiVais iroXXa xitpeii' kol iyiatVeiv Kdl 
 cv irpdrruv /SacriXevi koI aTpaTrjyo^ 'AvTt'oxos. The ancient Hebrew salu- 
 
I 1, 2] NOTES 31 
 
 tation was 'Peace ' (whioli the Peshitto gives here), as in Gen. xliii. 23, 
 and (epistolary) in Ezra iv. 17, v. 7. In 2 Mace. i. 1 we have the Greek 
 and Hebrew joined, ^atpuv kol dp-qv-qv ayaOrfv, As a spoken salutation 
 we have examples of tipijvr; in Luke x. 5, xxiv. 36 (of. Jas. ii. 16) : the 
 epistolary use is found in 3 John 15 dpyivrj a-oi, 1 Pet. v. 14. In the 
 other epistles these simple greetings are further developed, as x^P's «»' 
 dprivrj (Rom. i. 7, 1 Cor. i. 3, 2 Cor. i. 2, Gal. i. 3, Eph. i. 2, Phil. i. 2, 
 Col. i. 2, 1 and 2 Thess., Philemon 3, Apoc. i. 4, 1 Pet. i. 2, 2 Pet. 
 i. 2) ; in the pastoral epistles and in 2 John we have the fuller form 
 Xapts 2A.£0S elpi^r] ; Jude has cXeos koX iiprjvrj koX ayaTrrj. There is no 
 preliminary salutation in Hebrews, 1 John, 3 John. We meet with 
 the final salutation tj xap's tov Kvpiov 'I. X. fieO' v/^Avinmany of the epistles. 
 Another final salutation is ippuxrde = Lat. valete (Acts xv. 29) : see 
 Heisen jVou, Byp. pp. 95-144. The use of the form )(aipe(,v naturally 
 suggests the identity of the writer of this epistle with the writer of the 
 circular in the Acts, and is at any rate a strong argument against the 
 view that our epistle was written towards the close of the first century. 
 Is it conceivable that, after the introduction of the fuller Christian 
 salutation, any one professing to write in the name of the most 
 honoured member of the church at Jerusalem would have fallen back 
 on the comparatively cold and formal ^acpuvl 
 
 2. irdo-av.] This does not mean strictly totality of joy, as though there 
 were no joy besides, but merely denotes a superior degree to ju.eyaA.171/ 
 or TToW-qv. Possibly the expression originated in an attraction from 
 TToiv elvai j^apdv, and is thus equivalent to 'entire, unmixed joy.' Of. 
 Phil. ii. 29 /tem 7racn;s xo-pa.^, 1 Pet. ii. 18 ev iravTi 4>6^(a, 1 Tim. ii. 2 iv 
 TTaaig cicrcjScta, ih. ii. 11 Jv Tracrg xnroray^, Tit. ii. 10, 15, iii. 2, Acts xvii. 
 1 1 eSe^ai'TO tov A.oyov fiera irdcrrj^ TrpoOv/jLiai, ib. xxiii. 1 Trdarj crtivetSijcret 
 ayadrj. The same use is found in classical authors, e.g. Soph. Phil. 
 618 S TTvp (TV Kol Trav Setjua, ib. El. 293, Eur. Med. 453 irav KepSo'S lyyoB 
 ^r]iJi,iovfi,iv7] ^vyg, Epict. 3. 5 x^P"' <''<'t ex<^ Tracrav, and in Latin, e.g. Oic. 
 M.D. ii. 56 omnis ordo, where other instances are quoted in my note. The 
 language is more measured in 1 Pet. i. 6, and Heb.xii. 11 TrSo-a /xevjraiSci'a 
 TTpo^ [/.hf ro irapov ov SokcI )(apas elvat dXXa XvTrrjs, vtmpov Se Kapirov elprjviKov 
 TOL's Si avTTJs y£yi;ju.va(rju,€vots aTroSiSoxriv StKOiocrwiys. But neither does 
 St. James say that trial is all joy ; he bids us count it joy, that is, look 
 at it from the bright side, as capable of being turned to our highest 
 good. 
 
 xapav 'n7^(rao-8e.J The word x^P"* echoes the preceding x«'PE"' 
 according to the wont of the writer. See vTrofiovr/, reXctov, \enr6[ii,evoi 
 just below, and the Essay on Grammar and Style. Xapd is here ground 
 of rejoicing, as in Luke ii. -10. The salutation might sound like a 
 mockery to those who were suffering under various trials, but St. James 
 proceeds to show that these very trials are a ground for joy. For the 
 same realization of what was often a mere phrase of courtesy cf. Eui\ 
 Hec. 426 IIOA. X'^'P' ^ rcKovtra, X''-V^ K.acrcrdvSpa re /not. EK. x°'''po^<''"' 
 aWoi, firjTpl 8' ovK ea-nv ro'Se. Eor the thought cf, Matt. v. 10-15, 1 
 Pet. iv. 12-14 fjLri ^£vit,€(r6e (at your trials) w? $evov v/jiiv cni/x^atVovTos, 
 it is not strange or foreign to your Christian life, but a part of your 
 
32 THE EPISTLE OP ST. JAMES 
 
 training for glory, therefore ^(aipeTe, so 1 Thess. iii. 3 oiSare on eh tovto 
 KeifieOa, Acts V. 41. 
 
 ■/[■yiicracrBe.] We might have expected the present tense, like fjyela-Oc 
 in 1 Pet. iii. 15 and below XaXeire ii. 12, as the aorist is used rather of 
 a single act than of a continuous state; but it is here employed in 
 reference to each separate temptation as it occurs, perhaps also as more 
 urgent, like fiaKpodviJiria-are in v. 7. [The aorist is used as the authori- 
 tative imperative in 2 Tim. i. 8, 14, ii. 3, 15, &c. A.] : of. Winer tr. p. 
 393 foil. 
 
 dSc\if>o{ |jiou.] In the O.T. the word is used of Israelites generally 
 (Lev. XXV. 46, Deut. xv. 3), denoting, as Philo says (Carit. M. 2 p. 
 388), oi /xovov Tov Ik run/ avTbsv <l>vvTa yoviiav aXXa. koX os av dcrTos 17 
 6/;io0uXos -g : so also in N.T. (Acts ii. 29, Rom. ix. 3) ; but here it is 
 more commonly used of the spiritual Israel (Matt, xxiii. 8, xxv. 40, 
 Acts ix. 30, 1 Cor. v. 11), equivalent to the later 'Christians' (see 
 below V. 9 and ii. 15). St. James frequently makes use of this appeal- 
 ing address (ii. 1, 14, iii. 1, 10, 12, v. 12, 19), sometimes without fwv 
 (iv. 11, V. 7, 9, 10), sometimes with the addition of ayawr^ot (i. 16, 19, 
 ii. 5). The simple aSeX.(jioi is the most frequent in St. Paul's epistles. 
 In the two epistles of St. Peter and the other catholic epistles ayainjToi 
 is often used by itself. 
 
 ■ir€ipao-|j.ois.] Here used of outward trial, as in the parallel passage in 
 1 Pet. i. 6 iv <h ayaWiacrBe, oXiyov apri ei Seoi' XvirrjOevrei iv ttoikiXok ireipafy- 
 p.oli, iva TO SoKiiJ,Lov vfji,o)v rrjs TricrTeois ■ . . evpeOrj £ts eTraivov k.t.X. The inner 
 trial (temptation) is expressed below (v. 13) by the verb Tretpa^to. Dr. 
 Hatch (Essays in Biblical Greek, p. 71 foil.) seems to me to restrict the 
 sense too much to one kind of trial, viz. affliction. Riches, as we see 
 from ver. 10 and 1 Tim. vi. 9, are as much a ■jreipaa-fios as poverty ; and 
 the temptation of Christ in the wilderness (Luke iv. 13) was not an 
 appeal to fear but rather to hope and desire. See Comment on 
 Temptation. 
 
 irepwr^ort]T€.] The word brings out the externality of the temptation 
 in opposition to the internal temptation arising from ISla IttiOvixm (v. 14). 
 Cf. Luke X. 30 Xiytrrats ■jreptWco-cv,. Plato Legg. ix. 877 C. tt. crv/ic^opars, 
 M. Ant. ii. 11 rots p-iv Kar dX^^ctav Ka/cois iva p,rj Trepnriin-rj 6 av6po>Troi, 
 iir' aiT(3 ro ttoLv WiVTo. Heisen gives many examples. 
 
 iroiKiXois.] Also used of diseases and lusts (2 Tim. iii. 6, Matt. iv. 
 24), to which answers irotxtXij x°-P'-'^ ®eov (1 Pet. iv. 10). It is a common 
 word in Philo. For examples of various trials see 2 Cor. vi. 4, 5, xi. 
 23 foil. 
 
 3. yivda-Kovm,] In iii. 1, as in Rom. v. 3, we have the more usual 
 6i8oTes, but yiv. is found Rom. vi. 6, Heb. x. 34, 2 Pet. i. 20, ib. iii. 3. 
 Bishop Lightfoot thus distinguishes them (Gal. iv. 9) : "whilst olSa, 'I 
 know,' refers to the knowledge of facts absolutely, yivtoa-Kw, ' I recog- 
 nize,' being relative, gives prominence either to the attainment or the 
 manifestation of knowledge." It may be questioned however whether 
 fine distinctions of this sort were always observed in the Hellenistic 
 use. 
 
 tJi 8ok£hiov vjifiv Tfjs Tr£<rT£ws,] On the order of the words, which is the 
 
I 3] NOTES 33 
 
 same in 1 Pet. i. 6 quoted above, see below ver. 5 and the Essay on 
 Grammar and Style.^ AoKi/itov is here the instrument or means by which 
 a man is tested (SoKi/ia^erat) and proved (8dKi/*os), as in Prov. xxvii. 21 
 SoKi/iiov apyvpiw kol XP^f? ^vpuxrn, avrjp 8k SoKip-d^erai Sio, trTo/ioTos iyKW- 
 fiia^ovTUiv avTov, Hei'odian ii. 10. 12 SoKifiiov crTpaTUDToiv (ca/xaTos 
 (Wetst.), Plut. Mor. p. 230 r]payn]crev el SoKLfjuov €)(£i tivl rpoTrta irttpa^cTai 
 o 7roA.iji^tXos...dTi;;^ia, ehrev. The word Soki/jlt^ is used in the same sense 
 by St. Paul 2 Cor. viii. 2 iv voXXy Soki/j.'^ OXlij/iia? ij irepto-creta t^s X'^P°'^^ 
 avrSiv K.T.X., ib. xiii. 3, but in BiOm. v. 4 it is used of the result of 
 endurance, tried and proved virtue, much as Soki/jllov in 1 Pet. i. 6. It 
 is assumed here that Treipaa-fios is the 8oKtp,iov Trtb-Tcios. Compare with 
 the whole passage Sir. ii. 1 foil, et Trpoa-ipxg hovX^veiv Kvpia tTot/xao-oi/ 
 TYjV ij/v)(^v crov CIS irei,pacriA,6v evOvvov ttjv KapSiav crov Koi Kapript^trov . . .irav o 
 tav lira^dfj croi Sefai koX iv aWdy/xacn TaTreivwcreuis (tov p.aKpo6vfx.iq(rov otl iv 
 TTvpX SoKt/iafcrat ^pixros (cat a.v6pa>Troi, SeKTol iv Ka/jLivio Tairetvuo-eo)?. ttio-tcv- 
 (70V avTw KOI avn\i^\j/eTai cov, Luke viii. 13 ovtoi pitp-v ovk €)(Ov<tiv ot wpos 
 Kaipov TTLo^TevovcTiv Kol iv KaipS Trepacr/jiov aij)i<TTavTai...TO Se iv rrj KaX.yj yfj 
 ovToi, oiTive'S...Tbv Xoyov KaTCxovcnv Koi Kapiro^opovfnv iv mrofiov^. Seneca 
 insists much on the use of adversity, Prov. 2. 2 omnia adversa exercifa- 
 tiones putet vir fortis; ib. 6 patrium deus liahet adversus bonos viros 
 animum et illos fortiter amat ; ' operihus,^ inquit, ' doloribus, da/mnis 
 exagitentur ut verirni colligant rohv/r.' Just below (3. 3) he quotes from 
 Demetrius nihil mAhi videiur infelicius eo cui nihil umquam evenit 
 adversi, non licuit enim se experiri. There is a reminiscence of the text 
 in Hermas Vis. iv. 3 &cnrep to ^vctlov SoKi/xd^eTai. . .ovtio^ kol v/jLeii SoKi/xd- 
 ^eirOe ol /carotKovvTCS iv avrio (t(o k6(TII.(oj. o'l ovv /icivavTes koX TrvpiaOivTei 
 VK avTov Ka6apicr6T^<Te<T6e. 
 
 TT)s irCo-rttts.] That St. James no less than St. Paul regarded faith as 
 the very foundation of religion is evident from this verse as well as 
 from verse 6, ii. 1, v. 15. See Comment on Faith below. 
 
 KwrepyiUrai.] An emphatic form of ipyd^erai, ' works out,' often 
 found in the epistle to the Romans ; cf. especially v. 3 17 6X.i{j/is viroiJi.ovrj[v 
 Karepyd^eTai, and see below on KaraKavxacrBe in. 14. The simple verb is 
 similarly used below i. 20, ii. 9 dpMpnav ipydt^ea-de.^ 
 
 imo^ovl\v.] Used (1) for the act of endurance (2 Cor. i. 6, vi. 4), and 
 (2) for the temper of endurance, as here and in the parallel passages 
 Eom. V. 3 and 2 Thess. i. 4. The verb is found below, ver. 12, Matt, 
 xxiv. 13 uTTO/tetVas tk reXos croiOi^a-erai, E,om. xii. 12 rij iXmSi xaipovTt^, 
 Tfi OXiij/ei, iiro/x.ei'ovTes, rrj TTpocrevyJQ Trpoa-KaprepovvTti (where we find joy, 
 endurance and prayer joined as in the text), Didach6 xvi. 5 ot viro/iet- 
 mvres iv ry Tria-TU avrSiv aro>6iQ<TovTai. It corresponds generally to 
 the Aristotelian Kaprepia (cf. Heb. xi. 27 tov yap doparav o)s bpZv exap- 
 Tepri<T€v) and to the Latin patientia, thus defined by Cic. Invent, ii. 54. 
 163 patientia est honestatis aut utilitatis causa rervrni a/rdvm-wm ac ddffi- 
 cilium voluntaria ac diutwma perpessio ; but its distinctively Christian 
 
 1 Bp. J. Wordsworth (_8tud,. Bibl. p. 137) thinks t?s iriaTfus may possibly be a 
 gloss from St. Peter, rightly omitted by Corb. 
 
 " [The simple and compound forms are used together in Eom. ii. 9, 16, and 2 Cor. 
 vii. 10. A.] 
 
 D 
 
34 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 quality is shown in Didymua' comment on Job vi. 5 quoted by Suicer 
 ovK avaiddr^ov elvai Sci tov hUaiov kov Kaprepu>'S <f>ipxi '''"■ OXi^ovra- avrq 
 yap apirq cortv, orav aiaOrjo-LV tS)V iTrnrovoiV Be)(6p.tv6i Tis virip<j>povy ruiv 
 aXyrj^ovoiv hia. tov Oedv. Plut. {Cons, ad Apoll. 117) quotes from Eurip. 
 TO. irpocrirfa-ovTa 8' ocrTts e£ <^€p€i /SporZv, apurTOi elvai croxftpovelv re p,oi 
 SoKct. Philo (Cong. Ervd. Grat. M. 1. 524), followed by Chrysostom 
 (ap. Suic. S.V.), calls vTro/xovQ the queen of virtues, and says it is typified 
 by Rebecca. Bp. LightfOot distinguishes it from ij.aKpo6v/ji,ia (Col. i. 12) : 
 see below on v. 7. 
 
 4. if Sk virojiov/j.] See note on x«P"> ver. 2. 
 
 ip-^ov T^Xeiov i\iT(a.] ' Let it have its full effect,' ' attain its end.' Alf. 
 translates ' let it have a perfect work,' but tliis does not quite repre- 
 sent the force of the original, which in colloquial English would be 
 rather ' make a complete job of it ' = TeA.£(os ivepyeino. In classical 
 Greek we should probably have had to ipyov, but the omission of the 
 article emphasizes the first point, that endurance shall be active not 
 passive, as well as the second, that its activity shall not cease till it has 
 accomplished its end. Of. for the thought irapOt/itiVas below ver. 25, Heb. 
 X. 36, xii. 1 foil. St' vwop.ovrj'i Tp€^(i>//.€V TOV TTpoKei/j.iVOV rjiuv aySn/a, v. 5 
 Iva p.rj Kd/ji,rjT€ rats i/'j;;^ats vptSiv iKXvofJieyoL k.t.X., Clem. Al. Sir. 4. p. 570 
 P. TeXeicucrtv to p.apTvpiov KaXov/xev oti T€X.eiov epyov ayairqi; ivcSet^aro. 
 
 TtXeioi.] Not 'perfect' in the strict sense of the term, since iroXXci 
 ■jri-aio/iev airai/res (below iii. 2), though all are bidden to aim at perfection, 
 (Matt. V. 48, Eph. iii. 19). The word occurs again below iii. 2. It 
 is used of animals which are full grown (cf. Herod, i. 83, where to. 
 TcXia Tuiv ■7rpo/3a.Tiov are opposed to ya\a$r]vd, Thiic. v. 47), and hence in 
 this and other passages of Christians who have attained maturity of 
 character nnd understanding (Phil. iii. 15, where see Lightfoot's note, 
 Col. i. 28, iv. 12, esp. 1 Cor. xiv. 20, Heb. v. 12-14). Thus it be- 
 comes almost synonymous with •jrvcu/xariKos and yi/wo-TtKos.^ Philo con- 
 trasts it with do-KTjTtKos and ttpokotttuiv M. 1. p. 551 xoiaBra V(j}rjyuTai roi 
 a.(TKrjTi.Kii rj virop.ovyj, 552 tov acrKT/jTiKov Tpoirov, koX viov irapa. tov TeK^uov, koX 
 <jit\ias a^tov €ii/at Tid^jxev, 169 at TcXetat aperaX p.6vov tov TfXciov KT'^fiara, 
 582, 689 : cf. the Stoic use (Stob. Eel. ii. 198) iravTa 8k tov koXov koi 
 ayaOov avSpa TiXeiov cTvat XeyoixTt Sta to /XT/Sc/itSs a.Tro\air(.(r0aL apervj's. 
 The word apTtos is used in the same sense in 2 Tim. iii. 17 "va 
 ajOTtos i) o TOV ®eov avdpbnro'; irpos Trai/ Ipyov ayadov e^pTUTfievoi, cf. 1 Pet. 
 V. 10 6 St ®e6's...dXiyov Tra^dvras avTO'S KaTapTia-ai i/tas. In Heb. ii. 10 
 Christ liim.self is said to have been made perfect thiough sufferings. 
 The word rcActos is often used by later writers of the baptized, 
 as by Clem. Al. I'aed. i. 6. p. 113 P. avayfwrjdivTe^ ivdita% to t4Kuov 
 aTr(L\-^<j)aiJLev i(j>u)TicrOyjiJL(V yap' to 8c ^ortv cirtyvaii'at ®e6v. ovkovv aTeXr/^ 
 6 iyv<DKU)<; to TeKuov. 
 
 oXdK\r)poi.] Omnibus numeris absoluti. Used of a victim which is 
 without blemish, complete in nil its parts {integer), Jos. Aoit. Jud. 
 iii. 12. 2 TO, Upiia 6vovcri.v oXoKXijpa kol KaTo. firjSiv XeXo)^i;/ieVa, also of 
 the priest Philo M. 2. p. 225 iravrtX^ Koi 6\6kX.7jpov etmt tov Upea irpotr- 
 
 ' [See 1 Chron. xxv 8 reArlaiv koI iJ,avBavii>Tuv, where it nieans 'teachers.' A.] 
 
1 4, 5] NOTES 35 
 
 TCTOKTai, of the initiated Plato Phaedr. 250. 'OXoKXijpia is used of the 
 lame man who was healed, Acts iii. 16. Hence, metaphorically, Philo 
 M. 1. 190 TO, 8 aX\a, o(ra }pvyy]V o\nKki)pov Kara, iravra to, fj,i\T] irape^^erai, 
 6\oKavTovv ®£<3, ib, M. 2. p. 265 Set tov /AeXXovra Bveiv tTKeTTTeadai, iir] el 
 TO tepeiov a.fi,(afJ.ov, dXX' el ij Stai'ota okoKkrjpo^ avrw Koi 7ravT£A,jjs Ka6i(TTrjKe, 
 Herm. Mand. v. 2. 3 irib-Tis oXdicXijpos, Polyb. 18. 28. 9 cwKXeia oXd/cXrypos, 
 Wisd. XV. 3 TO yap iwicTTaa'OaL <t€ oXokXi/joos StKaioo-wiy, 1 Thess. v. 23. 
 It is often joined with reXetos, as in Plijt. Mor. p. 1066 F. reKeiov ck 
 TovTwv Koi oXokXijpov (Zoi'TO oTD/iTrXrjpow (Stov, and in Philo. See on both 
 words Heisen pp. 299-371. In this passage it would be contrasted 
 with a partial keeping of the law such as we read of in ii. 9, 10. 
 
 «v |jiT|Sevl Xci.ir(S|uvoi.] The preceding positive expression (oXd/cXrjpos) is 
 supported by the corresponding negative, as in ver. 6 iv Trto-rct p,r]Skv 
 8«iKpivd/i€vos. The only passages in the N.T. where the passive is used 
 (as in Plato Legg. 9. 881 B 8ei ras iv6a.8e KoXao-cts /aijScv tSv iv AlSov Xct- 
 -TreuOai.) are this and the following verse and ii. 15. Strictly it means 
 ' being left behind by another.' It is used with the gen. both of person 
 and thing, rarely of both together. More usually the thing is expressed 
 by the dat. or ace, or with a preposition, tts ri, Kara, ti, Trpds ri, Iv tivi. 
 The active occurs with much the same sense in classical Greek, Arist. 
 Gen. An. iv. 1. 36 o! eivovxoL fiiKpov XeiWovo-t tov 6-qXeo^ T-qv ihiav (' fall 
 short of '), and is also used of the thing with dat. of the person, Luke 
 xviii. 22 hi croi Xera-et ('is lacking'). We may compare 1 Cor. 7 ix,rj 
 vo-repeLcrOai iv firjSivl xap^cfiari. MrjSevl is- required as it is a negative 
 in a final clause, cf. Phil. iii. 9 iVa Xpto-Tov xepS^o-w.-.p,^ ep^wv c/i^v 
 SiKaiocrvvrjv, and Winer, p. 598. 
 
 There is a close resemblance between the scale here given of Chris- 
 tian growth and that in Rom. v. 4. After speaking of the Christian 
 exulting {Kavx<i>i'-e6a ver. 9 below) in the hope of the ^lory of God, 
 nay even iv rah OXtij/ecnv, St. Paul continues eiSoTts on rj OXo^i's { = to 
 ' SoKi/jLiov rij'i iri'o-Tetos or Treipacrfjioi here) VTroit,ov-qv Karepyd^iTaL. These two 
 stages may b* considered the same as those given here : but the third 
 seems inconsistent. Here endurance leads to the perfection of the 
 Christian character ; there the words rj Se vwop,ovij Soki/xi^v apparently 
 reverse the first step of St. James. The word hoKip.-!] however is not 
 there used in the same sense as our SoKtfiiov, of which it is rather the 
 result ; and this, the tried and tested character, is not very different 
 from St. James' ' perfection,' of which we may consider the two 
 following stages in St. Paul (^ Sc Soki/jlt] iXmSa, r/ Se eXirt? ov Karaia- 
 X^vei, oTt rj aydirri tov ®cov iKKexvTai) to be marks or elements. There is 
 a similar chain, including wo/uoi/^, in 2 Pet. i. 5 foil., where however 
 there seems no attempt to give a natural or chronological order. 
 
 5. ei 8^ Tis Xefirerai (ro<|>tas.] The preceding XtiTrdp.ti'oi is caught up like' 
 TcXcios and vTroiiovq before. The thought omitted is thus supplied by 
 Bede : gi quis veslrvmi non potest intellegere utilitatem tentatiomi/m quae 
 fidelibus prohandi causa eveniunt, postulet a Deo trihui sibi sensuni quo 
 dignoscere valeat quanta pietate Pater castigat filios (' how am I to see 
 trial in this light, and make this use of it? it needs a higher wisdom '). 
 The ideas of wisdom and perfection are often joined, as in 1 Cor. ii. 7 
 
 d2 
 
36 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 cro^iav XaXovfi.iv ev toTs reXetoiS, Col. i. 28 SiSda-KovTK Travra av6po>Trov 
 iv Trdcrr] (rot^iq, iVa Tra,pacrTri(TU>ii,a' iravTa avOpunrov TcXctov ev XpicTcu, 
 Wisd. ix. 6 Kov yap Tts -g reXeios ev viol's dvOpdiroiV Trjs airo crov cro<^ias 
 aTTou'cnys eis ouSev XoyiardrjcreTat. Hence Eulogius (Jl. 590 A.D.), quoted by 
 Heisen p. 377, speaks of ij TcXetoTroios o-o^ia ^eov. On the true nature of 
 wisdom see below iii. 13. To St. James, as to the writer of the book of 
 Job (where the necessity of wisdom to understand the use of trial is much 
 insisted on) and of the other sapiential books, wisdom is ' the principal 
 thing,' to which he gives the same prominence as St. Paul to faith, St. 
 John to love, St. Peter to hope. Not that wisdom is neglected in the 
 other books of the N.T. : cf. Luke ii. 40, vii. 35, xi. 49, 1 Cor. i. 17 
 foil, (where true and false wisdom are contrasted). Col. i. 9 airou/ievoi 
 iva 7r\7]p<iOrjT£ ttjv eTrtyviotriv Tov OiKrjp.aTO's avrov ev Trdcrr] crocjiia Koi (rwecrei 
 irvevp.a.TiK'^, where see Lightfoot's note, Eph. i. 17 Iva 6 ®£os Sm; vplv 
 ■irvivjxa o"0(^tas /cai aTTOKaXvij/ecoi iv eTnyviixru avrov, •m^uiTi.a'p.ivov^ tovs 
 6tj>0aXiJ,ovi ttJs KapSiai eis to ciSevai vfiM Tii i<TTiv fj JXttIs t^s kX'^o-ccos 
 aiiTov, Tts o ttXovto^ t^s Sofijs r^s Kkrfpovop.l.a's k.t.\., which may serve as 
 a commentary on the whole of this passage, esp. on vers. 10 and 12. 
 The prayer for wisdom takes a more definitely Christian form in St. 
 Paul's prayer for the Spirit. Compare Plut. Mor. 351 0. Travra ph/ 
 Set rdyaSa tovs vovv €)(0VTai aiTcTo-^at -rrapa twv OeSiv' pAkurra Se r^s Trepi 
 avTuiv hruTTrip,7]<s, oaov icfiiKTov icrriv avOpdtirois, p^cTiovres ev)(6p,e$a Tvy)(dvav 
 Trap' avTiov iKtivoiv, o)S ouSev dvOpw'Trio XaySetv putpv, ov ^apitraaOai ©eu 
 crtpbvorepov dXij^etas. 
 
 alTcCrci) irapol tov SiSovtos ©eoO iracriv dirXws.] The great example is 
 Solomon : cf. 1 Kings iii. 9-12, Prov. ii. 3, Wisdom vii. 7 foil., ix. 4 
 foil., Sir. i. 1 foil., Ii. 13 foil., Barnabas xxi. 5 o ©eos Swij vp-tv cro^tav cv 
 vTTopovfj, below iii. 17 -ij avmOev o-oi^ia. The more natural order of the 
 words would have been Trapa tov TrScrtv dirXSs 8. ©., or with article 
 repeated ir. toB ©eoO, tov it. a. StSdvTos : cf. for the hyperbaton 2 Pet. iii. 
 2 p,vq(r6rp/ai twv ■/rpouprip.ivusv prjpdTiov inro twv dyiwv irpo<^TjT(i)v, Acts XXVI. 
 6 eTr' eXirtSt t^s eis Totis rraTepa's rjpSn> eTrayyeXtas yerop.evijs wo tov ®eo5, 
 Rom. viii. 18 Tr/v p.iXXovo'av Sofav aTroKoXvtjjOrjvaL €ts ripas, Matt. XXV. 34 
 Tijv fiToipaa-pevriv vplv /SamXeCav (XTro KaTa/JoX^s Kocrpov. We occasionally 
 find the same thing in classical authors, when the qualifying clause 
 between the article and substantive is itself further quab'fied or supple- 
 mented, as by a prepositional phrase (Xen. Anah. vi. 6. 19 6 a.<ftaipiOeh 
 dvrjp vTrb 'Ayacrtov, Thuc. i. 18 ptTo. ttjv tSv Tvpdvvwv KaToXva-iv ck t^s 
 'BXXctSos, see Krueger 50. 9, n. 8, 9 ; 10. 1, 2, 3), or by the object (Deni. 
 Cor. 301 o KaTeiKrjcjiw's KtVSvvos t^v irdXtv, Epict. Diss. i. 1 xP'JO'tik''? Sw^/tis 
 Tats (^avTatrtais. Here the unusual position gives a special prominence 
 to Tracriv d.7rXSs. 
 
 There are two ways in which dirXw's (only here in N.T.) is taken, (1) 
 in a logical sense, ' simply,' unconditionally,' ' without bargaining,' 
 which may be said most truly of Him who makes his sun to rise on the 
 evil and the good (Matt. v. 45) : cf. Herm. Mand. ii. 4 TrScrtv iorcpov/iei/ois 
 StSou aTrXSs, p,ri SiaTa^wv TiVt SftJs 17 TiVi pyj 8(3s, Tracriv SiSov, and again im- 
 mediately below aTrXGs is explained by pr]6ev SioKptvcov : (2) in' a moral 
 sense, ' generously.' The latter is more in accordance with the use of 
 
1 5, 6] NOTES 37 
 
 d7rXoTr7s= 'liberality,' which is common ia the N.T., cf. 2 Cor. viii. 2 iv 
 TToWfj ooKifji/rj OX.i\^iis>% y] TrepurcriLa r^s )(apas aurcoi' iTrepi(Tcr€V(rtv ets to ttXov- 
 Tos iTjs airA.OTr;TOS aurSv, IX. 11 ev Travri irAowTt^o/iei/oi eis Trdaav dirkonjTa, 
 ver. 13, Rom. xii. 8 o /icTaStSous ev aTrXorrjTL. This use of dirXoriys seems 
 to come from the idea of frankness and openheartedness belonging to 
 ciTrXovs. There is however no example of the adverb being thus used, and 
 it seems on all accounts better to keep the ordinary sense ' uncondition- 
 ally,' which also contrasts better with the following p,r] ovuSl^ovtos. Cf. 
 Philo Cher, M. 1 p. 161 o ®£os oi TrtoXrjTrjp iirevu>vi^wv to, iavrov KTrip,a,Ta, 
 ocopijTiKos 8e tS>v airavTW, devvdous ^apirtov myycis avd^ifiyv, a.p.oi^fj'S oiiK i<jii,i- 
 /AEVos, Alleg. M. 1 p. 50 tfyiXoBmpoi &>v 6 0eos xapi^erai ra dya^d Tracri, Koi 
 Tois fir] reXfiois foil., ib. p. 251 voOev r-qv <^povr)(Tiu>'i Buj/Zaav SLoivotav eiKos 
 icTTi irX-qpovaOai TrXr\v airo <TO(j>Las OeoB ; Herm. Mand. ii. 4 iraa-Lv o ®eos 
 StSocr^ai deXei ek t5>v iStW S(i)prjp,oiT<x)v, where the context is full of remin- 
 iscences of St. James ; id. Sim. v. 4.3 os dv SoBAos ■g tov ®€ov /cat e^j? rov 
 iS.vpiov lawToB iv rfj Kaphiq, aiTCirai Trap avTOV crvvtcriv Koi Xa/iPdvei. . .o(roi 
 oe dpyol (ctcrtr) tt/dos ttjv evrev^iv eKcivoi SitTTa^ovcriv alrelcrOai irapd tov 
 Kvptou, ib. ix. 2. 6., Sen. Ben. 4. 25 c?i quodcimnque faciunt, in eo quid 
 praeter ipsam, faciendi rationem sequuniur ? Plut. Mor. 63. F, below 
 ver. 17 TrStra Sdcrts dya^i;. 
 
 H'fl oveiSKovTos.] Sir. 41. 22 fiira to Sow/at p,rj dvetSt^e, 18. 17 p.iapo'S 
 axapicTTO)? ovEiSiei, Koi Sdcrts jScutkovov iKTrjKU ofjiOaX/jLOvs, 20. 13 foil. Sam's 
 d(l>povo£ ov XvcrtTeXiJcret (ye- oXiya Swcret koI ttoXXo, ov£t8icr6t.../A(opos epet. .. 
 ouK €o-Tt x'^P's TOIS dya^ots /".oi;, Herm. Mand. 9. 3 (after speaking of 
 Siij/vxio-) bvK eo-Ti ydp 6 ®tos As ot avdpwTroi ol p^vrjcriKaKovvTCs, dXX' airos 
 apMyjCTiKaKOi k(TTi, Sim. 9. 23 6 ®eos ov p-vrjO'iKaKCi tois l^ojxoXoyovfi.ivoi'i Tois 
 afiapTias, aXX' (Aeojs yiverai, Sim. 9. 24 TravTt avOpixnria e^op'^ijcrav dvovct- 
 Sio-TMs Ktti dSio-TciKTws. So Philemon (Mein. /r. irec. 18. p. 401) koXwi 
 iroi-qaras ov Ka\oJs covetSto'as' epyov KaOslXes TrXovcriov 7rT0)X<? Xoyo), Kai;x<"- 
 /Acros TO Swpov 8e'8<0Kas <^tA,o), Dem. Cor. 316 to tois iSt'as euepyco-ias 
 vTroii.ifi.vq<TKuv . ../jLLKpov Seiv ofioiov ecTTt Tu ovetSi^eiv, Polyb. ix. 31. 4, xxxviii. 
 4. 11 6va8«ras ets dxa.puTTi.av, Plant. Amph. prol. 41 raam 5mc? eg^o 
 memorem, ut alios in, tragoediis vidi, Neptunum, Virtutem, Victoriam, 
 Mwrtrnn, Bellona/m, commemorare quae bona nobis /ecissent...sed m,os 
 numquam, illifuit patri meo optumo ut exprobraret quod bonis faceret 
 boni, Ter. Andr. i. 1. 17 istaec commemoratio quasi exprobratio 
 est immemori benefici, Cic. Lael. 71, Sen. Sen. ii. 11, Plut. Adul ii. 
 64. A. irSaa oveLSt^ofiivt] X"P'5 e^ax^^s Koi dxapis. The thought 
 expressed is similar to that in Matt. xii. 20 (Isa. xlii. 1), and is. 
 intended to encourage those who were tempted to regard their trials as 
 a sign of God's displeasure for their sin. It is not meant that God never 
 upbraids (see Mark xvi. 14 (ovetSwrev Trjv diria-Tiav avruiv, Const. Apost. 
 vii. 24 ' prepare yourselves for worship ' "va fif] dvaftus i/iSv tov HaTepa 
 KaXovvTiav 6veiSi<r6^T£ vir avrov), but that where there is sincere repent- 
 ance He freely gives and forgives whatever may have been the past sin. 
 
 SoO'/io-eToi.] Sc. TO atToijjuevov. The same words in Matt. vii. 7 atTciTe 
 Koi So6-qa-eTai viuv :' cf. below ver. 17, also Clem. E. 13 and Polyc. 
 FhU. 2. 
 
 6. alrilTu ii ivKCa-Ta,] Again catching up the preceding verb. Cf . e^x^ 
 
38 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 TJJs TTia-Tetji'i below v. 15, and for air. iv. 3, where also there is a limita- 
 tion on the prayer which is sure of an answer. For the meaning of 
 TTto-Tts see Comment and Gfrbrer Philo, p. 452 foil. 
 
 (j,r|Siv 8iaKpiv<J(jievos.] The simple sense of the active is to 'divide,' 
 often contrasted, as in Plato and Aristotle, with crvyKpiveiv : so in the 
 system of Empedocles (Diels p. 478) to. crTOL)(eia Trore fi,ev vtto Trjg <^t\tas 
 (TvyKpLv6fi,ei/a, Trore Se inro tov vecKovs SiaKpivofJLeva k.t.X. In 1 Cor. iv. 
 7 (tis o-e SiaKpivei;) it means to separate from others as superior. 
 Similarly in the passive, as Philo M. I. p. 584 (a veil is interposed) 
 oTTcos SiaKpivrp-ai tSiv eicro) to, efo). Hence it is used of quarrelling, Herod. 
 9. 58 fiaxg Sia/cpt^jjrai Trpos riva, Acts xi. 2 BuKpivovro Trpos avrov \e.yov- 
 TEs ('disputed'), Jude 9 tu 8ia/3dXo> SiaKptj/o/x.evos, and in ver. 23 ikeyxere 
 SiaKpivofievovs (Alf.), Jerem. xv. 10 SiKa^o/Jievov /cat SiaKpivo/ievov irda-g rg 
 yy, Ezek. XX. 35, 36 8taKpi5^o-o/tat irpos ('I will plead, contend, with you ') 
 ov Tpoirov hnKpiQ-qv Trpos Toiis iraTepas vfiZv. In the N.T. it is frequently 
 used of internal division, like Siafji,epitoiJi,ai (Luke xi. 18 icj) iavrov 8te/Ae- 
 pia-Orj, of. Virg. Aen. iv. 285 animum nunc hue cehrem mmc dividit illuc) ; 
 and contrasted with faith. Matt. xxi. 21 eai' ^x'?'''' mtrnv koX /j-tj Staxpt- 
 Orjre, Mark xi. 23 oj av et7rri...Kal firj StaKpidy iv Tg KapSiq. aXka TruTTevirr] 
 ...eo-TOi auTM o iav ehrrj, Rom. iv. 20 eh tt/v iirayyekiav tov @eov ov SieKpiOrj 
 TJj (XTricrrta dXX' iveSwaiJi<i)6rj tj; iriarei, below ii. 4 ov SieKpiOriTe iv iavroii ; 
 Acts X. 20 iropevov firjSkv SiaKpivofJi.evo's, Eom. xiv. 23 o Swi.KpLv6fji,evoi iav 
 <f>ayfi KwraKeKpiTai on ovk iK iria-Tems. This use is apparently confined to 
 the N.T. and later Christian writings, e.g. Protev. Jac. 11 p. 216 T. 
 aKovoracra 8e Maptap. hieKpiOr) iv iavrrj \iyauara- el iyui cruXXiji/'op.at, <us 
 irao-a yvvrj yevva. ; Clem. Horn. ii. 40 Trepl rov /xovov ®eov BiaKpiBrjvaL ovk 
 o<^«A,£ts, Socr. IJ.E. iii. 9 SieKpiveTo KOLvoiveZv Eva-e^iio. The act. is also 
 used in the sense of distinguishing, discerno, Matt. xvi. 3, Acts xv. 9 
 ouSev hieKpivev p,eTa^v rjpMV re Koi avrSiv, xi. 12 fir]Sev SiaKptVavra (making 
 no distinction), 1 Cor. xi. 29 p,i] BiaKpivtov to a-S>p.a (not distinguishing 
 the body of Christ from common food), xvi. 29 (discerning of spirits), 
 •so Herm. Hand. ii. 6 quoted on aTrXols : also of deciding (judging) 1 
 Cor. vi. 5 ava. p,e<jov toS aSeX^oB, Ez. xxxiv. 1 7 Trpo^aTov koX TrpojSarow, 
 and with ace. of person 1 Cor. xi. 31, as in Psa. xlix. 4 SiaKplvai tov 
 Xaw avTov, Prov. xxxi. 9, Zach. iii. 7.^ The force of the word here 
 may be illustrated by iv. 4 below and by Matt. vi. 24. Hermas para- 
 phrases it by aiToS dStcTTaKTtos Mand. ix., a passage full of reminiscences 
 of St. James. Mr;8eV is required by the imperative, see Winer, p. 598. 
 
 ^ Hofmann, followed by Erdmann, explains SiaKpn/oiaevos here as middle, ' sicli bei 
 sich selbst in Bezug auf etwas fraglich stellou,' and supports this by a reference to 
 4 Maco. 2 (it should be i. 14) Siaxplvunev Se t( 4(rTiv Koyiajihs Koi t1 irdBos, where 
 however Sm/c. has nothing to do with questioning, but means simply ' let us dis- 
 tinguish.' Dr. Abbott also would prefer to take it as a middle, comparing such cases 
 as Eur. Med. 609 its oh Kpwovnai TuvSi croi rk Tr\eioi'a ' I will debate the matter no 
 further,' Arist. Mib. -rim iiXv olv iKpiv6iJiiff (of. the Latin cemcre hollo) ; and he 
 thinks SieicplBri may be used with a middle force, like oir6icp(e») for SLtrfxplyaro. The 
 idea of self-debate is much the same as that of self-division, and it may well be that 
 the. sense here takes a colour from the secondary, as well as from the primitive force 
 of the verb icpha, but the connexion with the primitive notion ' division ' is, I think, 
 the more important, and liarmonizes better with the word Sixfiuxos, which appears as 
 a syupnym just below. 
 
I 6-8] NOTES a9 
 
 ioMi kXvSuvi..] Like a cork floating on the wave, now carried 
 towards the shore, now away from it ; opposite to those who have ' hope 
 as an anchor of the soul, sure and steadfast, and which entereth 
 within the veil,' Heb. vi. 19. For the figure of. Eph. iv. 14, where 
 we have opposed to the avrjp rekeioi of v. 13, viprioi KXySoivL^o/xevoi Koi 
 TTCpufteponevoi TravTt avi/JLio t^s 8t8a(r/<a\tas, Sir. xxxiii. 2 6 i7roKpifo/x,€vos 
 iv vofiM o)s ei/ KaraiyiSi irXolov. In Isa. Ivii. 20 the sea is used as a 
 type of restlessness, of. Jude 13. For a similar figurative use of 
 the name ' Euripus ' see my note on Cic. iV^. D. iii. 24. So Matt. xi. 7 
 Ka\a[ji,ov iiro avep-ov craXevo/jievov, Virg. Aen. xii. 487 vario nequiquam 
 fluctuat aestu, Hor. Ep. i. 1. 99 aestuat et vitae disoonvenit ordine toto, 
 Seneca Ep. 95. 57 non contingit tranquiUitas nisi immutabile certumque 
 julicium adeptis : ceteri decidunt subinde et reponuntur et inter intermissa 
 appetitaque altemis flucluantwr. KXvhtav is only found in the sing., ef. 
 Luke viii. 24 iireri/j.ria'ev tw avifji,(o /cat t<3 kXvSwvi tov vSaros, and see 
 Essay on Style. The word eo6Ke only here and below ver. 23 in 
 the N.T. 
 
 dv£ji.i.So(i.^v<j>.] = classical avc/Aoo). Perhaps coined by the writer. The 
 only other examples quoted in Thayer are Schol. on Od. xii. 336, 
 Hesych. s.v. dvatj/viaL, Joan. Moschus dve/*t^ovTos tov irXoiov. Heisen 
 notices (p. 441) that St. James has a fondness for verbs in -t^aj, e.g., 
 6i/«ot^a), pnriifo, TrapaXoyi^o/iai, <jiXoyi^(i>, iyyi^to, KaOapitfii, ayvitfo, a^avitii), 
 drja-avpL^oi, depi^ia, (TTrjpi^io, p,aKapltfo. 
 
 pi7n^o)i.Evci>.] From pvirii, ' a fan ' ; most often used of fanning a flame. 
 Only found here in N.T. Of. Philo Ineorr. Mund. M. ii. p. 511 et 
 p,r] Trpos avifninv pnri^oiTO to vSu>p...v(f>' ^crux'as vexpovTai, and a comic 
 fragment in Dio Chr. 32. p. 368 B^/ios ao-raToi/ KaKov, \ /cat daXda-crrf 
 irdvd' ofioLov vir dve/jiov pnrileraL, Aristoph. Ban. 360, Philo Gig. M. 1. 
 p. 269 IStov Tts TOV iv Tats i/'u;^ats o\e/cTov Kat /Sapirv ^unSiva, o<s vtto 
 )8totoTciT»;s <^opas twv Kara jStov irpayp.a.Tuyv avappurit^erai, T€0avjjiaK€v 
 ei/coTOJS et Tts iv kXvSwvi Kvixaivovfrr)^ OaXda'ar]'; yaXi^vrjV ayeiv SwaTat ; 
 Epictetus i. 4. 19 has a similar use of pi,erappimi,e<rOai. 
 
 7. n^ 7op oUVew.] This is the only passage in N.T. where the verb occurs, 
 except oXp-ai John xxi. 25, oio/jbevoi Phil. i. 17. Oii;o-ts is often used in 
 Philo in a bad sense = Sofa, as opposed to iirta-Ti^firj. Fides non opinatwr 
 says Bengel on this passage, echoing the Stoic ju.^ Sofao-eii/ tov <to<j>6v. 
 Tap here, like the preceding, gives the reason for aiTetTo) e'v ttlo-tsl. 
 
 6 AvSpwiros sKetvos.] For e/ceivos simply, as in Mark xiv. 21, Matt, 
 xxvi. 24, and passim. 
 
 Toy Kvpiov.] Here and below iv. 15, v. 10, 11 used of God : of Christ 
 in i. 1, ii. 1 certainly, and v. 8, 14, 15 probably. 
 
 8. avf|p 8£i|ii)xos.] St. James commonly uses dvqp with some cha- 
 racteristic word, as fMiKapioi i. 12, icaTavoaiv i. 23, j^puo-oSa/cTvXtos 
 ii. 2, T€A.€tos iii. 2, keeping avOpunroi for more general expressions, 
 cKEtvos, iros, ouSets, &c. This agrees fairly with the use in the LXX. 
 and Gospels : in the other epistles dvijp is almost exclusively used in 
 opposition to yuv^. Apparently the word Sti/^. (only found here and 
 below iv. 8 in N.T.) is here used for the first time : the thought is 
 found in Psa. xii. 2 ' with a double heart (ev /capSta /cat ev KapSta) do they 
 
40 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 speaki,' 1 Chron. xii. 33, 1 Kings xviii. 21, Sirac, i. 25 /irj airud-qa-g's 
 4>oP^ Kvpt'ou /cat ii,rj Trpoa-iXOyi airu iv KapScq, Suro-iJ, ib. 11. 12 
 oval afiapraiXa i-Tn/SaivoVTi in Svo Tpi^ovs ■ ■ ■ oval v/uv tois o/TroXoiXeKocrL 
 rijv vTTOfiov^v. It is the opposite to Deut. iv. 29 ^ryT^o-ere cxet 
 Kvpiov Toi/ ®eov vfibStv Koi evprja-ere avTov orav e/c^ijTijo-eTe avrov i^ bXtjs 
 Tijs KapSias crov Kai e^ oXi;s riys ij/vy^'s uov iv ttj OXiij/a crov, and to Wisd. 
 i. 1 iv dirXonjTi KapSt'as^ ^ijT^traTe (tov Kvpiov) oti evpia-KeraL Tois /^^ Treipd.- 
 iflvaw avTov, ifjLKJiavi^erai 8e tois ju.!? aTrto-Tottrti/ auTu. St. Paul describes 
 a 8ii/'u;^ta in Rom. vii. : cf. below iv. 4, Philo M. 1. p. 230 ttc^vkc yap o 
 a^pcov, del Trepi tov opObv Xoyov Kivtyip.evo's, ■^ptp.ia /cat dj/aTraiJcret Sx;o-p.£v^s 
 etvat /cat em /ArjSeros icrrdvai Trayitos /cat ipr)p€i(rdai. 8oy/x,aTos, /c.t.X. Though 
 seemingly introduced by St. James, the word was quickly taken up by 
 subsequent writers : it occurs about forty times in Hermas, e.g. Mand. ix. 
 4. 5 foil. aiToO Trapa toS Kuptou /cat aTroK-qxpri Tra.VTa...iav Se Sto-Tcttnys ev t^ 
 /capSta O'er, oiSev oi p.^ X-q^nj tS>v aiTrnidTWV (tov- oi yap StCTTd^ovTes, oStoi 
 eicrti/ 01 Siij/vxpL. . .TTcis yap Si>j/v^oi avrjp iav fur] /JLeravoi^crri SvctkoXui^ (TU>6r](T€- 
 rat : the whole chapter is a comment on our text, and full of reminis- 
 cences of this epistle ; thus ■q tticttk avioOiv cctti Trapa tov K.vpiov /cat f)(ei- 
 hvva.[i,iv /xeydXrjV tj he. Si>pv)^ia iiriyeLOV wvivp-d icrri irapa tov Sia/BoXav, 
 Svva[ji,iv firj €)(ovaa is an echo of James iii. 15 ; ovk (.(tti yap 6 ®eos ois oi 
 av6p<oiroi ot /iviycrocoKOi/vTes reminds one of /jlyj ovetSt^ovTos just above. In 
 the space of thirty lines we find fifteen instances of the use of Siij^vxos 
 and its derivatives. So Clem. Rom. i. c. 11 (Lot's wife is a warning) 
 oTt ot 8ti/'u;(0t /cat ot StcrTtifoKTes Trept t^s tov ©eoC Svva/;tEO)s ets /cptp.a... 
 ylvovTai, 23 (the Father bestows his favour on all that come to him) 
 aTrXij Siavoio,- Sib p.^ Sitj/v^w/Jiev . . .iroppo) yei/ecr^co dcj>' yip.Siv fj ypac^'^ auTi; 
 OTToi; Xeyet TaXaiirmpoc^ elcnv ot Siij/v)(OL, ot Sio-Tcifoi'Tes t^v ij/v)(r]v k.t.X., 
 Clem. Rom. ii. 11 p.'^ Snj/vxS>iJi,ev aXXa eXiritravres iTropetVtopev, ib. 19 p'^ 
 dyavaKTcofiev oi a(ro<j>oi (cf. XetTrcTat croc^tas above) orav Tts ^pSs voiifleT^... 
 ivLOTC yap irovqpb. Trpdo'O'ovTes oi ywiiuTKOiXiV Sia T-qv SLij/v)(lav Koi aTTUTTiav, 
 Clem. Al. Strom, i. 29 § 181 (quoting Hermas), Didache iv. 4 oi Sti/'vx'?- 
 o-ets iroTcpov eo-Tat rj ov, repeated by Barnabas xix. 5, and in Const. Apost, 
 vii. 11, with the addition iv rjj Trpoa-evxu a-ov...Xiya yap 6 Kvpios epoi 
 XleTpo) eirt t^s 6aXd(T(Trji 'OXtyoTrtcrTe ets Tt eStcrTacras ; Can. Eccl. 13, Act. 
 Philip, in Hell. p. 99 Tisch. ot mb tiJs Trto-Teios i(TTrjpiyp,evoi ovk eSti/ru^rj- 
 o-av, Enoch xci. 4 (Dillmann tr. p. 65) ' be not companions of those who 
 are of a double heart.' Similar phrases are St^dvota Clem. Horn, 
 i. 11, StirXoKapSia Didach6 v. 1, Barn. xx. 1, 8tyv<»p.ci)v Barn. xix. 7, 
 Uyviop.0% Const. Ap. ii. 6, 21, 8t7rpo'o-tu7ros Test. Ash. iii. p. 691, 
 StxdvoDs eirap.^oTepto-T'^s o 3.<j)pwv Philo frag. M. 2. p. 663, SiXoyos 1 Tim. 
 iii. 8, SiyXbia-a-o's, Sir. v. 9. For classical parallels cf. Xen. Cyr. vi. 1. 
 
 41 8i;o yap, 'i(j>ri, (ra<l>S)'s €X<a \jn))(di...ov yap 8^ pta ye ovo-a apa dyaflif tI eo-Tt 
 Kat KaKij, ov8' dfia koXSiv Te /cat ai(T)(pS)v epyiav ip^ /cat rawa dpa /SovXerat 
 re /cat oi ^ovXeTUi TrpdrTctv, Plato Bep. 8. 554 D (of the oligarchical man) 
 OVK ap' av ill] dcTTao-tatTTOs 6 toiovto% iv kavrm oiSe els, dXXa 8tirXoSs Tts, and 
 
 ' See Taylor's Gospel in the Law, p. 836 foil. ; lie considers that St. James here 
 quotes from Prov. xxi. 8. ^ The phrase occurs also Eph. vi. 5, Col. iii. 22. 
 
 ' The quotation is from an apocryphal writing, supposed hy Lightfoot to be ' Eldad 
 and Modad,' by Hilgenfeld to oe the ,' Assumption of Moses.' 
 
I 8, 9] NOTES 41 
 
 still more the tyrannical man 588 foil., Epict. Ench. 29. 7 tva a-e 8ei 
 avOptaTTov ^ ayaObv ^ Kaxov cTvai. De Wette quotes Tanchuma on Deut. 
 xxvi. 16 ' with all thy heart,' iVis habeant (quipreces ad deum/acere velint) 
 duo corda, unwm ad dewm, alterum vero ad aliani rem directum. 
 
 WH. make av. Siij/. subject of X-qfjLt^erai, but I prefer to take it with 
 B (which puts a stop before dv^p), the Peshitto, Wiesinger, Huther, 
 &c., in apposition to the subject of o'Ucrdio, like iii. 2 Swaros x'^Xiva- 
 ytayrja-ai after reXeios avijp, ver. 6 o Kotr/^os r^s aStKt'as after Triip, ver. 8 
 aKaTaa-Tarov KaKou after yX&a-a-av (though here the apposition is 
 irregular, see note), iv. 12 6 8wa/x€vos after /cpir^s. The other way of 
 taking it seems to me to lack the energy of St. James, appealing less 
 directly to the person addressed and weakening the force and rhythm 
 of the following clause. The Vulg., followed by Schneck., Hofmann, 
 Schegg, &c., makes ver. 8 an entire sentence, vir duplex inconstans est ; 
 but, as Alfox'd says, it is hardly possible that the writer could have 
 introduced a hitherto unknown, or at any rate a very unusual word 
 in this casual way; Alford himself makes it a new predicate to 6 
 avOp. cK. ' he is a man with two minds,' but the construction is certainly 
 easier if we take it in apposition to the subject : it will then sum up 
 in one pregnant word the substance of the two preceding verses. 
 
 oKardoTaTos.] Only here and below iii. 8 in N.T. : 'unsettled,' 'un- 
 stable' (cf. ovK t)(ova-i piifxv Mark iv. 17); once in LXX. Isa. liv. 11 
 Ta^etv^ KoX aKwrdtTTaTO's (' tossed with tempest,' A.V. and R.V.) ; Herm. 
 Mand. 2 dicaTao-TaTov Sat/x.ovtoi' : it is used by classical writers, e.g. 
 Dem. F.L. 383 o //.ei' S'^juos ifrriv OAjTaJBii.'iyroTa.TOV irpaypLa tSiv irdvTtav koI 
 &(Tvv6enj>TaT0V , Sxnrep iv 6aXd(T(rrj Kv/xa aKaTdcTaTOV, ws av Tvyrj Kivovjxivov, 
 where see Shilleto; the verb occurs Tob. i. 15 ai oSot rjKaTao-TdTrjcrav 
 (' were disturbed ') koI ovKeri yjhwdirOiqv TropevOfp/ai ets T-qv Ti/lrjSiav, Herm. 
 Momd. 5. 2. 7 d/caTacrTaTet kv Trdarj irpd^u aurov, id. Sim. 6. 3. 5 aKara- 
 crraTovvTES rais PovXal^...\.iyovcTiv kavroi"; //.rj iioSovcrOai, iv rais Trpd^e- 
 aiv avTotv koX.. .aiTiSvrac rov TSjvpiov. ' AKorauTairia, ' unsettlement,' ' rest- 
 lessness,' occurs iii. 16 (where A.V. and E.V. have 'confusion '). It is 
 found also in 1 Cor. xiv. 33 opposed to dprp/-q, and in pi. Luke xxi. 9. 2, 
 Cor. vi. 5, xii. 20 (where A.V. and E,.V. have ' tumults '), Herm. Mand. 
 6. 3- 4 : Poly bins uses it both of political disturbance and of individual 
 character, see iv. 5. 8 t^v d/caTaoratrtav koX /jMviav rov fiupaKiov. 
 
 h iro<rais Tots 68ois.] ' In the whole course of his life' : cf; below Vi 
 20, Rom. iii. 16. It is a Hebraism for iv Tuacri, or diravra. The same 
 comparison of life to a journey is implied in the words ■n-opevop.ai, irtpi- 
 iraTeiv : see Vorst Rebr. p. 194 foil. 
 
 9. Kavxdo-eo).] Repeats the note of iracrav xapdv ver. 2 : it stands first 
 in order to emphasize the opposition to Siij/vxia- Ear from being thus 
 undecided and unsettled, the Christian should exult in his profession. 
 If in low estate, he should glory in the church, where all are brothers 
 and there is no respect of persons ; he should realize his own dignity as 
 a member of Christ, a child of God, an heir of heaven : if rich, he 
 should cease to pride himself on wealth or rank, and rejoice that he 
 has learnt the emptiness of all worldly distinctions and been taught that 
 they are only valuable when they are regarded as a trust to be used 
 
42 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 for the service of God and good of man. Cf. Philo Jos. M. 2. 61 raTret- 
 vo% €1 rats TV)(aii ; dAXa to tfipovqiJM /xij KaTayrnrTerij). Travra trot Kara vow 
 X«)p«; jU.eTttjSoA.'^v evXa/Sov, Sirac. 10. 21 TrXouVios koL IvSofos koI TTTm^ds, 
 TO Kav)(ri/jia avT&v ^oftos Kvplov, Jer. ix. 23 /jltj KavxacrOw 6 (rotjioi ev tjj 
 (Tocjiiq, avTOV . . . Koi jjJrj Ka.v)(a.frBto o irA,oi5<rios ^v r<a ttXouto) avroB, ' but let 
 him tliat glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth 
 mc.saith the Lord,' Rom. i. 16, 1 Pet. iv. 16, 1 Cor. vii. 22 o ev 
 Kupto) /cXiy^Ets SoBAos, anreke.vOipo'i Kvptou €<7Tiv' o/JLOitai Koi 6 i\tv$epo^ kXtj- 
 Oels, SovX.6s etrri Xpurrov, ih. vii. 29, Phil. iv. 12 oiSa raTravovcrBaL, olSa 
 Koi Trepi(r<rev€iv Iv TravTi koX iv iracriv ne/xyrjiMu Koi ■)(opTa.t^i(yda.i koX ireivav, 
 Kal TTtpixTcriviiv KoX i(TT€p€i<T6aL. The word Kav)(. is much used by St. 
 Paul, generally in a good sense : the Christian's boast is in God (Rom. 
 v. 11), in Christ (Rom. xv. 17, 1 Cor. i. 31, 2 Cor. x. 17, Gal. vi. 14, 
 Phil. iii. 3 Kav)(utfi,evoi iv Xpto-TU Irjaov Kal ovk iv crapia. Tren-oiOores), in the 
 hope of salvation (Rom. v. 2) : St. Paul glories in his converts (2 Cor. 
 vii. 14, ix. 2, 3, 2 Thess. i. 4, Phil. ii. 16), in afflictions (Rom. v. 3), 
 ia infirmities (2 Cor. xii. 9) : he apologises for boasting in self-justifi- 
 cation (2 Cor. xi., xii.). There may be a wrong boasting in God and 
 in the law (Rom. ii. 17, 23), a boasting of self-righteousness towards 
 God (Rom. iii. 27, iv. 2, 1 Cor. i. 29, iv. 7), an actual boasting in sin 
 (1 Cor. V. 6), or on the ground of mere carnal advantages (2 Cor. xi. 
 18, Gal. vi. 13). It is used below of blamable self-confidence (iv. 
 
 16)- . . , 
 
 6 d8E\(t>bs 6 Toireivds.] WH. bracket the former 6, which is omitted 
 in B. This would leave no doubt that d.Se\<f>6s was a general term 
 applying to both itXouctios and TaTreivos. Even with the article this is 
 the natural way of taking it. The objections will be considered below. 
 TttTT. here refers to outward condition as in Luke i. 52 KaO^TXe Bwaa-rds 
 . . .v\j/ti>(re Taireirovs, Rom. xii. 16 /jbrj to. i\j/ri\a (jipovovvm aXXa tois Tairci- 
 vois qT)vwjray6fii.evoi, cf. below ii. 5 ; in iv. 6 tott. refers to the character. 
 10. Sc irXouo-ios iv Txi Tttireiviio-ei airoO.] ' Let the rich brother glory in 
 his humiliation as a Christian ' : cf. Sir. 3. 18 oo-w /teyas €1 TooroijT<a 
 TaTTUVov aeavrbv Koi evavTi Kvpiov evp'^crei \a.pLv, 1 Tim. vi. 1 7 charge them 
 who are rich in this world /x,^ v\l/y)Xo<^povdiv /aijSc T^XiriKEvai iiri ttKovtov 
 dSjjXoTijTi, Luke x vi. 15 Tijv dv^pwirois vxprjXov ^Sekvyp-a ivuyiriov rov OeoS, 
 Matt, xviii. 4 oo-tis TaircLVuMTn lauTov...oi)TOs ItTTat o fieC^iov iv ry ySao-iXeia 
 Ta>v ovpavSiv, ih. xxiii. 12, 2 Cor. xi. 7 ip.avTov TairuvSiv Iva i/ieis vi/'ciftjTe, 
 also below iv. 10, Philo M. 1. p. 577 TaTreii/w^i^Tt wo tois ^(ETpas air^s 
 («c. of Sarah = virtue) Ka\i)V TawavuxTiv, <^povijp.aTOs aXoyov KoOaipicriv 
 €xov(rav, Xen. R. Lac. 8. 2 iv r-fj SirdpTj; ot KpdTicrToi...Tw TaTretvol elvai 
 fjicyaXvvovTai. We might understand Taw. with reference to the loss of 
 position, the scorn which one who became a Christian would have to 
 suffer from his unbelieving fellow-countrymen (1 Cor. iv. 10-13); but 
 it seems better to refer it, like vfos above, to the intrinsic effect of 
 Christianity in changing our view of life. As the despised poor learns 
 self-respect, so the proud rich learns self-abasement, cf. Luke xxii. 26 
 6 ^you/icvos <!)s 6 ScaKoviov. Alf., after Bede, Pott, Huther and others, 
 distinguishes 6 irXowVios from 6 dSeXt^ids on the ground (1) that the rich in 
 this epistle are always spoken of in terms of great severity (ii. 6, v.l foil.); 
 
I 9-11] NOTES 43 
 
 (2) that TrapeXivcrerai and fi.apavdr)<TiTai are not appropriate if spoken of 
 a brother. He therefore supplies Kavxarai, not Kavxdo-Oia, after 6 ttXou- 
 crios, with the sense ' whereas the rich man glories in his debasement,' and 
 illustrates it from Phil. iii. 19 &v rj Sofa ev ry ala^vvri avrav. But raTretVu)- 
 cris never bears this sense in the Hellenistic writers. It and its cognates 
 are used either in a good sense morally (as below iv. 6, 10), or of mere out- 
 ward humiliation (as in Luke i. 48 iTre^kexj/iv iTrl ttjv TaTreivaia-iv Tfjs Sou'Xijs 
 avTov, Sir. 2. 5 avOpuyiroi Xcktoi SoKi/xafovTat ev Ka/J,iv<p TamivwcrevK, ih. xi. 13, 
 XX. 10, Psa. cxix. 50, 67, 71, 1 Mace. iii. 51, 2 Sam. xvi. 12, Neh. 
 ix. 9). In the next place such a change of mood in the verb to be 
 supplied is extremely harsh, and I think Alf. stands alone in supposing 
 it possible. Equally impossible is the supposition of Oecumenius, 
 Grotius and others that some such word as ato-p^i/eo-^w or Twireivo-ia-dui 
 should be supplied. However we understand TrXovtrios, no interpreta- 
 tion is admissible which does not supply the imperative KavxdxrOm. 
 Bede, followed by Huther and Beyschlag, has attempted to reconcile 
 this with the idea of tt^owios, as an unbeliever, by giving it a sarcastic 
 force, ' let the rich man, if he will, glory in his degradation.' It must 
 be allowed that such bitterness of sarcasm is not impossible in the 
 writer of ii. 19, iv. 4, v. 1-6 ; but could he so early in his letter, in 
 cold blood so to speak, have thus anathematized the rich as a class, 
 when we know from iv. 13-16 that some of those to whom he writes 
 were wealthy traders ? How could one who had known Nicodemus 
 and Mary of Bethany, Joseph of Arimathaea and Barnabas, have thus 
 denied to the rich the privilege of Christian membership % According 
 to the correct interpretation all that he does is to repeat his Master's 
 warning in Matt. vi. 19 foil., xvi. 26, Mark x. 24, Luke xii. 15-21, 
 xvi. 9-31 ; so St. Paul 1 Cor. vii. 29-31, cf. Herm. Sim. ii. 4 foil. 
 
 8ti a% avBos \6pTov TrapeXevo-cToi.] A quotation (given more fully 
 in 1 Pet. i. 24) from Isa. xl. 6 Tracra trapf ■)(6("'°'^ "<*' Tracra Sofa avOp^irov 
 (i)S avdos )(opTov i^pdvOij 6 \6pTo^ kol to a,vOo% i^tTrecrev : cf . Psa. Ixxxix. 
 6, ciii. 15. It is evident that this is not a special threat intended 
 only for the rich, but a general truth applicable to all, though more 
 likely to be kept out of sight by the rich than by others. ' Let him 
 glory in that which the world holds to be humiliation, but which is 
 indeed the commencement of everlasting glory, because he must soon 
 pass away from earth and leave behind the riches in which he is now 
 tempted to glory.' Pliny N.H. 21.1 has the same comparison, Flores 
 odoresque in diem gignit (natura) magna admonitione hominum, quae 
 spectatissime floreant celerrime marcescere. 
 
 irapEXcvo-cTai.] Used in this sense, as well in common, as in Hellenistic 
 Greek : cf. Mark xiii. 31 6 ovpavoi koL r) yrj TtapeXevcreTai. It is not 
 necessary to understand a new subject TrXoBros from irXova-ios, though it 
 is possible that the equivalent phrase in the LXX. Sofa avOpunrov may 
 have been in the writer's mind ; but the rich man as such, whether 
 believer or unbeliever, must quickly disappear, and, like the flower, lose 
 Tr)v evirpeTTtLav rov irpoiXioTrov- 
 
 11. d,v^TciX6v yap 6 ■fjXios.] Gnomic aorist, as in the original Isa. xl. 7, 
 and below ver. 34, cf. Winer, p. 347 note, Krueger, Gr. § 53. 10. 
 
44 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 o-tiv Tip Ko«o-<i)vi.] It is questioned whether #c. here means 'heat' 
 simply, or a special burning wind blowing from the eastern desert over 
 Palestine and from the south over Egypt. It is used of wind in the 
 following : Jonah iv. 8 iyevero a^a t(3 (ivaT£iA.at rov ^Xlov kcu irpocriTa^ev 
 o 0€os TcvivixaTi Kavauivi, Ezek. xvii. 10 (of a vine) ov)(i afia. tw anj/aarOai 
 avTrj'i avefj-ov rov Kavariova ^pav6r)(T€Ta.i, on which Jerome says Austro 
 Jlaiite qui Graeoe Kava-wv inter pretatur, Bz. xix. 10, Hos. xii. 1, Jer. 
 xviii. 17, Hos. xiii. 15 iird^ei Kavacova avefiov KiJpios Jk ttJ'S iprnxov «V 
 avTov : and the destructive effect of the wind generally on vegetation is 
 referred to Psa. ciii. 16, Gen. xli. 6, Virg. Eel. ii. 58 floribus Austrum 
 iminisi. Prop. iv. 5. 59 vidi ego odorati victura rosa/ria Paesti sub malu- 
 tino cocta jactere noto. There are however passages in which k. seems 
 more naturally understood of heat, e.g. Luke xii. 55 (when ye see) votov 
 TTveovTO. XeytTe on Kavariav co-Tat, Matt. XX. 12 taovs tois PatrToxraixi to 
 ^apos TTJ'S rjiA.epa's Koi tov Kavcruiva, Sirac. 18. 15 ov)(l Kav(rtiiva avarravcret 
 Spdo-os, and Schegg is disposed to take k. always in this sense, except 
 where it is accompanied by ave/xos or Trvev/jta. I think that the addition 
 of the article (Corbey ' cum aestu suo,' Schegg ' its heat,' but in 
 Hellenistic Greek we should have expected tw k. airrov) and the resem- 
 blance to Jonah iv. 8 are in favour of the interpretation ' wind ' here ; so 
 Bp. Middleton On tlie Article p. 422. Compare also Wetzstein's note on 
 Jobxxvii. 21 in Delitzsch'sed.: ' The name Sirocco, by which the E. wind 
 is known, means literally der von Sonnenau/gang her wehende : it is 
 not uncommon in spring, when it withers up all the young vegetation.' 
 Other passages where the meaning of the word is doubtful are Sir. xxxi. 
 16, xliii. 22, Isa. xlix. 10, Judith viii. 3, Athenaeus iii. 2 Kaviruvos 
 <3pci ipvKTiKii>Ta.Toi iJi,eXiX(!>Tivoi (TTetfiavoi. For the metaphor cf. Job xxvii. 
 21 avaX^qif/eTai Se avTOV (the lich) Kavcrwv koX aTTiXivcrerai, ib. xxiv. 24 
 TToXXovs iKaKOicre to vij/(aiJi,a avTOV, ifjMpdvOrj 8e Sxrinp p-oXo^r] Iv Kavpan rj 
 &(nrep crTa,)(vs airo KaXap.i;s auTO/naTos aTroTretrwv, Psa. xxxvii. 2, xcii. 7. 
 
 X<5pTov.] Properly = Aort MS ' inclosure,' then used for a paddock, 
 then for grass and fodder, from whence comes the use of xop^^o/*"" = 
 edo ii. 16. Here we may understand it loosely of wild flowers mixed 
 with grass : cf. Matt. vi. 30. 
 
 el^ireo-e.] Used of flowers falling from the calyx in Isa. xl. 6, xxviii. 
 1, 4, Job xiv. 2, XV. 33 : not found in this sense in classical writers. 
 
 fimpeireui toB irpoo-iiirov avTOv.] ' Grace of its countenance.' cutt. only 
 here in N.T. In Sir. 24. 14 we have exnrpeirij^ iXaia, Psa. 1. 2 ix %i<av ^ 
 evirpe-TTeia T^s wpatoTiyTos avTov, Psa. xcii. 1 eiirpeTreiav c'veSvo-aTO, Aeschin. 
 p. 18 TYjv TOV (TuyfiaTos cvTrpeTToav, Ps. Demosth. 1402, 1404. For thought 
 cf. Matt. vi. 28 foil. Yorst ffell. Lex. p. 342 foil, regards Trpoo-. as a 
 Hebraistic pleonasm : others more correctly take it in the general sense 
 of outward appearance, like /acies. 
 
 & irXoiio-ios.] The rich man qua rich, with no special reference to the 
 rich brother. 
 
 Iv rats iropcCais.] It seems best to take this here in the literal sense, 
 as in the only other passage in which it occurs in the N.T. (Luke xiii. 
 22), referring to the journeyings and voyages of the merchants : cf, 
 below iv. 13 foil. For the redundant amov cf. Winer, p. 179. 
 
I 11, 12] NOTES 45 
 
 (lapavO'^o-crai.] Used On account of preceding simile (here only in 
 N.T.) : cf. Philo M. 2. p. 258 /xijt' iirl itXovtio, /xr/T' Itti 8d|r), fi')J6' rfyeyio- 
 via...(re[x,wv0^i, Xoyttra/ievos oTt...o^£tai' ep^et tyjv fjLeralioXrjV /jLapaivo/JLeva 
 TpoTTov TWO. irplv dv^^crai ;8ej8at<i)s, Pint. ^M. Conv. 674 A avOpiiiirov 
 IkXittovtos Kol fj.apaivoiJ.a'ov, Herm. Vis. iii. 11.2, Sim. ix. 23. 2. 
 
 12. (lUKapios av^p.] See n. on ver. 8. The same phrase occurs in Rom. 
 iv. 8 (a quotation from Psa. xsxii. 2) ; Psa. i. 1, xxxiv. 8, xl. 4, Ixxxiv. 
 5; Prov. xxviii. 14, &c. See below v. 11. The absence of the article 
 shows that dvijp is part of the predicate. In Psa. xciv. 12 and Jer. 
 xvii. 7 we have the more natural construction juaKapios (eiXoyiyju-cvos) 6 
 avflpoDiros. For the classical way of expressing a similar sentiment cf. 
 Pind. 01. V. 61 jUttKaptos os 'X^'^ Xoycov (j}epTa.T<ov iJ,vap,fjov, Soph. Ant. 
 578 cvSat/tovEs oTcri KaxSv ayevaTOi aiiav. The pleonastic avr/p is often 
 found, as below iii. 2 reXcios avi^p, with afiaprwXos Luke v. 8, Trpo^^riys 
 ib. xxiv. 19, <j)ovevi Acts iii. 14. This blessing is referred to below v. ll. 
 
 8s 4iro|i.6'€i ireipao-pidv.] So we have /xaK. os (jtayerat Luke xiv. 15, but 
 more commonly the subject is expressed by the participle, as Apoc. i. 3 
 jitaKapios 6 avayivaxTKwv. This verse limits the general exhortation of 
 ver. 2 to rejoice in trial. It is only he who endures that is blessed. 
 There may be another result of trial, as is shown in the following 
 verses. Cf. Herm. Vis. ii. 2, 7 fiaKapioi J/^eis oo-oi mo^even rr/v 6\i\piv 
 
 K.T.X. 
 
 8dKi(i,os-] See above on Soki/j-iov, ver. 3. 
 
 rhv o-Tt'^avov.] The word is used (1) for the wreath of victory in the 
 games (1 Cor. ix. 25, 2 Tim. ii. 5) ; (2) as a festal ornament (Prov. i. 
 9, iv. 9, Cant. iii. 11, Herm. Sim. viii. 2, Isa. xxviii. 1, Wisd. ii. 8 
 CTTti/^cOjue^a poSiov koXv^i Trplv rj /xapavB^vai, Judith xv. 13 i<TTe(f)avu>cra.vTO 
 rrjv iXaiav) ; (3) as a public honour granted for distingui.^hed service 
 or private worth, as a golden crown was granted to Demosthenes (see 
 his speech on the subject) and Zeno (Diog. L. vii. 10 o-rc^avuia-ai XP^'^V 
 crT£<f>a.v<o dpcT^s tvcKa Koi a-iii<^po(jvvrj<s) : references to these are very 
 common in inscriptions ; (4) as a symbol of royal or priestly dignity. 
 The last is denied by Trench {N.T. Syn. p. 90, crre^avos 'is never, 
 any more than corona in Latin, the emblem of royalty '), but see 2 
 Sam. xii. 30 ' David took their king's crown {<jT€<f)avov) from off his 
 head, the weight of which was a talent of gold with the precious 
 stones,' Psa. xxi. 1 foil, 'the king shall joy in thy strength... thou 
 settest a crown (a-Tetfiavov) of pure gold on his head,' Zech. vi. 
 11 Mfyprj dpyvpLov koI )(pvcriov koi TTOtijcrEts (TTecfxivov'S koI eirtS^creis iirl 
 Tr]V KiffiaXrjV 'Ir/crov toS lepeais tov fieydXov, Apoc. iv. 4 iirl tovs 6p6vov<s 
 eTSov ei/cotrt recraapa'S TrpetrySuTcpous Ka.Orjjj.ivov^. . .koX eTn ras icei^aXas avTusv 
 (TT£<j>dvov9 )(pva-ovs : inch. v. 10 the same elders praise the Lamb for 
 making kiDgs and priests to God out of every nation: ib. xiv. 14 one 
 like the Son of Man sat on the cloud €x<jiv iirl r^s Ke(l)aX.rjs avrov o-Te<^a- 
 vov )(pvaovv : lastly, in the mocking of our Lord (Matt, xxvii. 29) there 
 surely can be no doubt that the o-Te'^avos and Ko.Xa/j.o's stand for the 
 crown and sceptre. Virgil speaks of regni coronam, Aen. 8. 505. 
 Trench however is right in saying that 8ta8i;/xa is more commonly used 
 in this sense, e.g. Isa. ixii. 3 ecrg crre^avos koWovs Iv x^'P' Ki^ptou /cat Sid- 
 
46 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Sij/ia ftaa-iXuai iv x«'pt ®iov aov. The question then is, from which of 
 these uses is the metaphor here derived. Comparing ii. 5, where what 
 is here said of the crown is repeated of the kingdom, it would seem 
 natural to take the word as implying sovereignty, and this would agree 
 with Wisd. V. 16 Slkmol Xrixpovrai to jiaariXiiov r^s euTrpeiretas Koi to StaSij/xa 
 ToC KaXXoDs EK x*V°* Kvpiov, it. iii. 8, Dan. vii. 27 ' the kingdom was 
 given to the saints of the Most High,' Apoc. i. 6, 1 Pet. ii. 9 i/iets 
 PaxrLXaov Uparev/Jia, Rom. v. 1 7 ot T'^v TTipurcniav t^s \a.piTO^ Aa//.;8avovT£s 
 ev tfi)^ ftaa-iXiva-ovcriv, Luke xii. 32 ' it is my Father's good pleasure to 
 give you the kingdom,' ib. xxii. 28 ' I appoint unto you a kingdom, 
 and ye shall sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel,' 2 Tim. 
 ii. 12 ei iTTO/tci/o/tcv kol <TvfiPaxTiXtva-ofii,tv, which reminds one of Zech. vi. 
 14 6 o-T«<^ai/os Eorat toi? iTro/xevoucrt, following immediately after Kordp^a 
 £7rl rov 6p6vov avToC ; SO the Stoic paradox sapiens rex. The nearest 
 parallels to our passage are Apoc. ii. 10 ylvov irto-ros axP'- Oo-vo-tov koX 
 Sulcru) iToi rov <TT€<j)avov r^s ^<i)^9, 2 Tim. iv. 8 diroKiiTai /x.ot 6 Trjs SiKaio- 
 crvvrji; (TTe^avos b dTro8aJ<7£t juot 6 K.vpios iv eKuvy rrj '^fji,4pq....Kai Traxn tois 
 r/yaTrrjKOcn rrjv iwiffxiveiav avrov, 1 Pet. v. 4 (jjavepoidevTOi rov dp^iTroL/jievo^ 
 KO/j.ieLO'de Tov a/xapavrivov rrji So^rji (Tri^avov. The use of the article in 
 all these seems to imply some well-known saying or a very definite 
 expectation. On the other hand, the idea of a kingly crown seems less 
 appropriate in them than that of a crown of merit or victory. The 
 Rabbins talk of three crowns (Pirke Aboth iv. 19). Probably the 
 metaphorical use would be coloured by all the literal uses. Other 
 instances are Sir. 1. 16, vi. 30, xv. 6, Acta Matt. Tisch. p. 169 iyyvs 
 eiTTLV TTJ's vTrofiovrjg crov 6 (TTetftavoi, Philo Legg. All. M. p. 86 criroijSao-oi' 
 ariffiavtoOrjvai Kara Trjs tovs aWons aTravrai viKiicrrji -^Sovrji KaXov kol evKXeS. 
 <TT€(j>avov ov ovSefiia ■jrav^yvpis dvOpwiroiv i)(dtpr]cre. 
 
 Ttjs Iwfjs.] Gen. of definition, as in the parallels quoted in the last 
 n. : ' the crown which consists in life eternal.' Cf. 1 John ii. 25 avrr] 
 ia^TLV Tj iirayyekia rjv avTOS eTnjyyeikaTO v/uv, ttjv ^(orjv rijv a'uLviov, 1 Pet. 
 iii. 7. This is contrasted with the fading away of earthly prosperity. 
 Zeller and Hilgenfeld {Ztschr.f. tviss. T/ieol. 1873, p. 93 and p. 10) con- 
 sider that the expression is borrowed from Apoc. ii. 10, this being the 
 promise referred to below. [Wisdom promises a crown and life, Prov. 
 iv. 9, iii. 18, Aboth vi. C.T.] 
 
 8v l'irr]7Y«'^<<'T0 toIs a-yairwo-iv avT<5v.] Kvptos or ©cos is inserted in some 
 MSS. but in AB Sin. &c. the subject is omitted, as in Heb. iv. 3 KaOm 
 tiprjKev, and often in introducing a quotation : cf. iv. 6, Eph. iv. 8, 
 Gal. iii. 16, 1 Cor. vi. 16, Heb. x. 5, and Winer p. 735. Putting on one 
 side Apoc. ii. 10, which was probably written subsequently to this 
 epistle, we do not find the precise words tov crTi<l>avov Trj-s ^<o^s in 
 any particular passage of the Bible. It is a question therefore 
 whether they constitute an unwritten word, a record of oral teaching, 
 such as we have in Acts xx. 35, and of which others have been pre- 
 served by early Christian writers ; ^ or whether it is an instance of 
 
 ' They are collected in Reach's Agraplia. Leipzig. 1889. Besides this verse (on 
 which he compares Isa. xxii. 17-21 and Acta Pliilippi, p. 147 T.) he includes i. 17 
 ■waaa iiiTiS hyadii, iv. irp^s <f>S6vov iirtiroSei, iv. 17 el56Ti oif Ka\hv iroietv, V. 20 
 
I 12, 13] NOTES 47 
 
 loose quotation, representing some of the verses cited above on o-Tt'^avos, 
 such as we find below iv. 5. Foi' the latter view it may be said that it 
 is apparently the same quotation which is repented in different words 
 below ii. 5. For the former, that the undoubted references to the 
 Sermon on the Mount which occur in this epistle are in all probability 
 actual reminiscences of spoken words, not copied from the written 
 Gospel ; and secondly, that it seems easier to explain the coincidence 
 between St. James and the writer of the Apocalypse on this than on 
 any other supposition. Promises to those that love God are found in 
 Exod. XX. 6, Deut. vii. 9, ih. xxx. 16, 20, Jud. v. 30, Psa. v. 11, 
 2 Tim. iv. 8, 1 Cor. ii. 9 (a quotation from Isa. Ixiv. 4, where however 
 the LXX. has toTs viTOfi.ivov(riv ekiov for St. Paul's toTs ayaTr!ii(nv avrov). 
 
 13. |jii)8€ls ir«ipa?<5(i.«vos Xev^TO) Stu] Hactenus de tentalionihus quas per- 
 mittente Domino exlerius probandi gratia periMimur disputavit : nunc 
 incipit agere de illis -quas interius insiigante diabolo vel etiam naturae 
 nostras Jragilitate suadente toleramus (Bede). Though trial in itself is 
 ordered by God for our good, yet the inner solicitation to evil which is 
 aroused by the outer trial is from ourselves. The subst. Trcipacrfios 
 denotes the objective trial, the v. ireipa.tpft.aL subjective temptation. 
 "Oti introduces the direct oration as in Matt. vii. 23, John ix. 9, and 
 often both in Hellenistic and classical Greek. 
 
 airb 0eov ireipd1So|iai.] 'Aird expresses the remoter, as contrasted with 
 the nearer cause expressed by iurd (Winer, p. 463 foil.). Eve was the 
 immediate cause of Adam's transgression, but Adam tried to make God 
 the ultimate cause in the words ' whom thou gavest to be with me.' 
 So the fault is often laid on hereditary disjosition, on unfavourable 
 circumstances, on sudden and overpowering 7r€ipao-//.ds. The same plea 
 is noticed in both Jewish and heathen writers : cf. Prov. xix. 3 d(t>po- 
 <rvvrj di/Spos X,vfiaivfTai ra.'s oSois avTOV, tov he. ©eov amSrat ry KapSiq. avrov, 
 Sir. XV. 11—20 fjiij eiTrrj's on SiaKvpiov airecn-ijv' a yap ifjiicrrja-ev ov woirjr 
 a-eii- jxij etirrj'; otl airds jnc i7rXdvr]a-€v...7rdv jSSeAiiy/ia if]i,ia~i^<Tev 6 Kijpios, 
 KOL OVK tcTTiv dyaiTrjTOV Tois <^oj8ov/i6Vois avTOv' airos cf apx'}* eTrOLrjaev 
 dvOpuTTTOv Kal dtftrJKSv avrov iv X^'P' Sia^ovXiov ovtov . . . tvavTL dv6pu>Tr<t)v ij ^wr] 
 KOI o OdvaT<k K.T. A.., Rom. ix. 19 tl €ti p,ijji,<ptTai ; ™ yap ySouXij/iari avrov 
 Tts dv6i(TTy]K€ ; Clem. Ho'in. iii. 55 rots Se olofievoK on 6 ©cos 7rcipa^ct..,e</nj' 
 6 TTOVJ^pds l<rnv 6 Treipd^uiv, 6 Kal aiTov Trupdcra^, Herm. Mand. ix. 8 cav 
 Sti^DX^tnjs aiTOUjiicvos aeavrov avriSi koX p.^ tov StSovra croi, Tert. Orat. 8 
 (commenting on the Lord's Prayer) dbsit ut Dominus tentare videatur, 
 Philo M. 1. p. 558 rts av ycvoiro aicrxiW KiiKr/yopia ^ to <^ao-K€iv p.'^ Trcpi 
 ^fids aXX.d'Trepl ®e6v yei>e(Tiv cTvai tIov KaK&v ; ib. p. 214 ov yap, <us iviot tS>v 
 diri^liiv, rbv ®€ov atTtov KaKiov <f>i^(7l Mwiio^s, dXXa ras ijpcTcpas x^ipas-.-Kai 
 Tas iKovaiov^ r^s Siavotas irpos to ^(ilpov Tpoirdi, Hom. IL 19. 85 (Aga- 
 memnon excuses himself for his injustice towards Achilles) eyco 8' ovk 
 atTtds ct/ti, dXXd Zeis Kal /jLotpa koI ■^epo<j)oiTL'S Ipivvs, oi re poi elv ayoprj 
 <l>p€a-lv IfifiaXov dypiov aTqv, Od. i. 32 S ttottoi oiov 8^ vv 6iOv<; ^poTol 
 alnooiVTaC cf ^fiS>v yap ^acri KaK c/*p,6vai" ot 8c kol avToi (r(jyfj(7iv drair- 
 
 Ko\iiij'« vKrjeos among the number of sayings of Jesus unreported in our Gospels. 
 I have long held that we have in this rerse an ' unwritten word,' but I do not think 
 there ia much force in the arguments adduced by Eesch as regards the other verses. 
 
48 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 OaXiria-iv vn-kp fiopov aXyc' ^exova-iv, Aeschin. Tim. p. 27. 5. Nagelsb. 
 Horn. Tlieol. p. 343 foil., Nachhom. Theol. 319 ML, and my note on Cic. 
 R.D. iii. 76. 
 
 &ireCpao~rds «<rTi kokwv.] ' TJntemptable of evil ' : not found elsewhere 
 in N.T. or LXX.^ The verb Trupatia, from which it is formed, is not 
 used by the Attic writers. It could not be formed from Tretpaoj, as the 
 perf. and aor. passive are without the cr {Tmrupaii,ai, iTreipdOrjv), but 
 Trapdtfii being sometimes used in the sense 'to attempt' (e.g. Acts xvi. 
 7 iireipa^ov Kara, rrjv 'BiOvviav TTopevea-Oai), ctTretpacrros might be equivalent 
 to aTTctpaTos from Treipdia. The usual force of the verbal in -tos is seen 
 in aSiKoxTTo^ ' unbribable,' (xvt/kco-tos ' incurable,' a^imTo^ (A'os) ' intoler- 
 able,' d/ieTa/JXijTos ' unchangeable,' apprjKTos ' infrangible,' Many of 
 these verbals have the force of a perfect part. pass, {intentatus as well as 
 intentahilis), and even an active force, like airTauTTo^, d(^uA.aKTos : cf. 
 Lat. penetrabilis and Winer, p. 120. Hence a wide difference between 
 commentators as to the force of aTretpao-Tos here. Beyschlag says ' bei 
 den Kirchenvatern wird Gott iifters einfach der Unversuchbare 
 genannt,' but the only instances cited are Pseudo-Ignatius De Baptismo 
 ad PhUipp.^§ 11 (Lightfoot vol. 3 p. 783) ■n-ws ireipdfns tov aireipaa-Tov ; 
 and Photius c. Manichaeos iv. p. 25 (Migne Patrol. 6r. cii. col. 234) 
 TOts SaSSouKatots irupd^tLV i'7n)(eip-q(ra(Ti tov diriLpaa-Tov (written in the 
 9th cent.). The former is quoted in connexion with Matt. iv. 7, 
 which leaves no doubt as to the sense in which dTretpao-ros is used. 
 It is used in the same sense by Clem. Al. Strom, vii. p. 858 P. 
 avcTTrjpoi ovK eh to dSidij>Oopov p,ovov, dXA.a xat Ets to diretpao'Tov 
 ovSajjLrj yap evSotrt/AOV ovSk d\(0(7t/u.ov rjoovrj Tt koX Kmrg Trpr \j/vj(ijv 
 Trapia-TTjcnv, ib. p. 874 P. eKetvos avSpas vikS, b ydfuio Kal iraiSoiroua,.., 
 iyyvp.vrj<Tdp.evoi...Trda'rj's KaTe^avuTTa/jLevoi TreipasT^S 8ia T€Kviav Koi yuvaiKos 
 ...TU 8c aoLKw TO, TToXXo, ttj/ai avp.PiPrjKe.v oTretpdarTia. In Const. Apost. 
 ii. 8 Xeyu 7] ypacfirj' dvrip dSoKt/tos dirctpao-Tos Trapa ®ew (which must 
 apparently mean ' one who is without trial is unapproved in the sight 
 of God ' ') there is probably an allusion to our ver. 12 and to Heb. xii. 8. 
 It is used in a different sense in Jos. B.tT. vii. 8 ol criKaptoi t^s irapavo- 
 p.La's rip^avTO firiTe Xoyov dpprjTov €ts v/8piv /a^t' epyov S/irtipaarTov {/acwMS 
 intentatvm) ci's oXiBpov irapaXetVovTes. In this sense the form diriipwroi 
 (from Tretpdco) is more common, e.g. Demosth. 310, ovt aTrovoia Suo-ikXcovs 
 ovre crvK0(jiavrLa ^iXoKpaTOvs. ..ovt aXXo oiSev dirupaTOV rpi TOVTOi'i KaT ifiov, 
 Demad. p. 180 irporepov aweipaTos tiv ToXe/xias a-dXinyyo's (' having had no 
 experience of '), Diod. i. 1 17 8ia t^s icToptas 7reptyivop,ev?; trwco-ts tUv 
 d.XXoTpi(ov diroTevyfJidTiov . . .direipaTov Kaiciv cp^et 8t8acrKa\tav, Plut. Mor. p. 
 119 F (of early death) ivTroTp.oTepo's 8ta, tovto koL KaKtav d.TriipaTO's ioTiv, 
 and in Jos. J.B. iii. 7. 32 ip,eivav 8e ovhi 5a.//.ap£is dirttpaTot (rviJ.<j>opu>v, ib. 
 V. 9. 3 yivuiaKCLV ttjv 'Pw/taiW i(r)(yv dvvTroa-TaTOV, koX to SovXevuv tovtok 
 
 ' This and the two following verses are quoted by Epipli. 1066, Panar. 
 
 ^ This treatise was probably written towards the end of the 4th century (Lightfoot 
 vol. i. p. 260). 
 
 " Cf. Tert. JSapt. c. 20 neminem intentatum regna caelestia consec/uturum with 
 reference to Luke xxii. 28, 29 ; Cassian. Coll. ix. 23 omnia vir qui non est temptaim 
 noil est probatus. 
 
I 13] NOTES 49 
 
 ovK OLTTtipaTov avTOts, Pind. 01. viii. 60 Kov^orepai yap aTreipdrtov (jjpiu^i '. 
 the Ionic form occurs Horn. Od. ii. 170, Herod, vii. 9. 3 4'crT<o /atjSci/ oTreiprj- 
 TOV avTOjjLarov yap ovSii/, aW airo Treiprys Trdvra a.v6p<jy!rot.cn. 
 
 In accordance with the use of airdparo^ Alf ord translates ' unversed 
 in things evil' ; so Hofmann {'Bosem/remd odevvom Ueheln unbeirqffen, 
 auf keinem Fall aber von Bosem oder zu Bosem unversucht oder unver- 
 SMc/t6ar'), Briickner, Erdmann. Others (Yulg. Aeth. Lutlier) give it 
 an active sense, 'God is not one who tempts to evil.' The latter 
 interpretation would make the next clause (irctpd^ct 8e) mere tautology, 
 and it has now no defenders. It seems to me that the case is equally 
 strong against the former interpretation. The meaning of the rare 
 word aTTctpao-TOs must be determined from the general force of ■jreipdt.o) 
 in the N.'T., and especially from the following clause, which is evidently 
 intended to be its exact correlative in the active voice {airdpaa-- 
 Tos : Trupa.t,a 8e avTos). The relation of the two clauses would have been 
 more clearly marked if p.lv had been added after air.: compare for its 
 omission Jelf§ 767, and below ii. 2, 11. Further it is impossible to read 
 this sentence without being reminded of very similar phrases used 
 about God by Philo and other post- Aristotelian philosophers, of. Philo 
 M. 1. p. 154 God is aKoivmnfTOi KaK&v, ib. 563 (5 A.oyos) aft,ero-}(p^ Ka). 
 dirapaScKTos iravros clvai icit^vKev a/w.pTi^fj.aTO's, ib. M. 2. p. 280 God is 
 fjLovo'S evSaifiav Kal [laKapto?, ■ko.vtuiv p-h) dp.iTO)(Oi KaKtov, TrX'^prj's Se dyadSiv 
 reXuoiv, p.SXkov Se airos wr to dyaBov, os ovpavio /cat -yg to, Kara pbtpos 
 uifjt,^pi(rev dyaOd, Plut. Mor. 1102 F ■n-avT<ov Trar-qp koXSiv 6 ©cos icrnv Kal 
 ipavXov oiSev iroieiv avTM ^e/*is, uxnrep ovSe Trda-)(€iv k.t.A.., M. Ant. 6. 1 
 oiSe/tto.]/ hf iavTio cuTiav €)(ii Tov KaKoiroieZv KaKiav yap ovk ^x^h °^^^ '''' KaKS>s 
 TTotei, see Gataker's note there and on ii. 11, Sext. Emp. Math. ix. 91 ro 
 TeXeiov Kal apicTTOv ■ ■ .■TravTos KaKov dvairoSeKTOv, Seneca Ira 2. 27 di nee 
 volunt obesse nee possunt. Natwa enim mitis et placida est, tarn remota 
 ab aliena injuria quam a sua ; ib. Epist. 95. 49 nee aeeipere injuriam 
 gueunt nee faoere : laedere enim laedique eonjunctum est : sv/mma ilia ae 
 pulcherrima omnium natwa quos perieulo exemit ne periculosos quidem 
 feeit. The original source seems to be the maxim of Epicurus, Diog. L. 
 X. 138 TO fiaxdpLov Kal d<f>6apT0V ovt£ aiiTO irpdypaTa c^ei ovt€ aX\<o Trapex^i, 
 which is compared here by Oecumenius ; see my note on Cic, JV.J). i. 45. 
 For the gen. KaxSv, which is perhaps more easily explained as meaning ' to 
 evil ' than ' by evil,' see Xen. Gyrop. iii. 3. 55 dTratSeuros dptrijs, Winer, 
 p. 242, who compares 2 Pet. ii. 14 KapSiav yeyvp.voLO'ftcvrjv irXeove^tas, 
 Soph. Ant. 848 a/cXavTos (fylkwv. I think these are best classed under 
 the head of ' Genitive of the Sphere,' an extension of the Inclusive 
 ('Partitive') genitive, 'untemptable in regard of evil things,' just 
 as it might be said of one who was wholly evil that he was 
 aTTeipaa-Tos ayaOwv.^ We have still to consider an objection drawn from 
 the context : ' there is no question here of God being tempted, but of 
 God tempting,' Alf. This is sufficiently met by the passages cited 
 above from Philo, Plutarch, and Antoninus : God is incapable of 
 tempting others to evil, because He is Himself absolutely unsusceptible 
 
 ' Von Soden destroys the sense of the passage by taking xaKai/ of afiBictions. It is 
 of course used of moral evil, as in Kom. i. 30, 1 Cor. x. 6. 
 
 E 
 
50 THE EPISTLE OP ST. JAMES 
 
 to evil ; i.e. our belief in God's own character, His perfect purity and 
 holiness, makes it impossible for us to suppose that it is from Him 
 that OTir temptations j roceed. 
 
 ireipctSei Zl avrbs o48iva.] The 8e with avTos contains an opposition to 
 Aireipaa-TO's ■ ' so far from himself tempting others to evil, which would 
 imply a delight in evil, he is by his own nature incapable of being 
 even solicited to evil.' For the difficulties connected with this subject 
 see comment on Temptation below. 
 
 14. ^KaoTos 8^ ireipdfCTai iirb T^is l8Cas liriSuiiCas.] Wetst. quotes Mena- 
 choth f. 99. b (slightly shortened) ca/ro et sanguis seducit a viis vitae 
 ad vias mortis : Dev,s a viis mortis ad vias vitae. We may compare 
 the famous words of Plato aiTta kXafnivov ©eos a.vauno% Rep. x. 617; 
 also Phaedr. 238 (kTriOvftXa.'s aAdy<os kXKova-q^ eirt ijSovas koX ap^d(njs) 
 this tyranny of lust was called v^Spis, Cleanthes (Stob. Ed. i. 2. 1 2) 
 ouSe Ti yiyveral ipyov hri x^ovl crov Sixa, Sai/iov, irXriv birocra pet,ova-i KaKol 
 (r(j>eT€p7](Tiv dvotats.-.auTot 8' av6' op/xuxriv avev Ka\ov aXXos itr d'AAa k.t.X., 
 Chrysippus ap. Gell. 6. 2. 12 ; above all the discussion on the voluntary 
 nature of virtue and vice in Arist. ML iii. 5. See also Philo M, 2. 
 p. 349 TO di/f£v8Gs av Xe^dBev dp)(€KaKov TrdOos itrrlv eTridviiCa, ib, 208 
 aSiKYj/idTiov Tnjy^ iTnOvfjLia dtj>' ^s piov<nv ai wapavopniraTai irpd^ws, ib. 
 M. 2. p. 204 (in contrast with other affections which may be deemed 
 involuntary) ixovr/ iiriOviJiia rrjv dpxrjv i$ ■^p.Siv Xjxfi^dvei /cat icrrlv eKovcrioi. 
 It is these iTriBv/iuu aapKo^, as they are frequently called, which consti- 
 tute ' the law in our meinbers ' (Eom. vii. 23). St. James describes them 
 below (iv. 1) as ■^Soval ' warring in our members.' As eiriOvfi-ia is here 
 personified, there is no question about the use of vtto, on which see below 
 iii. 4 n. For iSi'as cf. 2 Tim. iv. 3, 2 Pet. iii. 2, Jude 18, 19. 
 
 4|cXK<i|i.cvos Kol Se\ca^o|i,6vas.] Abstractus a recto itinere et illectus in 
 malum, Bede. A4\eap and its cognates (used first of the arts of the 
 hunter and then of those of the harlot) are often found in this con- 
 nexion, see 2 Pet. ii. 14, 18, Philo M. 1, p. 604 iiriOvp.iwv BeXiaa-iv 
 dyKi(TTp€v(Tacr6ai, pp. 265-267, ib. M. 2, p. 216 (on the attractions of 
 idolatry) iva 6ij/iv koX oIkotJv SiXedcravTe^ (rwapTrdtroKTi r-qv i/rup^'^v, ib. M. 1, 
 p. 569 cyo) p,iv, &7rep eiKOS ^v ipydcrcurOai tov PovkofL^vov Tpmrov ^dxravov 
 /cat hoKipafTiav Xa/Setv, ireiroHjKa SeXedp KaJdii<s, 6 8e iiriSii^aro ttjv eavTOv 
 (j}V<nv ovK evdXwTov, Plato Tim. 69 ■^Sovijv, p-iyia-rov KaKov SeXeap, Isocr. 
 Pax 166 6pS) Tovs tyjv dSiKiav TrpoTt/xSvTas o/ioia irdcr^^ovTas rots 8£Xea- 
 ^opdvoLi T<Sv ^(iioiv, Anton, ii. 12 rd ^8ov^ SeXedfovra, Cic. Cato § 44. 
 It is often found combined with eXkoj or its cognates : Philo M. 
 2. p. 474 TO crvvrjOfs oXkov koX SeXcdcrat SwartoTaTov, ib. M. 1. 
 p. 316 tv yap ouSev Itrrtv o p,ij irpos riSovrjs SekeaaOiv ctA/cutrTat, ib. M. 
 2. p. 61 al(T6f)(Ti's SeXfa^ofievr) 0£a/*acrt...oT;v£<^eX/c€Tat Kat ttjv oX-qv 
 ij/v)cqv, ib. M. 1. p. 512 tTnOvfuia. oKkov cp^outra 8wVap.tv to 7ro6oviJi,evov 
 SuiiKeiv dvayKa^ii, ib. p. 238 ■qSovrji oXkov ScXratrrpa, Epict. frag. 112 
 irdxrq'i KaKtds oiov ti SiXtap ■qSovr] irpoPX-qOiida cv/cdXcos rds Xtj^vorepas yfiv)ia.% 
 brl TO dyKUTTpov t^s an-wXtias £<^eX/c€Tai, Plut. Mar. 1093 C (the pleasures 
 of geometry) Bpi/iv Koi ■ttoikiXov f)(ov(rai to StXeap ou8evos tS>v dywyt/xmi' 
 diroSc'oiicni', tX/coiitrai KaBdircp tvy^i rots Siaypd[i,iJ.a<Tiv, ib. 547 0. The 
 relation between the two words has been wrongly illustrated frtm 
 
I 14, 15] NOTES 51 
 
 Herod, ii. 70 iinav vCtrov iios SeXeatri; irepi ay Kimpov .. .o KpoKoSuX.o'; ivTvyli>v 
 T<3 vcoTco KaraTrtVci, ol 8e eXKOvcTLV' cTreav Se i^ekKvcrOy h yijv k.t.X. This 
 would make a va-repov irporepov in our text, where the drawing is 
 previous to the actual catching at the particular bait. He! sen cites a 
 number of lines of Oppian in which IX/cm and its compounds are used, 
 as here, of the first drawing of the fish out from its original retreat, e.g. 
 iii. 316 the bait e^eXKcrai i^Ova^ €tcr<o, iv. 359; cf, Xen. Cyrop. viii. 
 1. 32 eyKpaTCiav ovrta ixaXiuT av (aero a<TKeicr6ai €i avTOS iiriSuKVvoi iavTOV 
 p.'q VTTo tSv iTrapavTiKa ■^SovSv iXKop-evoy airo tSv dya$Siv, ib. Mem. iii. 11. 18. 
 In like manner the first effect of €7rt6u/Ata is to draw the man out of 
 his original repose, the second to allure him to a definite bait. Heisen 
 illustrates this from the temptation of Eve, first moved from her 
 secure trust in God by the words of the tempter (Gen. iii. 1-5), then 
 attracted by the fruit itself (v. 6).'- Another way of distinguishing 
 between the two words is to suppose that e^eXko) implies the violence, 
 8eX. the charm of passion, as in Philo M. 2, p. 470 irphs eirt^vutas 
 Ikavverai 7/ vfj) rjSov^<s SeXea^erai, ' driven by passion or solicited by 
 pleasure,' but I prefer the former explanation. 
 
 15. <ru\XapoO(ra t£kt6i d|JHipTiav.] For the metaphor cf. Psa. vii. 14 
 wSivrjcrev dSiKiav, (ruveXa^e ttovov kol ir€K€v dvo/xiav, Philo M. 1. 40 oTa 
 iraipis Koi fA.a.)(\o^ ova-a rjSovrj yXi^iTUL Tvx^lv ipatrrov, ib. 149 orav 6 iv rjiMv 
 V0V9 — KeKkrja-do) Si 'ABdfA, — evTup^w aiaO'^a-ei — KaXeiTai 8e Eva — (rwovo-iai 
 6pe)^6eLS TrXrja-ida-rj, ^Se (rv\\a.fi^a.vei...iyK^iJiO}v re ylverai koI e»^vs wStVei 
 Kot TiKT€i KChKuiV ^vyQJ'i TO /jLeyuTTOv, o'rjcriv, ib, 183 wcrirep rais yvvat^l ttdos 
 ^looiv yevea-LV oiKeioraTOV fiipos fj c^ucrts eSwKe fLrp-pav, otSru) Trpos yeveo-iv 
 irpay/jidTuiv wpurev iv i/'V^^ Bvvafiiv, Si' ■^s Kvo^opei koI wStvu Koi diroriKTU 
 TToXXa Stavota- tSv Se dTTOKVofiLeviav vo-qpATtnv to. fiev dppeva, to, Se 6v\ia, 
 Justin M. Trypho 327 irapOevo^ ova-a Ei!a tov Xoyov tov diro tov otbeos 
 crvXXaPova-a irapaKorjV Kal Odvarov erexe, and in classical writers Theognis 
 153 TtKTei yap Kopos v^piv, and Aesch. Ag. 727 foil. Sin is the result of 
 the surrender of the will to the soliciting of iTriOvfiia instead of the 
 guidance of reason. In itself, imOvp-ia may be natural and innocent : 
 it is when the man resolves to gratify it against what he feels to be 
 the higher law of duty, that he becomes guilty of sin even before he 
 carries out his resolve in act, 
 
 ff Si aiiaprfa diroTeXeo-eelo-a ttiroKuel edvarov.] ^ g^ dfiapTia takes up the 
 preceding apapTiav as 17 Se inro/iovi^ takes up mroij.ovrp' in v. 4. Sin when 
 full-grown, when it has become a fixed habit determining the character 
 of the man, brings forth death. Cf. below ii. 22 iK tS>v Ipywv fj ttjo-tis 
 ireXeuaOri, and reXetos above v. 4, Philo M. 1. p. 94 t^s KaKias V u,lv iv 
 a-xea-ei ^ Se iv Kwrjcru ^eojpecraf vivu Se Trpos ras toW dwoTeXe&fjMToyv 
 
 1 The two examples oited for this use of 6|e'AKC(c by one commentator after another 
 are somewhat doubtful. Arist, Pol. v. 10. 1311, b. SOwap^ Trjs yvvamhs 4^e\Kvaeels 
 might mean 'lured away from the side of his wife,' but hardly ab uxore sollicitaius 
 (Alf.) ; and that which Alford calls 'the nearest correspondence of all, Plut. de sera 
 numinis mndicta -rh yKvKh ttjs irieu/ilas Siairep Si\eap efcA/ceij/,'! have searched for 
 in vain in the treatise referred to, and it is not to be found in Wyttenbaoh's Index 
 It is, I presume, a misquotation for the words which do occur in that treatise (p. 554 
 E) (x^Tai cKaffTos aSiK^iros tJ SUri, Kol rh yKuxb rijs aSixias &<rir€p S4\eap ciSiis 41M- 
 SoKc, t6 Se (TvvetShs cyKfiixevov tX"" k.t.X. 
 
52 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 EKirXijjDola-eis r/ Iv t<3 KLvtla-Oai' 8io koX ^eiptov, ih. 74 sensation {aia-6rj<Ti%) 
 itself is passive, it becomes active when the reason (voSs) attaches 
 itself to it, then you may see its old potential existence {hvvafi,iv Ka$' 
 e$Lv rip€)x.ov(Tav) changed into an aTroT£\e(r/xa and evepyeiav, Philo M. 1. 
 p. 211 (the thought of murder constitutes guilt) r^s yvtafjirji ta-ov t(3 
 reXeto) hwajUjivr)^. ecus jJ-ev yap to. a.ia-)(fia. /xovov ivvoov/jLev Kara ij/iXrjV Tov 
 vov t^avracriav, t6t£ t^s Siavoias ia/j-iv wop^oi' Swarai yap Koi. aKOVcriws rj 
 ij/vxr] Tp€ire(r6ai' oTav 8e TrpocryivrjTai rots l3ovX.ev6t'l(nv yj irpa^ig, {nraiTLOv 
 yLverai koX to /SovXevcracrOai' to yap eKovio-t<i)s Sta/^apraveiv Tavrg fxaXuTTa 
 Siayv<i)pt^€Tai, Hermas Mand. iv. 2 rj iv6vp.r](ni avT-q ©eoC SovXa ap-apria 
 fji,eydX.r]' iav Si tis ipydcrrjTai to epyov to TTOvrjpov tovto, Odvarov taiiTcS 
 Karepyd^eTai, Arlst. ffist. Anim. ix. 1 (the distinctive characteristics of 
 the sexes are shown at their fullest development in the human species) 
 TOVTO yap ^y(ii ttjv (jivaiv dTrOTeTik£(Tjj.ivrjV SidTi koI TavTas ras efets etvat 
 <^av£po)Tepas iv a^TOts. 
 
 The verb kvoi or Kve'u, in the sense of to be or to become 
 pregnant, is common in older Greek, e.g. II. i/r. 266 Kveova-av, 
 Plato Theaet. 151 B (in reference to the Socratic pLaievTiKYj) hroTTTeviav 
 a-e wSiveiv Tt Kvovvra tvBov. The aorist of the shorter form is used 
 transitively (meaning ' to impregnate ') in Aesch. fr. 38 o/ji,/3pos etcvae 
 yalav, and in the middle (meaning 'to conceive') Hes. Theog. 405. 
 Hence Hermann wished to limit the use of kvw to the male, Kvim to the 
 female, but Lobeck {Aj. p. 182 foil., Parol, p. 556) shows that this 
 distinction is not borne out by MSS. or grammarians. Eustathius even 
 states the opposite kvuv to icam yaarpos l^fiv, kvSi Sk to yeyvZ, oOev ol 
 KvqTopK, KoX eKvet r^yovv iyevvi^a-e (p. 1548. 20, cited by Lob. Aj. 182). 
 The compound is only found here and below, ver. 18, in N.T. It is used 
 metaphorically in 4 Mace. 15. 14 S /jLovrj yvvr] Trjv eva-i/itiav okoKXrjpov 
 diroKv-na-aaa, ' having given birth to piety in perfection.' It is common 
 in Philo, Plutarch and the later authors generally. For the force of 
 diTo (denoting cessation) cf. diraXyeco, oKiXiriifji, diroTrovem. For , the 
 thought of. Eom. vi. 21-23, viii. 6, Matt. vii. 13-14, where the 
 parallel between the two ways leading to death and life (the 8vo oSoi of 
 the DidacM and of Barnabas, 18. 1) is similarly brought out. The 
 issue of sin is seen most plainly in sins of the body leading to bodily 
 disease, but also in the deterioration of mind and character which 
 accompanies every kind of sin, till the man is said to be vck/oos tois 
 TrapairTw/Jiamv (Eph. ii. 1). 
 
 16. n^i irXavoo-Oe d8eX<|>oC |i.ou.] ' Be not mistaken : not temptation but 
 all that is good comes from God.' Cf. Matt. xxii. 29 irXavaa-de /n-^elSdrcs 
 ras ypa<Aas, Luke xxi. 8 ^SAeVeTe p,i] irXavriO^Te. St. Paul uses the phrase 
 art TrXavaa-Oe, 1 Cor. vi. 9, 15. 33, Gal. vi. 7. Here its earnestness is 
 softened by the addition aSeXcjioi a,s in Ignat. Philad. 3, Eph. 16. 
 
 17. iroo-a Sdo-is d^aefi koV irav 8cipT||iia T^tiov.] 'All good giving and 
 every perfect gift ' (descend from Him who gives to all liberally). 
 The stress is laid on dyaOrj and TiXuov. Beyschlag and Erdmann 
 with others have assigned to Tca.<Ta the same meaning as it bore 
 in V. 2 but this use is rarely found except in reference to abstract 
 qualities, not to acts or things. No doubt such a rendering would 
 
I 17] NOTES 53 
 
 give a more exact logical contradiction. 'AH good comes from God' 
 does not necessarily exclude the possibility of evil also coming from 
 Him. But practically the opposition is sufficient, ' God does not 
 tempt to evil : it is good, good of every kind, which comes from 
 Him ' ; and if we are right in supposing the verse to be a quotation, 
 there is the less reason to ask for an exact logical antithesis (cf. 
 below, ii. 5). For the thought see Plato Bep. ii. 379 ow8' apa 6 
 ®€0s iraVTiav a.v eirj aiTL0S...a\X' okiytiiv fj-iv Tois avOpwiroii airios ttoWSiv 8k 
 avaino's- ttoX-v yap iXdrTio TayaOa tS>v KaKmv '^/juv Kal riav /xev dyaOStv 
 oiSeva aAAov aiTiariov, tZv 8c kclkIov aX\' arra Sei ^fjTeiv to, ama, dA.X' ov 
 rov ©edv, Dio Chr. Or. 32, p. 365 M. tovto ireia-Orjre /ScySat'us on Ta 
 <Tvfi.paivovTa rots dvSpaJirots hr dya6(3 'Trdvd' o/iocw's icrri Saifiovia k.t.\,, 
 Philo M. 1, p. 53 @€ov cnreipovTOS Kal (j>VT£vovTOi iv i/'i'X^ Ta /caXa o Xeywv 
 vov's oTi, eyo) </)VT£ija), dcre;8ct, M. 2. p. 208 ®eos fnovuiv ayaBSiv ainos KaKov 
 8e oiSevos, ih. M. 1. p. 432, 174 oihiv icTTi tSv Ka\S>v o fjLrj ®£ov re Kal 
 Oeiov, ih. M. 2. p. 245 God is spoken of as afiiy^ KaKZv to. dya^a Su>pov- 
 fievov, and above on ver 5. 
 
 It will be observed that the words make a hexameter line, with a 
 short syllable lengthened by the metrical stress. I think Ewald is right 
 in considering it to be a quotation from some Hellenistic poem. The 
 authority of a familiar line would add persuasion to the writer's words, 
 and account for the somewhat subtle distinction between Socr. dy. and Sta. 
 reX. Other examples of verse quotations in the N.T. are Tit. i. 12 Kprjres 
 del xj/evarai Ka/ca drjpla yao-repes apyai, 1 Cor. XV. 33 <j>6€Lpov(nv rjOr] )(pyj(r6' 
 6/xiA,ioi KaKai, which follows a /t^ irXavacrOe, as here, without any mark 
 of quotation. Acts xvii. 28 rov yap Kal yei/os ia-fiev. More doubtful 
 examples are John iv. 35 ov^^ vfiei^ Xiyere on en ' TtTpd/j/rjvoi icm Kal 6 
 {x^) OipuTfio? ipx^TOj.,' Heb. xii. 13 Kal rpoT^tas 6p6ai Troi^traTE (al. 
 TTOtEiTc) rois TTOo-iv vfi,S)v, where the source of the quotation (Prov. iv. 26 
 6p6ai Tpox'as TToUi tois irocrlv) seems to have been altered for the purpose 
 of versification. Dr. E. L. Hicks considers that traces of verse may be 
 found in the second epistle of St. Peter (Class. Eev. iv. 49). 
 
 The distinction between Socrts and Sdprjfia is illustrated in Heisen 541- 
 592 from Philo Cher. M. 1. p. 154 (a comment on Numbers xxviii. 2 tol 
 Scopd fjiov, SojUard /j-ov) Tuiv ovtoiv to. fxhr xdpiTOs /J^icrris ri^iayrai, rj KaKiirai 
 Socris, Ta 8e dp-eivovo'S, ^s ovo/xa olKeiov Suiped, id. Leg. All. M. 1. p. 126 
 Swpa So/iaTiiiv Siatjiepovcri' to, fih/ yap €iJ.(j)a(Tiv iJ,eyi6ov<s TcXetcov ayaOStv 
 8rjX.ovcTLV, a Toi's TcXeiois )(api^eTai 6 ®eds, Ta 8e ets Ppa^vraTOv itTToKTai, 
 S)V jxeTexovtriv ol ei^ueis dcrKrjTai, ol irpoKOirrovTes, id. M. 1. 240 Sapeal 
 at Tov ®€ov KaXal iracrai, id. M. 1 . p. 102 Siapca Kal €vepyf<TCa Kal ^dpicr/xa 
 ®eov TO, TrdvTa Sera iv Koer/ua Kal auTos 6 K6(rfji,oi icrri. The two words 
 are found together in Dan. ii. 6 So/j^ara Kal Siapea.'s koI ti/itjv ttoXX^v 
 Xrnl/€u6e Trap' ifiov, ih. v. 17 Tct SdjtiaTa crov <rol €aTU>, Kal ttjv Scopedi/ t^s 
 oiKt'as crov kripia 8ds, where there is the same difierence between the 
 corresponding words in the Hebrew ; also in 2 Chron. xxxii. 23 i^^pov 
 huipa T(3 K.vpiia tts lepovcraXrjp, Kal SojjiaTa tm 'E^eKia ySacriXct. There is a 
 similar peculiarity about the use of the verbs SiSm/ai and Soipiop-ai, e.g. 
 in Philo M. 2. p. 183 6 yap Trpos to ^rjv a<j>0oviav 8oris Kal Tas irpos to €v 
 ^rjv a^opixas eSwpeiTo, the former expresses the simple act, the latter 
 
54 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 implies the accompanying generosity of spirit. Dr. Taylor notes {J. of 
 Philology, vol. xviii. p. 299 foil.) that Hermas has borrowed the word 
 Su)p7]fji.a (Mand. 2 and Sim. ii. 7). Philo's distinction is further borne 
 out by the fact that Sdipij/Aa in the only other passage in which it occurs 
 in N.T. (Rom. v. 16) is used of a gift of God, and so Btopea, wherever 
 it occurs (John iv. 10, Acts ii. 13, viii. 20, x. 45, xi. 17, Eom. v. 
 15, 17, 2 Cor. ix. 11, Eph. iii. 7, iv. 7, Heb. vi. 4); SSpov is mostly 
 used of offerings to God. Again S6jj.a is always used of human gifts 
 except in a quotation from LXX. tSwKe Sofiara toTs avOpunroK (Eph. iv. 8) ; 
 but Sdo-ts, which, like iroLrjo-i^ below, v. 25, strictly means the act (as in 
 Phil. iv. 15, the only other passage in N.T. cts \6yov Socrewg koL Xiy^ui/fews, 
 Sirac. 32. 9 iv iraa-rj Secret IXapuxrov to 'Trpocrayirov crov, ib. 20. 9), is used 
 equally of God in Sir. 1. 8 Kvpios iiexeev cro^uxv Kara ttjv Boa-iv avrov, ib. 
 V. 15 Soo-ts Kvpiov Trapafiivu eicrc/Seo-i, ib. 32. 10 Sos "Yxj/ia-Tia Kara rijv 
 Sotriv avTov. Thus Sioped and StaprjfjLa are always used in the higher 
 sense, So/jia (with one exception) in the lower, while Soo-is may have 
 either sense. We might take as examples of Socns here, the gradual 
 instilling of wisdom, of S^prjua, the final crowp of life. The choice of 
 the epithets ayaOi^ and rikeiov is also in agreement with Philo's distinc- 
 tion ; compare for the latter Clem. Al.Paec?. 1. 6, p. 113 TeAeiosuivTeAeia 
 Xa-pLeiTai S^Trov^ei/, Philo M. 1, p. 173 oXoKk-qpoi koX iravTEA.eis at rov 
 ayeirvrfTOV Siapeal Trao'at. 
 
 S.v(d94v lo-Tiv.] Wll., Ewald, Bouman, Hofmann, agree with the 
 Vulg. des'm'sum, est, descendens a patre luminwm in separating ia-TLv 
 from Kara^alvov. Alf ., with the majority of commentators, takes them 
 together (.= Kara/ialvei), referring to iii. 15 ovk icrnv avn] 17 cro^ta avtaOev 
 KaTspXafj-evrj, on which see n. There is no doubt that the Hellenistic 
 usage admits of their being taken together, cf. Mark xiii. 25, where 01 
 acrT€p€s ecrovTai. TTLirTovrei = iretrovvrai. Matt. xxiv. 29 ; Luke ix. 14, where 
 iv t£ elvai wpoo'cv^o/ierov = iv T(3 irpocrev^mOax v. 27 ; ib. v. 16 avToi r/V 
 vTro^mpSiv iv rots ip-qp-oi^, v. 17, ^v StSao-Kwv. For this extension of the 
 periphrastic tense, itself merely an instance of the analytic tendency 
 which marks the later stage of language, see Winer, p. 437, A. Butt- 
 mann, p. 264 foil., where many cases are given; Arist. Met. iv. 7 ovSev 
 8ta<^epet to cLvOporTro^ /SaSi^uv eo-Ttv Tov av^puTTOS /3aSt^6i. On the whole 
 I think the rhythm and balance of the sentence is better preserved by 
 separating ia-ri from KarajSaivov. The construction will then be the same 
 as is found in. John viii. 23 ip,ets ck tGv KaTu iari' iyib 8e £k tS>v avoi et/it, and 
 implied below iii. 17 ■^ 8e avwOev <To<f>La dyv^ eo-Ttv. For avmOev cf. John 
 3. 31, where it is equivalent to ix tov oipavov immediately afterwards, 
 Xen. Symp. vi. 7 (ot ^eot) h/wBev /aev i'oi/Tes ii^tkavTiv, avoiOiv 8e <^Ss 
 Trapixova-LV, Philo M. 1, p. 645 'Io-aa,K Sto. Tas ofL^ptjOdcra^ a.vui6ev Swpects 
 ayaOb's /cat TeXetos ef "pp^iys iyevero. 
 
 KaTapatvov dirb toB iroTpbs t&v ij«uT(i>v.] Explains a.vo}$€v. Just as eK tS>v 
 rjSovSiv explains ivrevOev in iv. 1 below. The comparison of God to the 
 sun, and of his influence to light, is found both in Jewish and in 
 classical writers : for (1) see Malachi iv. 2 avareXu vfuv Tots <^oj8ovp,€vots 
 TO ovofia p.ov ^Xtos St/catoo-iJKiys, Psa. XXXV. 9, Isa. Ix. 1, 19, 20, 1 John 
 i, 5, Apoc. xxi. 23, Wisd. vii. 26 ((ro(f>ia) aTravyacrp.d ia-ri, ^wtos atStoi;, 
 
I 17] • NOTES 55 
 
 ib. V. 29 icrrlv yap avrr] einrpiTrecrTepa r/kiov Koi virtp iraa-av aiXTpiiiV Oiariv, 
 <l>oiTL crvyKpcvofievri eipicrKCTai irpoTcpa- rovro pAv yap BiaSexcTlu vv^, cro^ia% 8e 
 ovK avTUT)(ya KaKia, Philo M. 1. p. 637 irpiv ras tov j«.ey«rTou /cai hruJM- 
 vearaTov @eov xaTaSwai ircpiXa/tircoraTas avyas, as 8t' cAeov tov yeyovq 
 ijpuni £ts voBv TOV avOpumivov oipavoOev dirouTeAAet k.t.X., ib. M. 1, p. 579 
 Trrjyrj Trjs KafiapiomTrjs avy^s ©eos i(TTLV, <ucrT€ orav iTrL<f>aivr]Tai \j/vxfj, Tcis 
 dcTKious Kal •TrepM^avecTTdTas aKTtvas avitrx^i, ib. p. 7 Icttiv (6 Oeio's Xoyos) 
 inrepovpavioi ao'Tr/p, irqyrj tS)V aUrBrjTutv aaripiov. (2) The chief passage 
 in a classical author is the elaborate comparison between the sun and 
 the tSea TOV dya^oC in Plato Bep. vi. 505 foil., and especially vii. 517 
 irScrt iravTiov avnj 6p$j>v re kol KaXiov aiTia. 
 
 For the word -n-aTrip compare Eph. i. 17 6 irarijp t^s Sdfiys, 2 Cor. i. 3 
 o iraTTip tS>v olK.Ti.pp.Siv, Job xxxviii. 28 Trai-iyp ueroC, John viii. 44, Philo 
 M. 1. p. 631 jif^ OavpaxTTj's et 6 ^A.ios KaTO, Tovs dAAijyopias Kavdvas l^opoiov- 
 Tai rm Trarpi Kai r/yepovi tSiv a~up7ra.VT<ov k.t.A.., and a little below (after 
 citing Psa. xxvii. 1 Kvpios <j>S)s /tov) ov p.6vov tjiSts aXXa Kal iravTos eTepov 
 <^(OTos dp^ennrov, /ioAAov Se dpp^eTwrou irp£(ry8iJT£pov Kai dvMrepov, t6. M, 
 2. p. 254 6 ®£09 Kal vop.un' e<7Ti irapdSety/ia dpp^eruTrov Kai ijXtov ijA.tos, 
 voijTOS aitrft^ToC, irape^iav Ik rtav aopdruiv TnjySv opaTO, ^eyyij Tw ySXeTro/ievo). 
 Philo constantly uses the phrase o iraTrjp tZv oXmv for the Creator. 
 
 TMv 4«5to>v.] Eefers in the first place to the heavenly bodies (Gen. 
 i. 3, 14 — 18, Psa. cxxxv. 7, Jer. xxxi. 35, Sir. xliii. 1-12) ; which, accord- 
 ing to Ewald, were by the Jews identified with the angels or hosts of 
 God (Job xxxviii. 7, where they are expressly called 'sons of God') ;i 
 but secondly to intellectual and spiritual light, which is more connected 
 with the general meaning of the passage, though the remainder of 
 this verse continues the metaphor drawn from light in the literal sense. 
 Compare Matt. v. 14 vp,eis ia-Te to (f)<i>s tov Koo-p-ov, Luke xvi. 8 viol tov 
 ^(UTos, John V. 35 (John was) 6 kv^vos 6 Katdp.£vos Kai <j>aiv<Dv, and you 
 were willing for a time to rejoice iv tw <^<oTt avrov, Psa. cxix. 105 
 Xv;^os Tots TToai p.ov 6 v6p.o% (tov, koi ^ms tois TptySots pov, and for plural 
 Psa. cxxxvi. 7 Tm ■jrotijo-avTi ^Sto peyaXa, Jer. iv. 23 eire/SXei/fa eis tov 
 ovpavov, Kal oiiK yjv to, <j)S)Ta avTov, Philipp. ii. 16, Philo M. i. 108 tov 
 lyKvp,ava Beiiov {fiioTiav A.dyov. 
 
 TTop' u oiK ivi iropoXXo-yfi.] For this somewhat rare use of wapd 
 denoting an attribute or quality cf. Eph. vi. 9 irpoa-ia'TroX.-rjpxj/ia ovk 
 i(TTiv Trap' avTu, Eom. ii. 11, ib. ix. 14 prj aBiKia irapa t<o ©cm; 
 Job. xii. 13 Trap' avTw (TO<j)ia Kal 8vva/tts, Dem. Goron. p. 318 ex 8' ovv 
 ecTTi Kal Trap' ipLoi tk ip-ireipta, Winer p. 492. For ovk tvi cf. Gal. iii. 28 
 oo'oi £is KpuTTov i^airTi<T6riT€...ovK tvi 'lovSatos ov8e 'EA.Xrjv, where Light- 
 foot translates ' there is no place for,' and notes that ' not the fact 
 only, but the possibility ' is negatived. He approves Buttman's view 
 (given by Winer, p. 96) that evi ' is not a contraction from iveaTi, but 
 the preposition ev, ivi, strengthened by a more vigorous accent, like e^rt, 
 
 ^ Philo speaks of the stars as f^o roepii M. 1. p. 17. It is perhaps a slight con- 
 firmation of the idea that St. James had at one time been infliienced by the Essenes, 
 that the latter are .said to have paid special reverence to the sun ; compare Philo Vit. 
 Cord. M. 2. p. 486 firhv BedtravTat rhv t^\lov oivlffXoyTa. . .evrifiepiav Kal a\-l}6eiav 
 iTT^vxavrai Kol o^vwiriav Koyttr^oVj Joseph. B.J. ii. 8. 5. 
 
56 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 iraptti aud used with an ellipsis of the substantive verb.' In 1 Cor. vi. 
 5 ovK Ivi iv i/uv ov'Seis crowds the word has a weaker force, as often in 
 Plato, Xen., &c. 
 
 irapaXXa-y^.] Only here in N.T. ; used of mental aberration in LXX. 
 Iv irapaXXayy ' furiously ' 2 Kings ix. 20 ; of the succession of beacon- 
 lights, Agam. 490. Its general sense is the same as that of the 
 V. TrapaXXacrcro), denoting variation from a set course, rule or pattern, 
 as in Plut. Mor. 1039 B, Epict. Diss. i. 14 (referring to the changes of 
 the seasons) iroOev xpos r-rjv av^criv koI /leLcaa-iv t^s a-eXtjvrj's Koi ttjv tov 
 rjXiov TTpocroSov Kai a<j>oSov Tocravrrj TrapaXXayrj Koi tirt ra kvavria /jLera/SoXr] 
 tS>v ciriyctW Oiuipurai ; hence it is used for difference, as ib. ii. 23. 32 
 fjbrjSiixiav elvai irapaXXayrjV KaXXov^ Trpos aX<rxo?. Some commentators 
 have thought it to be a vox technica of astronomy = TrapaWa^ts, our 
 ' parallax,' but no instance of such a use is quoted. It is true it is a 
 favourite word with the astronomer Geminus (contained in Petavius' 
 Uramologion), but he uses it quite generally of the varying length of the 
 day, (fee. ; cf. p. 26 B a.KoXov6it Se tovtio koi TrapaXXayyfv tS)V -^^pwv fieyd- 
 Xrjv yivea-Oai Sia ttjv twv Tfirjixaruiv virepoxTjv a>v KJiiperaj, 6 yXiO'S virip yrjv (i.e. 
 the length of the day varies according to the sun's elevation). Other 
 instances are cited by Gebser p. 83. We may therefore take the word 
 to express the contrast between the natural sun, which varies its 
 position in the sky from hour to hour and month to month, and the 
 eternal Source of all light. A similar contrast is found in Epict. Diss. 
 i. 14. 10 aXXa <f)iaTi^eiv fxev oTds re 1<ttiv b ^Xto's ttjXikovtov p,ipos tov 
 TravTO'S, oXiyov 8e to a(f>u>Ti(TTOV aTToXnruv, o<tov otov T iiri^^ecrdai v'Tto ctkiSs 
 fjv y y^ TTOLei- 6 Se Kai tov ^A.toi' avTOV weirovrfKiai kol Trtpidyoiv, /icpos ovt' 
 avTOV fiLKpov, 0)5 Trpos to oXov, ovtos S' ou SvvaTai irdvTmv aia^OdveaOai ; 
 
 rpoirrjs aTro<rKCa<r|ia.] The A.V. ' shadow of turning,' though supported 
 by the Old Latin modicum obumbrationis and by the Greek commentators 
 and lexicographers and by Ewald in modern times, is undoubtedly wrong. 
 The simple word o-Ktci may take this colloquial sense, as in Philo M.-l. p. 
 606 TreirtcTTCVKus vxvo's rj <7Kiav rj 3>pav dirujTtas Sci^cTat, Demosth. 552. 7 ei 
 ye £T;^e any firiv ^ cTKLav tovtwv, but it is impossible that this should be the 
 case with a air. Xcy. like d7ro(rKi'a<rp.a. The cognate d7roo-K(a<rp,ds occurs 
 Plut. Pericl. 6 ■yi/cop.dvwv d5ro<TKiacrp,ovs of the shadows thrown on the 
 dial, and aTroa-Kid^oi Plato Eep. vii. 532 0. Taking the word by itself we 
 naturally understand it of an eclipse, where the sun is hidden by the 
 shadow thrown off from the moon. Denying this of God is in effect 
 equivalent to 1 John i. 5 6 ©eos <j>S>'S Io'tI koX u-kotlo, iv avria ovk Icttiv 
 owSe/it'a. 
 
 The word Tpoiri} is only found here in N.T. ; it is used of the 
 heavenly movements in LXX. Deut. xxxiii. 14 KaO uipav yevvvaaTrnv 
 yjXlov TpoTTuiv, Job. xxxviii. 33 ima-Tairai TpoTras ovpavov, also in Wisd. 
 vii. 18 (God gave me to know) o-WTacriv Kocrp-ov koL ivipyeiav a-TOixiimv, 
 TpoTTuiv dXXaycts Kai p,€Taj3oXa.i Kaipwv, evtaVTOv kvkXovs Kai dtrTcpcov Oiceii, 
 where it has its usual technical meaning ' solstices.' The E.V., in agree- 
 ment with Gebser, Wiesinger, Alf., Beyschlag, Erdmann, translates 
 ' shadow that is cast by turning,' which Alf. explains as referring to ' the 
 revolution in which the heavens are ever found, by means of which the 
 
I 17, 18] NOTES 57 
 
 moon turns her dark side to us .... is eclipsed by the shadow of the 
 earth, and the sun by the body of the moon.' But what a singular way 
 of describing this to say that it is an overshadowing which comes from 
 turning or change of position ! ' Overshadowing of one another,' 
 dAA^Xojv aTToa-Kiaa-fia, would have been what we should have expected. 
 Accordingly Schneckenburger and De Wette (BrUckner) have rightly 
 felt that Tpoirrj must be taken here in another and far more usual sense, 
 that of 'change in general' (like ruyy]^ rpoirai Plut. Mor. p. 611, yvcu/xTys 
 TpovT^ ib. Vit. 410 F), since, as the latter says, 'schwierig ist damit 
 (i.e. with the idea of revolution) dxoo-Kiacr/ta in Verbindung zu briogen.' 
 ■rhe liability of all that is created to change (Anton, vi. 23 to, 
 ovra If jjivpiais TpoTrats, Kat cr^cSov ovSiv icTTOs, ib- viii. 6 Trdvra Tpoirai) 
 is continually contrasted in Philo with the immutability of the 
 Creator : cf. M. 1. p. 72 ttSLv to yevvrjTov avayKoiov TpeirecrSaf tSiov 
 yap eoTi tovto, uxnrep ®eov to aTpeiTTov elvai, ib. 82 ttGs av tls Trier- 
 revtrai ©euJ; iav p-adfj oTt vdvTa to, oXKa rpeirtTai, p.ovo's 8e avTos 
 aTpETTTog eo-Tt, and (with a still closer resemblance to our text) 
 ib. p. 80 OTav afidpTf] koX dTraprrjdfj o vovs apCTrj's, aiTtSrat to. Otia, tyjv iSt'av 
 TpoTrrjv ■Kpoa-diTTtov ©eu. Many similar passages will be found in the 
 treatises Leg. Alleg. and Cherub. From this opposition to the Divine 
 nature the word rpcnrij gets a second connotation implying moral frailty, 
 as in p. 72 avTi^iXoveiKu iioi fj rpoirij, Kat ttoAAoikis /SovAd/uevos KaO^Kov tl 
 vomeral iTravT\ovp,ai xais Trapa to KaBTJKOv eTrtppotais, ib. 188 6 ©eoC 6epa- 
 irevTTjs a'uLviov iXevOepiav K£Kap7ro)Tai, Kara ras (ruve^^cTs TpoTras T^S deiKivrj- 
 Tov ^Irvyrj'i tacrets 8e;^d//.€vos e7ra\A.^Xovs...i^S /x€v rpoir^s 8ia to (j>v(r€i OvqTOV 
 lyyaioii.ivr]';, t^s Se iXfvdepias Sia rif Tov ®eov Oepaireiav eiriyivo/xcvr^s. 
 Schneckenburger takes Tpoirrj here in Philo' s sense, and translates 
 obumbratio quae oritwr ex iticonstcmtia natv/rae. This gives a very good 
 sense, ' overshadowing of mutability,' as one might speak of ' an over- 
 shadowing of disgrace': no changes in this lower world can cast a 
 shadow on the unchanging Fount of light. Or we may take TpoTi-^s as 
 a qualitative genitive, and interpret as Stolz does, after Luther, 
 ' keine abwechselnde Verdunkelung.' Beyschlag maintains that this 
 would require TpoTi-^ diroo-Kiaa-/«iiTos,^ but why may not ' overshadowing 
 of change ' serve to express ' changing shadow ' (i.e. an overshadow- 
 ing which changes the face of the sun), just as well as ' a hearer of 
 f orgetfulness ' in ver. 25 to express ' a forgetful hearer ' or ' the world 
 of wickedness ' in iii. 6 to express ' the wicked world ' 1 The meaning 
 of the passage will then be ' God is alike incapable of change in his 
 own nature (irapaWay^) and incapable of being changed by the action 
 of others (wTroa-Kiaa-fJia).' On the unchangeableness of God compare Mai. 
 iii. 6, Heb. xiii. 8. It is on this doctrine that Plato founds his argu- 
 ment against the possibility of a Divine Incarnation (Rep. ii. 380 foil.). 
 See comment. 
 
 18. PovXtiScVs oireKvTio-ev rjiias.J So far from God tempting us to evil. 
 
 His will is the cause of our regeneration. It is the doctrine expressed 
 
 by St. Paul (Eph. i. 5) wpooptVas •fjfiS.i eis vtoOeaiav 8ta 'I.X. £is avTov, KaTo. 
 
 TTjv evSoKiav tov OiKrjiJMTOi avTov, Rom. xii. 2; by St. Peter (i. 1. 3) 6 
 
 ^ B reads Tpoirris &irofficidafiaTos. 
 
58 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Kara to iroXv avTOv tAeos avayewqtras ^/aSs €is i\7riSa tficrav and ver, 23 ; 
 by St. John (i. 13) ot ovk ef aiixdrutv ovSe ex 6cKriiJ.a.T0<s a-apKO? ovSe ek 
 Oeki^fj.aTO's dvSpds dXX' £k ©eoB €yewri$-quav and iii. 3-8, 1 ep. iv. 10. 
 As the seed of sin and death is contained in the unrestrained indul- 
 gence of man's iiriOvixta, so the seed of righteousness and life in the 
 word of God. For the general metaphor compare 1 John iii. 9 irSs 
 o yeyevvrjfievos €k tov ®eov a/jLapnav ov irotci, OTt (T'lrepfia avTov iv avrol fievei, 
 KaL ov Svvarai ajxapTdveLv on Ik tov ©eov ye.yevvr(Ta.i, Psa. Ixxxvii. 4—6, Ixxx. 
 18, cxix. 25 (quicken Thou me according to Thy word), Deut. xxxii. 
 18, Clem. Al. Strom, v. 2, p. 653 P. KaX irapa. rots fiapPdpoLs <j>iko- 
 crotfioii TO Karqxrja-ai koX (fxoTia-ai, avayewrja-ai Xeyerai, 1 Cor. iv. 15, and 
 a Jewish saying in Schiirer Hist, of Jewish People, i. p. 317, Eng. tr., 
 ' A man's father only brought him into this worJd : his teacher, who 
 taught him wisdom, brings him into the life of the world to come,' ^ 
 also Philo M. 1. p. 147 (ai dpeTol) /j,^ Se^dfievai irapa tivos kripov i-TnyovrjV 
 ef iavTuiv iJ,€V fx-oviav oiSeTTore Kv^<rovcrf ti's ovv 6 cnrupiav iv avTols to. Kaka 
 vXrjv 6 tS>v oktov TTttTijp, ib. 108 TOV iyKvfiova Oetwv iJMXTtav \6yov, ib. 123, 
 where the text Kvpios rfvoi^e ttjv //.T^rpav Acta? is explained o ®eos Tas 
 /iijTpas dvoiyei inrdptov iv airais ras Ka\as Trpdfcis, ib. 273. The choice 
 of a word properly used of the mother is explained here by the refer- 
 ence to V. 15, but it may be compared with Psa. vii. 14 quoted on v. 
 15 above, and with the use of &Uvuv Gal. iv. 19 ; also with Psa. xc. 2 
 (where the Heb. word translated ' thou hadst formed ' means primarily 
 'to be in pangs with child,' 'to bear a child,' Jennings in foe.) and 
 Psa. xxii. 9, Clem. Hom. ii. 52 'A8a/* 6 vtto tSsv tov ©coC x^'P"'' Kvo<f>o- 
 p-qOds. On the word dinKv-qa-ev see V. 15. On the beneficence of the 
 Divine Will cf. Philo M. 1. p. 342 Kaff o p.h> ovv 3.px(av iariv, a/A(^o) 
 SwaTat Kai ev kol KaKws Troielv...Ka6' o 8e evepytTijs, Odnpov /Aovoi/ fiov- 
 AcTat, TO evepyiTuv, man's greatest blessing is to have the firm hope 
 which springs from the consciousness of the loving will of God (« 
 TOV "irpoaLperiKtsis etvai <j>i\68u>pov), ib. M. 2. p. 367, 437 l3ov\y)6el'S o ©tos 
 8ia ■^fiepoTifjTa Koi <f>iXav6pur!riav irap' Tjfilv ToW iSpvaacrOai k.t.X., Clem. Al. 
 Paed. i. 6. p. 114 P As yap to 6iXrjp.a avTov (his absolute will) ^ epyov iari, 
 Koi TovTO Kocr/ios 6vofi,dt,eTai, outojs koX to PovX-qpa avTOv (his desire) dvOpto- 
 TTiDV £(7Ti crtunypia, koX toBto iKKk-qcria KoXevrai, ib. Strom, vii. p. 855 P. 
 ovT€ yap 6 ©EOS aKbiv dyaOos, ov TpSwov to irvp OepfiaVTLKOv, Ikoijo-ios 8e rj tS)V 
 dyadiov [/.eTaSoais avTw, Plato Tim. 29 (on the cause of creation) Xeym/Acv 8t' 
 •qvTwa. aiTiav yh/^criv koa. to irdv ToSe 6 ^wio'Tas ^wiO'Trjcrev. dyafios i)V, 
 dya^o! 8e ovSets Trcpi ouScvos oi8£iroT€ iyyiyvcTcu <j>66voi. 
 
 \6yif aXri9«£as.] The word (explained in the parallel passage, 1 Pet. 
 i. 25, to be to p^/xa to cvayyeXicrficv eis i/ias, as in Rom. x. 8, 17) is God's 
 instrument for communicating the new life : see below v. 21 Xoyos 
 
 ' (Mishnah, Siirenh. iv. 116) Jewish Fathers, p. 85, cf. Juv. vii. 209 -with Mayoi^'s 
 note. 
 
 ^ Bp. Westcott (Heb. vi. 17) says that 'as distinguished from Bixetv, fioixeaecu 
 regards a purpose with regard to something else, while BeKttv regards the feeling in 
 respect to the person himself.' 1 should rather be disposed to say that the element 
 of thought and desire is more prominent in 0oi\f<r6ai, the element of pure volition 
 (determination) in BeKetv, cf. below i^v 6 Kiipios fleA^o-p. The distinction is of course 
 liable to get blurred by such figurative uses as we have in iii. 4 iirov ^ 6pni) PoiKerai. 
 
1 18] NOTES 59 
 
 €/x<^uTOS, Matt. iv. 4, John vi. 63 to, pij/xara a iyu) X.iX.a.krjKa v/jllv Trvev/id 
 €o-Ttv Kol ^0)^ iaruv, xvii. 7, 8, Eom. x. 17, 1 Pet. i. 23. The phrase 
 occurs Psa. cxix. 43 (cf. Eccl. xii. 10), Eph. i. 13 aKova-avre^ rov \6yov ttj^ 
 aXrjOeia^, to tiayyiXiov rrj^ crcoTiyptas vjxuyv . . A(rtf>payi(T$r)T£ Toi Trveu/tart, 
 
 2 Cor. vi. 7 (approving ourselves as ministers of God) iv A.oy<p oX-q6ua';, 
 iv Suvd/x« Oiov, 2 Tim. ii. 15 (Timothy is urged to show himself a 
 workman rightly dividing) rov \6yov t^s akrjOeia's, Col. i. 5 (the hope 
 which you had) iv rio Xdyu rijs dXij^ctas rov ^vayyeXiov. Alf., following 
 Wiesinger, calls dXij^ti'as a gen. of apposition ; why not objective, ' the 
 declaration of the truth, viz. of God's love revealed in the life, death, 
 and resurrection of Jesus Christ'? cf. below v. 19, and Westcott on 
 Heb. X. 28.1 ggg ^^gg John viii. 31, 32 'if ye continue in my word ye 
 shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free,' and xvii. 17 
 ' sanctify them through thy word, thy word is truth.' For the omission 
 of the article with abstract words cf. Phil. ii. 16 \6yov ^m^s eirep^ovTcs, 
 Gal. V. 5 ■^fi.eis yap imvftMTi iK iricTTCcos eXTrt'So tiK(uo<Tvvq<; dircKSep^o/iC^a, 
 below ver. 22 iroiijTai \6yov, iv. 11 vofnov, and see Essay on Grammar 
 and Winer p. 198 foil. It is quite unnecessary to explain, as 
 Hofmann, ' ein Wort, nicht das Wort.' 
 
 «ls TO ctvai.] Most often used to express the end or aim, as here and 
 below, iii. 3, Heb. vii. 25, Acts vii. 19, E,om. i. 4 (see Westcott Heb. 
 p. 342); sometimes the result as in Eom. i. 20 to, aopara avrov rots 
 •iroi.rjp.a<Tiv voovfieva Ka6opaTai...eK to elvai avTovi avaTToXoy^rov?, ib. vii. 
 4, 5, 2 Cor. vii. 3, viii. 6, Gal. iii. 17, Heb. xi. 3 j sometimes merely 
 reference, as below ver. 19 /SpaSvq els to XaXrja-aL^ : see Winer p. 413 foil. 
 
 diropxTJv Tiva rav airov KTio-|idTO)v.] The gifts of God were consecrated 
 by devotion of the First-Fruits ; see Z>. of B. s.v., where six kinds, 
 private or public, are specified, and cf. Exod xxii. 29 foil., Deut. xviii. 
 3, xxvi. 2 foil., Neh. x. 35, Ezek. xx. 40. Similar offerings were 
 made among the Greeks and Romans, cf. Homeric i'lra.pxop.a.i, and apy- 
 fmra, Od. xiv. 446, Herod, i. 92 (of the offerings of Croesus), Thuc. 
 iii. 58 ocra Te fj yrj ■^p.wv dvcStSot) &pala, travToiv dTrap^ds eirtc^epoVTES, 
 Isaeus Bicaeog. 42, Lat. primitiae. We find the word used meta- 
 phorically, Plato Legg. 767 C, Plutarch Mor. p. 40, where see Wytt. j 
 so Philo M. 2. p. 366 (Israel) tov uvp-TravTos avOpuiirwv yivovs aTreve/ji-qOrj 
 old Tts dTrap;^'^ to! TTOirjTy Koi iraTpi, with ref. to Jer. ii. 3. St. Paul 
 uses it of the first converts, Eom. xvi. 5 os iaTiv dirapxri ttjs 'Ao-ids eh 
 XpuTTov, 1 Cor. xvi. 15 d7r. Trj's 'A;^aias(speaking of the house of Stephanas). 
 The faith of the patriarchs, sanctifying their posterity, is typified by the 
 heave-offering of the dough (Numb. xv. 21) el r/ aTrapxrj dyia Koi to 
 (l>vpafia Eom. xi. 16. In 1 Cor. xv. 20 Christ Himself is called dir. 
 tSv KeKOL/j.r}p.evii}v. The nearest approach to St. James is found in 
 2 Thess. ii. 13 God has chosen you oi.Trapxr]v ek o-aTrjpiav : in Eom. viii. 23 
 
 ^ [I should prefer to take it as a possessive genitive ' words belonging to truth,' 
 as (in 1 Cor. ii. 4, 13) <ro(plas \6yoi 'words belonging to wisdom' or 'uttered by 
 wisdom.' A.] 
 
 2 [Out of forty-two Pauline passages I find only one (2 Cor. viii. 6) in which eij 
 ■rh may not be translated ' in order that ' ; but often an action is said to have 
 been done for a purpose contemplated not by the doer but by God, e.g. 1 Thess. ii, 16, 
 Rom. i. 20, iv. 11, &c. A.] 
 
60 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 the existing manifestation of the Spirit is described as a mere 
 Airapxri in comparison with what shall be hereafter, 'the glorious 
 liberty of the children of God ' : in Apoc. xiv. 4 the 144,000' are called 
 aTrapxrj tiu ©cm Kai tw 'Apvio), cf. the iKK\rj<Tia trpuiTOTOKWv of Heb. xii. 23. 
 In the Clementine Homilies (i. 3) Peter speaks of Clement as tu)v 
 a-wtfi)x.e.v(i)v i6vwv airapx^. Tivd = Lat. quidam, ' as it were,' marks that 
 the word is used not strictly, but metaphorically. KTttr/iaTwi' : cf. 
 Wisd. xiii. 4 Ik KaXX.ov^'S KTurp-aruiv dva\dy<os 6 yev€(Tiaupyo^ OeuipeiTai. 
 The writer uses the widest possible word, embracing not only Christians, 
 but mankind in general, who were blessed in Abraham and still more 
 in Christ; not only men, but all created things : cf. Rom. viii. 19-22, 
 the iraXiyyeveo-ia of Matt. xix. 28, the prophecies of Isa. xi. 6 foil., 
 Ixv. 13. The position of airov is unusual : cf. 1 Pet. i. 3 6 Kara to 
 noXv avTov eXeos di/ayevv^cras ^/".Ss, 1 John ii. 5 og 8' av rrjpy airrov tov 
 Xoyov, ver. 27 to ainov )(pia-iMi. 8t8do-Kei .tj/uSs, 2 Pet. i. 9 tSiv TrdXai 
 avTov afmpTiiov, in all of which there is an emphasis on the pronoun. 
 
 19. loTs.] ' All this you know : act upon your knowledge. Since it 
 is through the word we are begotten anew, let us listen to it in meek- 
 ness, instead of being so eager to give utterance to our own opinions. 
 Do not think that overbearing fanaticism is in accordance with the 
 will of God, or that fierce argumentation is the way to recommend 
 God's truth.' Cf. below iii. 1 foil, with notes. We find the same 
 appeal to the knowledge of the reader in i. 3, iii. 1. The form tore is 
 found elsewhere in N.T. only in Eph. v. 5 and Heb. xii. 17, oiSaTc being 
 ordinarily used, as below iv. 4. It might be taken as an imperative ' be 
 sure of this,' but I prefer to take it as indicative, as in Eph. v. 5 and 
 Heb. xii. 17 ; cf. ywdso-Kerc below, v. 20. 
 
 iros ftv9p<i)iros.] This individualizing phrase is often found instead of 
 TravTEs in N.T., cf. John i. 9, ii. 10 ■ttos dvOpunro's irpStrov tov KaXov oXvov 
 TiOricrL, Gal. v. 3, Col. i. 28 (thrice). 
 
 Tox»is ets Th dKov<roi.] For this use of £19 to cf . 1 Thess. iv. 9 6eo8iSaKToi 
 ia-TC £is TO ayairav oXXriXovi, and such instances of the simple ace. after 
 £ts as Luke xii. 21 eis tov ®eov ttXovtSsv, Rom. xvi. 19 croc^oiis p.ev cis to 
 ayaOov, aKepalovs 8e eis to KaKov. For the thought cf. Sir. ii. 29 fir/ 
 yLVov Ta)(yg (al. Tpaxp's) ev yXu>(ra~rj (TOv, Kal vmOpoi iv Tots tpyoig <TOv, ib. 
 V. 1 1 yiVov rayyi; iv aKpoaxTU crov Ktti iv p.aKpoBvixi(}. <f>6€yyov airoKpuriv, ib, 
 XX. 4, Prov. X. 19, xiii. 3, 11, xxix. Eccl. v. 1, 2, Taylor Jewish Fathers, 
 p. 104, Zeno ap. Diog. L. vii. 23 Sto. Tavra 8vo Stra ixpfnev oTOfio. 8e ei', 
 iva wXeio) fikv aKovti)p,£v ^TTOva Se XaXSi/iev, Demonax ap. Luc. § 5 1 (asked 
 how one would best rule, he said) dopytjTog koX oXiya fiev XaXSiv ■TroAAa Se 
 aKovbiv, Bias /i,ta-ci to Taxv XaXeiv, /xij d/tdpTgs, (quoted with other maxmis 
 of the kind in Mullach's Frag. Phil i. p.'212 foil.). 
 
 ppaSvs els ip7V-] O'^- -^* Ponto i. 2. 121 piger ad poenas, ad praemia 
 velox, Philo M. 1. p. 412 /3pa8vs ci<^£X^o-ai, Ta^vs pXd\j/ai, ib. ii. p. 522 
 ySpaScis p^iv 0VT£s Ta KaXa iraLSeveirOai, to, 8' evavTia p,av6d.vuv ofuVaToi. 
 For thought cf. iii. 9, 14-16, iv. 1, 2, 11, Prov. xvi. 32, Eccles. vii. 9 
 p,rj (TTrevcrrj's iv wvevixari crov tov 6v/j,etcr6ai. 
 
 20. 6pyif y^p — ipvdJtToi.] Sir. i. 19 ov BwqcrtTai 6i)/i(uSi;s dvrip (»!• 
 Ovfios otStKo?) SiKaL<j)6TjvaL, Psa. cvi. 32, 33 (of Moses at Meribah). For 
 
I 20, 21] NOTES 61 
 
 the omission of the article see above v. 18 and Essay on Grammar; so 
 0i\.r]iia avSpoi John i. 13, ov yap OcXrj/jiaTi, dvOpwirov rjvi)(6ri 7rpO(^r;T£ia. 
 1 Pet. i. 21. The choice of ai/ijp here, instead of avOpoyn-o's, was probably 
 determined by the facts of the case ; the speakers would be men, and 
 they might perhaps imagine that there was something manly in violence 
 as opposed to the feminine quality of wpaij-njs, cf. Longin. Sublim. 32 
 TTjv fihi tS>v kirL6vii,iSsv oiK-qtriv TrpoaemfV <J)s yvvaiKOiViTiv, t^v tov Ov/jlov 8c 
 wa-TTtp avSpwviTiv, Clem. Al. Strom, iii. p. 553 P. Bvfxhv p^iv appeva opp,riv, 
 6riX.iia,v hi -np/ eVtflv/iiW. The word avijp is used of men in contrast to 
 gods in Homer's phrase Trarijp dvSplav re Oeuiv re. Here the thought that 
 it is God's righteousness brings out the absurdity of man's hoping to 
 effect it by mere passion. 
 
 SiKaioo-uvTiv 0€ov.] Already in theO.T. we find righteousness described as 
 the attribute and gift of God : Isa. xlv. 24,liv. 17,lxi. 10, 11, Jer. xxiii. 
 6, xxxiii. 15, 16, Dan. ix. 7, Hos. x. 12 ; and in Micah vi. 5 ij SiKaio- 
 (Tvvri TOV Kvpiov is declared not to consist in sacrifices but in doing 
 justice and loving mercy. This is more clearly expressed in Matt. 
 V. 20, vi. 33, Rom. i. 17 SiKaioavvrj ®eov ev auTu (the Gospel) d^roKaXw- 
 TCTai EK irt(rT£0)s eis tticttiv, ib. iii. 5, 21 foil., x. 3 dyi/ooCcres t^jv tov 
 @iov StxatocriJnji' koI ttjv iSiav SiKaioorvvrjv ^rjTOVVTes (rrria'ai, Trj SiKaioo'vvri 
 TOV ®£ov ovx vTreTayria-av. What St.' James understood by the phrase 
 was no doubt (1) the perfect obedience to the law of liberty contained 
 in the Sermon on the Mount (see below ver. 25, ii. 8, 12) as distin- 
 guished from that outward observance which constitutes righteousness 
 in the eye of man, and (2) the acknowledgment that such righteousness 
 was the gift of God, wrought in us by His word received into our hearts 
 (above ver. 5, 18, iii. 17). We may compare the phrase SiKaioi ivunrLov 
 TOV ®iov Luke i. 6 (of Zechariah and his wife). Acts iv. 19, viii, 21, 
 1 Pet. iii. 4, &c. See Vorst ffellen. p. 399 foil., 649 foil. 
 
 ep'yalerai.] So KaTepyd^erai virop,ovr)V ver. 3, tu iron;cravTt eXcos ii. 13, 
 epya^d/xcvos hLKaiocrvvqv Acts X. 35, Heb. xi. 33. 
 
 21. SUi diroe^|ievoi irotrov p\m-op£av.] ' Wherefore,' in order that we may 
 yield ourselves to the divine influence, let us prepare our hearts. Cf. 
 Eph. iv. 25 8to a.iroOip.evot to i/revSos XaXeiTe aXrjOeiav, 1 Pet. ii. 1 
 wiroOefievoL ovv iracrav KaKuav. . .to koyiKOV aSoXov ydka eirtirofi^craTe. It is a 
 metaphor from the putting off of clothes, as in Heb. xii. 1 (stripping 
 for the race), Rom. xiii. 12 where dTro6wp,i6a to, epya tov ctkotous is 
 opposed to iv8v(ra.a-6ai to. oirAa tov (jxnToi, Eph. iv. 22 where dTro6ea-6ai 
 TOV TTaXaLov dvdpuyrrov is opposed to evSvcraaOai tov kucvov dvOpunrov, Col. 
 iii. 8 foil. aTToOeo'Oe opyqv, 6vp.6v, KaKiav, /3Xacr(j>r]fji,Lav, a'uT)(po\oyiav . . . 
 ivSvaaKrOe. . .Taireivoffypoo'vvrjv, irpavTTjTa k.t.A.., Clem. Rom. i. 13 diroOifJiei/oi ' 
 irdcrav dXa^6veiav.,.Kal6pyds, Acta Matt. Tisch. p. 171 naKiav dTro6ep,£voi... 
 dyaTrijV ivhva-diJ,evoL, Justin. Tryph. p. 343 oiVives ev Tropveiais kol d7rA.Ss 
 wdaji pvTrapa xpdfet virdpxovTe?, Slot T^s Trapd tov rjfiiTepov 1-q(T0v kclto. to 
 OeXrjfia tov Xlarpos ■^dpiTO's, to, pvirapa. TaCra, a ■^fji.cliUa'fJi.eOa, KaKot. drreSvo'd- 
 fxeda, Clem. Horn. viii. 23 ei/Su/ta ovv el ySovAecr^e yiVecr^ai Oelov wvevfiaTO^, 
 OTTOuSdcraTC irpwTOV eKSwatr^at to pvirapov v/xmv TrpoXrip.p.a, orep io'Tiv 
 axdOapTov TiTeii/ia. For the comparison between dress and character see 
 Matt. xxii. 11 (the wedding garment), Apoc. iii. 4, 18 (white garment 
 
62 l^HE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 the symbol of purity), ib. vii. 14, xix. 8, Isa. Ixi. 10, <fec. The metaphor 
 is continued in the word pmrapia (air. key. in N.T.) ; see below ii. 3, Isa. 
 Ixiv. 6 'our righteousness is as filthy rags,' Zech. iii. 4 di^eXere ra 
 1/j.aTia ra pvirapa. aTr avTOV /cat tTjre Trpos ainoV 'iSou atjjyprjKa Tas avofiw.'S 
 (Tov, Koi evSiJcraTE airbv TroS-^pr], Job xiv. 4, Apoo. xxii. 11 6 pira-apos 
 pvTtavBriTw. St. Paul uses the synonym f]i.o\v<TiJ,6g 2 Cor. vii. 1 (filthi- 
 ness of the flesh and spirit). Strictly speaking the word piVos is used 
 of the wax of the ear, as in Hippocrates and Clem. Al. Paed. ii. p. 222 
 P. quoted by Heisen, who suggests that there may be an allusion to 
 the purged ear, aurium removendae sordes sv/nt quae attdiendi cekritatem 
 impedire queunt ; but it cannot be assumed without evidence that the 
 derivative retained the original force of the simple word. The phrase 
 aapKo^ (xTrd^eo-is pxnrov is used of baptism in 1 Pet. iii. 21 ; and so Schegg 
 would explain here ; but there is no reference here to a past event. 
 The aorist participle is part and parcel of the command contained in 
 the imperative Se'^ao-^e, as in the quotations from St. Paul. Other 
 examples of the metaphorical use are Philo M. 1. p. 597 (through 
 repentance the soul washes away) ra KarappviraivovTa, ib. 585, 273, 
 Dion. Hal. A.M. xi. 5 pviraivovTe? aicr)(pm /3i<o rai eavrw re /cai rStv 
 irpoyovtov aperd^, Epict. Diss. 2. 5 recommends the expulsion of a 
 pmrapa ^avTacrla by one which is KaX-q koi yewaia, Luc. V. Auct. 3 KaOapav 
 rrjv tj/vxrjv ipyacrd/jievos koi tov ctt' avrg pvwov e/c/cXwas, Acta Thomae. 
 Tiscb. p. 200 pvTrapa KOivwvia, pvTrapa eiriBvfiia, Ignat. Uph. 16 eav ns 
 irio'Tiv Oeov iv /ca/cjj SiSatTKaXioi ff>6eip7j...pvTrapo^ yivo fievos els to irvp to 
 dcr^ea-Tov x'^PW^'- Plutarch uses pmrapia, (like our ' shabbiness ') of 
 avarice {Mor. p. 60 D) : the compounds pwrapoyjwxos, pvTrapoyvw/juov are 
 found in Byzantine writers. Its precise force in our text will be con- 
 sidered in the following note. 
 
 iTEpio-creCav KaK(as.] ' Overflowing (ebullition) of malice.' The meaning 
 is best shown in the cognate phrase in Luke vi. 45 (' the evil man out 
 of the evil treasure in his heart bringeth forth that which is evil') ex 
 yap TOV TrepwfTfviiaros T^s KapSias XaXei to crTofia avToC. The only other 
 passages in which irepto-creta occurs in N.T. are Kom. v. 17 ttjv inpura-eiav 
 TTJi xaptTos ' the superabundance of grace,' 2 Cor. viii. 2 ij irepuTo-eia r^s 
 YapSs... «irepto"0'£uo'£V til to wXoijTos Trj's aTrXoTijTos awroiv 'the overflowing 
 of their joy overflowed to (so as to make up) the wealth of their 
 generosity,' 2 Cor. x. 15 us irepura-tiav ' to overflowing ' (abundantly). 
 The writer warns his readers against hasty and passionate words, 
 against the outbreak of evil temper. Then comes the question whether 
 pmrapiav is to be taken separately (Calvin, Bouman, Lange), or as 
 'governing KaKi'as along with irepura-aav. The fact that iratrav is not 
 repeated is in favour of the latter construction, which is supported by 
 Matthaei's Schol. tyjv afiapriav t^v puTraivovcrav tov avOpxa-wov <j>rj(ri, ttjv ws 
 TrepiTTTjv ova-av iv ij/iiv. Perhaps however it is better to give /cat an 
 epexegetic force, ' all defilement and effervescence of malice ' being 
 equivalent to ' all defilement caused by the overflowing malice of the 
 heart': so Wiesinger 'alien Schmutz der reichlich bei ihnen sich 
 findenden Bosheit.' Other explanations of irepia-a-tia are (1) ' superfluity ' 
 A.V. (malitimn majorem quam in Christianis expectaveris, Theile). 
 
I 21] NOTES 63 
 
 This would seem to make the writer guilty of the absurdity of 
 supposing a certain amount of malice to be proper for a Christian. 
 It might be said the same objection applies to the rendering 
 abundamtia ' overflowing ', because it is the seat of the disease 
 in the heart, not its manifestation in the words which the Christian 
 should seek to get rid of. But St. James here speaks as below in ch. iii. 
 and as our Lord in Matt. xv. 18, 19 of defilement arising from words: 
 before we can receive the word of God into our hearts we must prepare 
 the way by laying aside this open outward sin. (2) 'rank growth,' 
 '-Auswuchs,' with reference to the ground which has to be prepared for 
 sowing the seed of the word : so Alf., Bassett (who translates, clearing 
 away every kind of ' rubbish, pvirapia, and overgrowth '), Heisen, 
 Loesner, Pott, comparing Philo M. 2. p. 258 TrepiT^iJi.vicrOe ras aKk-qpo- 
 KapBicv;, TO Be iari, ras TrepiTTcls (jivaet^ rqv rjyefjLOVLKOv, as al afLirpoi t&v 
 iraOutv €(nreipa.v T€ kol (rwijvfijtrav op/iaX koI o KaKos "/"^X?* yetapyos itfivrev- 
 (Tev, a,<j>po<rvvrj, /i€Ta (TTravSrjs d.'iroKflpacrde. It does not however appear 
 to be proved that either irepurcre.ia or (still less) pmrapia would bear the 
 meaning suggested. (3) Hofmann, after Gebser and others, takes it 
 in the sense of ' residuum,' ' what is left over and above ' ; the Christians 
 addressed have already renounced sin, but still sin is not entirely 
 vanquished in them. It is true that Trepicrcreia is not found in this 
 sense, which would rather require wepicra-tvp.a, but we have Trepiorcros 
 Exod. X. 5 (the locust) KareSeTcu irav to irepurcov t^s yijs, to KaTaXct^^ei/, 
 o KareXtTrei/ -q x'^''S") Joseph. B.J. ii. 6. 2 (they begged the Romans 
 to pity) TO, Trjs louSaias Xeiij/ava kol ju.^ to "irepiuuov avryjs a/Troppixj/ai toTs 
 wfuj>% <nrapa.<T<Tov<yi, and SO 7repttr(reD/*a Mark viii. 8 of the frag- 
 ments of the loaves. (4) Nothing need be said of the strange inter- 
 pretation praeputium adopted by Grotius, Hammond and Clericus, 
 nor of Beza's excrementwm = -irepiTTuxris or irepiTTbyfia. Heisen indeed 
 cites a similar use of TrepiTTeia from Clem. Rom. p. 183 (which I am 
 unable to verify) ; but what meaning could KaKias have in connexion 
 with the word thus understood? Those who take pmrapia with an 
 independent force understand it of the special sin of uncleanness, but 
 there does not seem to be any special reference to that sin here, though 
 there possibly may be in iv. 4, 8 below. KaKia seems best understood 
 here of malice : cf. Lightfoot on Col. iii. 8 {air6dea-6e opyrpr, dvp,6v, 
 KaKMv) : ' It is not, at least in the N.T., vice generally, but the vicious 
 nature which is bent on doing harm to others, and is well described by 
 Calvin (on Eph. iv. 31) animi pravitas qvMe humomitati et aequitati est 
 opposita.' He refers to Trench JV.T. Synon. § xi. p. 3.5 seq. It is not 
 quite correct to say that it always bears this force in the N.T. (cf. Acts 
 viii. 22, Matt. vi. 34), but here the preceding opyy\ and the following 
 irpavnyi leave little doubt as to the meaning. [Is it possible that 
 mnrapia may be used to denote the passively mean and base, in 
 opposition to KaKia, an active form of vice, which leads irepKra-a 
 Trpacrcreiv ? — C. T.j 
 
 Iv irpawrriTi.] Cf. below iii. 13, 1 Pet. iii. 15, 2 Tim. ii. 25. 
 
 S^lairOc Tov ?(iij)in-ov Xd^ov.] Cf. Acts xvii. 11 eSt^ai/TO tov \6yov fjLeTO, 
 irditnjs irpoOvfiias, 1 Thess. i. 6, ii. 13. ''Eft.^vTos only here in N.T. Its 
 
64 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 common meaning is 'innate,' as in Wisd. xii. 10 ifi^vro^ fj kukm avrZv, 
 Plato Eryx. 398 Trorepov Sokcl eivat StSaxToviy apery] rj €fJi<l>VTOv, Justin M. 
 Apol. ii. 8 (the Stoics and others have spoken well on moral questions) Sta 
 TO ifiKJiVTov TroLVTi yivv. avdpioTTiov (riripfjia tov Xoyov, ib. 13, and so Oecu- 
 menius here ; but the word Seiacrde forbids this. We must therefore take 
 it as the 'rooted word,' i.e. a word whose property it is to root itself like 
 a seed in the heart : cf. Matt. xiii. 3-23 esp. ver. 21 ovk l^et pi^av iv 
 iavT(o, XV. 13 TrStra <jiVT£ia rjv ovk i(j)VT€vcr€v 6 Tlaryp iJ,ov 6 ovpdvios 
 iKpLtfaOrjo-erai, 1 Cor. iii. 6. The cognate words are used with 
 a similar meaning, as Plut. Mor. p. 125 E Sio, Tpv(jyr]v ras o-Too-eis 
 i fi.(j)v ecrd ai rais iroXecri, Xen. £. Lac. 3 to alSilcrOai i ft, <fi v (t i Si (r a i 
 ySovAo/Aevos airots, SO e/t<^vT£iJ<o, i/xcjivTeia of grafting. The A.V. seems 
 to identify our word with ifji<j)VTevTov, which however would be out of 
 place here, since the word is §own, not grafted, in the heart. Other 
 examples occur in which it cannot mean 'innate,' e.g. Herod, ix. 94 of 
 Euenius, to whom the gods granted the gift of prophecy as a solace 
 after he had lost the sight of his eyes, /^era ravra ifxtfyvTov /lauriKrjv 
 el^ev, Barnab. i. 2, and ix. 9 ttjv efi.(j)VTOv Sinpeav rrji St8a;^s avroB 6efji,e- 
 vos iv vfuv, where Harnack quotes Ignat. £ph. 17 (ree. maj.) 
 €fjL(j)VTOV TO irepl ®£o5 irapa XpiaTov XajSovres KpiTrjpiov. In like manner 
 (TVfji,^vTOi, which literally means ' congenital,' as in Jos. Ant. vi. 3. 3, is 
 also used of that which has coalesced or grown into one since birth, as 
 in Rom. vi. 5 avfj-tjivroi yeyovafiev t£ o/jLoua/juin tov BavaTov avrov. The 
 Latin insitus has the same two meanings, ' innate,' and ' ingrafted ' or 
 'incorporated.' The verb is found in the same application, though 
 with a different meaning, in Plut. Mor. 47. A rbv ck ^i\o<To<j>ia's i/j-tfivo- 
 fievov ev(j>vicn viol's Srjy/xov awTos 6 TpuSo'as Adyos larai. For the injunction 
 cf. Job. xi. 13, 14, Deut. xi. 18, and esp. xxx. 14 as explained in 
 Rom. X. 8, Jer. xxxi. 33, Acts xx. 32, 2 Cor. iii. 3, 1 Thess. ii. 13. 
 
 rbv 8wii|jievov o-cSo-ai tos <|»vxos 6|iMv.] Cf. below ii. 14, iv. 12, v. 20, 
 1 Pet. i. 9 TO TeXos Tiys Trio-Tews aioTrjpiav \pv)(S>v, John v. 24 6 tov Xoyov 
 fx,ov aKovutv KOI iricrTeutov tw Tri/jLij/avTi fie e^ei t,<i>riv aliivtov, Rom. i. 16 
 OVK eTrai(T)(vvoiJi,ai to evayyikiov, Swa/iis yap @eov Io'tIv eh o-oTiypiav iravTi 
 T(U TriCTTevovTi, 2 Tim. iii. 15, Heb. x. 39 Trio-Teojs ia-p-ev eis Trepiiroiijo'iv 
 •/'"X^Sj Ba-i'iS'l'' xi^- 8 fieXcTSv ets to aZcrai ij/v)(r]v tm Xoyio, Clem. Horn. 
 iii. 54 Tj dXrjOeia rj cui^ovcra ■^v kcu cWiv ev T<3 Irjo-ov rj/jLuiv Xoyw, SO we 
 read of <ju>^uv Swa/Acvoi Xdyoi, t,oioTrot.ol Xdyoi, ib. i. 5, 6, 19. Below v. 
 15 the phrase is used of bodily life : see Vorst, p. 123, Hatch, p. 101. 
 22. -ytveo-et.] The imperative eorTe does not seem to be used in N.T., 
 though 10-01 and co-tod are not uncommon. We may take y. to mean 
 not simply ' be,' but ' show yourselves more and more ' : see below iii. 1, 
 Matt. X. 16 ytvea-de ovv <t>p6vip,oi, ib. xxiv. 44 y. erot/toi, 1 Cor. xiv. 20, 
 XV. 28, Eph. v. 1. 
 
 ■iroii)Tal \d70v.] Cf. iv. 11 ir. vopLov, Rom. ii. 13, where ir. v6p.ov is 
 opposed to aKpoaTrjs v. as being justified before God, Matt. vii. 24 ttSs 
 00-Tts Akovu p.ov Tovi Xdyovs TOVTOvi /cat iroiei avTovi, Luke vi. 46, xi. 28, 
 John xiii. 17, Ezek. xxxiii. 32, Sen. £p. 108. 35 sic ista ediscanvus ut 
 quae fu&rint verba, sint opera, Porphyr. Abstin. i. 57 8t' Ipywv ^/iiv t^s 
 o-coTi/pias, ov Si dxpoao-ccos Xoywv \j/iX^i yiyvofievrji. The word ttohjt^'s is 
 
1 21, 23 NOTES 65 
 
 only found six times in N.T., of which four are in St. James. Grotius 
 quotes a rabbinical saying to the effect that there are two crowns, one 
 of hearing, the other of doing.^ Cf. also Taylor's Jewish FatJiers, p. 
 63 ' R. Chananiah used to say whosesoever works are in excess of his 
 wisdom, his wisdom stands ; and whosesoever wisdom is in excess of 
 his works, his wisdom stands not ' ; ih. p. 75. 
 
 aKpoara^.] Regularly used of an attendant at a lecture, but distin- 
 guished from jxaOrjTq'i by Isocr. ad Nie. 17 TroirjrSiv dxpoarijs, (to^uttwv 
 fLaOr/TTj's yi-yvov, ib. p. 405 B. : similarly d/covo-r^s and auditor. As 
 Dr. Plummer observes, we naturally think of the reading of the 
 Scriptures in the synagogue, on which the Jews laid such stress. The 
 word is used three times by St. James, only once besides in N.T. 
 (Rom. ii. 16). 
 
 irapaXoYi^<S|i.evoi.] The only other passage in which it occurs in N.T. 
 is Col. ii. 4 iva /xiyScls i/Aas irapaXoyL^tjTai iv TnQavoXoyla, which Lightfoot 
 explains ' lead you away by false reasoning.' In LXX. it is more loosely 
 used, as 1 Sam. xxviii. 12, where the witch of Endor says to Saul Iva ti 
 TrapeXoyicro) jue; 
 
 «aDToiJs.] Regularly used in N.T., and often by classical authors, for 
 the plural reflexive of the 1st and 2nd persons : cf. Winer, p. 187 foil., 
 Vorst. p. 68. 
 
 23. 8ti.] Here = yap, giving the reason for the injunction ' do not be 
 mere hearers,' because on such the word has no abiding influence. The 
 causal connexion denoted by on, which is sometimes so close as to make 
 even a comma unnecessary (e.g. Matt. xx. 15 6 o^6aX/*os a-ov irovr]p6i 
 icrnv otl eyo) ayados ei/ju ;), is sometimes so loose as to allow of its being 
 separated from what precedes by a full stop, as in Mark iii. 3 d/u,^v Xiyto 
 vfuv . . .afiaprriiuiTO^. on tXeyov TrvevfJLa aKaOaprov ep^ct, Luke xi. 18, ib. 
 xiv. 11, Heb. viii. 10. 
 
 ou •7roir]T'/)s.] Ov is used even in classical Greek after d, when, as 
 here, it may be considered to coalesce with the particular word or 
 phrase to which it is joined, and not to affect the condition generally 
 (this takes place most easily with such words as 6iX<i> or ed<o), or when the 
 negative conception is immediately contrasted with its positive, as below 
 iii. 2 iroXXci TTTaio/ji.ei/ aTravres. ct tis ov irraUi, or when it may be regarded 
 as parenthetical, being most exactly represented by the insertion of 
 such a phrase as ' I do not say.' The same rule applies where the con- 
 dition is assumed to be the fact, d being equivalent to cttei or on. But 
 beside these cases, in which ov was admissible in classical Greek, the 
 later Greek employs d ov instead of £6 /ji'q as more emphatic, the latter 
 being generally used without a verb (out of ninety-three examples cited 
 by Bruder only fourteen are followed by a verb) in the sense of ' but ' 
 or ' except.' Of ei ov Bruder cites thirty-one examples, omitting how- 
 ever this verse and iii. 2. On the other hand, jjl-q is always used with 
 
 1 [On Exod. xxiv. 7, which ends (lit.) 'we will do and we will hear,' it is written 
 (T. B. Shabbath 88ffl) that "when Israel put 'we will do' before 'we will hear, 'there 
 came 60 myriads of ministering angels, and attached to each one of Israel two 
 crowns, one corresponding to ' we will do' and the other to 'we will hear,' and 
 when they sinned there came down 120 myriads of destroying angels and tore them 
 off."— C. T.] 
 
 F 
 
66 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 lav (sixty-two instances in Bruder), never ov. See Winer, 599 foil., 
 A. Buttmann, 296 foil. 
 
 oStos.] The use of the pronoun to emphasize the apodosis after a 
 relative, a condition or a participle, is a characteristic of the writer's 
 style, cf. below 25, iii. 2. 
 
 ■^oiKcv.] Only here and in ver. 6 in N.T. 
 
 ov8pl KaravoovvTi eavrrfv.] For avSpi see above ver. 8. Karav. properly 
 ' to take note of,' as in Xen. Gyrop. ii. 2. 28 Ka.Ta.vo-l)a-a.<i riva. tu>v \oxa.ylov 
 cruvSetTTVoi' Treirotiyjuevov avSpa viripaur^ov, hence, on the one hand 
 'observe,' 'look at,' as here and Acts vii. 31, 32, and more generally 
 ' see,' as in Psa. xciii. 9 6 TrXatras tov oKJidaXjuiv, ov)(i Karavoei; on the 
 other hand ' consider,' as in Heb. x. 24, Herm. Sim. viii. 2. 5, ix. 6. 3. 
 
 tJ> irpdo-coirov Tfis yivitrvni avToS.] On the difficult word yei/ccris = ' fleet- 
 ing earthly existence,' as in Judith xii. 18 Tracras tcis -fifiepas t^s yevt'o-cws 
 ' all the days of my life,' see below iii. 6. It is used here to contrast the 
 reflexion in the mirror of the face which belongs to this transitory life, 
 with the reflexion as seen in the Word of the character which is being 
 here moulded for eternity. 
 
 Iv lo-diTTpij).] The figure of the mirror is also found 1 Cor. xiii. 12, 
 contrasting the imperfect knowledge gained through the reflexion with 
 the perfect knowledge of the reality (as in Plato's cave, Jiep. vii.), 
 2 Cor. iii. 18 i^jaeis a,vaKeKakvfi,fi,ivia irpoo'ut'ino rr/v So^av K.vpiov KaroTrrpi- 
 ^ofievoi (reflecting as in a mirror) rrjv avrrjv e'lKova iJi,eTafu)p(jiovfjL£6a airo 
 Sofiys eh Sd^av, with allusion to the glory which shone in the face of 
 Moses, Sir. xii. 11, where the feigning of the hypocrite is compared 
 to the rust on the face of the mirror which has to be rubbed off in order 
 to see his real character, Wisd. vii. 26 cro<j)ia is tcroTrrpov a/ojXtSuTov -rijs 
 TOV ®€ov evepyeia's. It is often' used by the poets {e.g. Eur. Hipp. 427- 
 430, Ter. Ad. 415), and philosophers, as (Epict. Diss. ii. 14) the Stoic asks 
 Tt (TOi KaKov ireTroiijKa ; ei fjir) /cat to icroTTTpov T<3 aicr^w on SeiKvuei avToi' 
 avTia olds ecrTiv ; Plut. Mor. p. 42 B ov yap Ik Kovpeiov p-ev avacrTavra 
 Set 't(o KaTOTTTpw irapao-r^vat Kai t^s KeiaX'^s aipacrOai njv irepLKOTrrjv 
 TOW Tpi)(S>v eTTLfTKOTrovvTa Koi Tijs Kovpai T)jv Sia(j>opdv €K 0€ aKpoaxretoi 
 aTTiovTa Koi o-^oX^S ovk evOv'S a(j>opav XPV '"'P"^ eavTov, KaTap.avddvovTa 
 TTjv il/vyriv, e'l, Ti Tcov o-)(Kr]p!hv o.iroreQeip.h'ri Ktu. irepLTTiav eXatjipoTepa 
 yiyove K<ur]8io)v,'Bia,S ap. Stob. Flor. 21. 11 Oeu>pet Za-Trep ev KaTOirrpm 
 Tois cravToC irpa.^ei's Iva ras p-ev KaXas iiTLKOa-p.fj's Tas 8« aicrxpas KaXuTTTrjs, 
 often by Philo, cf. Gfrbrer, p. 439, who cites M. 2. p. 483 (the Law is 
 compared by the Therapeutae to a living creature, of which the letter 
 is the body and the spirit or intention the sonl) ev w ^p^aro rj XoyiK^ 
 tl/vxri 8ia0EpdvT(os ra oiKeia Oeuipeiv &(nrep 8ia KaTOTrrpov tSv dvo/iaron', 
 ^faio-ia KciXXr; vo-qp-aTtav KariSovo-a, ih. 197 (through the number seven) 
 <I)S 8ia KaTOTTTpov <f)avTa(TiovTai 6 voCs ®€ov Sp&VTa Koi KO(rp.o7roiovvTa, lb. 
 156 the priest should remember, as he bathes, that the laver was made 
 out of the brazen mirror (Exod. xxxviii. 8), iva koX avros ota Trpos rar- 
 oTTTpov avya.t,ri Tov ffiiov vovv, Clem. Hom. xiii. 16 koXu Eerdirrpu opa ek 
 TOV ®ebv ipi^XeTTova-a, Clem. Al. Paed. i.^ 9. p. ^150 F. is yap to 
 ecTOTTTpov T& ala-)(pSf ov KaKov, on BcLKVvei avTov olds eoTiv, Kai o)s o larpos 
 T(j voa-ovvTi ov KttKds, TOV irvpeTOV dmyyE'XXcov avTOv . .ovTWS ovSt o cXeyx<»'' 
 
1 23-25 NOTES 67 
 
 Bvcrvovi T(3 Kafivovri T-qv if/vyci^v. The mirror was sometimes made of 
 silver, but more frequently of a mixture of copper and tin {B. of B. s.v.). 
 The point of comparison here is that the Word will show us what needs 
 to be cleansed and amended in our lives, as the mirror in regard to our 
 bodies. It shows us what we actually are in contrast with what our 
 deceitful heart paints us (ver. 26) : it shows us also what is the true 
 ideal of humanity which we are called upon to realize in our lives. 
 
 24. KaTcviSi)o-c Kal aTreX^Xveev.] 'Just a glance and he is off.' For the 
 gnomic aorist often used in comparisons see ver. 11 avenikev, 
 A. Buttmann, p. 174, Goodwin, M. and. T. § 30. The proleptio perf. 
 (on which see Buttmaun, p. 172) expresses the suddenness and com- 
 pleteness of the action, as in Xen. Gyr. iv. 2. 26 o yap KparZv a/ia iravra 
 (TvvripTraKev, E/Om. xiv. 23 6 SiaKpi.vofLevo'; tav 4"'-yXI KaraKCKpiTat, ib. vii. 2. 
 On the combination of aorist and perfect see below ii. 10 oWis irrai'trij 
 yc'yovEv, Winer, p. 339. Both he and Buttmann (p. 171) ignore the 
 special force of the perfect here, and compare it with such barbarous 
 uses as Apoc. v. 7 rjXOi koX e'i\rj(f>e to /JtySAior, where, as often in the 
 arguments to the speeches of Demosthenes, the perfect cannot be 
 distinguished from the aorist, cf. eLXrj)(e and TreirotqKf.v for f.ka.)(€ and 
 eTToirjo-ev in Fro Fhorm. hyp, p. 944. 
 
 iiUa% €m\a9ero.] Dr. Taylor (J. of Phil. vol. xviii. p. 317) has pointed 
 out that the phrase is borrowed by Hermas in the remarkable passage 
 Vis. iii. 13. 2. 
 
 oirbtos ^v.] The direct form irotos is always used in N.T. for indirect 
 interrogation except in this verse and in Gal. ii. 6, 1 Thess. i. 9, 
 1 Cor. iii. 13. So always rts, Trotros, 'ttot^, TroOev for ocm?, ottoctos, oitote, 
 oTr6$ev. "Ottov and otws are frequent, but the former is never, the latter 
 only rarely, used in an interrogative sense. 
 
 25. irapaKvil'as. ] ' bending over in order to examine minutely,' ' peering 
 into' : so 1 Pet. i. 12 els a. i-TriBv/jiovcnv ayytA-ot irapaKvij/ai. It is used of 
 John and of Mary looking into the sepulchre (John xx. 5, 11), also in 
 Sir. xiv. 23 (blessed is) 6 TrapaKvirrtov Sto. tGv dvpi&iav crocjiias, Philo M. 
 2. p. 554 TTOv yap TOis tSwuTais difjus ets rjye/jLOviKrjs tpvX')^ irapaKvxpai 
 PovXevfjiaTa, in Act. Thom. Tisch. p. 230 eh -)(aiTp.a irapaKv\f/ai, Epict. 
 Diss. i. 1, 16 TrapaKVTTTOfJLev a-vve)(S)s tU aveyiios irvei. In classical wiiters 
 we find it sometimes used with the opposite sense of a careless glance, 
 e.g. Dem. 1 Phil. p. 46 ra ^eviKo. TrapaKvij/avTa em rbv r^s TroXeios 
 TToXe/jLov TTpos ' ApTa^a^ov oiy(eTai irXeovTa. Clement of Rome uses JyKVTrTO) 
 in the sense of St. James' irapaK. as in i. 40 eyKeKvtftores eh ra jBdOrj Trjs 
 6eia% yv(x)(Teo>s, where Lightfoot refers to other passages, esp. 45 iyKtmreTe 
 eis Tois ypa<j)aLs. So also M. Anton, iv. 3 eh a tyKvi/^as, ' contemplating 
 which things.' 
 
 v6fLov T^Xeiov tJ>v rijs IXeiiSepfas.] The careful hearer feels that the A.oyos 
 aXrjOetai is, and must be, the law of his life, though a law of freedom : 
 it is the ideal on which his eye is to be iixed, not a yoke too 
 heavy for his shoulders to bear. Even of the Mosaic law the 
 psalmist says (xix. 7) ' the law of the Lord is perfect,' but this 
 is merely rudimentary when compared with the law of Christ (Gal. 
 vi. 2), as is shown in detail in the Sermon on the Mount, and 
 
 F 2 
 
68 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 in the Epistle to the Hebrews. St. Paul speaks of himself as 
 eVvo/xos XpuTTov (1 Cor. ix. 21), and further describes the new law as 
 i/d/Aos 7r6crT£(Ds (Rom. iii. 27). It is of this he says in language which 
 may serve as a comment on St. James 6 vo/j.o's tov 7rvev/x.aTos t^s ^(d^s iv 
 XptcTTcS Irjcrov rjX.€v6ep(a<Tiv /xe a.7ro toO vofiov t^s d/iapTt'as Kal tov 6ava.Tov. 
 Jeremiah prophesied of this law (xxxi. 33) as a new covenant which 
 should be written on the heart. What led St. James to call the Gospel 
 a law of liberty here and in ii. 12 ? Clearly he must mean by it a law 
 not enforced by compulsion from without, but freely accepted as ex- 
 pressing the desire and aim of the subject of it. Such free obedience is 
 recognized even in the O.T., Exod. xxxv. 5, Deut. xxviii. 47, Psa. i. 2, 
 xl. 8, liv. 6 'with a free heart will I sacrifice unto thee,' cxix. 32 'I 
 will run the way of thy commandments when thou hast set my heart 
 at liberty,' ib. 45 ' I will walk at liberty for I seek thy command- 
 ments,' 1 cxix. 97 ' how I love thy law.' This freedom is declared to 
 be the gift of God Psa. li. 12 ' stablish me with thy free Spirit,' cor- 
 responding to the words of St. Paul (2 Cor. iii. 16) ov to ■nrev/jia 
 Kvpiov cKei iXevOepla. But probably the source of the phrase used 
 by St. James is his recollection of the words recorded Matt. v. 17 
 ovK ^X6ov KaTaXvo'ai tov vo/xov dA.Xa irXr/ploaaL, and John viii. 32 yvmreirOe 
 rijv dX-^^eiav Kal ■^ aX.i^6eia iXevOepiio'ei v/iSs. It is another point in 
 which St. James reminds us of the Stoics and their paradox, on fi.6vo<: 
 6 a-o<j>6i iXivOepoi koI irSs at^ptmr SoSXos, on which Cicero (Farad. 34) 
 comments Quid est lihertas ? potestas vivendi ut velis : quia igitur vivit 
 ut vult, nisi qui recta sequitwr, qui gaudet officio, qui legihus quidem 
 nan propter metv/m pa/ret sed eas sequitu/r atque colit quia id salutare 
 maxime esse ivdicat ? So Ov. Met. i. 90 sponte sua sine lege fidem rect- 
 umque colebat, of the golden age, and Plut. Mor. 780 tw ovv apiti tcv 
 apxoVTOs ; 6 v6[ji,oi, 6 TrdvTiav fiao'iXevs Bvryrmi re kol adavaTtiyv, is €<^ij 
 IltVSapos, OVK kv jSt^Xtois Ifoj yeypafUfievos, aX\' efixj/vxoi tav iv avroi (the 
 ruler) Xdyos, ael ctuvoikSv koI TrapatjjvXdTTuiv kol p/qShroTe ttjv ^v^r/v iu>v 
 eprjfx.ov ■qyep.ovia's, Philo M. 1. p. 120 vopoi yap OeToi oBtos tyjv apiTrjV 8i' 
 iavrrjv TLp,av, Seneca Vit. Beat. 15 in regno nati sumus : Deo parere 
 Ubertas est ; cf. the Collect 'Whose service is perfect freedom.' The 
 law of liberty is called reXeios, as the heavenly Tabernacle in Heb. 
 ix. 11, because it carries out, completes, realizes, the object and mean- 
 ing of the Mosaic law which it replaces (Matt. v. 17). From ii. 8 and 
 12 we learn something of the contents of St. James' law of liberty ; he 
 agrees with St. Paul (Gal. v. 1 and xiii. 14, Rom. xiii. 10) in identifying 
 it with the law of love. Possibly he may not have contrasted it so 
 strongly as St. Paul and St. Peter with the bondage of the Mosaic law 
 (cf. Acts XV. 10, Rom. viii. 2 foil.. Gal. iv. 9 foil., 21 foil.), but his 
 view naturally leads on to theirs. Cf. Iren. iv. 39 rd dTroo-ravTa tov 
 iraTpiKOv cjxiiToi Kal irapa/Sdvra tov Oea-pov Trjs cXeuflepi'as irapd t^v air&y 
 dTTt'o-Tijo-av a'lTLav, ib. iv. 34. 4 Ubertatis lex id est verbum Dei ab apostolis 
 amnuntiatwm, iv. 37. 1, iv. 13. 2. For the position of the article see 
 Essay on Grammar, and on the 'Torah' Cheyne's Isaiah i. 10. 
 
 1 Cf. Taylor, J. F. p. 43 ' E. Gamliel used to say Do His will as if it were thy 
 will' 
 
1 25, 26 NOTES 69 
 
 irapa|M£va5.] Contrasted with the previous aTreX.ri\vOe, as irapaKvil/as 
 with KaTevojjcre. Of. John viii. 31 iav /leLvrjTi iv T<a Xoyco tu e/t<5...yv(«- 
 <T€(r6e TTjv aX-qOuav KT.X., Luke ii. 19, 51, ib. viii. 15, Deut. xxvii. 26 
 eirtKaTaparos iras avOpiOTroi bs ovk Cju/Acvet ei/ Tracri tois Aoyots toC vo/jlov 
 TovTov TToiTJcraL avTov'S, Philo M. 1. p. 180 TO yt aij/a/JLtvovs tjjs eirtcrTjf/Aijs 
 [jLTj eirtjueivai o/xoiov €crTi t(3 yeutrao'^ai (riTi'uv, Died. ii. 29 oAiyot irapafiev- 
 ova-iv iv Tu /xaOrj/jiaTi, (he is contrasting the superficial study and the 
 absence of fixed principles among the Greeks with the opposite among 
 the Chaldeans). The parable, as Oecumenius remarks, is incomplete, 
 omitting to give the case of one who makes full use of the mirror, or 
 rather blending the figure with the interpretation in the word irapaKvif/as. 
 
 dKpoaT'f|s 4iri\i]<r|jiovfjs.] For the gen. of quality see below ii. 4 Kpiral 
 BiaXoyiarfiutv trovqpiiiv, iii. 6 6 Kocr/aos rqs dStKtas (where see note), also 
 Essay on Grammar, and Winer p. 297. The only other passage in which 
 eiriK. occurs in all Greek literature is Sir. xi. 25 Kaxuxris copas iTTiK'qaii.ovrjv 
 TToicT Tpw^ri^. According to Meineke's correction of a scholium to 
 Aristophanes {Fr. Com. ii. p. 223) the form was also used by Cratinus. 
 The usual form is hrtX-qfj-fio^rvvri. Other examples of such double forms 
 will be found ia Glass. Rev. ii. 243. 
 
 iroiT)T^s ?p7ov.] This does not correspond exactly to the preceding 
 phrase, as the genitive here is objective. A more exact opposite would 
 have been tt. (juXcpyias or eTrt/teXeias. The present phrase suggests such 
 an opposite as axpoaT^s <^a)v^s. It acquires however a qualitative force 
 by dwelling upon and intensifying the meaning of the word TrotijTijs. 
 We have above tt. Xoyov v. 22 and below tt. vofnov iv. 11. 
 
 oJtos.] See above v. 23. 
 
 (laKapios.] Cf. V. 12 above, and John xiii. 17 ci Tavra oiSare fxaKapioi 
 etrre iav irovffTi avrd, Seneca Fp. Ixxv. 7 non est beatus qui scit ilia sed 
 qui facit. 
 
 iv T^ iroi^jo-et.] Only here in N.T. It occurs in Sir. xix. 18 iv irda-r] 
 'cro^ia TToiTjcns vo/jiov, Ii. 19 ev Trovrjcru vofiov SvrjKpiPoicnijji/rjv. 
 
 26. 8oK6i 8pr|a-Kbs elvoi.] Here we have another source of self-deception, 
 not in hearing, but in saying and doing. Of. Erasmus : Qui Judaismum 
 sapiunt religioms laudem constituunt in palliis ac phylacteriis, in delectu 
 ciborum, in lotionihus, in prolixis precibus ceterisque ceremoniis. Aokei 
 is used in N.T. either impersonally = (1) 'seems' as Acts xxv. 27 
 aXoyov fi.01 SoKei, (2) ' seems good ' as Luke i. 3 tSof e Ka/xoi : or per- 
 sonally (1) of others. Acts xvii. 18 ^iv<ov Sai/jiovitov SokcT KarayyeXevs 
 elvot, (2) of a man's self, 'think,' as here. In this last meaning 
 the word is used absolutely (a) Matt. xxiv. 44 ^ &pq, ov SoKelre : or 
 (6) with oTt Matt. vi. 7 Sokovo-iv oti cio-aKoucr^ijo-ovTai : or (c), as 
 here, with infinitive relating to same subject, cf. John v. 39 SokeTtc iv 
 airals ^(orjv cx«i', 1 Cor. iii. 18 et Tts SoKet ffoc^os elvai, ib. viii. 2, 
 X. 12, xiv. 37, Gal. vi. 3. In some cases (e.g. Gal. ii. 6, Phil. iii. 4) 
 it is disputed whether 'seem' or 'think' is the right rendering. 
 Here the question is decided by the following diraTZv KapSlav eavrov. 
 
 6pT)(rKds] ttTT. A.£y. The word 6p-q<TKiia occurs Acts xxvi. 5 Kara tjjv 
 OKpiPfo-TaTriv atpetrtv r^s rajLeripai Oprja-Kuai e^r/tra ^apicraios. Col. ii. 18 
 Oprjo-Kiia tS)v dyyiX.u>v, and the compound eOeXoOpyja-Keia (self-imposed 
 
70 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 worship)^ Col. ii. 23, where see Lightfoot : also in Wisd. xiv. 18 and 
 27 rj tS>v dSwXoiv 6pr)(jKua, in 4 Mace. v. 6 rrj 'lovSaiwv -xpitiixivo^ 
 6prj(TKclq.,ib. V. 12, and in Josephns ' Ant. iv. 4. 4 t'ois kot' oTkov Ovovcriv 
 ei)(o^tas eVe/ca t^s auTuv dXXa yni) 6prja-K€ia's, ib. v. 10. 1 yurarKas ras eVi 
 Oprjo-Keiq, Trapayivofieva.'S, ib. ix. 13. 3 (of the priests) tW del rrj OprjCTKeia 
 Trapaij,iv(ii(n ' that they may always remain in attendance on public 
 worship,' ib. xii. 5. 4 and xii. 6. 2. Philo carefully distinguishes the 
 term from eva-ejSua and ocrioTiys (M. 1. 195) ireirXdvrjTca t^s wpos cio-eySetav 
 ooov, Opyjo-Keiav dvTi ba-iorrjTO? '^yovp.evos koI Swpa to) dSeKacTTw SiSovs, and 
 SO Plut. F. .4^63!. 2 (where he gives the derivation from ®pyjcraa, which 
 seems to have suggested to Dr. Hilgenfeld his strange idea that dprjGKoi 
 is an Orphic word borrowed by St. James) So/cei to dpTja-Kevuv 6vop.a rais 
 KaraKopois yevia-Oai koI Tnpiepyoi's Upovpyiai^. Dr. Hatch sums up the 
 result of his investigation {I.e. p. 57) in the words 'religion in its 
 external aspect, as worship or as one mode of worship contrasted with 
 another, must be held to be its meaning in the N.T. as in contemporary 
 writers.' I subjoin some examples from later writers, Justin M. C'oh. 
 ad Gent. § 38 rriv rStv Trpoyovwv 6coa-e/3€iav KaraXiTrovTes SiSaa-KaXia 
 jiaa-Klvov haip.ovo's €Tn rrp/ tw fir} OeSiv irpaTn^crav Oprja-Keiav, ib. 9, id. 
 Monarch. 1 drpeTTTOv ex^iv rfiv ets tov iravTaiv yvuxxTTjv Oprja-Kuav, ib. twv 
 ciSwAwv Op. [in Coh. ad Gent. 10 it is identified with Oeoa-e^cia, the 
 prophets being spoken of as teachers first of one, then of the othei-], 
 Olem. Rom. i. 45 'Avavias koi 'A^api'as koI Murarj\ vtto tS>v OprjcrKtvovTOiv 
 Ttjv fieyaXoTTpCTT^ kol fvSofov OprjorKCiav tov iij/'o-TOv KaT€tp)^9rj<Tav f is Ka/iivov 
 TTvpos; /xiySa/ifis tovto yeyoiTO, Clem. Al. Strom, vi. p. 795 P eSwKcv rov 
 rjXiov Ktti TTjV creX^viyv kol to, ao'Tpa eh dprjO'Keiav. It is of frequent 
 occurrence in Olem. Horn. ; see the account there given (vii. 8) of the 
 dprja-Keca required by God. The verb Op-qa-Kevw occurs in Wisd. xi. 15 
 with an object eBprjo-Kevov SXoya. epirerd, and xiv. 16 (in the passive) 
 Tvpdvvav eirtrayais eOprjcTKeveTo to. yXviTTd, Josephus B.J. ii. 9, 2 ^v Trap' 
 avTOis 0pr)(TKev6p,evov (rdpPcLTOv, so Euseb. H.E. ii. 13 tovtous OprfO'Keveiv 
 eTTixetpovvTe^, Clem. Al. Strom, vi. § 77, p. 778 P to Se (keeping the 
 commandments) e<7T\ OprjaKeveiv to Oeiov 8ta t^s ovtius SiKaioo-wijs epywv 
 T£ KOL yvda-eu)^, a passage much resembling the text, ib. iv. § 160, p. 
 636 P Ty ePBo/Jirj rj dvdiravai'; 6pT]a-KeveTai, ' is observed.' On the whole 
 the words seem to answer to the Lat. cola, cultus. See Trench Synonyms 
 of N.T. and Coleridge there cited. 
 
 xaXiva-yoi-yfflv.] This seems to be the first use of the word. It occurs 
 again below iii. 2 and in Herm. Mand. xii. 1 tvScSv/xfvos rrpf eTnOv/xiav 
 TrjV dyadijv /aio-tjctcis ttjv irovrjpav eTndvp.iav Koi )(a.\ivayii>yqa-eK auTTjv, Poly- 
 carp ad Phil. v. 3 vewTepoi, )(akivay(oyovvTes eairrous dm iravTos KaKov, also 
 in Lucian Tyra/nnicida 4 Tcts ijSovGv ope^ei's ■)(aKivaywyeiv : Plutarch uses 
 ^aXivoo) (read here by B.) in the same sense {Mor. p. 967). We find 
 dxdXwov (TToixa in Aristoph. Ran. 862, Eur. Bacch. 385 and often in 
 Philo, e.g. M. 2. p. 5, 75, 219. Compare for metaphor Diog. 
 L. V. 39 (of Theophrastus) Oottov e<l>rj Trio'Teveiv Seiv iTTTro) ap^aXiVw f/ Xoyo) 
 
 ' The quotations from Josephus Antiq. are borrowed from Hatch Bibl. Gr. p. 56 : 
 add from 5./. vii. 3, 3 vpotrayifievoi rais 9pT)(rKeiais iroAi Tr\rieos 'EAA^raic, 'bringing 
 over to their rites a multitude of Greeks.' 
 
I 26, 27 NOTES 71 
 
 do-uvraKTo), Psa. xxxii. 9, xxxix. 1, cxli. 3. For thought see ver. 19, 
 and below iii. 1-10. 
 
 oLiraTuv KapSCav toiiTov.] We should rather have expected this to come 
 in the apodosis : ' if any one thinks himself religious and yet does not 
 bridle his tongue, he deceives himself and his religion is vain.' If 
 included in the protasis it would have been more logically expressed 
 by £1 Tis SoKEi Op7J(rKog eivai, /j,-}) Siv, aXk' aTrarStv k.t.X. For the general 
 [itr] oiv the writer substitutes that positive failing which he took to be the 
 cause of this unreality. The phrase aw. KapS. is equivalent to irapaXoyL- 
 ipfxevoi kavTox>% above ver. 22, of. Rom. xvi. 18 Sio. t^s cvXoyt'as e^awa- 
 TU>aL Tas KapSi'as tS>v clkixkiov, Gal. vi. 3 el yap So/cei tis elvai Ti, /jLrjSlv (or, 
 iavTov <J3pevaTraTa, 1 Cor. iii. 18 p.-qSii's iavTOV efaTraTaro)" el Tts Sokei 
 croc^os elvai iv vplv /x<apos yevco-^o) k.t.X., Test. Nephth. p. 668 Fabr. fi,yj 
 cTTTOvSa^erc ev Xdyots Kcvois airaTav ras i/^v^as vpZv, on crtcoTrSvTcs ev KoOapo- 
 TT]TL KapSt'as Svv-qcreaOe to OiXrjpa Tov Oeov KpaTeiv, Hatch, p. 98. 
 
 Iidraios.] Cf. Tt o^eXos below ii. 14. Here with two terminations, as 
 in Tit. iii. 9, but with three in 1 Oor. xv. 17, 1 Pet. i. 18, see Winer, 
 p. 80 : for thought cf. Isa. i. 10-17, Isocr. ad Nicoc. p. 18 E rjyov 6vpa 
 TovTO KoAAicTTOv etvai Kal OepaTreiav p,e.yiiTTrjv lav us jSeAticttov koX SiKaioraTov 
 cravTov Trapi^rj^. 
 
 27. KaSapd Kal d|i£ovTos.] Often found together, as in Herm. Sim. v. 7 
 TTjv aapKo. (f>v\a<ra-€ k. Kal ap,., Philo 2 M. p. 249, Dion. Hal. A.S. viii. 
 43, 52 K. Kal a/x.. ex^'" crvpjS-qcriTai Trp/ ipv)(rjv airo TravTOi )(6Xov. Erasmus : 
 Purus est apud Judaeos qui morticinium non contigit, qui lotus sit 
 vivo Jlumine . . .impurus est qui carnem suillmn ederit. 
 
 irapd T^ ®va Kal IlaTpC.] The heavenly standard is appealed to here 
 as above ver. 20 BiKaioa-vvijv ®eov, 1 Pet. ii. 20 tovto X"P's Trapa ®€<1^ 
 and below fvmnov ®eov iv. 10. The phrase o 0eos Kal IlaT^p is used below 
 iii. 9 according to some MSS., and by St. Paul 1 Cor. xv. 24, Eph. v. 
 20, also with rjpZv added 1 Thess. i. 3, iii. 11, 13, Gal. i. 3, Phil. iv. 
 20. ©eos TraTrjp is found Rom. i. 7, 1 Cor. i. 3, Eph. i. 2, &c., 6 ©cos 
 TraTT^p Col. i. 3, iii. 17, where see Lightfoot, 1 Pet. i. 2 6 ©eos Kal Harrip 
 TOV Kvpiov rjjjMv 'I.X., Rom. xv. 16, 2 Cor. i. 3, &c. 
 
 afiTT) lo-Tiv, eirMTKeirTeo-Stti.] For the attraction of tovto to ai'riy see 
 Madv. Gr. § 98 ' a demonstrative pronoun to which a substantive is 
 attached as predicate-noun by dpi. &c. is apt to assume the gender and 
 number of the substantive, Xen. Oeeon. 8. 2 avrr] irevia ia-Tl o-a<f)ijs, to 
 Sco/ici'ov TWOS p.r] €)(eLv )(pT}a-0aL.' For the explanatory infinitive in appo- 
 sition to avrrj cf. Winer, p. 663 foil. The verb is used of visiting the 
 sick in Matt. xxv. 36, 43, Sirac. vii. 35, and in classical Greek, as 
 Xen. Cyr. v. 4. 10, viii. 3. 25. 
 
 opifiavaiis Kal x^P"'*.] God is called the father of the fatherless and 
 judge of the widow Psa. Ixviii. 5 ; there is a special curse on those who 
 afflict the fatherless and widow Deut. xxvii. 19 ; the Pharisees are 
 charged with devouring widows' houses (Luke xx. 47) ; cf . Exod. xxii. 22, 
 Job. xxxi. 16, 17, Sirac. iv. 10 yivov optf^avols (is iraTrjp Kal di/rt dvSpos rij 
 p,riTpl avTwv. We find descriptions which recall many of the features of 
 this passage in Barnab. xx. 2 x'^po. wal op^avu oi irpo(rE^ovT£i...wv paKpav 
 Kal iroppm TVpavTTjs Kal vTrop.ovri . . .avK kXmvTe'; tttih-^ov, ivx^pw iv KaraXoXi'^ 
 
72 THE EPISTLE OP ST. JAMES 
 
 ...■7r\ovo-6W TrapdKXrjToi, Tev^TUiv avo/ioi Kpirai [this is paxtly borrowed 
 from Didache v.], Polycarp Philipp. 6 describes the TrpccrfivTepoi. as 
 e7ri{7KewTO/*£vot xavTas acrdevets, fJi-rj dp.tXovvTf'S XVP"'^ V op<f>avov rj irivryro's. ■ . 
 oTre^o/itvoi Trda-rj^ opyrji, 7rpo(7C07roXi;/ti/^tas, Kpto-£(os dSt/cou ; SO in Clem. 
 Horn. i. 8 Peter charges the presbyters to act the part of parents to 
 the orphans, of husbands to the widows, cf. Herm. Hand. 8. 10, 
 where Harnack cites many illustrative passages, Ignat. ad. Pol. 4 x^P'" 
 p/r] &p,eXeicr6(a(rav p,€Ta. tov Kvpioi' <rv avrSiv (jipovTKTTrjS tcro. 
 
 So-TTiXov lavrbv TTjpetv.] For asyndeton see Essay on Grammar, cf. 
 1 Tim. vi. 14 rriprja-ai ttjv ivToXrjv da-!nX.ov, 1 Pet. i. 19, 2 Pet. iii. 14, 
 Herm. Vis. iii. 4. 5 d<TinXoi koL KaOapol earovrai oi eKXeXey/jiivoi. eis ^w^i' 
 aliiviov, Sim. V. 6. 7, Lact. Inst. v. 9 (Ckristianorum) omnis religio est 
 sine scelere ac sine macula vivere, above ver. 21 pmrapiav, below iii. 6 
 ■^ yXSiiTCTa rj tnnXov(ra oXov to crZpa. For rrjpuv 1 Tim. v. 22 (reavrov 
 dyvov TTjpei, 2 Cor. xi. 9 iv Travrl dj3ap^ epavrov vfuv tT-qp-qfTa. 
 
 airb ToO Kd(r|iiav,] See below iv. 4, 2 Pet. ii. 20 airo^vyoVT^'s TO. pidcT- 
 fna/ra tov Kocrp-ov. For otto Acts xx. 26 KaOapos iyta dwo tov aipaTos 
 irdvTwv, Matt, xxvii. 24 dfiiSos d.Trb, 2 Sam. iii. 28, Mark v. 34 la-di 
 vyirjs CLTTO TTJs pddTiyo's (tov. Pom. vii. 3 eXevOipa icrnv diro tov v6p,ov. 
 The classical writers use the simple genitive with KaOapo's and d^wos ; 
 iXevOepo^ is found with diro in Xen. and Plato ; Hermas Mand. xi. 4 
 has Ktvos aTTo t^s aXyjOda';. See Ryle, Psalms of Sol. p. Ixxxiii. 
 
 II. 1. — a8e\(^aC |jiov.] See n. on i. 2. There is special propriety in 
 its use here, where he is urging them to brotherly kindness. 
 
 h 'irpo(r«iro\T)n\|/Cais.] Cf. Eom. ii. 11, Eph. vi. 9, Col. iii. 25, in all 
 of which TrpocrioTToXripAJ/ia is denied of God, Polycarp ad Phil. 6 direxo- 
 /icvot irdo-Tjs opy^s, irpoo'wiroXrjp.ij/ia'S. The v. wpoo'unroXripTm'iv occurs 
 below V. 9., the S. irpoa-onroXrjpTrTrj^ Acts X. 34 ovK ecTTt 7rpoa-U}TroX-qpwTrj<: 
 6 ©£os, and the adv. dirpoo-coTroX-^/ATn-ms 1 Pet. i. 17 also of God (of man 
 Clem. Rom. i. 1). These are the only recorded instances of the use of 
 these compounds. The uncompounded Xap/Sdveiv irpocrioTrov occurs in 
 Luke XX. 21, Gal. ii. 6, and in LXX., Lev. xix. 15 oi X-qpxjrrj Trpoa-wirov 
 irTO))(o{) oiSe p,rj da.vp.dcrrj'S irpderuiroi' Svvao'Tov, Psa. Ixxxii. 2 eius irore 
 KpLvere dSiKiav koI irpoaoiira dpapTwXZv Xap^dviTe ; Malachi i. 8, 9, ii. 9, 
 Sirac. iv. 21 (of false shame) j«,ij XdjSijs TrpotrtoTrov Kara rljs i/'vx^s o-ov, 
 ib. 27, 2 Kings iii. 14 irpotrumov 'luo-ac^aT Xap-^dvo), Didach6 4. 3, Can. 
 Eccl. 20. In all these passages there is signified a bias of judgment 
 owing to the position, rank, circumstances, popularity, and externals 
 generally of the person judged. A just judge must not be influenced 
 by personal prejudices, hopes or fears, but by the single desire to do 
 justice. Other verbs used with Trpocruiirov in much the same sense are 
 6avpAt,eLV, Jude 16 Oavpd^ovrts wpoa-anra ax^eXeias X'^P'"' 2 Chron. xix. 
 7, Job xiii. 10, Prov. xviii. 5, Psalm. Sol. ii. 191 [used in good sense 
 Gen. xix. 21 iOavpaa-d^ a-ov rb Trpoa-om-ov, 'I have accepted thee']; 
 f-myvvuxTKUV, Deut. i. 17 ovk iwiyvuxrr) irpoa-wirov iv Kpio-a, ib. xvi. 19; 
 mocTTeXXea-Oai, Deut. i. 17 oi p,ri VTrooTctXr/ 7rp6(Tonrov avOpwirov, Wisdom 
 vi. 8 ; aiStio-^ai, &c., Prov. xxiv. 23, os ovk ciraio-xwflg irpdcrojTrov eWt/iou 
 Job xxxiv. 19 ; atperi'^eiv, 1 Sam. xxv. 35 -gpiTUTa. to irpoa-ayirov crov 
 
 1 Aq. ^po. 
 
1 27, II 1 NOTES 73 
 
 (good sense); Kplvav, Phocyl. 10 /iij Kplv^ irpoa-wirov. Equivalent 
 phrases are /JXe'ireiv or bpav cis irpocrmTrov Mark xii. 14, 1 Sam. xvi. 7 
 av^pwTTos oij/iTai eis ■n-potronrov, o 8i Oebi oi/'tTai ets KapStav, 2 Cor. x, 7 Ta 
 Kara, irpocriaTrov pXhren ; also Kpivuv Kar oij/iv John vii. 24, Kara rrjv 
 Sdfav Kp. Isa. xi. 3, Kara rriv a-apKa Johnviii. 15. In its strict sense the 
 Greek would mean to accept the outside surface for the inner reality, 
 the mask for the person,^ cf. Epict. ^nch. 17 fx,iix.vr)<ro on viroKpirrj^ d 
 opapaTOi oiov av OeXrj 6 8i8aor/<aXos...(r6i' tout' itrnv to Sodkv viroKpivaarOai 
 ■Kpoa-unrov koASs. The plural of the abstract refers to the many ways 
 in which partiality may show itself, cf. below iv. 16 ev dXafovtats, 2 Pet. 
 111. 11 €v eicre/Sctats, Col. iii. 22 Iv dc^^aX-jnoSouXeiats, Jude 18 iiriOvfjiiaL 
 da-£)8£iw, "Winer, p. 220, and for the similar use in Latin my note on 
 Cic. N.I). ii. 98. 
 
 ?X«Te T^v irCoTiv.] ' Do not have your faith in personal respects,' ' Do 
 not you, who call yourselves believers in Christ, disgrace your faith by 
 exhibitions of partiality.' WH. with marg. in R.V. take 'dx^re as 
 indicative with a mark of interrogation, ' Do ye, in accepting persons, 
 hold the faith ? ' &c. The interrogative rendering is also preferred by 
 Stier, Schneckenburger, Kern, Gebser, Pott, and other commentators. 
 I think it is simpler and more natural to take Ix^tc as imperative, 
 especially as it is the commencement of a new section of the epistle, 
 and it is the manner of the writer to begin by putting each topic 
 forward clearly and explicitly, usually in the shape of a precept, 
 and afterwards to enforce and illustrate it in a variety of forms. 
 It certainly cannot be said that, taken interrogatively, the sentence 
 gives a clear, unmistakable meaning. At first sight it would 
 seem to suggest that those addressed are not guilty of respect of 
 persons. And the following ydp, which, if we take t^ere as impera- 
 tive, gives a warning against respect of persons, because it is 
 shown by an example to involve worldly-mindedness and unrighteous 
 judgment, is hard to explain if we take ex^te as a question : (' Can it 
 be that you are guilty of partiality ? For if you make distinctions in 
 your religious meetings you are not whole-hearted, but led away by 
 worldly considerations.') The imperative also suits better the serious- 
 " ness of the writer and the opening words d,8eA.<ii>ot p.ov. For iv express- 
 ing the sphere of manifestation cf. above i. 21 €v nrpavrrjTi, 1 Tim. i. 
 18 Lva o'Tparemj ev airais tyjv KaXrjv (TTpareiav. M.rj ^xiTe is a more 
 personal way of putting pAj ea-Tot 17 ttio-tis, implying free-will and 
 responsibility, cf. Mark ix. 50 ex^re iv iavrol's aXas, Rom. x, 2 ^^kov 
 @eov €xova'iv aXk' oi Kara iTriyvuxriv, below ii. 18 crii ttio'TIV «x^'* Kaylb 
 epya «X'"'* 
 
 irCo-Tiv Toi) Kvplov ^|i.wv.] For this objective genitive cf. Mark xi. 22 
 
 ' Mr. Jennings on Psa. Ixxxii. 2 says the Hebrew 'ndsd pdntm primarily in- 
 volves the act of raising the face of anofher with the view of comforting him.' If this 
 is so, the meaning is entirely lost in the Greek translations and a much more striking 
 idea substituted in its place ; see Lightfoot, Gal. ii. 6 "in the 0. T. it is a neutral 
 expression involving no subsidiary idea of partiality, and is much oftener found in a 
 good than in a bad sense. When it becomes an independent Greek phrase, however, 
 the bad sense attaches to it owing to the secondary meaning of irpcdrMTrov as 
 'a mask.'" 
 
74 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 ^X^Ti TTLo-Tiv ®eov, Acts iii. 6 tt. tov 6vo/x.aTos, Rom. iii. 22 Si/caiotrwn; 
 ®£oi) 8ia wia-TtMs 'Iijuoi) Xpto-ToB, Gal. ii. 16, Apoc. xiv. 12. The same 
 relation may be expressed by ds Acts xx. 21, iv Gal. iii. 26, Trpos 
 1 Thes. 1-8, cVt' Heb. vi. 1. 
 
 Tfjs SiJ^ris.] This genitive has been variously interpreted as having an 
 objective, a subjective, or a qualitative force, and been connected in 
 turn by different commentators with every substantive in the sentence : 
 with 7rpocr(aTro\r}iJ.tj/Laii (1) by Erasmus, Calvin, Heisen, Michaelis ; 
 with TTt'o-Ttv (2) by the Peshitto, Grotius, Cornelius k Lapide, Hammond 
 and Hof'mann ; with the whole or a portion of the phrase tov Kvpiov 
 ...XpuTTov (3) by the majority of commentators. 1. Erasmus trans- 
 lates ' Cum partiuin studio quo ex sua quisque opinione quevilibet 
 aesti'inat' ; Calvin, ' JVe in acceptionibus persona/rum fidem lidbeatis...ex 
 opinione,^ which he explains ' N^ain dum opv/m vel honorwni opinio 
 nostros oculos perstringit, Veritas su2)primitwr.' Both interpretations 
 would make 8of);s a subjective genitive, denoting the cause or source of 
 Tj-po(Tii)7roXr]iJi,\j/La. Michaelis, on the other hand, gives it an objective 
 force, translating ' Adniiratio hominum secundum externum sp>lendo- 
 rem ' ; and much in the same way, Heisen. It is now generally recog- 
 nised that the order of the words renders this explanation of the 
 construction impossible. 2. The Peshitto, followed by Grotius, Ham- 
 mond, Hofmann, (fee, translates ' faith of (in) the glory of Christ ' 
 (objective genitive). Huther, 'Christ-given faith in the glory to be 
 revealed ' ; Gataker, followed by Hottoman, ' the glorious faith in 
 Christ ' (qualitative genitive). Though the interval between the two 
 words TTia-nv and 8ofr;s in my opinion entirely precludes any qualitative 
 connexion, it is perhaps not so decisive against Grotius' interpretation. 
 To a certain extent we may find a parallel in i. 2 : to Soki/aiov vixwv ttjs 
 TTLCTTiui';, ' tho proof of your faith,' is not unlike tt/v iria-Tiv . . .'Iriaov Xpio-- 
 Tov Tijs 8d^-i;s ' the faith in Christ's glory ' ; but of course the harshness 
 becomes greater with every additional word which separates them, and 
 with the greater importance of those words. 3. It remains to consider 
 the interpretations which make t^s 8of>79 depend upon the whole, or a 
 part, of the phrase preceding. 'These may be classified as follows : 
 {a) So^ijs depending on Xpia-rov only ; (b) depending on 'Iijcrov Xpitrrov ; 
 (c) on TOV Kvpiov rnjuav ; {d) on tov Kvpiov understood ; (e) on the whole 
 phrase t. K. -q. 'I X. {a) ' The Messiah of glory ' : so Laurentius, Schul- 
 thess, Lange, Bouman. The objection to this is, that it is impossible 
 thus to separate 'Irjaov XpurTov, and that in any case it would require 
 the article before Xpia-Tov. (6) So Ewald : ' Den Glauben unsers Herrn, 
 Jesus Christus der Herrlichkeit.' This seems to make an arbitrary 
 division of the words, and is also liable to the same objections as (e). 
 Moreover, do we ever find a proper name used with the genitive of 
 quality 1 (c) ' Our Lord of glory, Jesus Christ.' So Schneckenburger 
 De Wette, Wiesinger. It this were the writer's meaning, why did he 
 not place the words ttjs So'^ijs after rjfjLwv 1 (d) ' Our Lord Jesus Christ 
 (the Lord) of glory.' So Baumgarten, Semler and others ; but it is 
 without parallel, and is not supported by any of the later commen- 
 tators, (e) 'Of our glorious Lord Jesus Christ.' So Kern, Alford, 
 
II 1 NOTES 75 
 
 Beyschlag, Erdmann, Schegg, and the great majority of modern com- 
 mentators. We may allow that St. James makes frequent use of the 
 genitive of quality, as in i. 25 aKpoarij's iTriX-qa-ixovri^, ii. 4 Kpiral SiaXoyia-- 
 fjLuiv irovrjp&v, &c. : but it is very improbable that such a genitive would 
 be appended to a phrase which is already con;plete in itself; and we 
 may safely say that no one would have thought of such a construction 
 for this passage if the other suggested interpretations had not involved 
 equal or even greater harshness. 
 
 There is however a perfectly natural and easy construction sug- 
 gested by Bengel, which has been set aside by later commentators 
 on what seem to me very inadequate grounds. His note is, ' T-ijs 
 Sofj/s; est appositio, ut ipse Christus dicatur ij h6^a...Christus gloria ; 
 hinc fdeles gloriosi. Uanc fidelium gloriam, nullus mundi honos 
 aequat, nemo personarum acceptor agnoscit.'^ The objection made 
 to it is that the abstract term 8d|a, by itself, is too indefinite 
 to bear this weight of meaning. But other abstractions are used 
 of Christ. He calls himself the Truth, the Life; He is called the 
 Word, why not the Glory 1 If we had before us such a sentence as p.y) 
 £;^eTe ev a.<j>po<Tvvri ttjv iriaTiv rov Kvpiov ■^p.wv 'Irjcrov Xpiarov, rov Xoyov, 
 we should have no scruple in translating it ' Do not hold in folly the 
 faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, who is the Word,' any more than we 
 have in translating 1 Tim. i. 1 kot' iiriTayriv Kvpiov XpLarov 'Irjcrov t^s 
 cAttiSos '^fjMv, ' According to the command of Christ Jesus, who is our 
 hope.' Why should we object to the similar translation here, 'the 
 faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, who is the glory ' ? The only question 
 is whether the abstract Sofa is thus used of a person. Bengel cites 
 Luke ii. 31 to a-wn^pwv o ■fjToip.aa-a? ...So^av Xaov a-ov 'IcrpaiyA,, Eph. i. 17 
 6 Oeos Tov Kvpiov ■qp.lav 'IiycroC 'KpuTTOv, 6 TlaTr/p tyjs So^t/s, 1 Pet. iv. 14 
 et ovcLSi^eaOe ev ovo/ian Xpurrov, jMaKapioi, on to t^s 8d^s /cat to toC ®eov 
 IlviviJM itf)' ijuSs ctvaTTaijeTai (where he takes So^s as an appellation of 
 Christ). Perhaps more striking parallels are 2 Pet. i. 17 <l>iavrj's ivexOd- 
 crrjs TotStrSe vtto t^s p.eyaX.oirpi'Trovs Sdfi;s (' The words seem a periphrasi-s 
 for God Himself,' Alf.), Col. i. 27 tl to TrXovrog ttjs 8df>;s tov pLvarripiov 
 TovTov, ecTTiv li.pKTTo's f.v iiplv, ■fj eXiTis TTjs So^s, Eom. ix. 4, where it 
 stands for the Shekinah (cf. 1 Sam. iv. 22, Psa. Ixxviii. 61, ib. cvi. 20, 
 Isa. iv. 5), John xvii. 22 iy<i> Trjv 86$av ^v SeScokcis p,oi ScScoxa avTois, ib. 
 i. 14 edtaa-dfJLida tyjv So^av dvTov, So^av o)s {wvoyevovs Trapa IlaTpds (of 
 which Westcott says (p. xlvii.) 'Christ the Light of the world is seen 
 by the believer to be the manifested Glory of God '), Heb. i. 3 awavyaa-iMi, 
 So^s. Similarly fji,eya\(oa-vvrj is used Heb. i. 3, and 8wa/;(,ts Matt. xxvi. 
 64, cf. Clem. Bom. i. 16 to aKrJTTTpov rrjs /ieyaXcoo-wr/s tou OeoC, 6 Kvpios 
 ri/j,!av XpuTTos 'Iijo-oSs. We may suppose that the reason why the word 
 Sofa stands here alone, without ■^fiwv or tov UaTpos, is in order that it 
 may be understood in its fullest and widest sense of Him who alone 
 comprises all glory in Himself. This interpretation is confirmed by the 
 rhythm which makes a natural pause before ttjs S6^^. 
 
 Since the above note was written I find that Mr. Bassett in his 
 
 ^ W. H. in their marginal reading imply this construction by placing a comma 
 after Xp«rToD. Cf. Ign. £ph. 3 'IrjtroCs Xpurrhs rh aSiaKpiTov iiiSiv (rjv. 
 
76 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 commentary takes Trjs 8o^?ys, as I Lave done, in apposition to 
 Tov Kvpiov- In an appendix on this verse, to show that the name 
 Shekinah was used by the Jews of God or of the Messiah, he 
 cites Psa. Ixxxv. 9 e'yyiis tS)v <j>oPovfi€V(ov avTov to orwT^piov avTov, tov 
 KaTaa-KTfvSicTai So^av iv Ty yfj rjfjiwv, on which Jennings notes ' the 
 glory is certainly as in Psa. Ixiii. 2, Zech. vi. 12, 13, that of the 
 Divine Presence which now again dawns on the restored people... St. 
 John's description of the Advent of Christ offers an approximate 
 parallel ..." the Word was made flesh and dwelt (eo-Kiyvioo-e) among 
 us and we beheld his glory... full of grace and truth" : so here ver. 10 
 tells of a concurrence of Divine goodness and truth.' Bassett refers 
 also to Hagg. ii. 7, 9, Zech. ii. 5 'I, saith the Lord, will be [the] glory 
 in the midst of her,' ib. v. 8, 10, and to the book Sohar,i where the 
 Son of God is spoken of as the Shekinah. Thus So^a would appear to 
 be equivalent to Emmanuel, cf. Apoc. xxi. 3 fj a-Krjvrj (= Shekinah) tov 
 ®£oC /u,£Ta Tu>v avOpunroiv, Lev. xxvi. 11, 12 drjaw ttjv (TKrjvqv jJLom iv vfuv 
 Kai...€iJi,irepnraT'q(TU) iv v/juv, Koi itrofiai vfiSsv 0eos Koi u/t£?s icreaOi /JiOL Xads, 
 and Pirke Aboth iii. 3 ' two that sit together and are occupied in 
 words of Thorah have the Shekinah among them,' where Taylor com- 
 pares Matt, xviii. 20 'there am /in the midst of them.'^ 
 
 2. els (ruva7<i)-y^v 4(i.<ov.] Either ' to a meeting of yours,' or ' into your 
 synagogue,' the article being omitted according to Hellenistic use, as 
 in V. 20 £K Trkdvrjs avTov. The word is used of a distinctively Christian 
 assembly by Hermas Mand. xi. 9 (when a man having the Spirit of 
 God comes) eis (jvvaytayrjv avSpZv 8iKat<ov ..koI tvTev^ig yivrjTai Trpos tov 
 &€ov Trj<s crwaywy^s tS>v dvSpSiv exctVcov (there the power of the Spirit is 
 manifested). In the note Harnack says that the word is used in the 
 earlier Greek only in active sense of ' bringing together,' but by 
 Jewish writers of the apostolic age (1) of the religious community, (2) 
 of the religious assembly, (3) of the place of assembly. It alternates 
 with lKKkrj(TLa in the LXX., but the latter soon became the predominant 
 and distinctive term among the Christians, a-vvayoiyr] being contrasted 
 with it, as denoting an assembly of Jews or heretics, cf. Apoc. ii. 9, 
 iii. 9 (Tvvayuiyrj tov Sarai/a, and many passages cited by Harnack from 
 Tertullian, Irenaeus, Clem. Al., Apo&t. Constitt. It seems however 
 that the Christians of Judaea retained the wider use, after it had been 
 abandoned elsewhere, as Epiphanius xxx. 18 says of the Ebionites 
 crvvayoyrjv ovtol KaXovcri Trjv lavTSiv iKKXyjaiav Koi ov)^i iKKX.T)(Tiav 
 (Lightfoot Philipp. p. 190). It is also found loosely used by other 
 Christian writers in the sense of 'gathering' (eVicrwa-yuy^ Heb. x. 
 25), as Ignat. Polyo. iv. 2 TniKVOTtpov o-uvaymyai yivia-Ouxrav ( = Didache 
 Xvi. 2 TTUKvSs crvvaxO'^a-€<T0e), Theopli. ad Autol. ii. 14 SeScoKev 6 ©eos 
 
 ' ' Commenting on Psa. ii. Simeon ben Joohai speaks of "the Lord of the serviug 
 angels, the son of the Highest, yea, the Shekinah," and again, " God said Faithful 
 Shepherd ! verily thou art my Son, yea, the Shekinah." ' Bassett, p. 101. 
 
 ^ Delitzsch, in his story on Jerusalem in the time of the Herods, says with 
 reference to this verse of Aboth, ' they had often felt in past days that the Shekinah 
 was in their midst, but now this gracious Presence assumed bodily form in the 
 person of Jesus, as the Messiah of Israel ' — (shortened from EngUsh tr. p. 121). 
 
II 1, 2 NOTES 77 
 
 Tu KO(r/ia)...Tas crwayMyas, Xcyojuevas Se eKKXrja-ia^ dyias, Clera. Al. 
 Strom, vi. 4, p. 756 dA'^^eta ovpavoOiV avuiOev eirl ttjv avvaytay^v ttJs 
 €KK\rj(ria^ d<^iyjU,evT;, Const. Apostol. iii. 6, ov yap iirl to koivov ttjs 
 o-uvayojy^s avaTrav/jLa iv Trj KvpiaKy KaTavrSxriv. Some have supposed that 
 cruvayuy^ should be taken in its ordinary sense of a Jewish synagogue, 
 the epistle having been written at a time when the separation of 
 Christians from Jews was not completely effected. Compare Westcott 
 Heb. p. xxxviii. ' For a time the fellowship of the church and synagogue 
 was allowed on both sides. Little by little the growth of the Gentile 
 element in the church excited the active hostility of the Jews against 
 the whole body of Christians, as it troubled the Jewish converts them- 
 selves. This hostility could not fail to be intensified in Palestine by 
 the spread of aggressive nationalism there shortly before the outbreak 
 of the Jewish war. . . . When as yet the national unbelief of the Jews 
 was undeclared it was not possible to foresee that the coming of Christ 
 would bring the overthrow of the old order. The approaching catas- 
 trophe was not realized in the earlier apostolic writings. In the 
 epistle to the Hebrews it is shown to be imminent.' So we read in 
 Acts vi. 19 of Christians belonging to the synagogue of the Libertines ; 
 in Acts XV. 21 it seems to be implied that the Jewish Chuistians 
 still heard Moses read in the synagogue every sabbath-day ; ib. ix. 4 
 Saul takes letters to the synagogues in Damascus bidding them 
 to purge themselves of Christian members, cf. xxii. 19 eyu ^(jltju 
 <t>v\aKi^(ov KOI Sipwv Kara tcIs cruvaycoyas Toiis irto-revovTas IttI ere. After- 
 wards in his missionary journeys St. Paul regularly begins by preaching 
 in the synagogues (Acts xiii. 14, 4.3 ; xiv. 1 ; xvii. 1, 2, 10, 17 ; xviii. 4, 
 26 ; xix. 8) ; in Corinth we hear of his leaving the synagogue in con- 
 sequence of the violent opposition of the Jews and making use of 
 an adjoining house (Acts xviii. 7) ; at Ephesus he preached in the 
 synagogue for three months before he withdrew to the school of 
 Tyr.innns {ib. xix. 9). In onr text it is plain that the writer supposes 
 the meeting-place mentioned to be open to non-Christians : strangers 
 might enter it either from curiosity, or from sympathy, or from 
 malice to spy out what was going on. But as it is called crvvayosyrjv 
 V fidv, it is evidently assvimed that it was mainly under Christian 
 direction. The precise circumstances would of course vary from town 
 to town. 
 
 Xpuo-oSoKTiXios.] aTT. \ey. Lucian [Tim. 20) uses )(pvcr6xeip in the same 
 sense, and Epict. Diss. i. 22 speaks of yipmv xpvcrovs Sa/cTuXt'oDs e^mv 
 TToAAoiJs, so Seneca iV.Q. vii. 31 omni artieulo gemma exp:!nitur, Plin. 
 N.n. xxxiii. ch. 6, Juv. i. 28 : that the wearing of rings was customary 
 among the Jews appears from Luke xv. 22. In Const. Apoist. i. 3 
 Christians are warned against fine clothing and wearing of rings (/tjjSc 
 ^v<Trj\aTov (r<j)evh6vr)v tols SaKTu\ots aov •rrepiOy's), for these are all marks 
 of wantonness. For dvijp see above i. 8 n. 
 
 Iv l<r6t)Ti Xafxirp^.] iv is classical in this use, like in in Latin. The 
 same epithet is used (Lukexxiii. 11) of the robe in which Herod clothed 
 Jesus [should this be identified with the Troptj^vpovv i/Aartov put on him 
 by the soldiers John xix. 2 ?], and of the angel (Acts x. 30), cf . Posidonius 
 
78 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 a?;. Atlien. v. p, 212 d. of the upstart Athenio, who l^a ;!(\a/ti;Sa 
 Xa/A7rpav eKO-vpuiv kol ■jrepiKeifi.evo^ SaKTvX.iov ;(pvcrioii, Philo M. 2. p. 56 
 (of Joseph) avrl puTrtocnjs Xaynirpar iirOrJTa dmSovTcs, Artemid. ii. 3 fin. 
 del 8e ajMUVOV Kadapa Kol XafiTrpa LfiaTLa ex"" '"'■' ireirXvfJi.iva KoXutg rj 
 pvwapa /cat airXvra. There does not seem any reason to confine the 
 meaning to white colour as Thomas Magister and Casaubon on 
 Theophr. Gfiar. 21. According to Wolf, the latter allows (in his 
 Kxercitt. o. Bar. xvi. 73, p. 532) that it may refer to any brilliant 
 colour, and so Salmas. on TertuU. Pall. p. 182. In Euseb. H.E. ii. 10 
 a robe called Xapirpa. kol ^aa-LXiKri is afterwards described as a-rokr] i^ 
 apyvpov 7mroirjfj,ivr]. Here the contrast with ptyirapd ' soiled,' ' shabby ' 
 (see above i. 21 n.) would perhaps be most marked in the case of white, 
 which was also the usual colour worn by the Jews. Similar expressions 
 are t/Aarto-jLios evSo^os Luke vii. 25, or iroA.-ureXijs 1 Tim. ii. 9. 
 
 €l<reXflir| 8i Kau] ' And there come in also ou the other hand.' For 
 omission of the correlative p.iv cf. above i. 13 -n-upalei 8e, below v. 10 
 irraio-g Se, iv. 6 TaTctvots Si, Matt, xxiii. 24, 25, Buttm. p. 312 foil. 
 For the repetition of the verb see Essay on Grammar. We must 
 suppose that in each case the man is unknown, and that each has his 
 place assigned to him only on the ground of his appearance. St. Paul 
 refers to such visits from strangers in 1 Cor. xiv. 23. For construction 
 see below ver. 15 foil, eai' yvp.vol iTrdp^oi(7iv...et'!rr] Se Tts .■/*'^ Store Se'. 
 
 3. liripXe'i|/iiTe.] ' Look with favour,' as in Luke i. 48, ix. 38, 1 Kings 
 viii. 28, Psa. xxiv. 16. This meaning is not found in classical 
 writers. 
 
 ij>opafivTa.] So Matt. xi. 8 ci Ta fxaXaKo, (f>opowTK, and in classical 
 writers. 
 
 KuSov £Se KaXSs.] The form k6l0ov for KaOrjao occurs in Psa. ex. 1 
 KaOov Ik Se|tSv p.ov (five times quoted in N.T.), and in Sir. ix. 9 ixera 
 vTrdvSpov yuvatKos p,ri KaOov. It is attributed by the grammarians to 
 Aristophanes and Menander, but it is not found in their extant remains. 
 The corresponding indicative crv koBt) is found Acts xxiii. 3, see Winer 
 p. 98. For Ka\Ss = laute, pulchre, i.e. ' in a good seat,' Field compares 
 Aloiph. Ep. iii. 20 dyei p.i rts Xa^wv eis to Oiarpov KaOicra^ h> Ka\u, Aelian 
 V.H. ii. 13 ei/ KaX<3 ToC Omrpov Ka6r)(Tda.i, see too Arist. Eq. 785 KaOLtflv 
 /iaXaKois, Theile quotes ' Ptolemy KaXS><; eKa^io-e a bust of Homer,' for 
 which he gives the erroneous reference Socr. xiii. 22. On the distinc- 
 tions in the synagogue see D. of B. s.v. and Matt, xxiii. 6 ; and, as to 
 the duties of the deacons in finding seats for strangers in the congre- 
 gation, Apost. Const, ii. 58 (where there may perhaps be an allusion to 
 this passage in the words et Se tttioxos t) dyevjjs ■>; ^eVos hriXOoi . . . koX 
 TOTTOi oi)( VTrdpy^ei, Koi tovtol's tottov Troiijtret ef oXrjs Tijs Kaphias 6 StaKOvos 
 iVa fJLrj Trpos avOpoiTTOv yivqrai y) TrpocTiaTroXruj/i';, dXXa irpos ©cov 7] SiaKOvia 
 evdpea-TO's k.t.X.), Plut. j¥or. 58 C. 
 
 Kal Tip TTTcoxw riirtiTj.] We should rather have expected Se' instead 
 of KM to point the contrast to the case of the rich man ; but the 
 writer regards each action by itself, irrespective of the contrast, as 
 constittiting an instance of TrpoaroiTroXrujLtj/la. 
 
 itri) rh viroiroSiov. ] i.e. 'on the floor close to my footstool,' cf. vwo 
 
II 2-5 NOTES 79 
 
 T£t;(os, and see Luke x. 39 TrapaKa6i(Ta<ra, irapa. tovs irdSas tov K.vptov, ib. 
 viii. 35 and Acts xxii. 3. 
 
 4. oi SiEKp£6T]Te Iv lanTots.] ' Are you not divided in yourselves,' i.e. 
 guilty of Suj/vxfa, as in i. 8 ? You have not a single eye, but you are in- 
 fluenced by worldly considerations : you look to the world and not to 
 Christ only. For Sick, see on i. 6, and dStaKpiTos iii. 17. For iv eauTots 
 instead of iv v/juv avrots see i. 22 n. and of. Mark xi. 23 SuxKpiOy iv Trj 
 KapSia airrov. For construction iav €hrriTe...ov huKpLOnyri, aor. instead of 
 future or present, cf. 1 Cor. vii. 28 iav -ya/t^oTys ovk ^/xapTes, John xv. 6 
 eav fi/q tis jJ-fvrj ev ip-oX i^XyjOrj l^o) Koi i^pdvOrj, Dem. F-L. p. 411 Kav 
 avayKa(T6fj ttov <ruvTV)(eiv aTreTn^hyjcrev evOiioi, I think the aorist in such 
 passages commonly expresses the immediateness of the consequence ' if 
 ye speak thus, ye are thereby shown to be,' cf. n. on i. 24 on a similar 
 use of the perfect. In 1 Cor. vii. 28 it seems to show a wish on the 
 part of the apostle to repudiate at once any idea of blaming a man for 
 marrying ; ' if you should marry, I don't mean to say it was wrong in 
 you to get married,' see Winer p. 366 and Devarius ii. 451 there 
 referred to; Goodwin § 155. Others take it as the gnomic aorist 
 expressing a general fact, on which see i. 11, 24. 
 
 Kpiral SLaXo-Yio-iiuv irovripuv.] 'Wrong-considering judges,' gen. of 
 quality like aKpoar^s eirtA.i;a-/Aov^s above i. 25, o KO(r//,os Trjs dStKi'as below 
 iii. 6, Kpicrtv j3X.a<T<f>r]jj,ia's Jude 9. Any one who speaks against his 
 neighbour becomes a Kpirrj's, as we read below iv. 11. The reference 
 here is to the worldly considerations of expediency which made them 
 pay court to the rich and slight the poor. The phrase occurs also in 
 Matt. XV. 19 £K T^s KapStas €p)(OVTai StaXoyto-ynot irovqpoi, an example of 
 such StaXoytcr/iot is given Luke v. 21, 22, Rom. i. 21, see Hatch p. 8. 
 
 5. dKovo-aT£.] One of the rousing words employed by St. James, like 
 p.rj irXavacrOe i. 16, aye vvv iv. 13. It is not used in the other epistles. 
 In the Gospels and Apocalypse we find the still more urgent 6 ix*^^ °^s 
 aKovtraTui. The simple aSe\<f>oC of v. i. is here repeated in a more 
 affectionate form, as i. 16, 19 repeat i. 2. 
 
 cleX^^aro.] Used (in middle voice only) of the choosing of Israel 
 Deut. xiv. 1, 2, and of the ' elect ' Eph. i. 4 ; St. Paul speaks in much 
 the same way 1 Cor. i. 27 rd //.upd tov Kofrfiov i^eke^aro 6 ©eos k.t.X. 
 and our Lord, Luke xviii. 25, Matt. xi. 5. 25. 
 
 Totps irrayovs t<J K6<r|A0).] ' Poor to the world ' i.e. in the world's 
 judgment, 'outwardly poor,' see below iv. 4 and Luke xii. 21 6 
 6yf<Tavpit,uiv lavTw /cat p,7i ets 0£ov irXovrlav. For a similar antithesis of 
 the outwardly poor and inwardly rich cf. above i. 9 6 raireivos cv tu 
 mj/ei, 1 Tim. vi. 17, 18 rots ■jrXovtrt'ois iv t(o vvv alwvi, )( TrXoutrtots iv epyots 
 KoXoK.^ So of the two kinds of wisdom below iii. 15 and 1 Cor. iii. 19 
 ■q <ro<f>La ToS koct/jlov fji,o>pia irapa tu ©e(3 icrnv. For dative cf. Acts vii. 20 
 dcTTeios T(3 ®ew, 2 Cor. x. 4 Sward to! ®£(3, 1 Cor. ix. 2 aWoii ovk ei/xi 
 aTToa-ToXos, Winer p. 265. On Tmoxps see Hatch p. 73. It is the 
 regular word for ' poor ' in N.T. 
 
 irXovorCous Iv irCoTsi.] Oblique predicate, after i^eXe^aro. This verb is 
 sometimes used absolutely, as in Mark xiii. 20, 1 Cor. i. 27 ; sometimes 
 ' [Compare Herm. Sim. ii. — 0. T.] 
 
80 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 with infinitive as in Acts i. 25 avdSei^ov ov e$eX.£^ii}...\af}e'Lv rbv 
 TOTTov TTJ'S SiaKoviai TavTTji, Eph. i. 4 i$eXe$aTO rjjji.a.'i kv avT(a... etvai rum's 
 ayiov^, where elvai ij/ias might be omitted, giving rise to the con- 
 struction in the text, cf. Kom. viii. 29 ofis irpdiyvio koX wpouipuTev 
 <ru/i/i,dp<^oiis TTJ's eiKOVos, Phil. iii. 21 os fji,eTacr)(riiMi,Ti(TCL to crS/ia t^s 
 Taireivalo'ecos ■^fiZv (Tvjj,ixop^ov tm a-wp-aTL TTJ's Sof);s avTov, 2 Oor. iii. 6 
 iKaviiXTev ■Yjp.a.^ Sta/covous KaLvrjs Sta^^Kiys, Acts V. 31 tovtov o ®£os (ruyrrjpa 
 viji<i)(rev, Rom. iii. 25 ov TrpoiOero iXacrr^piov, 1 John iv. 14 direo-ToX/CB' 
 Tov vlov o-oiTTJpa tov K6crp.ov, also in classical Greek as Plato Meno 94 
 TovTovs hririas iSlSa^ev ovSevos x^'po^s ' A6r]vaL<tiv, especially with verbs of 
 choosing and with the so-called 'factitive verbs' generally. Some 
 take iv here with an instrumental sense, but this seems unnecessary. 
 We find iv, expressing the sphere, used with TrXovcrtos and the cognate 
 verbs in 1 Cor. i. 5 iv iravTi A.oya) iTrkovria-B-rfTi, 2 Cor. ix. 11, 1 Tim. 
 vi. 18 TrXoDTcIv iv tpyois, SO Eph. ii. 4 ®eos irXovcno's mv iv iXiii, Wetst. 
 cites the rabbinical phrase ' rich in the law ' = learned. The antithesis 
 is not logically exact (cf. above i. 17 TrSo-a, and 25 ttoh^t^s epyov) : either 
 the latter member should have been ' rich towards God,' or the former 
 ' poor in worldly wealth ' as opposed to those who are rich in the inner 
 treasure of faith. Cf. Philo M 2. p. 425 oh p.ev yap aXriOivbg irXoCros iv 
 ovp<J,v£ KaTaKUTai 8ia (rofjiia's koX oo-ioti/tos do-Kiy^eis, tovtois koI 6 Tuyv 
 ypr]ix.aTmf t^s yrj's ircptovtrid^ei. Test. Gad. 7 o yajo irei^s koI a<f>6ovos iiri 
 ■ira.cn YLvpita ii^apicTTlav avTos wapa Tracn irXovTci, Plato I'haedr. p. 279 
 ■7rXov(nov vo/JLi^oifJiL tov croipov, Philo M 2. p. 5 6 yu,'^ tui^A.os dW 6$v 
 jSXiiroiv irXovTOs 17 tuiv dperuiv icTTi irepiovcna. 
 
 kXt|pov6|jiot)s TTjs pacTiXefas.] Matt. v. 3 p,aKa.pioi ol iTTin^oi tm TrvevpMTi 
 oTt avTuiv ia-Tiv rj ySacriXeia tS>v ovpavZv (t<3 TTvev/xaTi is omitted in Luke 
 xvi. 20), Matt. xxv. 35 SeBre ol e.v\oyy)p.evoi tov TraTpos p-ov KX.r]povofi,rj(raT€ 
 TTjV ■^TOLpMtrfJievriv vpiv jSaaiXeMV dirb KarajSoX'^s Koapov, 1 Pet. i. 4 eis 
 KXripovop,iav a.<j>6a.pTov Koi dpLavTov, Justin M. Diogn. 10 ots t^v ev ovpavw 
 /SaxnXeiav iTrqyyeiXaTO Kal Swaei tois dyaTT'qcracnv aiiTov, borrowed, as the 
 final woriis show, from this passage. See Westcott's excellent note on 
 Heb. vi. 12, pp. 167ff., where after tracing the use of the word 
 KXrjpovop.o's in the O.T. he says that in ' the N.T. the word is commonly 
 used in connexion with the blessing (1 Pet. iii. 9) which belongs to 
 divine sonship, the spiritual correlative to the promise to Abraham 
 (Rom. iv. 13f. ; viii. 17; Gal. iii. 18, 29; iv. 1, 7; cf. c. vi. 12, 17; 
 xi. 8). The son of God as son enjoys that which answers to his new 
 birth (cf. Matt. v. 5 ; Eph. i. 14, 18 ; Col. iii. 24). This is described-as 
 " eternal life " (Matt. xix. 29 ; Tit. iii. 7 ; comp. Mark x. 17 ; Luke x. 25, 
 xviii. 18), or " the kingdom of God " (1 Cor. vi. 9f. ; xv. 50 ; Gal. v. 21 ; 
 comp. Matt. xxv. 34; Eph. v. 5), or "salvation" (Heb. i. 14), an 
 " inheritance incorruptible," "the eternal inheritance" (Heb. ix. 15).' 
 Also p. 483, 'the heirship of man to the Divine blessing answering 
 to his nature is founded on God's purpose in creation, on the gift of 
 His image with the power of attaining to His likeness.' 
 
 ■fis 4irr)7Y«'XaTo tois i.yair&irw airov.] See above i. 12, where the same 
 words are used of the crown. For attraction cf. 1 John iii. 24 « toS 
 TTvevpaTo's ov iSuiKcv, Winer p. 203. In the Psalms ' the poor ' is almost 
 
II 5-7 NOTES 81 
 
 equivalent to ' the godly ' ; with the same feeling'the Jewish Christians 
 took the name ' Ebiouites.' 
 
 In this and the following verses their Tjooo-wTroXiy/ni/rax is condemned 
 (1) as impiety, contravening the purpose of God, who has selected 
 the poor as special objects of His love ; (2) as injustice and want of 
 common sense, since it was the rich who oppressed them. 
 
 6. TjTi|id(roTe.] In the case supposed you slighted him by putting him 
 into an inferior position, cf. Prov. xiv. 215 aTt/ia^cDV TrevrjTai d/iapravci, 
 eXefiv Se tttco^oiis fLaKapUTTo^, ib. xxii. 22, Sir. x. 22 ov Si/catov dri/iacrai 
 T!T(i>)^ov arvverov koX ov /ca^^/cet Sofdcrai dvSpa afiapTuikov, the word is also 
 used Luke xx. 11, Acts v. 41. For a similar instance of unfair dis- 
 tinctions among Christians see 1 Cor. xi. 22. St. Peter in his 1st epistle 
 ii. 17 lays down the rule iravras Ti/j.'^craTe. 
 
 01 irXovcrCoi. KaraSwaa-TEvovo-iv -iiifflv.] In the supposed- case the sole 
 ground of preference between the two strangers was that the one 
 seemed rich, the other poor ; but you have certainly .no reason for 
 favouring the rich as a class. The verb only occurs elsewhere in Acts 
 X. 38 in N.T. but we find the similar forms KaTaKvpievea/ and Kare^ov- 
 <rid^£tv Matt. XX. 25. It is not uncommon in LXX. with ace, cf. Micah 
 11. 2 oiKovs KareSwda-Tevov, Amos viii. 4, Wisd. ii. 10 KaTaSwaa-Teva-w/j.ev 
 irevTjTa St'/catov k.t.A., ib. XV. 14. For warnings against wenlth cf. below 
 V. 1 foil., 1 Tim. vi. 9, 10, Matt. xiii. 22, xix. 23 foil.. Sir. xiii. 3, 18. 
 
 avTol ?Xkovo-iv v|j.as «ts KpiTyjpio ;] ' With their own hands drag you to 
 the tribunals.' The pronoun avrbs is used in the nominative, not only 
 with the meaning ' self ' when attached to a subject, as in classical 
 Greek, but also when itself standing for the subject, with a less amount 
 of emphasis, which we might render ' he for his part ' or ' it was he 
 who,' as in the next clause ; it is disputed whether it does not in some 
 cases lose its emphatic force altogether, as in Luke xix. 2 kol i8ov avi]'p 
 ovo/jLOLTt. KaXovfievoi ZaK;(atos, Koi airos ^v ap)(iTeXu)vri^ kol airos irXowcrios. 
 where it seems pleonastic, so xxiv. 31 avrSiv Se SHjvotx^r/crav oi oi^^aX^uoi 
 Kat. eTreyvaxrav avTov koi auTos acjjaVTO^ iyevero d,7r' avrSiv, see Winer, p. 
 186 foil. ; A. Buttmann, p. 93 foil. I have not noticed the fem. and 
 neut. used in this laxer signification. St. Paul condemns Christians for 
 going to law with one another (1 Cor. vi. where see Wetst.) : here St. 
 James is speaking of the persecution of Christians by Jews, especially by 
 the rich Sadduceete, cf. Acts iv. 1, xiii. 50. Paul and Silas were dragged 
 before the judgment-seat (called Kpirrjpiov 1 Cor. vi. 2, 4, Exod. xxi. 
 6, Dan. vii. 9, . Polyb. ix. 33 ; the classical word is SiKao-T'^ptov) at 
 Philippi, em\a,l36)i.€voi elXKVcrav ets T-qv ayopav im rovi dpp^oi/ras (Acts xvi. 
 19) ; and of Saul before his conversion we read crvpuiv avSpai koi yuvai- 
 Ktts wapcSt'Sov ets ipvXaKT^v. Our Lord foretold that his disciples would 
 be cited before the law courts both of Jews and Gentiles (Matt. x. 7, 
 18), be expelled from the synagogues and put to death (John xvi. 2). 
 
 7. ouK avTol p\a(r<f>i]|ji.ov(riv tJ> KaXbv Svojio.] ' Is it not they who 
 blaspheme the noble name ? ' BXd(r^i//tos and its cognates are used 
 generally of slander and evil-speaking, as in 2 Pet. ii. 11, Tit. iii. 2, 
 Col. iii. 8:'in the N.T. they have also the special meaning of impiety 
 towards God and Christ ( = Xe'yet avdOefm 'Itjo-ovv) : so St. Paul Acts 
 
82 THE EPISTLE OP ST. JAMES 
 
 xxvi. 11 Kara Tratras rots crwaycoyas TToAXaKts TLfiwpuiv avTolis rjvdyKa^ot 
 ^ka(T<j>riii,e!.v, and 1 Tim. i. 13 ro irporepov ovTa /a£ ^\a.(T<f>7]iJiOV /cat Siwk- 
 TTffv (cat vjipuTT-qv. Cf. Just.in M. Trypho § 117 (Xpiorot!) ovo/j.a ySc/S?;- 
 Xtu^Tj'"'" Kara irSo-av T^v y^i' /cai -/3\acr<f}rjjji,€icr0ai ol ap)(i,epci'S rod \aov vjiuiv 
 Kal StSao-KaXot dpyaa-avro, ib. § 16 with Otto's note. We first read of 
 the sin of blasphemy and its punishment in Lev. xxiv. 10-16. 
 
 If this is understood of wealthy members of the Church, we 
 must explain it, either by supposing that the rich were more readily 
 induced to apostatize and blaspheme Christ (cf. Acts xxvi. 11, Plin. 
 I'Jp. X. 97. 5, Polyc. Ma/rt, 9) than the poor, which may be illustrated 
 from Herm. Sim. viii. 6, 4 ovtol el<nv oi a.-!ro(7Td.Tai koI irpoSorai Ttjs eKKXrj- 
 <na9 Ktti pX.a<j(f)7]iJuqcravTe'; iv rais afj.apTiaK avrSiv tov Kvpiov (called ;8Xd<r- 
 tfjrip,oi, eh TOV K.vpiov ib. ix. 19, 1) ert Bi koL lirai(T)fyv6ivTe<; ro ovofia Kvpiov 
 TO eTnK\rj6ev Itt' avTovs, where see Harnack's note ; or, in accordance with 
 Horn. ii. 24 to ovojxa tov OcoC 8i' ijuSs pXaa-^-qpLiiTai iv rots Wveaiv (a 
 quotation from Isa. Hi. 5), 2 Pet. ii. 2 8i' ofis 17 oSos tijs aX-qdeia^ fiXaxr- 
 tj)rjjx-y]6'i]0-€T<u, 1 Tim. vi. 1 tva /i'^ to ovo/xa toC ®eoi) p\aa-cf)rj/j.T]Tai, Tit. 
 ii. 5, we may understand it of those who profess to know God but by 
 their works deny Him, Tit. i. 16, cf. Clem. Kom. ii. 13. The use of the 
 active voice seems less suited to this interpretation, though Theile cites 
 from Euseb. U.E. v. 1 81a. t^s avacTrpo^i axn-Syv l3\acr<f)ij/jix)vvTes rrjv oSov. 
 On the whole I think the general sense of the passage suits better with 
 the idea that the blasphemers are unbelieving Jews, as in Acts xiii. 45 
 avTeXeyov p\atT<j>rjp.ovvTK, and this is suggested, as Dr. Plummer 
 remarks, by the following e<^' v/uas, not iir avroijs. 
 
 rb KaXbv Svo(i.a.] Cf.' below V. 14, Acts v. 41 mrlp tov ovofxaro^ dn- 
 fiacrff^vai, Phil. ii. 9, 10 TO ovo/jLa to vTrip wav ovo/jLa, Acts iv. 12 oure 
 6vop.d io'TLV erepov vtto tov ovpavov to SeSo/jievov iv avOpwiroLi iv iS Set 
 (Twdrjvai rj/j-as, JMatt. i. 21, Deut. xxviii. 58 ro ovop-a to lvTip.ov to 
 $avpi,a(TTOv rovTO, kvpiov tov ©cov crov, 2 Macc. viii. 15 evcKtv r^s itr' 
 awroiis C'lrt/cXiyo'ccus toB (rep-vov Koi fj.eya\o7rpeTrovs ovdjuaros avroi), Hermas 
 Vis. iii. 3 tov iravroKpdropos Kal evSo^oti dvo/j.aros, ib. iv. 1 rd ovopa aurou 
 (row Kvpiov) rd p.iya Kcil evSo^ov, Taylor's Jewish Fathers, p. 80 foil. So 
 Clem. Rom. i. 1 wcrrc rd cre/Avdv ovofia p\a(r4>r]p.rj6rjvai. 
 
 rb IttikXhB^v e<j>' ifias.] This Hebraism comes from the LXX. (Amos ix. 
 12) Trdvra ra Wvrj €<^' oSs CTriKCKXijTai rd ovopia, p-ov eV airous, also quoted 
 by the writer of this epistle in his address to the Council at Jerusalem 
 (Acts XV. 17). The phrase is common in the O.T., see Deut. xxviii. 
 10 6ij/ovTaL TrdvTa to, Wvrj on rd ovop.a "Kvpiov iviKiKkrjTai iToi, Numb. vi. 
 27, 2 Chron. vii. 14, Isa. Ixii. 2, Ixiii. 19, Jer. xxv. 29, 2 Macc. viii. 
 15. It is used not only of Israel, as the people of Jehovah, but also of 
 the wife taking the husband's name (Isa. iv. 1), of children named after 
 their father (Gen. xlviii. 16). It is questioned whether the reference 
 here is to the name Xpicrrtavo's, which came into use at Atitioch appa- 
 rently before St. Paul's first missionary journey (Acts xi. 26), and 
 which is found Acts xxvi. 28, 1 Pet. iv. 16 (see lAghtioot's Ignatius 
 vol. i. pp. 400-404) ; or to baptism, cf. Acts ii. 38 jiairTi(r6riT(a e/cao-ros 
 vp.mv Iv T<3 ovop-aTL 'Ir/o-oS XpicrroB, ib. viii. 16, x. 48, Hermas Sirn. 9. 16 
 TrpXv (^opeVai tov a.v6pu>Trov to ovop.a tov Ylov tov ®eov vcKpoi IittiV oral' 
 
II 7, 8 NOTES 83 
 
 Se A.ay8iy T'^v cr^payiSa (baptism) airoTidfrai Tr/v veKpuxriv koI dvaXa/i/Sav€t 
 Tr]v ^(o-qv, Justin M. Apol. i. p. 94 D (in baptism) eTrovo/Ad^erai t(3 
 eXojtici/o) dvayevi')5^iji'at...To tov Xlarpos tSv oA.a)v ovofxa. The latter ex- 
 planation seems the better, both as more suited to the phrase, which 
 seems to imply an actvial invocation of the name of Christ over each 
 individual believer ; and also because Christians were known to each 
 other by such names as dSeA,<^ot and ina-Toi, while ILpicrnavoi, like 
 Nafwpatoi and raXiXaioi, was at first used by outsiders as a name of 
 reproach. 
 
 8. This respect for the rich may however (/aeVtoi in its ordinary sense) 
 proceed from a good motive ; it may be you are filled with the spirit of 
 love, ready to forgive injury and to do to others as you would have 
 them do to you. If so, well and good. But if your conduct is really 
 determined by worldly motives, if you treat the rich well simply because 
 he is rich and you wish to gain favour with him, and treat the poor 
 harshly because he cannot advance your interests, then you break the 
 law which forbids respect of persons and enjoins special consideration 
 for the poor. It will not do for you to plead that you are scrupulous 
 in other duties. The law is a whole ; it is the revelation of God's will : 
 disregard to a single point is disregard to the Lawgiver ; it is dis- 
 obedience to God, and the spirit of disobedience breaks the law as a 
 whole. Do not entertain any idea of keeping this or that particular 
 precept and obtaining credit by that means. Such views belong to the 
 slavish conception of law as a collection of unconnected rules bearing 
 on outward conduct alone. The Christian law is a law of liberty ; it 
 is the free manifestation in outward act of the loving spirit within. 
 We shall be judged not by the observance or neglect of this or that 
 external rule, but by the degree in which our heart and life has been 
 penetrated by the spirit of love. If we show kindness, consideration, 
 compassion in our behaviour to other men, we shall meet the same in 
 God's judgment of us. 
 
 v6)i.ov TtKiirt pao-iXiKov.] Middleton (p. 423) thinks the absence of the 
 article forbids the translation ' the royal law.' I do not understand 
 what he means by the words, ' ^amXiKos I interpret excellent, in which 
 case the article is unnecessary.' We have no right to tone down the 
 remarkable word /SamXiKo?, and even if we were at liberty to do so it 
 makes very poor sense to say ' ye fulfil an excellent law.' Hofmann and 
 Schegg however agree with M. : the latter says ' voijlov ohne Artikel, weil 
 Jakobus nicht das Gesetz der Nachstenliebe meint, sondern ein spezi- 
 elles Gebot das aus dem Nachstenliebe hervorgeht (viz. " Seeleneifer," 
 the Jewish love of proselytizing, as he explains above) und so erhaben 
 ist dass es ein kbnigliches genannt zu werden verdient.' Such an inter- 
 pretation needs no refutation, but it is strange that neither Winer nor 
 Buttmarin has referred to this passage in discussing the use of the 
 article in the N.T. There is no difficulty in the anarthrous vo/ios being 
 used (as below iv. 11) for the law of Christ or of Moses on the same 
 principle that /SacriXevs could be used for the king of Persia, but the 
 addition of an anarthrous epithet should not have been passed over 
 without comment, as it has been by the editors generally. The only 
 
 G 2 
 
84 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 other instances named by Winer are 1 Thess. i. 9 SovXeveiv ®eto 
 ^Sivn Kol AXtjOlvS (which might there be indefinite, ' to serve a 
 living and true God,' in contrast with the preceding iTrea-Tpeij/aTe arro 
 Tmv £i8o)X(i)v : see however Westcott on Heb. iii. 12 aTroo-njvai aTro ©eoC 
 lS>vTO's ' the anarthrous title, which is far more common than 6 ®. 6 la>v, 
 always fixes attention upon the character as distinguished from the 
 " Person " of God. In every case it suggests a ground for corresponding 
 thought or action '), and the constantly recurring Tlvevfw. ayiov, which is 
 used not only after a preposition, as in Matt. i. 18 evpeOr) iv yaa-Tpl 
 e^oucra €k IIi/eij/taTos aycov, but also without a preposition and even in tlie 
 nominative, e.g. Luke i. 15 IIvev/iaTOs ayiov wXyia-Orja-erai, v, 35 Ui/eC^a 
 ayiov £7reA.€«<reTai ctti ere, ib. ii. 25 Tivevfui rjv ayiov Itt avTov. It is notice- 
 able that, when there is no article, the words are always in this order, 
 but, with the article, to ayiov IIi'. is not much less common than to Hv. 
 TO ay.i We may compare also Luke i. 17 fjivr/crO^vai Sia6-qKrj^ ayiajs 
 avTov and other exx. given in the Essay on Grammar. The phrase 
 vofiov TeXeire is only found here and in Rom. ii. 27. The commandment 
 of love on which all others hang (Rom. xiii. 8, Gal. v. 14) is rightly 
 called ' supreme ' jSao-iXiKos : so Philo M ii. 459 ol croifiot ^aa-iXiKuyrepov 
 oiScv aptTTJi vop.it,ovTt<s, ih. p. 364 ^aaiXiKrjV eiioOev ovofi.at,eiv Mwiitr^s 68or 
 Tr)V pii<rqv virep^oXri'S Koi iXXeiKJ/eio'S ovcrav p-eOopiov, ib. Mi. p. 526 astro- 
 nomy is ^affiXh Tuiv iTTujT-qiJMiv. Zahn (Gesch. Neut. Kan. i. 323) 
 compares Clem. Al. Strom, vi. p. 164, the Scripture says ' if your 
 righteousness do not exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees ' (whose 
 righteousness consisted only in abstaining from evil, a-vv tw /heto, t-^s 
 ev TO'uTous TeXetMO'ews) koI tu tov TrXrjO'iov dyairSv koX evepyeTelv Swatr^ai, 
 ovK ccetrSe jSacriXtKoi, ib. vii. 73 orav p-Tj Kar avayKTjv 7] (j>6j3ov r) IXiriha 
 BiKaioi Tis rj aXX' Ik Trpoaipicrems, avrrj ij 68os Xeytrat PacnXLKrj rjv to jSacTiXiKov 
 bSevei yej/os. Clement's use reminds one of /Jao-iXetov UpaTevpa (Ex. xix. 6. 
 1 Pet. ii. 9). And this would make excellent sense. Christ's law is not 
 addressed to slaves, who must obey whether they will or not, but to 
 kings who voluntarily embrace the law as their guide : cf. the Stoic 
 paradox in Hor. £p. i. 1. 106. A curiously close verbal resemblance 
 is found in p.seudo-Plato Minos 317 C to p.ev opOov vopo'S eVrl /Sao-iXixds, 
 TO Si p,rj opOov ov, where ^aa-iXiKO's apparently means ' worthy of a states- 
 man,' it having been stated just before that laws are the compositions 
 of those who know how to rule states, viz. ol ttoXitikoi t€ Kat oi ySao-tXi- 
 Koi: cf. id. Up. 8. p. 354 C. 
 
 kotA Tf|v 7pa<(>'^v. ] Of course the O.T. viz. Lev. xix. 18, of which the 
 text is an exact quotation, cf. 1 Cor. xv. 3 KaTo. Tas ypa<j>ds. 
 
 a.yatri\iras rbv vKr\<rCov <rov i>s o-eavTov.] In Hellenistic Greek, as in 
 Hebrew, the f ut. is often used for imperat. e.g. Matt. v. 48 ea-fcrBe ipek 
 reXeioi, ib. vi. 5 ofi/c ecrccrOe ojs oi virOKptTai, Rom. vii. 7 ovk fTTiBvprio'eis : 
 this is very rarely the case in classical Greek, see Winer, p. 396. 
 The law, which is limited in Leviticus by the context oi prjviei'; tois 
 viol's TOV Xaov crov, receives the widest significance as re-uttered by Christ 
 Luke X. 27 foil., John xv. 12. Hillel is said to have told a proselyte 
 that the essence of the law was contained in the saying ' what is hate- 
 ' Bnider has 10 examples of the former and 26 of the latter. 
 
II 8-10 NOTES 86 
 
 ful to thyself, do not to thy fellow,' and that the rest was only com- 
 mentary.i The phrase o irhqa-iov is classical (as also 6 irtXas). We 
 find it without a following gen. in Rom. xiii. 10, xv. 2 ; rov erepov is 
 used as its equivalent in Horn. xiii. 8, see Vorst, pp. 67, 562. 
 
 KaXus iroMtT*.] Used ironically below ver. 19, but here simply as iu 
 2 Pet. i. 19 (tov Xoyov) m koASs Jroteire Trpo(Ti)(pvTK, Acts X. 33, 1 Cor. 
 vii. 37, Phil. iv. 14. There is a similar phrase in the circular letter 
 written from the Council of Jerusalem, probably by St. James, in Acts 
 XV. 29 6^ &v Suj,rr]povvT€'S lavTOv? iv vpa^ere. 
 
 9. irpo(rwiroXT)(i,'irTeiT6.] oitt. Xey. see above ver. 1 on TrpocrorTroXrj/JUJ/ia, 
 afiapTiav ipy&UaSe.'] See on i. 3 and 20, Matt. vii. 23 epyatfi[i.(.voi 
 
 avofiiav. 
 
 IXeTx^H^voi inrh toB vo|j.ou.] ' Being convicted by the law,' personified 
 as witness, so 4 Mace. 5. 33 S TratSewTo, v6/x,e, cf. Rom. vii. 7, Gal. iii. 
 24. So we have viro t^s o-wctS'^o-Ews ^keyxof-^voi in the disputed passage 
 John viii. 9. The reference is probably to the law of love which they 
 had broken by dishonouring the poor. [Or to Lev. xix. 5 fi.yj 6avfj.d.<rr)i 
 wpotrajTrov Svvaarov. A.] 
 
 as irapapoTai,.] Similarly Homer uses inrtpjialvio and v-irepjSaa-Lri II. i. 
 497. Ilapa/Saivoi with an object, such as v6p.ovs, and even 6eovs (see 
 Herod, vi. 12), or absolutely (Aesch. Ag. 59), is quite classical ; but the 
 only certain example of this use of irapaPdrrjs in a classical author is 
 from the treatise wepl tSiv ey StKcA.ia. ^au/u.ajo/xci'mv irora/ifij' of Polemo 
 (fl. about 180 B.C.) irapaySaTijs ycvd/Aci/os tS>v 6eu>v ap. Macrob. Sat. v. 19. 
 "The metaphor is adapted to the idea of righteousness as the way in 
 which a man should walk. It occurs absolutely Gal. ii. 18, with v6[U)v 
 below ver. 11 and in Rom. ii. 25, 27^; wapaySao-is is used by St. Paul 
 and in Heb. ii. 2, ix. 15, and Trapa^cuvio in this sense Matt. xv. 2, 3. 
 
 10. 8o-T4,s SXov Tovvojiov TT]p'/io-i].] ' Whoevcr ksBps the law as a wholo,' 
 cf. Gal. V. 3. When oo-rts takes the subj. it is usually joined with 
 av, as in Matt. x. 33, xii. 50, Luke x. 35, John ii. 5, xiv. 13, Acts iii. 
 23, Gal. V. 10; when av is omitted, the constant confusion of -et and 
 -t] in the MSS. makes it difficult to know whether the fut. or aor. subj. 
 is the true reading. Beside this verse WH. give oVtis dpvijo-ijTat Matt. 
 X. 33. In classical Greek av is occasionally omitted, both in poetry, as 
 Eur. Ion. 856 octtis icrOkos y, Medea 516, and in prose, as Thuc. iv. 18. 4 
 o'lTLves vo/jiicroxn, ib. 17. 2 o5 dp/cScrt, see KUhner on Xen. Mem. i. 6. 13 
 oo-TK TToiyJTai, Winer, p. 386, A. Buttmann, 197. We find ems Xd/irj 
 without av below v. 7, where see n. On the Hellenistic use of Trjpeiv 
 with such words as vofiov see Vorst, p. 191 foil. 
 
 irrafoT) 8i Iv lv£.] For ttt. see below iii. 2, Rom. xi. 11. It is a 
 question whether evl and the following TrdvTwv should be regarded as 
 masculine (agreeing with vo/jo), vo/awv) or neuter. It does not seem 
 that vo/jios is ever used in the Bible of a particular precept = hroK-q. 
 
 1 Taylor's Jewish Fathers, p. 37 n. 
 
 ^ Dr. Plummer (p. 56) thinks the phrase may have been borrowed from the ' un- 
 written word' contained in the remarkable addition to St. Luke vi. 4, which we find 
 in Cod. D, rp ahr-^ ^/uepcc 6ea(rd^ev6s riva epya^Sfieyov t^j ira^^drcp elirej/ avr^, '' Kv- 
 QpwTre ei fiev oidas ri iioieis 'fiaK^pios el, ci 5e ju^ oi^as itrtxardpdTbs aal irapa^Tiis el 
 TOV v6/iov. 
 
86 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 The ten commandments are never called oi SeW vo'/xot. But might not 
 St. James unconsciously pass from the collective sense of vo/aos to the 
 particular precepts of which it consisted, v?ithout reflecting that, 
 strictly speaking, such a use of the term was illegitimate 1 The other 
 explanation is not without difficulty. We have plenty of examples of 
 the substantival use of the neuter ev in the nominative and accusative, 
 but not, I think, in the other cases. 
 
 Y^yovev irdvrcDv Jvoxos.] For perfect following aorist see above i. 24. 
 "Evoxos (lit. 'in the power of) is used with a genitive of the offence 
 ('guilty of theft'), of the punishment (it/. Oavdrov Matt. xxvi. 66), of 
 the law sinned against, as here. It takes a dative of the tribunal. 
 XlavTCBv is equivalent to SXov tov v6[j,ov. 
 
 St. James seems to have had in his mind the case of one who, think- 
 ing himself to be religious (i. 26), assumes that all is right with him, 
 like the Pharisee in the parable (Lukexviii. 11). Some of the Eabbis 
 actually laid it down that obedience to certain laws, e.g. the law about 
 fringes and phylacteries, was as good as obedience to the whole.' Cf. 
 Midrash Mishle on Prov. i. 10 qui unum praeceptum servat est ac si 
 totam legem servasset. On the other hand, the principle here affirmed 
 by St. James is also to be found in the sayings of the Rabbis : thus 
 Schegg gives a story from a Midrash on Numbers : ^ ' R. Hunna having 
 taught his disciples that he who committed adultery broke all the 
 commandments, was asked by them to explain how this could be true 
 of the fourth commandment ' ; and Wetstein to the same effect quotes 
 two sayings of R. Jochanan from Sabb. f. 70. 2 sifaciat omnia, unum 
 vero omittat, ommium et singulorum, reus est ; and Pesikta f. 50. 1 omnia 
 qui dicit, tota/m legem ego in me recipio 2^oeier verhum unum, hie ser- 
 monem, Domini sprevit et praecepta ejus irrita fecit, Horaioth 8 b : 
 (Levifc. V. 5) R. Jose Galilaeus dixit: 'qui reus est unius, reus est 
 oinnimn,' cf. 4 Mace. 5. 18 fL-q fniKpav cTvai vofiiuri'S ravTTjv, et fiiapo- 
 <^ayijcrai/A€V, a/jiapTiav to yap eiri jm/cpois koi /icydA.ois irapavofjuiv icroSvvafwv 
 tcTTtv, Si iKwrepov yap 6/xo('(ds i-7reprj<f>av€lTai, and Test. xii. Patr. 689 aAAos 
 KXeTTTCt, aStKei, dpTra^ci, irXeoveKTii, Kal iXeei Tois TrTw^oiJS. OLTrp6(Ttawov fiiv 
 
 TOVTO, TO Sc OAOV TTOVrjpOV IcTTLV. 
 
 This passage of St. James is discussed at length by Augustine in a 
 letter to Jerome {Ep. 167). He compares the teaching of St. James 
 with the Stoic doctrine on the ' solidarity ' of the virtues and vices, as 
 to which see Stob. Ucl. ii. p. 108 tov p,iav t^ovra aperqv iratras «X^"'' '^"' 
 TOV Kara fitav TrpaTTOVTa Kara ■rrdcra's wpaTTCiv, ib. 116 if)acrl Se Kal irdvTa 
 TTOieiv TOV cro<^6v Kara Tracras ras dperas' TrScrav yap irpa^iv TfXiiav auTOV 
 etvai, 8i6 Kai firjSi/JiLas aTro\fXu<j>$ai dpcr^s, ib. 120 Kara to dvdXoyov Si Kai 
 TOV (j>avXov irdvTa ocra Troiei KaK&s iroieiv koi Kara Trdo-as Tas /caKiaSi both 
 doctrines flowing from their conception of virtue as the art of life. In 
 the same way the Stoics asserted the equality of all virtues, Diog. L. 
 
 ^ [See Shemoth Rabb. xxv. end : ' the Sabbath weighs against all the precepts ' ; 
 if they kept it, they were to be reckoned as having don^ all : if Ihey profaned it, 
 as having broken all. Rashi on Numbers xv. 38-40 says the same of the law of 
 P'ringes, but an integral part of this is to remember all the commandments. — C. T.] 
 
 '^ [Bemidkar Rabb. ix. on Numb, v. 14.— C. T.] 
 
1110-12 NOTES 87 
 
 vii. 101. We may compare St. Paul (Rom. xiv. 23) irSiv o ovk ek ma-Ttias 
 a/JLapria ia-riv, and 1 Oor. x. 31 etre ovv ecdlere etre irivfri eire ti iroteiTe 
 iravra eis ho^av Otov TrotetTc.^ 
 
 11. 6 7ip «lir(6v.] The unity of the law flows from the unity of the 
 law-giver (below iv. 12) ; it is the expression of one will. The essence of 
 sin lies in disobedience to that Will however shown. It was by an 
 appeal to the same principle that our Lord answered the question of 
 the lawyer iroia, eo-ri irpiTu] wacroiv evToXrj ; 'The first of all the com- 
 mandments is, Hear, Israel ; the Lord our God is one Lord ; and 
 thou shalt love the Lord thy God ' Mark xii. 29. This spiritual view 
 of the law rendered impossible the comparisons of which the Jews were 
 so fond. 
 
 H^ (loixsio-gs.] Here the seventh commandment precedes the sixth, as 
 in Luke xviii. 20, Rom. xiii. 9, and (LXX.) Ex. xx. where the order is 
 ov //.oi^ewets, ov kXei^cis, ov <^oi/euo"£is :■ cf. Philo M. 2, p. 189 ^ Se kripa 
 TrevTots TOM 7rao"as aTrayopivaru^ irspii^u ynoip^etSv, <j>6vov, kXott^s, ij/evSo/JUxp- 
 TuptSv, €iri,Bvp,Liov, ih. p. 201 diro p.oLyjEia's ap-^^erai, ib. 207, 300 cv rg 
 Sevripa SeA.™ irpfirov ypajifia tovt Icrriv, ov fJi.oi,)(£vcreis. We have the 
 usual order in Deut. v. 17, Matt. v. 21, 27, xix. 18 ; the order in Mark 
 X. 19 varies in different MSS. The future ov iJioixevaeis is used by St. 
 Matthew, as in the LXX. ; furj with the subjunctive by the other 
 Evangelists, as here. 
 
 ti 81, o4 |j.oix<v£is, <|)oveii6is S^.] For ov after ei see i. 23 ov irmrjTijs n. 
 Here the more exact way of expression would be p.oixevei's /icv ov, 
 (jioveveLs Si, the single word pLoixeiu^. being negatived, ' if you commit 
 not adultery, but murder.' For the omission of /icV in such antitheses 
 see above v. 2 eurekOr) hi and i. 13 ireLpd^u Si, also 1 Pet. i. 8 apn firj 
 qpStVTei Tn(mvovT€<s Si, V, 12 ov^ lauTois fuJ-lv Si. 
 
 7I70VOS irapapdTTis v<5|io«.] For perf. see i. 24 ; for TrapajSanjs above 
 ver. 9. On omission of article see Essay on Grammar. 
 
 12. Let your words and acts, e.g. your behaviour to the poor, be 
 regulated by the thought that you will be judged by a law of freedom 
 (see i. 25), that is, by a law of the spirit, not of the letter. It will be 
 a deeper-going judgment than that of man, for it will not stop short 
 at particular precepts or even at the outward act, whatever it may be, 
 but will penetrate to the temper and motive. On the other hand it 
 sweeps away all anxious questioning as to the exact performance of each 
 separate precept. If there has been in you the true spirit of love to God 
 and love to man, that is accepted as the real fulfilment of the law. The 
 same love which actuates the true Christian here actuates the Judge 
 both here and hereafter, or rather He who is already dwelling in our 
 hearts by faith assures us ef that forgiveness in our own case which He 
 enables us to show to others. 
 
 ofiTws XaXetre Kal ofirus iroisiTe.] The repetition of ovtio's is in accordance 
 with the earnest weighty style of the writer : see i. 19 on /ipaSvs, and 
 cf. Buttm. p. 341. It insists on the importance of a right regulation 
 
 • ^ Gebser cites Clem. Al. 2. 798 (it should be Orig. Sol. in Psalm, cxix., Loipm. 
 vol. xiii. p. 70J 6 TTci(ras voffttras ivroKiis, irTaitras 5e 4v jU^a yiverai iraVTtav ivoxos. 
 
88 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 of speech (on which see ch. iii. below), as well as of action (on which see 
 vv. 14 — 26 of this chapter). The reference in outojs is to the following 
 ws, as in 1 Gor. ix. 26 ovtm ■jrvKT^vw ws ovk aepa Biptov, ib. iii. 15 o-co^jjo-erat 
 
 OVTOiS (US Sia TTVpds. 
 
 MS 8ia vdfiov eXev6«p(as n^XXovres KpCvarflai.] The absence of the article, 
 which was used in i. 25, serves to give prominence to the qualifying 
 genitive. For other instances in N. T. of the classical use of ojs 
 with part. cf. 1 Cor. iv. 18, 2 Cor. v. 20, Heb. xiii. 17, and Winer 
 P- 770/ 
 
 13. ■!] ydp KpCo-is aviX«os T(u f.i] iroiyjo-ovTi iiXcos.] The reading avikeoi is 
 found in all the best MSS. instead of dviAecDs. Neither form occurs else- 
 where, but we find dveXt^s (in scholiasts) and the more classical avrjXerji 
 (Plato), dveXei^fjibiv (Wisd. xii. 5, E,om. i. 31). As to the formation, 
 dveXeos is regular from the classical 6 tXeos (like aXoyos, adeos), but 
 TO eXeos is the form used in N.T.,i from which would regularly be 
 formed di/eXeiys (like ivyevrjs from yevos) or dvrjXei^s (like avrjpecfii^s 
 from epetjiui). We have another reference to Kpia-Li below v. 12. 
 With TTOLuv eXeoi cf. Josh. ii. 12 d/toerare fjioi on ttoiG v[jliv eXeos Kal 
 ■jToiijcraTc Koi i/Aets eXcos, Matt. vi. 2 oTavirotgs iXerj/jLoo~uvrjv, Tobit. xii. 9 
 ot TToioBvTcs iXirjiJ,o(Tvvas koI SiKaiocrvva's. For the thought cf. Matt. v. 7, 
 vi. 14, vii. 1, xviii. 28-35 the parable of the debtor, xxv. 41-46 the 
 description of the judgment, Tit. iii. 5, below v. 20, Psa. xviii. 25, 26, 
 Prov. xvii. 5, Sirac, xxviii. 2/^. aijies dSiKrj/xa ™ 7rXrj<Tiov <rov kol Tore 
 Serjdivros crov at a/j.apTiai (tov XvO'^crovrai, Tobit. iv. 7—12, Test. xii. Patr. 
 p. 641 £^€T£ tvcrirXay^viav Kara Trav.TO'S dvOpiiirov iv eXeei Lva koI 6 KiJpios 
 6ts v/xdi (nrXay)(yia'Oel's iXeiQay) v/jlols, otl Kai ye lir 1<t)(6.t(dv tj/jLeplov 6 ®60s 
 dirocTTeXXei to crirXay^i/ov avrov iin, t^s yrji koi ottov tvpfj trirXdy^va eXeovs, 
 iv avTio KaTotKcT, Dem. Mid. 547 ovSeli i(Tn ScKaios Tuyi^avciv eXeov tS>v 
 jtrqBiva iXeovvTuiv. The reference to mercy looks backward to i. 27 and 
 forward to ver. 15 foil. 
 
 KaTaKovxartti gXtos Kpfcrews.] ' Mercy triumphs over judgment.' The 
 compound verb is found also below iii. 14 and Rom. xi. 18; the simple 
 verb above i. 9. For the thought see Hosea vi. 6 eXtos OeXw rj Ova-iav, 
 quoted in Matt. ix. 13, where the Pharisees complain of Jesus eating 
 with publicans and sinners, and again Matt, xii, 7 when they find fault 
 with the disciples for eating the ears of corn ; Luke vii. 47, 1 Pet. iv. 
 8, Matt, xxiii. 23. The absence of a connecting particle is a feature in 
 the vigorous style of the writer, cf. below v. 6 KareSiKacraTe, itjiovevcraTe 
 TOV SiKaLov OVK avTiTCLcro'eTai v/jitv, and above i. 19 Tap^s ets to dKoBcrai, 
 /SpaSiJs €is rb XaXrja-ai. Some MSS. insert Si, as in ver. 15 below, 
 which would limit the scope of the words by presenting them as an 
 antithesis to the preceding clause. It is such of course in the first 
 instance : as the failure to show mercy or consideiation for others 
 forbids us to expect mercy ourselves, so by the exercise of mercy man 
 gathers to himself ' a good reward against the day of necessity ' (Tobit 
 iv, 9), since ' God is not unrighteous to forget the labour that proceedeth 
 
 ' Similar iustaucea of change of gender in Hellenistic Greek are rh vKovtos, rh 
 irj\os, tI otkStos, on which see Winer p. 76. 
 
1112-15 NOTES 89 
 
 of love ' (Heb. vi. 10). But the asyndeton allows the words to be taken 
 in their widest generality, as embodying the very essence of the Christian 
 law of liberty, affirming the universal principle of God's judgment, 
 even when it seems to be dveXeos, and supplying the rule for the 
 believer's daily life, cf. Philo M. 1. p. 284 oi fii,6vov St/cao-as cXect dXXa. 
 £\ei}(ros StKafef Trpccr/Surepos yap BiKrjs 6 tXcos Trap' avT(3 Icttlv, octe tov 
 KoX-aaews a^tov ov jheto. rijv hiKTjV aXKa. irpo 8tK»/s eiSoti. 
 
 14 — 26. In this section St. James proceeds to enlarge on the meaning 
 and nature of that faith in Jesus Christ which was spoken of in ver. 1 
 as inconsistent with wpoo-coTroXij/xi/fta. He dwells on the contrast, noted 
 in i. 26, between mere outward religion and the consecration of the 
 life to God. If a man -rricmv e)(ei ev 7rpoa-<i}TroXrifi\j/{aLS, is not this the 
 same as having a profession of faith which is not evidenced by deeds? 
 But it is not such faith as this that can ever triumph over judgment. 
 Compare the words of St. John (1 ep. ii. 4) 6 Xeywv otl 'EyvwKa avTov, 
 Kol Tas EVToXas 11,-q Trjpwv, \j/€v(7Trj's icTTLv. The apocryphal fourth book 
 of Esdras shows that the question of faith and works was at that time 
 agitated among the Jews, see ix. 7. 8 ' whoever shall be able to escape 
 either by his works or by his faith shall see my salvation,' also viii. 
 33-36, xiii. 23. For the relation of St. James' view of faith to that of 
 St. Paul and the other apostles see Comment. 
 
 14. t£ S(J>cXos.] The omission of the article ('what good is it,' 'what 
 boots it,' instead of ' what is the good '), especially when the verb is 
 understood, is somewhat colloquial and has a sharp abruptness which 
 suits the passage. It is omitted also by Philo M 1. p. 241 rt yap 6<j>ekoi 
 X4yeiv /J-kv to, jSiXncrTa,, Siavoelcrdai, 8e /cat irpwrTuv to. aicr^io-ra. . .tl Se otfaXo^ 
 a fj-kv xprj StavoEier^at epyots Si droTTOis kol Xoyois xprjo'dai ; and p. 295, 
 320, M 2. p. 333, also by Plato and Xen. The only other place in 
 which the word occurs in N.T. is 1 Cor. xv. 32 ei Kar avOpwirov iOrjpio- 
 ft,ay(yj<Ta, ti /iot to oc^eXos ; 
 
 £p7a.] The eXeos of ver. 13. Cf. Clem. Hom. viii. 7 ov yap iKJjeXrja-ei 
 TLva TO Xiyeiv dXXa to iroieiv ek iravTOS ouv Tpomrov koXwv epytav ■^p^ia, Pirke 
 Aboth 'say little, do much' (Taylor J. F. p. 38), Philo M. 1. p. 525 f, 
 avev wpd^ECOs Oewpia ij/iXy] wpos ovSiv o<f>eXos tois liruTTrifiotrw. 
 
 |i*l SiivaTai. ^ irio-Tis <rw(rai oirov/] The interrogative [irj, expecting of 
 course a negative answer, occurs again below iii. 12, and is very fre- 
 quent in the 1st epistle to the Corinthians and the Gospel of St. John. 
 I'or crmo-at cf. i. 21 : it is the triumph of mercy over judgment of ver. 
 13. r) TTto-Tts not faith absolutely, but such faith as this, fides ilia 
 quam vos habere dicitis (Bede). 
 
 15. tAv olSeXcIios.] See n. on i. 2. If Se is inserted after idv we should 
 have to consider this a second paiallel case, in which profession is 
 opposed to reality ; but it makes better sense to omit it with B. and 
 Sin. and take this as a concrete illustration of the abstract principle 
 stated in ver. 14. Compare 1 John iii. 17, 18 (where the empty pro- 
 fession of love is contrasted with the living reality), Philo M 1. p. 527 
 wcnrep iv tarpoTs 17 XeyofJievrj XoyoiaTpeca ttoXv ttjs tS)v KajxvovTwv ok^eXemis 
 affoo-TaTEi, (j>ap/jidKOii yap Kal p(£ipoupytais kol SiatVais dXX' ov Xoyois ai 
 vocroi OepaTTivovTai k.t.X, For construction of idv yvfivol VTrdp^(i)a-i,v...ehrri 
 
90 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Be TK...ixr] Bu>Te Be compare ver. 2 above iav £l(r£X,6r)...el(riX&ri Bi... 
 eTTiySA.ei/'ijTe Be. 
 
 7«|ivoC.] He still has before him the case of the poor who were 
 slighted in the congregation. The word does not necessarily imply 
 absolute nakedness : a person wearing the cetoneth, under-tunic 
 {\Lr<iivL<TKo<s or vTToSvTiys), alone was described as naked : thus it is used 
 of Saul after having taken o'S. his upper garments (1 Sam. xix. 24), 
 of a warrior who has cast off his military cloak (Amos ii. 16), of Peter 
 without his fisher's coat (eirevBvTiq'i) ; of. too Hesiod Op. 391 yvfwov 
 (TTreipeiv imitated in Georg. i. 299. The same exjpression is applied to 
 the poorly clad in Job xxii. 6, Isa. Iviii. 7, Matt. xxv. 36, see D. of B. 
 s.v. 'Dress' p. 454. 
 
 X€nro(i.6voi.] See on i. 4. As the best MSS. omit Sxnv, this must be 
 taken with virap^unriv, cf. Acts viii. 16 Pel3airTt.(rii,evoL iir^pxov. The 
 pluial is of course not strictly grammatical after the disjunctive con- 
 junction, but it is a very natural irregularity; cf. Vlnto Leg. 8. 838 
 oTov dSeA^os rj aBek^rj t<o yevon/rai koXoi, Krueg. Gr. § 63, 3, 2. So a 
 singular subject followed by /tera with gen. is sometimes joined with a 
 plural verb : see below on BSne. 
 
 l4>T||ji^pou.] Only here in N.T. ; not in LXX. Diod. iii. 31 and Dion. 
 H. viii. 41 use the phrase e^^/xcpos rpo^jtrj, Philo M. 2, p. 538 has to 
 eK^rifiepov, probably quoted from a comic poet (ire'^TjTesctr/x.ei'Kat/xoA.ts 
 Tov(f>-qfji.epov €is avTo, rdrayKaia Tropl^eiv Stivd/ue^a). Field cites Ael. V.H. 
 lii. 29 Diogenes said he was 7rTft);^os Svaeipuov, piov Jp^wi/ tov e^Yifxepov, 
 Menacder p. 134 M. (TTpareia B' ov {j^epei Trepiovcriav icjiij/jLepov Be koL 
 wpoTrerri ^lov. It is defined by Pollux as to eis t'^i/ eTnov(ra.v p,r) p.evov, 
 cf. Herod, i. 32 ov yap toi 6 p-eya 7r\ov(rios p.aXKov tov eir ■qp.eprjv e^ovTO'S 
 
 oA.y8lU)7e/30S £0"Tt. 
 
 16. Tis e| 4(j.mv.] Tit. i. 1 2 eiTre Tts e| avTuiv, and frequently. Sometimes 
 Tts is omitted both in the accusative as Matt, xxiii. 34 diroo-TeAAo) 
 7rpo(f>T^Ta^...Kal cf avTS>v airoKTevelTe, and in the nominative as John xvi. 
 17 eiTTOv Ik tGi' ii.a6r]TS>v avTOV. 
 
 iiirdYere ev etp^jvg.] Cf. the words of the jailor at Philippi to Paul 
 iropeveaOe ev eip-^vrj Acts xvi. 36, Jud. xviii. 6 ; but more commonly we 
 find €is used, implying a future result, as in Mark v. 34 with viraye, 
 Luke vii. 50 with iropevov, also ch. viii. 48, 1 Sam. i. 17, xx. 42, with 
 /SdSiJc 2 Sam. xv. 9, a.TreXv6r]a-av fieT elprp/rj^ Acts XV. 33. In Tobit xii. 
 5 we have vTcaye vyiawtav in much the same sense. It is a formula of 
 comfort (' be at ease,' ' have no anxiety ') usually grounded upon some 
 act or assurance, as 1 Sam. xx. 42 the oath of friendship between David 
 and Jonathan, Acts xvi. 36 the order of the magistrates. Here it 
 should have been followed or preceded by the gift of food and clothing 
 instead of the mocking words. 
 
 6ep|j.a<vc(r6e koI xoprdlleo-SE.] Beyschlag and others take these verbs in 
 the middle sense ' warm yourselves and feed yourselves.' The Revisers 
 retain the old version ' be ye warmed and fed,' which certainly gives a 
 better sense and one more suited to the caustic irony of which St. 
 James is a master. The sight of distress is unpleasant to these dainty 
 Christians. They bustle out the wretched-looking brother or sister 
 
II 15, 16 NOTES 91 
 
 with seeming kindness and what sounds like an order to others to 
 
 provide for their immediate relief, but without taking any step to carry 
 
 out the order. Compare Hor. 2 /Sat. 8. 25 tibi di quaecunque preceris 
 
 commoda dent. To have said directly ' go and get warm, go and eat,' 
 
 would have been giving an order which it was plainly not in their own 
 
 power to obey : the other mode of address (like the barren fig-tree) 
 
 excites a momentary delusive hope analogous to the impression pio- 
 
 duced by faith without deeds. It could only be rightly used where 
 
 miraculous power accompanied the word, as in Mark v. 34 waye tis 
 
 elpT^vrjv Koi 1<t6i vyt^s aTro tijs juao-Tiyos <tov. Otherwise it is only a 
 
 specimen of that hypocrisy of saying without doing {Kiyrj l^eiv ver. 14) 
 
 which called forth the severest reproof of St. James as of his Master. 
 
 The active of 6ep/i. is common in classical writers and is found once in 
 
 LXX. (Sirac. 38. 17) Oipfjiavov kottetoV, 'make hot the wailing,' never in 
 
 N.T. : BepfiaLveadai occurs elsewhere in N.T. only in Mark xiv. 54, 67, 
 
 John xviii. 18, 25 of Peter warming himself at the fire : in LXX. we 
 
 find it with passive sense Hos. vii. 7 iOepin-dvOrjcrav as KXt/8avos and in 
 
 Hagg. i. 6 used, as here, with reference to clothing, i<j>dyeTe koI ovk eis 
 
 ■7r\ri(rn.ovTJv . . .■TrepLipaXea-Oe koL ovk e^ep/tdv^iyre (where it must mean, not 
 
 ' did not warm yourselves,' but ' were not warmed '), so Job xxxi. 20 
 
 dm Kovpds dfjLvwv /xou eOeppi.dvOi^a'av ol wfioi avTwv, 1 Kings i. 1 (of David) 
 
 TTcpte/SaAAoi' avTov t/taTtots Koi ovk iOepjiaivero, tropically Psa. xxxviii. 3 
 
 i6epfji.dv0ri 17 KapSia fiov ('my heart was heated') koI iv ry /icAerij /tov 
 
 iKKavOrjo-erai Trip. The passive is also common in classical writers, as 
 
 Eur. M. 402 xapa 0epfiaiv6fi.€o-6a Kaphiav. There is just as little objection to 
 
 taking p^opTa^eor^ai as passive. The noun ^opTos ' fodder,' on which see 
 
 above i. 11, is used of human food by Hipponax the satiri.st/r. 34 B. 
 
 SouXtos x°P'''°^- '^^^ verb, which is only used by classical writers of 
 
 beasts or men like beasts (Plato Eep. ix. 586 Poa-K-qfrnTiav Biktiv ^oa-Kovrai 
 
 Xopra^ofievoi), or as a piece of slang (Eubulus 350 B.C. /8oX/8ots i/J-avrbv 
 
 Xoprda-iov iXrjXvOa), gets the general meaning of satisfying hunger in 
 
 later Greek. Lobeck {Phryn. p. 64) compares it with iptvyca-dai as 
 
 having lost its original specific meaning : see Matt. xiv. 20 itj^ayov Kal 
 
 exopTda-6ri(rav (were filled), Phil. iv. 12 i).e)x.v7]ix.ai koX x°P'''d^^o-6ai koX 
 
 Treivdv, Psa. xxxvi. 19, Iviii. 15, Ixxx. 16, cvi. 9, cxxxi. 15 roiJs irTw^oiis 
 
 XopTdcTd) dpTuiv, Acts vii. 11 ovx (.vpia-Kov xoprdcr/jLaTa (sustenance). But 
 
 the remembrance of the original sense was not quite lost for scholars : 
 
 see Clem. Al. Paed. i. 155 P ' ij^opratr^cvTcs ' ^r/o-iV, to dXoyov t^s rpoi^^s 
 
 irX^pa)/na p^dpratrfia, ov j3pu>fii.a cIttwv : cf . Sturz Bial. Mac. p. 200 foil. 
 
 f.if 8uT€ 8^.] 'ihe plural is often used after an indefinite singular, such 
 as e/cacTTos, tis, oWis, see Erueg. Gr. § 58. 4. 5. To avoid separating 
 words which are closely connected, Se sometimes takes the third some- 
 times the fourth place in the sentence, e.g. with the preposition (below 
 V. 12 wpb TrdvTuiv Si), with the article (John x. 12 6 /iia-^oros Se), even 
 the relative (2 Tim. iii. 8 ov rpowov Si), and with the negative, as here 
 and Matt, xviii. 25 /xrj iX''VTo<s Si, Acts xvii. 6 /j-r] evpovres Si, Acts 
 xxi. 34 fir] Swd/xevos Sk yvSivai, xxi. 14: fir) rreSofiivov SI avrov, so ovk 
 iypd4>rf Si, ovk eypaij/a Si, ov Sikofiev Si. Examples of the fourth place 
 are John xvii. 20 ov ircpt tovt(ov Si, Acts xxvii. 14 fier ov irbXii Si, 
 
02 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 1 Cor. iv. 18 m fir] ipxofievov Se fiov, even the fifth occurs in 1 John ii. 2 
 ov irepl tSiv vfierepdiv Si fiovov. In Justin M. ApoL ii. 8 we fi.nd an 
 example of the sixth place, koL tous a.7ro rfiv %to}lkS>v Sk Soy/AciTaji/. 
 
 tA liriT^Scia ToO o-<4|iaTos.] Only here in N.T., frequent in classical 
 authors, e.g. Thuc. viii. 74 ocra Trepl to a-w/na eU Biairav V7njp)(€v eirtriySeta, 
 Theophr. Char. xi. 5 cfxiStaviw fjteTpw p.€Tpeiv avTos tois 'ivhov to. hriTrfiua 
 (their portions or rations). 
 
 17. •() irt(rTts...veKpd eo-Tiv.] The absence of works, the natural fruit of 
 faith, proves that the faith is in itself lifeless, just as a compassion 
 which expends itself in words is only counterfeit. Life cannot remain 
 latent. Of. Plant. Ej'id. i. 2. 18 quid te retulii beneficum esse oratione si 
 ad rem auxilium emortuum est ? For metaphorical use of v€Kp6s, nearly 
 = /iaraios i- 2. 6, or dpyos below ver. 20, cf. below ver. 26, Heb. vi. 1 
 and ix. 14 epya viKpd, that is, ' works done apart from the vivifying 
 influence of faith and love, with a view to earn salvation,' cf. above 
 i. 26 n. and John xv. 4) ; Horn. vii. 8 x'^P'-^ v6/j.ov ap.apTLa vexpa, ' sin 
 is dormant till roused into activity by antagonism to law ' ; Epict. 
 Diss. iii. 23. 28 av p-rj ravra ip,Troi7J (viz. produce conviction of error) 
 o Tov <j>iXo(TO<^ov Xoyos, veKpos eo-ri Kal avrbs Koi 6 Xeyuw. 
 
 Ka6' lavT^v.] Not a mere repetition of lav p-rj exv ^py"' '■ *^® absence 
 of fruit shows that it is not merely outwardly inoperative but inwardly 
 dead. 
 
 18. dW «p€i Tis.J 'Nay, one may say, Thou hast faith and I works; 
 do thou, if thou canst, prove thy faith without works and I will prove 
 mine by my works.' It has been shown that faith without works is 
 of no value : one may go further and say that its existence is incapa- 
 ble of proof. The writer, with his usual modesty, puts himself in the 
 background, does not claim to be the representative of perfect working 
 faith, but supposes another to speak. Usually the phrase aW Ipii tis 
 is used of an objection, like vr) Aia, at enim, as 1 Cor. xv. 35 a..i.T. ttSs 
 iyapovTai ol veKpoi ; and in classical Greek Xen. Cyr. iv. 3. 10 aXX' 
 ipei Tts ioro)s ...a\X' diroi av Tts, and so some would take it here : ' It 
 may be objected that works and faith are different forms of genuine 
 religion : your form may be faith, mine works, both equally acceptable 
 in the sight of God.' The explanation is untenable, because it makes 
 the imaginary objector treat the writer as though it was the latter 
 who was exalting faith above works, instead of the opposite. In the 
 text akXa. has a strengthening force = immo, like ttAtjv in Matt. xxvi. 
 64, cf. John xvi. 2 a.Troa-vvayu>yov<s Tron^a-ovinv vp.3,<s- aXX' lp)(erai uipa Iva 
 ttSs 6 diroKTetVcDv ii/xas S6^ Xarpuav TTpocrtjiipiiv T(5 ®E<3, Luke xvii. 8, 
 aXX' ovxi epet auT(o; (which I think should be translated 'nay ! will he 
 not rather say unto him?') 2 Cor. vii. 11 ttootjv KaTfipydcraTo v/iiv 
 o-ttovSt^v, aXXii airoXoyCav, aXXa ayavaKTrjcriv, dXXa <j>6ftov, k.t.X., Phil. i. 
 18 iv TOVTw xo-ipii)' dXXa. koX p^atp^croyiiat, Heb. iii. 1 6 TtVcs TrapetriKpavav ; aXX' 
 ov Travres ; with Alf.'s n. Instead of the future the optative with dv 
 would be more common in classical Greek, but the latter form is rather 
 avoided by the Hellenistic writers, occurring only eight times in N.T. 
 (thrice in Luke, five times in Acts), see A. Buttmann, p. 188, who cites 
 Koiji. V. 7 p.oXi's yap v-rkp BiKaiov ns aTro^avurai, &c. In Latin the 
 
II 16-19 NOTES 93 
 
 future dicef aliquis is far more common than the present subjunctive, 
 see Eoby, vol. ii. pref. p. 101 foil. 
 
 Ko^ci).] In the N.T. the contracted is more usual than the uncon- 
 tracted form, see WH. app. p. 145, Winer p. 51. We also find Ka.fi.oi, 
 Kafii, KaK€i, KaKEivo's. A close parallel to the form of this sentence is 
 found in Theoph. Autol. i. 2 Sei^dv /xoi tov avOpiDirov aov, Kayu> ctol Set'^w 
 Tov ©eov juov. 
 
 X<Dpls Tuv?p7ci)v.J We must supply a-ov just as we supply /jlov after 
 Tr)V mcTTiv. Of. Rom. iii. 28 Xoyi^ofjaOa SiKaiovcrdai, iritTTU avOpoiirov X'^P'-'' 
 tfyyoiv vo/jLov, ib. iv. 6 6 ®£os Xoyt^erai SiKaiocrvvriv x'^p>-'' ifyy^v- 
 
 Ik tSv Sp7uv.] So V. 21 below and iii. 13 Ik tijs koXyj's dvao-Tpot^^s. 
 
 19. <rtp TTio-TeiJeis 8ti. ets eo-Tiv 6 ©eos.] This reading supported by A. 
 Sin. Pesh. &o. seems preferable to that of B (accepted by WH.) cTs ©cos 
 ia-Ttv, as it expresses a more defioite belief in the actual formula 
 of Jewish orthodoxy given in Deut. vi. 4 3.kov€ 'l&pa.y)X, Kwptos 6 ©£os 
 yifx-Siv KvpLOi els IcrTiv, Mark xii. 29, 1 Cor. viii. 4, 6, Hermas Mand. i. 
 
 TTpUlTOV TraVTWV TTlCTTeVt OTl €15 IcTTLV 6 ©£05, PMlo Leg. ad C. M. 2. p. 562 
 
 'lovSaioDS SeStSay/Aevovs e^ avrSiv cnrapyiviav h/a. vo/jLi^eiV tov iraripa kou 
 ■TToirjTyjv TOV Koo'p.ov ©£01/. Much is said of the excellence of the p.ovapx'.K'') 
 6prj(TKeia in the Clementine Homilies. This verse from Deuteronomy is 
 the commencement of the Shema, that portion of the law which was 
 appointed to be read or recited both morning and evening by every Jew. 
 ' For him who reads the Shema with scrupulous precision as regards its 
 several letters, they cool Gehinnom' (Berakoth 156, quoted in Taylor, 
 Jewish Fathers, p. 52, and exc. iv.). St. Paul depicts the reliance 
 placed by the Jews on their orthodoxy, Kom. ii. 17 — 22. The phrase 
 TTUTT. OTL denotes intellectual belief, as contrasted with irio-T. £is or iv 
 denoting moral faith or trust ; so Bede : aliud est credere illi, aliud 
 credere ilium, aliud credere in ilium. Credere illi, est credere vera 
 esse quae loquitur; credere ilium, credere quod ipse sit Deus ; 
 credere in ilium est diligere ilium. Credere vera esse quae loquitur 
 muUi et mali possunt ; credunt enim esse vera et nolunt ea facere, quia 
 ad operandum pigri sunt. Credere autem ipsum esse Deum, hoc et 
 demones potuerunt. Credere vero in Deum soli novere qui diligunt Deum, 
 qui non solo nomine sunt Christiani, sed et factis et vita ; quia sine 
 dilectione fides inanis. WH. take the clause interrogatively : it seems 
 to me more impressive to regard it as stating a simple matter of fact, 
 like cri) ma-Tiv £x"5 before. There is no need to suppose with Winer 
 (p. 678) that it expresses a condition, to which KaX&s ttoieis supplies the 
 apodosis ; what is prepared for is the following phrase koI to. Saiynovta 
 K.T.X., not the merely parenthetic KaXG>^ ■ffotEis. Another question is 
 whether St. James must be supposed to speak here in'his own person, 
 or whether this verse also must be assigned to the interlocutor intro- 
 duced in v. 18. The repetition of crti ma-Tevu^ after av ttio-tiv £x«ts and 
 the decided break before v. 20 seem to favour the latter view. We 
 must suppose him thus to put forward the two arguments (1) belief 
 without works (may possibly be a real belief, but) can never prove its 
 existence ; (2) it may exist, and yet be consistent with diabolic 
 malignity. 
 
9i THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 KaXcis irowis.j The phrase is not necessarily ironical, see above v. 8 
 and Mark xii. 32 KaXGs enres on ets icrnv, but is made ironical by the 
 context, as in Mark vii. 9 xaXcus aOeTetre rrjv ivToXrjv, 2 Cor. xi. i d 6 
 epT(o/x€vos aXXov '1tj(tovv Krjpv<j-cr(t....KaXS>s ave^^ecrOe, John iv. 17 KoXwg 
 diras OTL avSpa ovk t^o). It is often used in a colloquial sense by classical 
 writers, e.g. Demosth. p. 141, 14 /heto, ravra r/ rvxi] KaXis iroiovaa (' many 
 thanks to her') ■jroXA.a TreiroirjKi to, Koivd, id. Mid, p. 582 ettrt /a€v eis to 
 lidX,i(TTa avTol TrXovcrioi koa, KaXSs TrotoCcri, where Eeiske translates id 
 vero laudo congratulorqiie, id. Goron. p. 304, 26 (Pliilip's cruelty others 
 have experienced) t^s 8c ^tA.av6pa)7rtas...'£/*ets koXuh Trotowres ('by good 
 luck ') Toiis KopTTOvs KSKOfiicrde, Arist. Plut. 863 /caASs tolvvv ttoluiv 
 diroAXuTat (' a good job too ') : see Hermann's Vigor, p. 362. [Diod. v. 
 p. 442 R. KttAuJs Si,e^6dp6a.i ' a pretty clean sweep ' A. ] 
 
 Toi Saifiovia irwrrrfoDo-iv.] This is the term regularly used in the 
 Gospels for the evil spirits, also called Trvev/jMra aKaOapra or Trovrjpd, by 
 whom men are possessed and who are themselves said to be subject to 
 Beelzebub. "We have instances both of their belief and their terror in 
 Matt. viii. 29 (of Legion) tupa^av Ae'yai'Tes tl ■^fuv kol croi, vie tov ®eov ; 
 rjXde? ZSe irpo Kaipov ^a(T-av[aHU ■^fj.a's ; of their belief, Luke iv. 41 'He 
 suffered them not to speak because they knew he was ihe Christ,' 
 Acts xix. 15 ' Jesus I know and Paul I know.' They suggest evil 
 thoughts to men : hence o-o^ta SatynoviajS-^s below iii. 15, SiSacr/caAtais 
 fiat/Aoi/tW 1 Tim. iv. 1. The sauje term is applied to heathen deities 
 1 Cor. X. 20 foil. 
 
 Kttt <j>pC<rcroD(riv.] The word, which properly means ' to bristle,' is used 
 like the Lat. horreo of the physical signs of terror, especially of the 
 hair standing on end, as in Job. iv. 14, 15. But the R.Y. translation 
 'shudder,' seems too bold ametiiphortoapplyinEnglish to spirits. It comes 
 to express only a high degree of awe or terror, as Daniel, after the vision 
 of the four beasts and their disappearance before the coming of the Sun 
 of Man, says e<l>pi$e to irve.vp.d fiov (vii. 15), Prayer of Manasses 4 Kvpte 
 ...ov wdvTa tjtpifTO'U Kol Tpijxu diro Trpocrunrov Svvdp.eiii'! crov, hence to (j>piK- 
 Tov ovo/xa, (j>piKTa pAXTTripia or opyia, fiapp-aLpwy tl (fipiKwhe's of the dazzling 
 splendour of the robes of Herod (Euseb. H.E. ii. 10); it is even used 
 of the effect on the mind of a favourable omen Xen. Cyr. iv. 2, 15 Sta-re 
 ■Tracri /xiv (jiptKrjv lyyiyve(r6at rrpo's to delov, Odppos 8e irpb's tovi TroXepLiovs. 
 The occasion of this terror is mentioned in Matt. viii. 29 quoted above, 
 cf, Heb. X. 27 (for those who sin after receiving knowledge of the truth 
 theie remains) (fioPepd tis ckSo^'^ Kptcretos, Philo M 1 p. 218 IttI tois 
 irpoaSoKuip.a'ois (^o/8epots TpipLOVTeq te koi (^ptTTOVTCs. We find many 
 reminiscences of this saying of St. James, e.g. Justin Trypho 49 {Kpiu-- 
 Tov) Koi TO. Sai/xovLa <l)piorarei Kol iracrai dtrXw^ al a.px"-'' *"*' i^ovatai T^s y^^i 
 Acta PhilippiT. p. 86 ©ec bv cftptrrovo'ii' Travres alutve's ■ . .bv Tpip-ovaiv ap)(ai 
 Ttav iirovpavlw, Laotant. de Ira c. 23 Apollo Milesivs de Judaeorum 
 religione consultus responso hoc indidit,..bv Tpe/xerat koI yala koi oupovos 
 ■^Se OdXacro'a, Taprdpeoi re pAi)(ol Koi Sai'/iioves iKtjjpiTTOviTLV, Orphica ap. 
 Clem. Al. Strom, v. p. 724 P 8at)u,ovES ov <j)pi(ra-ovai (Herm. Orph. p. 454), 
 Ignat. Philip, p. 175 (6 o-Tavpos) ectti to Tpoiraiov KaTo. t^s avToC (rov 
 8ta/3dXou) hwdp.eiD';, OTrep opuiv <^piTT£t. 
 
11 19-21 NOTES 95 
 
 20. e^Xeis S^ TV&vai.] Of. Rom. xiii. 3 ^cXcis 8e /jlt) <f>o^U(r6at; to d-ya- 
 6bv iroui. The question is equivalent to a condition ' if you wish for ti 
 conclusive proof that faith by itself cannot save, take the case of 
 Abraham.' It would seem that from this point St. James speaks again 
 in his own name. 
 
 & &v6puir« Ktve.] Cf. Rom. ii. 1 S avOpwire iras 6 Kpiviov, ix. 20 S 
 avOptinre, fievovvye crii Tt's el ; 1 Tim. vi. 1 1 S av6p(a7r£ @eov. Kcvos ( = Raca) 
 is defined (Epict. Dies. iv. 4. 25) as one c^' ots ov Sei liraipoixevos : like 
 vanus it is used of a man who cannot be depended on, whose deeds do 
 not correspond to his words, hence of boasters (Soph. Ant. 703 ovtoi Sux- 
 irrux^t'vTcs unftOrjcrav Kfvoi) and impostors, joined with dXa^wv Plut. Vit. 
 p. 581 F. I'erhaps the words in Hermas Mamd. xi. 3 avTos Ktvos u>v 
 K€va)s awoKplverai Kevois' o yap av i'Trepiarrjdfj Trpos to Ke'v(i)/ia tov avBpiinrov 
 aTTOKpiverai may refer to our text : cf. Didache 2. 5 ovk ecrxat 6 Adyos 
 trov i/'cdS'^s, ov K£vds, dA\a fiefiea-Tiofjievo^ irpa^a. Hilgenfeld and other* 
 who suppose this argument on faith and works to be directed against 
 St. Paul imagine that St. Paul himself is here addressed. See Intro- 
 duction. 
 
 ap7TJ.] Nearly = veKpd, which is read here by some MSS., cf. 2 Pet. 
 i. 8 TavTa (love, brotherly-kindness, &c.) ovk apyovi ovSe aKaprrov^ KaOim- 
 Trjo'iv, Matt. xii. 36 ttSv prj/xa apyov. 
 
 21. 'AppacLfji 6 iroT^ip tjufiv.] This was the constant title of Abraham, as 
 is .'-hown in Matt. iii. 8, John viii. 33 foil., Luke xvi. 24, Rom. iv. 1, 
 16. Its use favours the supposition that the epistle is addressed 
 principally to Jews. 
 
 OVK «S ipyav eSiKaimBu ;] The case of Abraham was naturally appealed 
 to as the pattern of faith not by St. Paul only (in Rom. iv. and Gal. 
 iii. 7, where we iind the same quotation as in our next verse), but in 
 Heb. xi. 8 and 1 Mace. ii. 52 'A/8paa/x ov)(l iv Trdpacr/xw evpe6rj TTio-Tos kol 
 iXoyicrOri a^ru tis SiKaiocrvvrjV, ib. xliv. 20 foil., Wisd. x. 5, see Light- 
 foot Galatiams, p. 151 foil. When the example of Abraham was abused 
 as af>suring justification to all who professed an orthodox belief, it was 
 equally natural to show, as St. James has done, that Abraham's faith 
 was not a mere profession but an extremely active principle. Clement 
 of Rome combines the views of St. James and St. Paul ; see i. 10, 31, 
 TtVos X'^P'" fj'^'^oy^Sv A^. ; ov)(i, SiKaioavvrjv kol ak-qOeiav Sia TriVrttos ttoltq- 
 o-as; ib. 33 with Lightfoot's notes, and above ver. 14 n. For i^ tpyov 
 see ver. 18 and Matt. xii. 37 ex tcov k6y<iiv Si/caKo^ijOTj. AiKaido) is 
 strictly to make i.e. pror ounce just, like aiiow to pronounce or deem 
 worthy or fitting, cf. Exod. xxiii. 7 oi StKaiuio-ets tov acreftrj, 1 Kings 
 viii. 32 Si/caiGcai Sinaiov, Sovvai airip Kara T'^v SiKaLOO'vvrjv airov, Psa. 
 cxliii. 2 ov SiKaiw^TjcrcTai ivunriov aov Tras t,S>v, Isa. xlv. 26 aTro Kvpiov 
 8tKa«i)^i;troj'Tai...irav to (nripij.a t5>v vlCtv 'IcrpaijA., Acts xiii. 39, Rom. iii. 
 28 XoyL^o/jieOa BiKaiovaOai iricrxci avdpmTrov )(0>pi'i €pyuyv vofiov, ib. iv. 1 ct 
 'Appaap, i^ epyuiv itiKaiiaOrj ex^ Kavxrjp-a, Habak. ii. 4 quoted in Rom. 
 i. 17. See T. S. Evans on 1 Cor. vi. 11. 
 
 ttV€v«'7Kas 'lo-ooK.] Cf. Gen. viii. 20 (xtto iravTwv twv KTrp/Siv tu>v Ka6apwv 
 ...avr/veyKev els oXoKapTTwcTiv iirl to 6v<Tia(TTrjpiov, 1 Pet. iii 5, Heb. vii. 
 27 a.Ta<j> Ova-ia^, where Westcott distinguishes it from the classical term 
 
96 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 irpocrcjjipo) as properly describing the ministerial action of the priest, 
 while the latter describes the action of the offerer. In the other 
 passages of the N.T. in which Abraham's faith is mentioned it is 
 differently proved : thus in Rom. iv. 1, 17-21 it is the faith in the 
 promise of a son; in Heb. xi. 8-12 it is the departure from his own 
 land to an unknown country; ib. 17-19 it is the sacrifice of Isaac in 
 the faith that God would raise him up again from the dead. The 
 much-quoted verse of Genesis (xv. 6) follows the promise of a son, but 
 a special blessing follows the sacrifice of Isaac {ib. xxii. 12, 16-18). 
 Philo has not less than twelve references to Gen. xv. 6 (see Lightfoot 
 Gal. I.e.), the most striking passage being M. 1. p. 486 SUaiov yap 
 ovTui'S ovSiv (US aKpana Koi a/ityei riy wpos ©eoc /xovov TTLcrTei Ke^rjfrOai 
 ...TO iiTL /jLovw T<3 ovTL ;8e/3aio)s Koi (IkA.ii'cos op/j-uv . . .BiKaiotrvvYji fx,6vov 
 epyov. While St. Paul makes no reference to Gen. xvii. 17, in 
 which Abraham is said to have laughed at the idea that he should 
 have a son by Sarah (the earlier promise having been made when 
 he was at least twelve years younger, and having no express reference 
 to Sarah), Philo endeavours to show that this is no discredit to 
 Abraham's faith (M 1. p. 605). I borrow from Gfrbrer cited by Bishop 
 Lightfoot I.e. p. 154 foil, the following rabbinical quotations : {Mechilta 
 on Exod.xiv. 31) 'Abraham our father inherited this world and the world 
 to come solely by the merit of the faith whereby he believed in God ' ; 
 {Siphre on Deut. xi. 13) 'The sacred text' means to show that practice 
 depends on doctrine and not doctrine on practice : and so we find God 
 punishes more severely for doctrine than for practice, as it is said 
 (Hosea iv. 1) Hear tJie word of the Lord, <Sco. ' : ^ ' As soon as a mau has 
 mastered the thirteen hea'ls of the faitb, firmly believing therein... 
 though he may have sinned in every possible way... still he inherits 
 eternal life.' It is to such views Justin refers {Tryph. 370 D) ou^ ws 
 ii/icis aTrarare eauTOus Koi, aWot Ttv€s.--ot \iyov(TLV on Kav OLp,apThiXoi Sxtl, 
 ®e6v Se yLvii><TK(o(riv, ov firj XoytcTTjTai. airots Ki;/Dtos ajxapnav. 
 
 Iirl tJ> BucTiacTT'^piov.] Gen. xxii. 9 iiriOrjK^v aiTov Itti to Ova. The 
 word, which is not found in classical writers, is used of the Jewish 
 material altar or the Christian spiritual altar in the N.T., LXX., Philo 
 Josephus, and later writers. See Westcott, Hebrews, p. 453^. 
 
 22. pXsireis.] I prefer, with WH., to take this and opare below v. 
 24 as a statement, not a question, both explaining yi/tiyi/ai in v. 20. ■ 
 It is used with on in Heb. iii. 19, 2 Cor. vii. 8. 
 
 •rvvf\pya rots Sp^ois.] 'Faith cooperated with his actions and was per- 
 fected by them ' : cf. Mark xvi. 20 tov Kvpiov a-vvepyovvTo^ (sc. rots 
 CLTToaToXoLi), Plut. Mor. p. 138 A TJj ij/v)(rj crvvipyiL TO croi/xa koL trvyKd/jLVU, 
 Philo M. 2, p. 616 avyfj to o.Troo'TeXXo/j.cvoi' ek ^Xoyd;, crui'cpyov 6<^5a\/u.oTs 
 eh Tijv Twv opaTZv avTiX-ijipiv. Here we have the opposite to ^(opis ' 
 ipytav. 
 
 23. ^TcXcuiSi).] As the tree is perfected by its fruits, so faith by its 
 
 ' The immediate reference is to Deut. v. 1 ' and ye shall learn them and obsci've 
 to do them,' which is cited on Deut. xi. See Jewwh Fathers, p. 64. 
 
 " [This is a free rendering of Maimon. on Mishnah, Sanhedrin xi. 1. See how- 
 ever Surenh. iv. 264. C.T.] 
 
II 21-23 NOTES 97 
 
 works. In like manner sin is spoken of (i. 15) as diroTeXeo-^eio-a when 
 transformed into act and habit and so producing its natural result ; 
 and mofiov-q is exercised and made perfect by practice (i. 4). Wherever 
 there are good works, it is due to the faith which inspires them, 
 wherever there is genuine faith it must blossom into works, see 1 
 John ii. 5. 
 
 eirXijpiieri.] So Matt. ii. 17 iirkripiLdyj to p-qOev k.t.X. 'the word of 
 prophecy about Rachel then received its true fulfilment.' In the 
 sacrifice of Isaac was shown the full meaning of the word (Gen. xv. 6) 
 spoken thirty or (as the Rabbis say) fifty years before. in commendation 
 of Abraham's belief in the promise of a child. When they were first 
 spoken Abraham's faith was imperfect, as is shown by the question 
 (Gen. XV. 8) ' Lord, whereby shall I know that I shall inherit it ? ' It 
 was the willing surrender of the child of promise, ' accounting that 
 God was able to taise him up from the dead,' which fully proved his 
 faith. The Rabbis distinguish ten instances of faith in Abraham;-^ 
 his faith was perfected in the sacrifice of Isaac, his justification was 
 proved by his being acknowledged as friend of God. The Jews implore 
 the mercy of God by the sacrifice of Isaac, as Christians by the sacrifice 
 of Christ.2 
 
 1) 7pai(>^.] The singular is used of a particular passage, as in Mark xv. 
 28 iirX-qputOr) r/ ypa<j>rj rj kiyovcra Kal //.era tuiv av 6 fiiov iXoycaOt]. 
 
 hrCrreviriv S4.] The MSS. of the LXX., with the exception of 19 and 
 108, have Kal iiria-Tevcrtv, but Se is found, instead of koi, in Philo M. 1. 
 p. 605,, Rom. iv. 3, Clem. Rom. i. 10. 6, Justin M. Dial. 92, showing 
 that 8e was the then accepted reading (Hatch, p. 156). 
 
 1X07(0-61) oirio £is SiKaiooTivTiv.] The original Hebrew (Gen. xv. 6) has 
 the active, ' God counted it to him ' : the quotations in the N.T. (Rom. 
 iv. 3 foil.. Gal. iii. 6) have the passive with the LXX. Similar phrases 
 occur Gen. vii. 1 (of Noah) ere eiSov SiKaiov ivavriov p-ov, Deut. vi. 25 ' it 
 shall be our righteousness (LXX. iXeqp.oa-vvri) if we observe to do all 
 these commandments before the Lord our God,' ch. xxiv. 12 foil, 'if he 
 be a poor man thou shalt deliver him the pledge again when the sun 
 goeth down... and it shall be righteousness {iXeqp,ocrvvri) unto thee 
 before the Lord thy God,' Ps. cvi. 30, 31 (then stood up Phinehas and 
 executed judgment) koL iKoyicrdrj avria eis SiKaiocrvvrjv ets yevcav koi yeyedv. 
 Compare also Levit. xxv. 31 at Se oIkicll irpbi tov aypov XoyicrflijcovTat 
 ' shall be reckoned as,' Ps. xxxii. 2 (quoted in Rom. iv. 6, 8) p.a.Ka.pio's 
 avijp o) ov p,ri XoyLarjTai K.vpioi dp,apTiav, Wisd. ix. 6 Kav yap rts rj reXeios 
 Iv uiois avOptiyiruiv r^s oltto (tov (TO<j>ia<i aTrovcrrji eis oiSev Xoytcrfijjo-cTat. 
 AtKatocruvij in the Bible is taken in even a wider sense than that noted 
 by Aristotle Eth. v. 1. 15 avTrj p.lv ow ■^ Zmaioavvr] aperr) p.iv icrn reXeia, 
 dXX' ovx dirXaJs dXXa tt/dos erepov, who quotes Theognis 1 47 ev 8e SiKaiocrijvg 
 otjXX'^/JSijv irStr' dperi^ 'anv. In the Bible it is the character of the man 
 who fulfils his duty in all respects towards God, as well as towards his 
 
 1 See Taylor's J.F. p. 94. 
 
 ^ See Schegg here, and Delitzsoh on Gen. p. 418 (ed. 1860). [Targum on Micah 
 vii. 20 adds Remember for us the binding of Isaac. C.T.] 
 
98 THE EPISTLE OP ST. JAMES 
 
 neighbour. The great importance of the text in Gen. xv. is that it is 
 the first passage in which the ' law of liberty ' is laid down. Definite 
 set tasks irrespective of motives are exacted from slaves : in the family 
 of God the motives of the children are the main thing in the eyes of 
 the Father. Here the right state of mind is declared to be in God's 
 sight equivalent to the right action ; though, as St. James says, 
 right action is the necessary result of the right feeling and it is only 
 through right action that the right state of mind can be evidenced to 
 others, so that the absence of right action (unless precluded by special 
 circumstances) is a proof that the state of mind is not right. The faith 
 of Abraham is the same as the trust which is so often declared blessed 
 in the Psalms, e.g. Ps. ii. 12, xxxiv. 8. 
 
 <|)£Xos OeoB «KXifi6Ti.] The precise words are not found in the LXX. In 
 Gen. xviii. 17, where our version simply has ' Shall I hide from 
 Abraham that thing which I do ? ' the LXX. has ov firi Kpvij/ia awo 'A/3. 
 ToC TratSds fiov a eyw ttolS), which is quoted by Philo (Scibr. M. 1, p. 401) 
 with the words rov <l>i\.ov jxav, though elsewhere {Leg. All. M. 1, p. 93) 
 he cites it without alteration. In 2 Chron. xx. 7 ' Art thou not our 
 God who...gavest it (the land) to the seed of Abraham, thy friend, for 
 ever ? ', the LXX. has cSojxas avT-qv (nripji,a.TL 'A^paa/j. ™ rjya.TTrifi.evia trov 
 eis rov allova, Vulg. semini Ahrahami amid tui ; Isa. xli. 8 'the seed of 
 Abraham my friend ' is in LXX. a-iripim, 'Appaafj. ov riyo.Trqa'a.^ The 
 appellation is still in use among the Arabs, ' with whom the name of 
 Khalil Allah (the friend of God), or more briefly El Khalil, has 
 practically superseded that of Abraham. Even Hebron, as the city of 
 Abraham, has become El Khalil ' (Plumptre in loc). Clem. Rom. has 
 the phrase twice, probably copying from St. James (i. 10 o <^tAos 
 Trpoa-ayopevOtU with Lightfoot's ,n. and 17), and so Irenaeus iv. 16, 2 
 Abraham eredidit Deo ei reputaiwm est illi ad justitiam et amiciis Dei 
 vocatus est. Compare John xv. 14, 15, Wisd. vii. 27 {cro<J3ia) cJs ij/vx^-s 
 6<7tas ixerajSaivovira. (jiiXovs ®eoC kol irpocjii^Tai TrapacrKma^ei, Taylor s J.F. 
 p. 1 1 3., and for the same sentiment in Grgek philosophers see Xen. 2[em. 
 li. 1. 33 (Virtue speaks in the allegory of Prodicus) 8t' c/Ae <^iXot /nev Seois 
 ovTcs, ayaTrrjTol St <j()tA,ots, Plato Leg. iv. 716 D o piv (riacfipwv 0€(3 i^tXos, 
 op.oioi yap, Rep. X. 613 ' the righteous man is 6io^iK-q<; and therefore all 
 must turn out well with him ', Epict. Diss. iv. 3. 9 eXev^epos yap ei/*t 
 KoX ^I'XosToO ®£ov, Cic. N.D. L 121, II. 165. 
 
 25. 'Paap ■i\ ircSpyr).] Selected as an example the furthest removed 
 from Abraham : so Erasmus ' tanticm valet apud Deum misericordia ac 
 beneficentia in "proxim/wm, ut mulier, ut meretrix, ul alienigena hospitali- 
 tatis officio comm^ndata meruerit in catalogo piorwm adnumerari.' 
 Probably it was on this account that her name was famous among the 
 Jews. She was counted as one of the four chief beauties, the others 
 being Sarah, Abigail, Esther ; and was said to have been the ancestress 
 of eight prophets (Meuschen, p. 40). She is also cited as an example 
 of faith, Heb. xi. 31, and is mentioned in the genealogy in Matthew. 
 Her faith is shown both by her actions here referred to and her words 
 
 ' Other ruadiiigs have <f>'iXou, see Field, IlcxaiiUi,, pp. 744 aud 513. 
 
Ijl 23-III 1 NOTES 99 
 
 recorded in Josh. ii. 9, 11 'I know that the Lord God hath given you 
 the land... the Lord your God, He is 'God in heaven above and in earth 
 beneath.' Clement of Rome (i. 12) connects the two aspects, to which 
 St. James and the writer of the epistle to the Hebrews direct attention 
 by his phrase 8ia rncmv kcu cftiXoieviav ia-<i>6rj 'PaajS, see Lightfoot on this 
 passage and also his appendix (pp. 413 and 470) on the attempt made 
 both by Jewish and Christian writers (Josephus, Chrysostom, &c.) to 
 weaken the force of the word Tropv-q. 
 
 {iiro8E|a|i.lvi) Tois d7-Y4X.ODS.] Heb. xi. 31 8e^a[ji.evrj tovs KaTacTKOTrovs. 
 Both renderings are independent of the LXX. which says aTria-reiXev 
 'Irjo-oBs 8vo vtavLcTKovs KaTacrKoireBcrai. The word vTroS- occurs elsewhere 
 in N.T. only in the writings of St. Luke. 
 
 eripa 68u.] By a .window instead of by the door, and to the mountain 
 instead of straight back to the camp of the Israelites, Josh. ii. 15, 16. 
 For this pregnant use of erepos of. Mark xvi. 12 cv iripa fiop(jyfj, Acts ii. 
 4 erepais yXwcrfrais. 
 
 eKpa\aS(ra.] In mild sense as Matt. ix. 38 ottos iKJ^dXy epyaras eh tov 
 depuTfJLOV avTov, Mark i. 1 2 to irveC/ia £K/8aA.Xei auToi' cts TrjV tpyj/iov ( = ayei 
 Luke, avdyeL Matt.), John X. 4 orav to. ISia {irpajBara) Travra iKJ3aXrj 
 (= efayet, v. 3). 
 
 26. TO (rto|ji.a x"P^s irvciiiiaTos veKpdv eoTiv.] It seems at first strange that 
 the outward visible part of man should be compared to the invisible prin- 
 ciple of faith, and the invisible spirit be compared to works which are 
 the outward fruits of faith ; but we must always keep in mind that St. 
 James is speaking here not of faith of the heart, but of a mere lifeless 
 profession of orthodoxy, ' professing to know God but in deeds denying 
 Him ' (2 Tim. iii. 5), ' having the form of godliness without the power ' 
 (Tit. i. 16).^ And as 'faith ' thus becomes a mere externality, so ' works ' 
 become identified with the working principle of love. It thus becomes 
 easy to understand how a mere shell of profession void of the animating 
 principle of love can be compared to a corpse. Or we might understand 
 TTvivft-a of ' breath' as in Ps. cxlvi. 4, Apoc. xi. 11, xiii. 15 (so Peile and. 
 Bassett), which would give a simpler illustration : as a body which does 
 not breathe is dead, so faith which does not act.^ A similar metaphor is 
 found in Curtius x. 6 (19) milita/ris sine duce turba corpus sine spiritu est. 
 TIL — 1. The writer goes back to the subject of i. 19 ySpaSis eU ro 
 \aX7Ja-a.i, and i. 26 j«,^ x"^"'°'7"7''^'' y^Sco-av, which suggests the figure of 
 vv. 2 and 3. It is also connected with that overvaluation of theory as 
 compared with practice which formed the subject of the last chapter. 
 
 11^1 iroXXoX SiSdo-KttXoi yCvttr9t.] In his circular letter (Acts xv. 24) St. 
 James condemns unauthorized teachers, cf. Matt, xxiii. 7, 8, ib. xv. 14, 
 Rom. ii. 17 foil., 1 Tim. i. 6, 7 OiXovres elvai vo/x,o8i8aa-KaXoi k.t.X., Heb. 
 V. 12 dc^eiXovTcs etvai SiSdo-KaXot 8ia tov ypovov iraXiv ;)(peiW e^eTe toS 
 8t8ao-K€H' vfx,a.<s Tiva to, (XTOixeia ttjs ap^i?? Tuiv Xoyitav tov ®iov, Pirke 
 Aboth i. 11 dilige laborem et Rabhinatmn odio liabe with Taylor's 
 n., Herm. Sim. ix. 22 OeXovrnv £0e\o8i8ao-KaXoi etvat acjipoves ovtes. The 
 
 1 The Hebrew word for ' body ' is used for the essence of a thing, see J.F. p. 76. 
 - Origen however {Set. in Psalm xxx. ) says irvevfia here is equivalent to ^f/vxh. 
 
 H 2 
 
100 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 phrase means ' do not be too eager to teach,' ' do not 'press into the 
 work of teaching,' lit. ' do not many of you become teachers.' For the 
 use of iroXXoL cf. Heb. vii. 23 koI ol /jlcv, irXeioves eicri ycyovoTes lepeis Sta 
 TO 0avdT<a K0i\vea-6at irapafjiiveiv, 6 Se. . .dwapdlSaTOV e)(€L ttjv Uptoa-vvriv. We 
 read of SiSda-KaXoi at Antioch (Acts xiii. 1) : they are included in St. 
 Paul's two lists of church officers, 1 Cor. xii. 28 where they come next 
 after apostles and prophets, and Eph. iv. 1 1 where the order is apostles, 
 prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers. In 2 Tim. iv. 3 a time is 
 foretold when the people will become impatient of sound doctrine and 
 Kara tcis iStas iin6vfiias eavTois hncnapeuaovo'iv StSacr/caA-ous. In the only 
 passages in which they are mentioned in the Didach6 (xiii. 2, xv. 1, 2) 
 they are joined with prophets and appear to stand on a higher level 
 than the ewto-KOTroi and SiaKovoi, though these latter also should be care- 
 fully chosen for their office, vfuv yap XeiTovpyovcri koi avrol ttjv Xeirovp- 
 yiav tS>v TrpofftrjTuiv /cat SL&atrKdXav ; see Hermas Vis. iii. 5 ol fi,ev XWol ol 
 TeTpayuiVoi...Eiaiv ol aTrocTToXoi kol iirLa-KOTroi Koi SiSdo'KaXoi Kot Sta/covoi, 
 where Harnack says in Sim. ix. 15, 16 episcopi et diaconi nagliguntwr, 
 quia ibi munus praedicandi eva/ngeliv/m solum respicitwr. Doctores svmt 
 omnes praedicatores Ghriatianas veritatis, etsi nequs apostoli neque 
 presbyteri Juere. Certwm est etia/m saeculo secwndo laicos in ecclesia 
 publics docuisse, and adds many references. 
 
 elSdres.] See on i. 3 yivmrKOvris, and i. 19 IWe. 
 
 |j.«t£ov KpC|xa Xr||i,i|ro|ji.Eea.i Greater than other Christians who do not 
 set up to teach, cf . (for the pregnant use of /x,«'^o)v) below iv. 6 ; and 
 for thought. Matt. vii. 15 foil., xxiii. 14 foil., on false prophets, 
 scribes and Pharisees, blind leaders of the blind, Mark xii. 38-40 
 ySXeircTe aTTo tS>v ypai>,ii,aTiu>v...Trpo(^d(TU jjMKpa 'jrpoa'evy(op,€voi, ovtoi XrjfJi- 
 ij/ovTaL irepLaa-oTepov Kpi/jia, Luke xii. 47 Sap^trcTat iroXXd^. Pirke Aboth, 
 i. 18 'not learning but doing is the groundwork, and whoso multiplies 
 words occasions sin.' For the phrase Kp. X. ' to be condemned ' see 
 Rom. xiii. 2, Luke xx. 47. Other references to judgment in this 
 epistle are ii. 12, 13, v. 9, 12. By the use of the first person (cor- 
 rected to the second in the Vulgate), St. James includes himself 
 among the teachers whom he warns, as in v. 9, cf. ii. 18 : so St. Paul 
 1 Cor. X. 6 foil., Heb. ii. 3, xii. 25, Ignat. Eph. 3 ov 8iaTacrcro/Aat i/uv 
 ms <ov TL^.-vvv yap dp^ijv c^w ToC fiaSrjreveo'Oai Kal TTpoaXaXio v/juv uis 
 OTJi/SiSao-zcaXtTois fnov. 
 
 2. iroXXd irTa(o|Mv &irovTes.] 1 John i. 8 : Wetstein cites many similar 
 sayings from heathen writers, e.g. Thuc. iii. 45 7re<l>vKaa-Lv airavrts Kal 
 tStci Kal 8i7/ioo-ia a/jiaprdveiv, Seneca Clem. i. 6 peccamMS omnes, alii 
 gravia, alii leviora. For iroXXa see Mark ix. 26 iroXXa. a-n-apd^a^ i^XOev, 
 for TTTaUiv above ii. 10, 2 Pet. i. 10, Jude 24 tw Swa/jtivia <j)vXd^ai u/iSs 
 dirTauTTovi- 
 
 A Tis iv \6yif oi irralti.] For et ov see above i. 23, ii. 11 : for the 
 thought Matt. xii. 37 ck tSi' Xdyuv arov Stxatto^^oTj kol e/c tSiv Xoyav o'ov 
 KaTaSiKacr6i^(r{i, ib. xv. 11 to CKiropcvd/iEvov ek toC o-To/iaros, tovto koivoI 
 Tov avOpioTTOv, 1 Pet. iii. 10, Prov. vi. 2 irayU la-xvpa dvSpt ra tSta X"'^*?! 
 XV. 4, tao-ts yX(oo-o-)js SecSpov ^(o^s, Sirac. xiv. 1 fjiaKapio^ [dvrjp os ovk 
 * coXtcr^ijcrei' Iv o-to/miti- avTov, ib. xix. 16, xxv. 8, xxviii. 12-26. 
 
in 1-3 NOTES 101 
 
 oStos T^Xeios ov^p.] ovto's marks the apodosis as in i. 23. For av^p see 
 above i. 8 ; for reXeios i. 4. 
 
 XoXivoY<o7<jo-ai.] See on i. 26, and cf. Philo M. 1. p. 196 (the true 
 man within each) iirurTO/j^L^tov rais tov truveiSoTOS ijvtats tov avBdSrj koi 
 /AETO. a^-qviafriiov Spofiov •yA-wmys iirecr^^cv, ih. p. 314. 
 
 Kttl 8Xov Tb «rM|jia.] Repeated in vv. 3 and 6. The figure of xa^. is 
 further carried out : by the bridle in the mouth we turn the horse as 
 we will, so by controlling our words we can regulate our whole 
 activity. We find the opposition of one member to the whole body. 
 Matt. V. 29. 
 
 3. I!S«.] WH. with E.Y. and all the recent editors (except Hofmann 
 and Bassett, who keep iSc) read ei 8e. The evidence is as follows : AB 
 with some inferior M8S. read EIAE, Vulg. and Corb. si autem ; Sin. 
 EIAE TAP, Sin.' omits yap ; Cod. Ephr. with many inferior MS8. and 
 Theophyl. and Euth. Zig. in comment lAE ; Pesh. ecce enim ; Egyptian, 
 Ethiopian and later Syriac versions ecce. The confusion between « 
 and I being extremely common,^ it is important to observe (1) that the 
 insertion of yap in Sin. seems to show that the preceding £i8e must be 
 taken as an imperative ; (2) that this view is supported by some of the 
 oldest versions ; (3) that as regards B in particular, since it ' shows 
 a remarkable inclination to change i into ei' (WH. Introduction, p. 
 306), its evidence here is of little weight.^ We have therefore to fall 
 back on other considerations : and it is plain that €t Se is not suited to 
 the context. ' If a man does not stumble in word he is able to bridle 
 his whole body. And if we put the bits into the horses' mouths that 
 they may obey us, — we turn about their whole body also.' The natural 
 apodosis to such a protasis would be ' let us also for the same purpose 
 put a bridle in our own lips.' The present apodosis adds nothing to 
 the clause eh to ireiOia-Oai, and it is diiBcult to find any natural meaning 
 for Se at the beginning of the verse : even the kul in apodosis is out of 
 place ; it would have been natural if the protasis had run £t to o-ro/ta 
 /leTayo/jiev. Lastly, the koli after iSov in ver. 4 seems to look back 
 to the preceding tSe. De Wette and Beyschlag felt these difficulties 
 so strongly that they included the whole verse in the protasis and 
 explained the construction as an aposiopesis. Thus the latter trans- 
 lates ' Wenn wir aber den Pf erden die Ziigel in die Mauler legen um 
 sie gehorsam zu machen, und so ihren ganzen Leib regieren, so sollten 
 wir es doch auch uns selbst thun, d.h. auch unserer Zunge einen Ziigel 
 anlegen und so unseres ganzen Leibes sittlich machtig werden ' ; and 
 refers, for examples of aposiopesis after ei, to Luke'xix, 42, Acts xxiii. 9, 
 Mark vii. 11, which however are very unlike the present. In fact such 
 
 ' Field compares Rom. ii. 17, where the old reading fSe <rl/ 'lovSaws has been 
 changed to el Se by late editors, misled by the spelling of the majority of the uncial 
 MSS., as in our text, and with equally disastrous effect on the construction. He 
 points out that Sin. has etSov for iSov in Luke xxiii. 15, rfSerc for fSere Luke xxiv. 
 39, 1 John iii. 1. Below v. 11 the MSS. are nearly equally divided between XSere 
 and rfSere. In Luke vi. 3 Cod. D has eiSe for tSe. 
 
 ^ In this epistle B gives €i not only for long t, as yeiKiffKovTes, 8\el\fiei, pemi(eij,4vcf, 
 ei6s, but occasionally for short t, as avSpunreivri, ariiels. So C has aoipfias i. 5. 
 
102 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 an aposiopesis is simply impossible here, and in any case is opposed 
 to the style of the writer : it is only suggested as a last resource by 
 editors who felt themselves bound to this reading on the mistaken 
 view of the overwhelming evidence in its favour, and in obedience to 
 the hazardous maxim that the more difficult reading is always to be 
 preferred. No doubt a copyist will avoid, if he can, a difficulty which 
 stares him in the face (and this might account for iSc being changed, 
 before the following iSod, into either ei 8e' or tSov) ; but as long as a pro- 
 tasis has an apodosis of any sort to follow, it is a matter of indifference 
 to the copyist whether it adds anything new or merely repeats what is 
 already included in the protasis. Lachmann proposed to read oiSe with 
 a question instead of d 8e. "With i8e we get exactly the right sense. 
 The casual use of the word ■)(aX. suggests the image to which he calls 
 his readers' attention (so IZov introduces a simile in ver. 7). ' Lo ! in 
 horses we use the bit for the purpose of making them obey and thus 
 control their whole body.' The less common active imperative is found 
 along with the middle in Eccles. ii. 1 ScOpo ^r) Treipdo-w crc ev ev<j>po(rvvrj 
 Ktti iSe ev a.ya6£- Koi iSov Kai ye tovto fiaraLOTrj^, Mark iii. 32 and 34, 
 i&ov r] ft.'qTrip o-ou...l'8e ij P-'^T'OP f-"'"! Matt. xxv. 6 and 22, xxvi. 51 
 and 66, John xvi. 29 and 32, Gal. Ke v. 2, l8ov i. 20 : St. Luke 
 always uses iSov. The difference between them is well given by 
 Donaldson (in "Winer, p. 319): 'the middle often exhibits a signifi- 
 cation which might be called intensive, but which really implies an 
 immediate reference to some result in which the agent is interested. 
 One of the commonest cases is that of the aorists tSetv and iSia-Bai, of 
 which the former means simply " to see," the latter " to behold, to look 
 with interest "... for this reason tSov is more frequently used than ISe 
 in calling attention to something worth seeing.' So here iSe is 'lo!' 
 ISov ' behold,' the latter calling attention to various particulars about 
 the ship. Of. a similar change below iv. 3 from oireto-^at to aireir. 
 
 Twv Hmrav.] The gen. is here put in an emphatic place to mark the 
 comparison. It belongs both to ^aA.ti'ovs and to (TTofLwra., probably 
 more to the former as distinguishing it from the human bridle, so we 
 have a.-)^i tS)V ■^(aXivSiv tS>v tWcoi/ Apoc. xiv. 20, etti tov ;^aA.tvov Tov Itrirov 
 Zech. xiv. 20. Compare Psa. xxxii. 9. 
 
 pdX\o(i.ev.] Mild force, as in l/cySaWu above ii. 25, of. Ael. V.H. ix. 16 
 tTTTro) €it,paXKuv ■)(., Xen. De re equest. vi. 7, ix. 9. 
 
 els tJ> ireCBecrflai airois <i|J.iv.] Of. Xen. Gyr. iv. 3. 9 Tret^erai o ithtos 
 XaKa/w, Soph. Ant. 483, Philo M. 1. p. 21. The subject of the infinitive 
 is specified, as in i. 18 eis to itvai ij/aSs airapxr/v, iv. 2 8ia to yu,^ airiurBax 
 v/j.oi's, iv. 15 dvTt TOV keyuv u/ias. 
 
 4. ISov.] Only found as an interjection in N.T. See below ver. 5, v. 
 4, 7, 9, 11, and compare aye vvv, ta-Te, aKovVare. 
 
 KaV tA irXoio.] For this comparison see Arist. Median. 5 to 7nj8d\iov 
 filKpov ov Kat en- ia-)(aT(o Tw TrAoto) Toa-avTyjv 8vvap.LV e;(« aSo-TC virb /iucpoj 
 oiaKOS Ktti evos avOpuiirov Swd/iews Kai Ta.vTr)<s ■^pe/iatos /*eyaA.a KivairBai 
 fieyeOri irXotW, Lucr. iv. 900. The two figures are united Plut. Mor. 
 p. 33 F, Philo M. 1, p. 131 evreiSav 6 r^s i/'i'X^s ijvtop^os rj Kv/3epv^T7j^ o voi)s 
 apxij TOV ^tLov okov...€v6vv€Tai o ySi'os, ib. 2. p. 521, Theoph. Simoc. JSp. 70 
 
Ill 3, 4 NOTES 103 
 
 (Didot's EpistolograpM, p. 783) ijn'ais koX ii.a.(Tri^t toiis itttous lOvvofiev, 
 Koi vauTiWd/ie^a ■tttJ /^ev tois tortots tiji' vaBi' CKTreTatraVTes, irjj Sc rats 
 dyKupais TttiJTijv )(a\ti'(i)(ravTes Kadopfii^ofiev' ovrut Kv^epvrjreov koi Trjv 
 y\!i)TTav, A^to^e. 
 
 Ti]XiKaSTa.] 1 Used elsewhere in N.T. only in 2 Cor. i. 10, Heb. ii. 3, 
 Apoc. xvi. 18. 
 
 imo dv^iuov <rKXr)pfflv IXavyiS|ieva.] Cf. Matt. xi. 7 (Luke vii. 24) KoXa/iov 
 mo avi/Lov a'aXevo/ifvov, ib. xiv. 24 ttXolov j8acran^d//.£i'0V xnro rS)V KVfjLo.- 
 T(i)v, 2 Pet. ii. 17 d/Ai^^Xat mro XatXairos eA.avi'dju.ei'ai, Jude 12 ve<j>e\ai vTrb 
 dve/iiov ■jrapa<^£pd//.evai, Apoc. vi. 13 (tvk^ vtto aviit,ov o-eio/tei/?;, Dio. Ohr. 
 iii. p. 44 C kXvSuvos vtto avifiutv (TKKrjpStv /ACTa/SaWo/tevov, Ael. V.H. ix. 14 
 p,^ a.varpeirqTa.1 vtto tSv avip.uiv et Trore crKkripol KaTtirveov, Plato Phaedo 
 84 B uiro tSv avifLtav Sia<f)vcrrjdeL(Ta rj ipv)(^, Arist. Anima i. 5, 15 i/'w^^ 
 ^ipopLorq VTTO tS>v d.vip.ti>v. The very frequent use of wo before ave/j-ov 
 and similar words suggests that here it retains something of its local 
 force, not simply 'by,' but 'under.' Otherwise it is rarely used in 
 the sense of ' by ' with things, as below {mo -irrjSaX.iov and v. 7, 
 Luke viii. 14 vtto juepi/xvui/ koX 7rXovTov...(TV/Jt.'7rviyovTai, 2 Pet. ii. 7 Ao)t 
 KaTaTTovovfiivov mro t^s tu>v adecrpMV 8ia(7Tpo<^'5s. In i. 14 vTrb TTJi kTnOv- 
 p.M's, and ii. 9 vtto tov vo/jlov, it is probably due to personification, as also 
 in Col. ii. 18 ^vcnovixtvo^ mro tov voos t^s <rapKos avTov. On its use in 
 the Attic orators see Marchant in Classical Review, vol. iii. pp. 250, 
 438. For a-KXrjpoi contrasted with fiaXaKos compare our ' stifE breeze,' 
 and see Pro v. xxvii. 16 Bopeas o-kAjjpos avefjio^, and passages cited above 
 from Aelian and Dio Chrys. 
 
 n-TjSaXCov.] Only used elsewhere in N.T. in Acts xxvii. 40. For iXa- 
 ^itrrov cf. Wisd. xiv. 5 eXa^^ttrro) ^Xw Tria-Tevovcriv avOpumoi, i/'v;^as koX 
 SieX^dvTES KXvhtava (r^eSia, Si€(7u>6rja'av. j 
 
 jiiro-u.] Here for oiry ' in whichever direction,' as often for ottoi (cf . 
 John viii. 22 ottov iyi> mdyoi), neither of these latter forms being found 
 in N.T. or LXX. Similarly exet and ttov are found for e/ceicre and iroi, 
 like the English ' where ' and ' here ' for ' whither ' and ' hither.' Even 
 in classical writers we find ottov for ottoi, as in Xen. Mem. i. 6. 6 /JaSi- 
 tpvTOr ottov av ISovkiofiai. Cf. Winer, p. 592. 
 
 ■i\ 6p)i.f| ToO eievvovTos povXtTot.] 'The pressure (touch) of the steers- 
 man decides.' The word op/iij is used of the origin of motion either 
 moral or physical. In N.!". it only occurs here and Acts xiv. 5 (of a 
 rush or onset of the people) ; so LXX. Prov. iii. 25 ov <f>oPy]0'ria-ri bpfi,ws 
 ofTi^Sn/ iirep^o/JLevai, ib. xxi. 1 op/jyij vSaros ' the rush of water ' : cf . the 
 erroneous comment on this passage in Euth. Zig. and the Catena, Trj^SaXto) 
 [jLiKprn 6pii,r]v irXoiov p,eTa<^ipofi,ev. It appears here to mean the slight 
 pressure of the hand on the tiller, what Apuleius, speaking {Flor. 1. 2) 
 of the eagle's flight, calls ivufMs clemens laevorsum vel dextrorsiim,. So 
 Schegg, Erdmann, Theile, "Wiesinger, Hofmann : on the other hand 
 Calvin, Gebser, Beyschlag, Briickner, Alford understand op/irj meta- 
 phorically of an inclination of the mind (R. V. ' whither the impulse 
 of the steersman willeth,' as in 1 Pet. iii. 17, 'if the will of God 
 
 ^ B has the article before tiiA. 
 
104 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 should so will ' ei 6e\oi to 6eXr]fia rov 6eov). As ^ovXofji.ai cannot be 
 used properly of a mere irrational impulse or whim any more than of 
 muscular pressure, it seems to me less confusing to understand it of the 
 latter : see above n. on i. 18, and (for the tropical use of ^ovko/jLoi) 
 compare Plato Symp. 184 Atoutous PovXeraL 6 rifieTepos vofx-o^ (iaa-avileiv, 
 and its technical meaning in Arist. £th. iii. 2 to aKovcriov fiovXerai 
 \eye(TOai ovk et Tts dyvoet k.t.X., Top. i. 7. p. 103 raSra yap iravTO, to %v 
 ^ovXerax trrjiJuCveiv. Similarly 6eXu> John ii. 8 to Trvevfjia oirov deXei irvii, 
 Plato Phaedr. 230 D ret /tev ovv )(ii)pia koI to, SivSpa ovSiv /j-e OeXa SiSao-Ketv, 
 Rep, ii. 370 ovk i$eX€i to irpa.TTop.a/ov Trjv tov irpa.TTOVTO'S a-)(pXrjV Trepifi.iveiv. 
 For aidvv. cf. Phil6 M. 1. p. 422 <f>iX€i yap ea-nv otc x^P's rivi6x<ov Te 
 Kal KvPepvryrZv o Te TrXovi Kal 6 Sp6/Ji,oi tidvvicrdai, Eurip. Cycl. 15 ev 
 TrpiJ/tVJj S'^Kpa. auTos A-ajSwi/ yjvOwov afji.(j>7Jpe^ 86pv, Aesch. Suppl. Ill oiof 
 iiOwTTip. 
 
 5. ^ ^Xuoro-a iiiKpbv [i^Xos.J This comparison is quite in the Jewish 
 proverbial style. The horse's mouth is small in comparison to the body, 
 yet through it the whole body is directed ; the rudder is small in com- 
 parison to the ship ; the tongue small in comparison to the man ; yet 
 control this small member and you control the whole nature. This 
 however is only the allegorical outside ; by the smallness of the tongue 
 is meant the insignificance, as we deem it, of speech in comparison with 
 action ; yet by controlling speech we acquire the power of controlling 
 action. For the metonomy by which an independent personality seems 
 to be attributed to the tongue, so that it stands for the temptations 
 or sins which are concerned with the use of the tongue, though, as 
 Augustine says (Serm, 17 cited by Corn, a Lapide), ream linguam non 
 facit nisi mens rea, compare Matt. v. 29, 30 'if thine eye... thy right 
 hand, cause thee to stumble ' ; Matt. xv. 19 ' the things that come out 
 of the mouth defile a man ' ; 1 John ii. 16 ' the lust of the eyes.' 
 
 |i6YdXa a4x«t-] 'Vaunts great things.' There is no idea of vain 
 boasting : the whole argument turns upon the reality of the power 
 which the tongue possesses. Whether written as two words with A B, 
 or as one (p.eyaXav)(u) with Sin. K L, (fee, the phrase occurs nowhere 
 else in N.!"., but is found in Ezek. xvi. 50, Zeph. iii. 12 (A.V. ' to be 
 haughty'). Sir. xlviii. 18, 2 Mace. xv. 32, cf. Ps. xii. 3 yXSxra-a //.eyaXop- 
 prifj.(ov. It may be compared with the Homeric eux"/*"' ""<*' ^^^ with 
 Philo M. 1. p. 338 /teyaXijs '/'I'X^s TO av)(rjp,a ykve.ua/ iwepKVTTTeLv, ib. 158 
 TO SovXeuetv 0ew p,iyUTTOV avy(yip,a, ib. M. 2. 235 kyKpareia 8e KaOapa koI 
 a.K.rjXiSwTO'S apeTT], TrdvToiv ocra xpos Pp&uiv Kal tto'ctiv oXcyyovua,, koX iirdvia 
 tS>v yauTpos ■^Sov&v av^^ovara IcnaaOai, /3(oijlu>v ipaveTO). Observe the use of 
 allitetation in p, to point the contrast of [UKpov /xeXos /ueyoXa av^ei, and 
 compare that in 8 below v. 7. 
 
 ifKCKov irijp ii\CKi]v iiXifv dv&ma.] ' How small a fire kindles how large a 
 forest,' cf. Philo M. 1. p. 455 (T7riv$rjp Kal 6 y8pa;^uTaTos oTai' KaTairvevcrdeK 
 ^mirvpijOy p.eydXir)v i^dirTei irvpdv. For the double question compare 
 Mark xv. 24 ^dXXovres KXrjpov Tts rt dprj, and Luke xix. 15, Isocr. p. 240 
 ovk ayvoSi 77X1KOS tov (' how old,' viz. 94) oo-ov epyov evioTa/xai, Plato Sep. 
 4, p. 423 B ijXt'/cjj ovcrrj (■ttoXci) oo-ijv )(ii)pav dtjiopura/ji.ivov's iav {Set), Soph. 
 Ant. 933 ola ttjoos ot<ov avSpmv ■;raor;^u), Krueger Gr. 51. 14. 1, ib. § 17. 10, 
 
Ill 4-6 NOTES 105 
 
 Seneca Controv. Exc. v. 5 nesciebas qua/m levibus ignihus qucmta incendia 
 oriantur, and Milton P.L. i. 91 'Into what pit thou seest from what 
 height fallen.' There is no force in the objection that this interpreta- 
 tion gives opposite senses to the same word in the same sentence. 
 Literally it is ' what (what-sized) a fire kindles what a forest,' but the 
 context interprets the meaning of ' what ' in either case. In Lucian 
 Hermot. 5 ijXi'kous '17/ias a.Tro<^aLva% ouSe Kara tovs Trvyiiaiovs Ikuvovs dXAa 
 vaj«,ai,Tr€T£t5 Travrdiraa-i.v, the context shows the meaning to be ' how 
 small.' The reference to a burning forest is common both in the Bible, 
 as Ps. Ixxxiii. 14 uxrel irvp o Sia<jike$€i SpvfJiov, axrd <j)\o$ KaraKava-ai oprj, 
 Isa. ix. 18, X. 17, 18, Zech. xii. 6 ; and elsewhere, as Hom. II. ii. 455 
 TTvp dtSrjXov eiriKJiXiyeL acnriTov v\7]v ovpeos €k Kopix^ijs, Thuc. ii. 77, Pind. 
 Pyih. iii. 66, Eur. Ino fr. 415 D. /iiKpov yap eK Xa/Airrijpos 'iSatov XcTras 
 TTp^frcLev av Tts, tKai irpos dv8p' ctTrwv cvat ■ttvOolvt av dcTTOi irdvTes a Kpyirreiv 
 vpewv, Philo M. 2. p. 208 ■^ liriOvii.ia ola <jiXo^ iv vXri ve/ierai SaTravZcra 
 Trdvra koI (jiG^ipova-a, ib. 143, 349, M. 1. p. 671. The only other place 
 in which dmTTTct occurs in N.T. is Luke xii. 49.i' 
 
 6. 7] 7Xioo-cra irOp.J Prov. xvi. 27 (dv^p a^pcov) em Ttav kavTov ■ffsiKiutv 
 6ri<ravpC^ti irup, ib. xxvi. 18—22, Sir. xxviii. 11 epis KaTaa-TrevSo/ji.ivri iKKaki 
 TTvp, ib. V. 22 oi p.rj Kpar-qa-ri €V(TeftS>v (rj yXGcro-a) Koi iv rrj (j>\oyi air^s ov 
 Ka-^a-ovTai, so some explain Psa. cxx. 4. On the other hand inspira- 
 tion from above is also symbolized by fire Acts ii. 3, Isa. vi. 6, 
 Jer. V. 14. 
 
 6 Kd(r|ios TTjs aSiK^as i] yKacra-a KaflfoTorai h tois |i^«oriv •^[Jiflv.J The first 
 point to be determined in this difficult verse is whether we should put 
 our stop after irvp with the R.Y., WH., Neander, Lange, Hofmann, 
 Erdmann, Beyschlag ; or after dStKi'as with the margin, Alf., Huther, 
 Schegg and the generality of editors. It seems to me that the former 
 gives the only tenable construction. The sense may be difficult, but 
 the grammar is clear, if we take 17 yXSo-tra as subject to KaOicTTarai, with 
 the attributive clause ^ cnriXoBo-a — yeevvrj^, and make o Koo-/ios tjjs dSiKtas 
 the predicate or complement. With the other punctuation r/ cnriXovcra 
 becomes the predicate, but there is no justification for the article : 
 either we should have Ka^io-Tarai cnnXov(ra or Ka-OifnaTai ro cnrikovv 
 (/ieXos) : and in either case KadUrTwrai loses its proper force. The predi- 
 cate is put first for emphasis, as in John i. 1 ®€os V » Aoyog, ib. iv. 24 
 Trvivfi.a 6 ©eds, 2 Pet. ii. 17 6 i;tds p.ov 6 dyoTnjTos p-bv oCrds eo-rtv, Luke iv. 
 41 Tov XpuTTov avTov dvai, see Winer, p. 689 /. As Koa-p.o's is defined by 
 the genitive t^s dStxtas, it necessarily keeps the article in the predicate, 
 cf. Apoe. xix. 13 KeKXrjrai to ovo/ta avToS o Adyos tov ®eov, 1 Cor. xi. 3 
 TravTos dvSpos r) Ke<^a\ij 6 XpitrTos eo-Ttv, Winer, p. 141. The fact that 
 the subject 17 yXGcro-a is repeated from the preceding clause of course 
 facilitates the transposition of the predicate. We may suppose that 
 the form of the sentence as it first occurred to the writer was 17 yXHia-a-a 
 TTvp, 6 K6a-iJi.oi T^s dSiKtas : and that for the sake of clearness he added 
 the remaining words. 
 
 '■ [On fires kindled by the tongue see Midr. Eabb. on Levit. (xiv. 2) xvi. where 
 the words are almost the same as those in St. James, quanta incendia lingua exdtat ! 
 and Schoettgen p. 1021. C.T.] 
 
106 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 The next difficulty is the meaning of Koa-fio's here. Isidore of Pelu- 
 sium (ji?. 400 A.D.), followed by the Greek commentators, mentions 
 two meanings (1) 'ornament,' iyKaXXmruTfWL SoKel t^s dSt/ctas, because 
 the tongue KO(rfi€t t^v dSiKiav Sia rrji twv p-qropuiv evyXmTTOv SeivoTfj- 
 Tos : so Eisner, Wetstein, Semler, Storr, Ewald, and others ; (2) ' the 
 wicked world ' : at least this seems to be intended by the somewhat 
 obscure expressions wCp icm, irX'^Oos dSi/ctos KaTaKaiovcro., and Kocfioi itTTi 
 Tiys dSiKias, oiovet w/dos tov (rvp<jieTwSr] o)(X.ov Koi Srj/naSrj iK<j>epofji,ei'rj koI 
 ySAeVovo-a, with which apparently should be connected the sentence just 
 below, TavTTj yap aXXt^koii KOLviDvov/iev tS>v kavTu>v vorjfji,a.Ttav. The majority 
 however of modern commentators follow the Vulgate 'universitas 
 miquitatis ' (3), thus explained by Bede, ' Quia cuncta fere facinora 
 per earn aut concinnantv/r . . . auf patrantur . . . aut defenduntv/r.' 
 So Erasmus, Calvin, Corn, h, Lapide, Schneckenburger, Kern, De Wette, 
 Wiesinger, Alford, Beyschlag, Erdmann. The objection to (3) is, that 
 St. James elsewhere only uses the word icdcr/tos in a bad sense (i. 27 
 amriKov kavrov TTjpiiv airb tov Koa-jxom, ii. 5, zv. 4 tj {ftiXia tov K6(Tfji,ov ^xBpa. 
 TOV ®£ov ianv) ; that only one example in all Greek literature is adduced 
 for the meaning ' totality,' viz. Prov. xvii. 6 tov ituttov oXos 6 Koa-fioi 
 tS>v y^pyip-a-Ttjiv, tov Se airia'Tov ovSk o/3oA.os, if indeed this should not be 
 rather understood more literally of the inanimate world, as consisting 
 of things which can be used and enjoyed. Lastly, the article seems 
 scarcely consistent with this interpretation. ' A world of cares ' is a 
 natural expression for many cares ; but if we say ' the world of care,' 
 we are understood to predicate something about the world itself. 
 Schegg's interpretation, ' the sphere or domain of iniquity,' is, I think, 
 an improvement on (3) as far as sense goes, but it is not the natural 
 meaning of koct-jhos. ,The objections stated above are also applicable in 
 part to (I). It is moreover a very harsh expression to call the tongue 
 ' the ornament of injustice ' because it is capable of being used to give 
 a colour to injustice ; and it falls flatly after the stronger word ' fire.' 
 
 Putting aside the commentators, if we read the words simply we can 
 hardly fail to be reminded of the similar expressions in Luke xvi. 8, 9 
 TOV oiKov6p.ov T^s dStKi'as, ToB /ia/twvd ttj's dSiKtas, where r^s dSiKias is 
 qualitative, as is shown by the parallel expression in ver. 11, tw dStKO) 
 fia/tft)va (cf. i. 17 above). The meaning of the phrase will then be 'in 
 our microcosm the tongue represents or constitutes the unrighteous 
 world ' which is probably the meaning of the version in the Speculum, 
 muiidus iniquitatis per linguam constat in memhris vestris : cf . 1 John 
 V. 19 6 KoVjUos 0A.0S iv T<3 TTovripio KUTai, and below iv. 4.^ In the 
 same way it might be said r) linOvixia, Trj<s crapKo<; 6 yaa-Trjp Ka6i(r- 
 TaTai iv Tois p,eXi<Tiv. The tongue represents the world, because it is 
 that member by which we are brought into communication with other 
 men ; it is the organ of society, the chief channel of temptation from 
 
 1 [I think the force of the expression is better brought out if wo explain t. dSi/cIos 
 as a possessive genitive, ' the world which is under the dominion of unrighteousness, ' 
 i.e. the world as converted by our diseased imaginations into an opaque looking- 
 glass for selfishness, instead of a window for the view of God. Compare Rom. vi. 
 16 rb awfia T^s iSi/cms. — A,] 
 
Ill 6 NOTES 107 
 
 man to man. Here it is described as ■^ cnriXoiio-a to a-!aij.a, but in i. 27 
 this is said to be the effect of the world ; true religion is shown by 
 keeping oneself acnriXov aTro toC Kocr/iov. Olshausen, Stier, and Lange 
 give this meaning to the passage, and I think it is hinted at by the 
 Greek commentators. Dr. Taylor has pointed out {J. of PhU. xviii. 
 p. 320) that, in place of the phrase 17 yXfio-o-a, 6 koct/aos t^s dSiKtas, 
 Hermas uses ^ irovrjpa iTnOvfita in Mand. xii. 1 jxia~ria-iL% t^v Trovr/pav 
 iTTiOvixiav Koi ^aXtvayrayijo-as avTrjv Kadwi ^ov\u (cf. above ver. 4, oirou 
 rj opiXT] TOii evOvvovTO's ^ovXiTai), aypia yap i<TTiv 17 iiriOvfiia rj Trovrjpa koi 
 8uo-KdA.(i)s riiiepovrai (cf. below ver. 8, ouSets SafidcraL SwaTai). Again, 
 Vis. ii. 2, he uses the phrase ovk airix^rai rq^ yXwaa-q's iv y Trov-qpeverai. 
 
 Dr. Taylor further illustrates the text, if understood in the sense 
 universitas iniquitatis, from T. B. Berachoth 15b, ' Life and death are 
 in the hand of the tongue. Has the tongue a hand ? No, but as the 
 hand kills, so the tongue. The hand kills only at close quarters : the 
 tongue is called an arrow as killing at a distance. An arrow kills at 
 forty or fifty paces : but of the tongue it is said (Psa. Ixxiii. 9) 
 "they have set their mouth in heaven and their tongue goeth 
 through the earth." It ranges over the whole earth and reaches to 
 heaven.' 
 
 It may be worth while to mention that the Peshitto, followed by 
 Morus, Bassett and others, takes koct/aos t^s dSiKtas independently of rj 
 yKiiitraa, and supplies v\-q as subject : ' the tongue is the fire, the world 
 of wickedness the forest ' (which it consumes). It is possible that 
 there was an old gloss vXt) intended to explain a difficulty ; but it 
 is inconsistent with the general thought : the tongue sets on fire the 
 rpo^os yevetretus not the Kocr/tos t^s dStxtas, and it has been already 
 shown that to put the stop after dStKtas gives an impossible construction 
 for the following clause. 
 
 The word Kadia-TaTcu literally means 'is set,' 'is constituted.' ^ It 
 is opposed to im-dp^w, because it implies a sort of adaptation or 
 development as contrasted with the natural or original state ; to 
 yivofuu, because it implies something of fixity. So in iv. 4 os kdv 
 /3ov\r]6y (fiiX.O's eivai tov Kocr/tou, i^^Opos tov ®eoB Ka6i<rTaTai, ' Whoever will 
 be a friend of the world thereby becomes (is constituted) an enemy of 
 God.' Cf. Thuc. iv. 92 irpos tous daTvyeiTOva.'S iracrt to aVTiTraXov koI 
 iXivOepov KaOuTTOTai ' equality constitutes freedom,' Isocr. p. 37 ot 
 fityidTai Itt' apcTrj S6)(as Ip^ovres TrkeiuTdiv SecrTroTai Ka6l(TTavTai. For iv 
 ToTs ji,f.\i(nv cf. iv. 1 below. 
 
 r\ o-iriXoSo-a 8Xov to tr<o|ji,a.] Of course an attribute of tj yXSxraa. See 
 above i. 27, Jude 23 /^KrowTes tov diro Tq<s (rapKOi icririXotixivov x'Tuva, 
 
 1 That it is passive and not middle may be inferred from the fact that out of the 
 twenty-two instances in Bruder, while sixteen belong to the active voice and two are 
 1st aor. pass., there are only four examples of the ambiguous form KoBiaTarai, two 
 of which are those cited above from this epistle, and the other two (Heb. v. 1 irSs 
 apx'^pftis e'l a.v6pilnrmv Xa/iPavi/ievos itrep avBpdnruv KaBlarwrai, 'is ordaiued for men' 
 [A. v.], and viii. 3) are undoubtedly passive. Westcott compares Philo M. 2, p. 161, 
 Tiji lisKKovTi Upei Ka8iirTa(r8ai. In this passage the Vulgate has constitiiitur, Corbey 
 posita est. 
 
108 THE EPISTLE OP ST. JAMES 
 
 2 Pet. ii. 13 crirTXoi koI /iGjuoi, Test. Aser. p. 690 Fabr. 6 TrXeoveKTwi/ tJji/ 
 ipvxrp/ a-irikoi. For the thought cf. Matt. xv. 11 to eKTropevofievov Ik tov 
 o-To/AttTos toBto Koivoi TOV avOptoirov. The phrase oX. t. croi/^a occurs above 
 vers. 2 and 3. 
 
 4>\o7£Jov(ra.J Here only in N.T. Psa. xcvi. 3 wup ^Xoytct tovs 
 ex^povs, Wisd. iii. 28 TrSp tjikoyitpfLfvov oLTroa-^ia-eL v8uip, Exod. ix. 24. 
 
 TbvTpoxiv Tfjs 7evio-£ws.] In this extremely difficult expression it 
 seems better to read rpoxov ' wheel ' than rpoxov ' course ' (for which 
 8po/Aos is the word used in the N.T. and LXX.), as the former alone 
 supplies a natural figure in the wheel which, catching fire from the 
 glowing axle, is compared to the wide-spreading mischief done by the 
 tongue. Heisen cites Achmet Oneirocritica 160 (8th cent, a.d.) d 8e 
 tSjj on •^Xaui'ei' iv ™ 8i(j>p(a Kal oi Tpo)(ol i<f)koyL(T6rja'av Ik t^s eXdcrecos, 
 tvp-^o'u v6(Tov avoKoyims r^s ^Xoyucreo)?.^ A consideration of the context 
 will exclude some of the explanations which have been ofFered. The 
 clause is evidently meant to be distinct from and stronger than that 
 which precedes : it cannot therefore be anything confined to the in- 
 dividual. This forbids any reference to Eccles. xii. 6 a-uvrpo-xaari 6 
 Tpo^os en-t TOV Xa/cKov, or to physiological phrases, such as we find in 
 Galen Hipp, et Plat. 711 borrowed from Plat. Tim. 79 (the whole 
 process of respiration) otov rpoxov TTEpiayo/xivov yiyverai, which is after- 
 wards referred to as ij toC rpoxov Trepiayoiyi^. On the other hand it cannot 
 be referred to the material world, of which Simplicius speaks (Comm. in 
 Epict. Ench. p. 94 6) as tw aTrcpai'TW r^s yevecrecos kvkXw, Slo, tovto ctt' 
 
 ^ It may be worth while to compare other instances of the metaphorical use of 
 rpoxis. In Sibyl, ii. 87 (Phooyl. 27) we iind Koivii TrdBri TravTuv iSioros rpoxiis' 
 So-TBTOS SK$os, Anacr. iv. 7 rpox^s 'ifimTos yhp oTa, $Iotos Tpe'xei KvXiirBeis. In both 
 of these the point of the comparison seems that of fortune's wheel ; that which is 
 highest soon changes to lowest, and vice versa; so in Sil. Ital. vi. 120 per varios 
 praeceps casus rota volvitur aevi and Boeth. Oons. 2. 2 haec nostra vis est, hunc continuum 
 ludum ludimus; rota/m, volubili oris versamus, infima summis, summa infimismutare 
 gazodemus, of. Plut. Numa p. 69 fin., Clem. Al. Strom, v. p. 672 P. on the emble- 
 matic wheel of the Egyptians. In Psa. Ixxxiii. 13 & @e6i fnov floB aurois us rpoxi", 
 Isa. xvii. 13, ib. xxix. 5, it is used as an emblem of destruction 'make them as a 
 wheel, a whirling thing ': cf. Psa. Ixxvii. 18 (jiavii t^s ffpovrrjs aov iv t^ -rpoxv 'in the 
 heaven ' A. V. but Hitzig and othei's ' with a whirlwind.' In Sirao. xxxvi. 5 rpoxis 
 a^ti^Tls 0"K\dyx^^ fiotpov KaX &s A^av (rrpe^tJ^ei/os d Sta\oyifffihs avTov Fritzsche under- 
 stands the phrase of a constant going round and round in the same rut, making no 
 advance. Hilgenfeld (Zeitschr. f. wissensch. Theol. 1873 p. 1 foil. ) quotes from Lob. Agl 
 p. 796 passages from Orphic writers in which metempsychosis is styled Kii/cXos or rpoxfis 
 yev4iTeas, as Simplic. de Caelo ii. p. 91 (I have been unable to find this in the Berlin 
 ed. of the Scholia), speaking of Ixion as a symbol of the soul, 7rpo(r5cSeTai vith tov 
 0eo5 TTj TT}s fiolpas rpox^ Koi ttjs yevetreas, itv oiSvvaTov fieraWd^ai /car' 'Opipea k.t.K., 
 Proclus in Tim. v. 330 fila (rarripia ^vxvs tov kijkXou tyjs yeveireas oiroWirTouffa K<d 
 TTJs iroWiis irXiivTis koX r^s &v7]vvrov ^uTJs tj irphs t^ voephf eJSos avaSpofvli, where also 
 there is a reference to the Orphic poems. [The word Tpoxis in Psa. Ixxvii. is the 
 rendering of ' galgal ', the rabbinic word for the celestial sphere, the plural of which 
 is used for the several spheres concentric with the earth, in which the planets were 
 supposed to be set. Thns Tpox- t. yev. might stand for ' the whole sphere of man's 
 nature. ' Then (pKoyt^a might be used with allusion to lightning as an all-pervading 
 fire, see Psa. xxix. 7, xcvii. 4, Matt. xxiv. 27. We find Tpoxol and irvp brought 
 together in Dan. vii. 9, cf. Sib. Orac. II. 296 ix vora/xov ixeyiKov iripivos Tpox'' 
 aliTois (4,a0i«oetf6i) 'an encircling fire.' — C.T.] 
 
Ill 6 NOTES 109 
 
 an-Eipov irpo'CovTi, 8ta to t^v aAAou ^Oopav aXKov yevecriv etvai, which is 
 merely another way of expressing the Heraclitean flux, 5 t^s •yeve'creus 
 iroTtt/ios cvSeXc^^ws pebiv Plut. Mor. p. 406. St. James speaking here of 
 the tongue's power of mischief in its widest extent can only refer to 
 the world of human life, the sphere of the worldly spirit, o koct/aos, of 
 which the tongue is the organ and representative in our body, and 
 which is always at enmity with God (below iv. 4). 
 
 Turning now to the word yei/co-is, the consideration of which was de- 
 ferred on its first occurrence i. 23, it is used (1) of birth Matt. i. 18, Luke 
 i. 14, so Gen. xl. 20 -^/xipa yevecretos ' birth-day,' ib. xxxi. 13 y^ t^s yei/eo-cws 
 ' native land,' (2) of creation Gen. ii. 4 fii^kog yei/eVems ovpavov koi yfjs, 
 Wisd. i. 14 crtiyrqpioi at yevOTets tov k6itii.ov ' all God's creations are whole- 
 some ' referring to the absence of poisons in Paradise (see Grimm in loo.). 
 But it is in Philo we find the fully developed meaning (3) in which it 
 stands for the seen and temporal as opposed to the unseen and eternal, 
 e.g. M. 1. p. 569 TO. Trpos yeVeo-iv Tw irpos ®f.ov p-aKpav airc^evKTar rrj /xkv 
 yap TO. (pavepa pAva, t<o 8e Koi a,<^ai/^ yvuptjua, and a little below ^cco/acvos 
 oa-a €v yeyecret (j>6iip6fji.ei>a koI yevvu>p.e.va, ib. 231 ®£oS ixev l^iov rjpe/jiCa Koi 
 CTTao-is, yeveo-eios 8e p-erd^acris re kou p,era^aTiKT] iracra Kivrjcri's, ib. 697 
 (those who claim for man the attributes of God) to aKaOalperov rov ®iov 
 KpoTOS yevOTCi rrj aKarao-TaTaJS aTroWvpivrj Koi (fiOeipop.ivr] irepidiTTOVTiS, ib. 
 177 (as there are some who prefer the body to the soul, so there are 
 some who) yevecnv p.3Xkov®€ovTrpoT€Tip,'qKa<7i,ib. 219 (unless God chastens 
 us, we shall not be servants of Him who is merciful) ycvta-ems 8e t^s 
 avrjkeovs, ib. 261 t^v p.ia-a.perov naX <J)i\t^Sovov yivecriv, ib. 608 Moses 
 rebuked those who gave the first place yeve'crei and only the second to 
 God, i6. 538 /teyaXiys i/'i'X^s to avyi]pa,, yevto'iv VTrepK-uimiv koi povov tov 
 dyewiJTOV irtpte^^eo-^ai, ib. 668 eio'ijitLa yerecretos p.iv eo'Tiv aWorpia, ®eov 
 Se oiKEia, ib. 251 ij dpeTrji ^wts poVr] tS>v ev ycvecrei KaXi; re koi dyaB'q, ib. 
 486 TO diria'Trjcrai, yevecrei Ty irdvTa ef lavr^s d-Tria'Tio, povio Si TrttrTeCcrai 
 ®eio...peydX.r]s koi 'OXvpmov Siavoiai epyov eo'Ttv (cf. p. 486), ib. 502 the 
 Logos is the Mediator between yevccris and God, ib. 497 the fourth com- 
 mandment was given iva ttjv dirpa^iav avrq's (rqi £^8op,dSos) p.eXiTuia'a 
 yei'Etris eis p.vqp.'tjv rov dopciTms TrdvTa SpoivTos ep^rjrai, ib. 477 tots Kaipbi 
 hiTvy)(dvav yeveo'iv t<o ireTroiiqKOTi ot£ tyjv iavTrjs ovdiveiav eyvtoKev. I need 
 not quote farther to show that yei/eo-is is used not only of the inanimate 
 creation but of the whole life of man upon earth. The idea is partly 
 Jewish and partly Platonic, see Plat. Eep. viii. p. 525 B (Mathematics 
 are useful to the philosopher) 8ta to ttj? ova-la^ dnTeov eivai, yti/etrcws 
 iiavaSvvTi,, Tim. 29 Xiyiap-ev 8i' ^VTtva avriajv yei/ecriv /cat to irdv To8e 6 
 ^vio-Tois fweo-njo-ev, Plut. Mor. p. 593 D at aTTTjAAay/iEvat yEvto-EMs ^v)(aX 
 Saip,ovh ela-iv, Philolaua ap. Stob. £cl. 1. c. 22 <}>iX.op,eTd^okos yeveo-i's, 
 ib. c. 20. 
 
 How are we then to understand Tpo^os i We may keep close to the 
 original meaning and suppose it to denote the incessant change of life 
 'which never continues in one stay,' though this is perhaps suf- 
 ficiently implied by the word yevea-is : or we may suppose the 
 metaphor borrowed not from the wheel in motion, but from the 
 shape of the wheel at rest, the circle or sphere of this earthly life, 
 
no THE EPISTLE OP ST. JAMES 
 
 meaning all that is contained in our life ^ ; the tongue being the axle, 
 the central fire from which the whole is kindled. This seems to make 
 the better sense, though the other meaning gives more precise point to 
 (fiX-oyt^ovcra. Lucian's treatise Be Calwmnia will illustrate how it is 
 that the tongue sets on fire ' the round of life,' cf. 1 (through calumny) 
 KoX oIkol avdcrraToi yeyovaai koI TroAets apSrjv airokwXaa-L, cf. Sirac. xxviii. 
 14 foU.^ For other interpretations see Pott pp. 317-329, Heisen pp. 
 819-880.3 
 
 (f>Xo'yi.to)i.^vT) iiirb ttjs Ye^wr)s.] For the repetition of different parts 
 of the same verb see above i. 13 dTrctpao-Tos — ireipdlei, and below v. 7 
 Sa/m^eraL — SeSa/tao-rai. The name Gehenna (Vaiivva) occurs only once 
 in LXX. (Josh, xviii. 16), more commonly it is denoted as ^dpayi 
 'Ewd/t, see Wetstein i. p. 299, D. of B. under ' Gehenna ' and 
 ' Tophet.' It is found in Matt. v. 22 rrp/ -yeeVrnv tov irupos (where see 
 Rabbinical quotations in Wetstein), -tJ. v. 29, x. 28, xviii. 9, xxiii. 15 
 vlov yeewT]?, ver. 33 Kpia-is yeewrjs, often in Orac. Sibyl, as i. 103, ii. 292, 
 Acta Johannis T. p. 276, Pirke Aboth i. 6 ' the wicked inherit Gehenna,' 
 ib. v. 29, 31. As ovpavo^ stands for ®£os, so yeEVm for Stay3oA.os, see 
 below v. 15 cro<l>La SainoniaSr]^, iv. 7, John viii. 44, 1 John iii. 8-10 6 
 iroiZv Trjv afiapTiav €k tov Sm/Sokov ia-Tiv, k.t.X. Here we have the origin 
 of sin carried back beyond the liriOvixia of the individual man as shown 
 above i. 14. Thus we have combined in this passage the three hostile 
 principles, the world embodied in the tongue, the flesh in the members 
 (iv. 1 as well as here) and Satah using both for his own purpose. 
 Wetst. quotes from the Targum on Ps. cxx. (lingua dolosa cum carhonihus 
 jv/niperi) qui incensi sunt in Gehenna, and other passages to the same 
 effect. See Sir. li. 4-6 and below on dKarao-TaTov a quotation from 
 Hermas. 
 
 7. iTtto-a ydp.] Introduces the proof of the preceding statement by 
 reverting to the original figure contained in the word ;;^aA.ivaya)y£tv. 
 The fact that the tongue is the one thing which defies man's power to 
 control it is a sign that there is something satanic in its bitterness. 
 
 <j)«(ri.s.] Here used with a pleonastic force, like natura in Latin ; 
 see Plut. 3for. 1112 F, where kcvov (^vo-is is said to be the same as wuto 
 TO Kivov, and my n. on Cic. N'.D. II. 136 alvi natura. If we are to 
 translate it, it is best done by an adverb ' every kind of animal is 
 natwrally subject to man.' Brute nature under all its forms is under 
 
 ' This use of Tfoxis is illustrated by the Homevic plirases KripoTo ii.4-yav rpoxif, 
 Od. xii. 173, ffTf'aTos Tfoxiv, ib. xxi. 178, aud by the concentric circles of land and 
 water described in Plato's Oritias, p. 113 foil. It agrees too, as appears from Dr. 
 Taylor's note above, with the Rabbinical terminology. 
 
 ^ Mr. "W. F. E. Shilleto compares Eur. Andr. 642, tr/uKpas ctir' apxv^ velKos 
 avBpdirois ii4ya ■yKasaa' iiciropl(ei. 
 
 ' It may be interesting to some readers if I give here the earliest extant com- 
 mentary on this difficult phrase (Isid. Pel. ii. 158). The text is cited, probably 
 from memory, in the form <p\oyi^ou(ra ffAoc rb trwfia koI inriXovfTa rhv rpox^v ttjs 
 Carls and explained as follows : 8ti rhv rpox^v rhv xp^^'o" iKdKein 8io rb rpoxoetShs 
 not KvicXLKhv (TX^A"*! ^'* iavThv yi,p ii/eXlTTeToi, is vouched for by the words of the 
 psalmist, evKoyiiireis rhv ariipavi/v rov iviavrov Trjs xP'7<'''''(iT7jT(is aov' lAvravBayap 
 kirh TOV kukXikov (rx'hf.<'TOs irre'ijjoi'os fi/ciiTws 6 XP<^'">^ ili'dfiaiTTOi. 
 
Ill 6, 7 NOTES 111 
 
 the control of human nature. It is also vaguer than Travra to. Orjpia 
 and may be supposed to admit of individual exceptions. 
 
 SiipCuv T« Kal ir£T«ivMv epircTtov re Kal IvaXCcav.l The classification resembles 
 that in Gen. i. 26, ix. 2 6 <^d/Sos vfiwv ecn-at iirl iraarL tois drjpiots Trj<s y^s, 
 €iri iravTO. to. rreruva tov ovpavov Koi irrl iravra to, Kivor/^eva itrl tjjs yrji Koi 
 iirl iravTas tovs i^Was T^s ^aXdo-oTjs, Deut. iv. 17, 18, Acts x. 12 to, 
 T€Tpdiro8a Trjs y^s koX to. Ipirera Kat to, ■TrcTeiro. toC oipavov, 1 Kings iv. 33 
 (Solomon) ikaXtjue irept tu)v Krqvlav koX irept tSiv ttetcivSv Kat irept tSv 
 epirtTw Ktti Trept tGv ix^vtov. So Philo M. 2. p. 352 foil, divides tfia 
 into TeTpairoSa, evvSpa, ipTreTa, in-qvd.. The word Ot^pia has a wider or 
 narrower meaning : it may even include bees, fishes, and worms (see 
 exx. in lex.), or may be confined to quadrupeds or more strictly to wild 
 beasts, which is of course the prominent idea here, as there is no need 
 to insist on the fact that domestic beasts are tamed. In like manner 
 Ipirera. is used in a wider sense for animals, which walk on four or more 
 legs in contradistinction to man who walks on two, as in Xen. Mem. i. 
 4. 1 1 and the poets ; but also for the very unscientific class of reptiles, 
 including the weasel, the mouse, the lizard, the grasshopper (Lev. xi. 
 21, 29). The word evaXtos is not found elsewhere in the Bible, but it is 
 quite classical (cf. Soph. Ant. 345 ttovtov t dvakiav <l>v(nv), and is used, 
 as here, with substantival force by Plut. Mor. 669 to tZv ivaXiuiv yivos, 
 ib. 729, cf. ps. Arist. Mund. 5 hraXimv t/ixnv koI inifiv koX aepiotv <^weis 
 ix<i>pi(re. For the coupling of the words in the list by re and koI com- 
 pare Rom. i. 14 "EAXijo-t re kol )8ap/8apois, (TO^ois T£ Koi dvoijTots. 
 Probably beasts and birds are coupled as the nobler orders, and the 
 other two because some of the ipirera are amphibious, and others, as 
 snakes, closely resemble some fishes. 
 
 Sajxa^eTai Kal SESd|jiaa-Tai.] Elsewhere in N.T. only in Mark v. 4 of the 
 untamable demoniac ; in LXX. Dan. ii. 40 used of iron which subdues 
 all things ; in classical writers both literally and metaphorically. For 
 the writer's love of paronomasia see Essay on Grammar, and Winer 
 p. 793 foil. ETere of course emphasis is gained by the combination of 
 the present and perfect : the art of taming is no new thing, but has 
 belonged to the human race from the first, cf. Juv. iii. 190 quis timet 
 aut tim,uit, viii. 70 damns ac dedimus, John x. 35, Heb. vi. 10. 
 
 TTJ <}>v(r6i.] Dat. of the agent, an extension of the dat. commodi used most 
 frequently with the perfect tense ; see Madvig's Gr. Synt. 38^, Winer 
 p. 274 (where this passage is however wrongly explained as dat. instr.), 
 Marchant in Class. Rev. vol. iii. pp. 250, 437, and for the similar use 
 in Latin, passages cited s.v. ' dative ' in the Index to my Cic. N.D. 
 
 On the thought cf . Isoc. Nic. p. 17 pJi] KaTayvZ's av6pu>7ruiv Tocravnqv 
 ^WTV^iav, <i)S irtpt fxiv to. Oijpia. Tt^vas evp'qKaiJi.EV ais avTutv ras ij/v^fas 
 rjiLipovfjiev . . .rjimi 8' auVovs ou'Sei' av Trpos apiTrjv ai(^eA.^o-ai/Aev (No ! believe 
 that our nature can be amended by training). Soph. Antiy. 332 foil. 
 Philo M. 1. p. 20 foil. 2. p. 200 7roA.XaKis eyviov ■fjp.epiaOivTa'; Xlovra's 
 apKTovs irapSdXeK k.t.X. Field cites Eur. Aeol. (ap. Plut. Mor. p. 954) 
 7] fipa^v TOt (rdevoi a.vipo<i- aXka. TroiKiXia. TrpaTTiSmv 8a/ia <f)v\a ■ttovtov )(dovL<av 
 r' depiuiv t£ ■TraiSevp.ara. It was a common-place of the Stoics, see Cic. 
 N.D. II. 151, 158 foil., Senec. Benef. ii. 26 cogita quanta nobis tribuerit 
 
112 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Pwrens noiter, quanta valentiora anvmalia sub iugum miserimus, quanta 
 velociara cansequamwr, quam, nihil sit mortale nan sub ictu nostra 
 positum. Erasmus in his Paraphrase illustrates as follows : cicurantur 
 leones, mansuescunt tigrides, serviunt etiam elephanti, subiguntur et 
 croaadili, mitescunt aspides, redduntur familia/res aquilae et vultu/res, ad 
 amicitiam alliciuntur delphini.. The writer here follows Gen. i. 28, ix. 
 2, Ps. viii. 6-8. 
 
 8. ovScls 8a(jido-ai, Svyarai dvOpioircov.J But if SO, how can the Psalmist 
 say iravtTov rrjv yXSccrdv crov aTrb KaKov (xxxiv. 13), and vow not to sin with 
 the tongue (xvii. 3, xxxix. 1)? So Pro v. xiii. 3. This may be partly 
 explained by the emphatic position of avOpdnrwv. Man cannot do it by 
 himself, but he who is tc'Acios may do it (ver. 2), and such perfection is 
 attainable through the help of God given in answer to prayer ; see 
 above i. 5 and compare the Psalmist's prayer, cxli. 3. So Aug. de nat. 
 et grat. c. 15 non enim ait, linguam nullus doma/re potest, sed nullus 
 hominum ; ut cuth domatur, Dei misericordia, Dei adjutorio, Dei gratia 
 fieri fateamwr. The Pelagians, followed here by Oecumenius, read this 
 verse as a question (Sohegg). In the next plane 17 ykaxrcra, when 
 regarded as setting on fire the whole round of life, is not simply the 
 , speech of the individual, but that multiplied and re-echoed a thousand- 
 fold by the voices of others and by the power of the press ; pa/rva metu 
 prima max sese attallit in auras. However a man may learn to control 
 his own tongue, these echoes are beyond all human power. 
 
 dKardoTaTov kokov.] Cf . above i. 8, also Herm. Mamd. ii. 3 trovripa. rj Kara- 
 XaXid, aKaToi(rTaTov Sai/xoviov i<TTi.v, iJi,rjSeTroTe elprjvevov, where Harn. cites 
 Orig. in Jbann. (0pp. iv. p. 355) ovk SiKv-qcrav Koi to. voixurOevTa av eA.ap(io-ra 
 eivat tSv afiapTTjixoLTUiv Sai/xovtois Trpocrdxpai ol <j>-^cravT£s rrjv 6^)(oX.iav Sai- 
 fiovLov etvai, o/iotcos Se Koi ttjv KaraXaXidv, and below ver. 1 6 dKaTa(TTa<ria. 
 Erdmann and Hofmann read aKaToa-x^'rov with Cod. Ephr., the Peshitto, 
 and some other versions, and we find the word similarly used by Philo 
 M. 1. p. 695 TO CTTo/xa StavotfavT€s Kat eacraVTes a.)(aXiv<oTov, Kaddinp peu/jia 
 aKaTacr^eTOV, <f>epea-6ai tov aKpnop-vBov Xoyov iSxri. This would suit the 
 passage very well, agreeing with Ps. xii. 4 ; but the other reading is 
 generally accepted and gives a good sense ' restless,' ' unquiet,' like the 
 least tamable beasts ; others translate as in i. 8 ' unstable,' ' incon- 
 sistent,' which they think agrees better with v. 9 foil., but it is a 
 somewhat incongruous epithet for KaKov. See above i. 8. We should 
 naturally take the words dx. k. as ace. in apposition to rrjy yXUxraav, 
 like i. 8 dvrjp Siij/vxo^, but the following nom. makes it more probable 
 that there is a sudden change of construction, dx. k. being the predicate 
 of an independent sentence with ^ ykSxra-a, understood as subject ; cf. 
 Mark xii. 38 foil. ^keTrere diro tS)V dekovTuiv iv o"ToXais Tr€pi'7raT€'iv...ol 
 KarccrOlovTe's ras oiictas tZv )(r]p!av ovtol ki^/jbij/ovTai TrepurcroTepov Kpifia. 
 In the Apocalypse we meet with many of these irregular appositions, 
 e.g. i. 5 a-TTO 'lrj(70v Xpitrroi), 6 /xdprus 6 ttuttos, ih. xx. 2 iKparrja-ev tov 
 SpaKovra, 6 o<j>i's 6 d.p)(a'io's, os ecTTtv 8td/8oA.os, Winer, p. 668 foil., 
 A. Buttmann, p. 68 foil. So even in Homer, II. vi. 395, x. 437. 
 
 |ji6orT*| loO eavaTi]<f>iSpov.] For fiecrri^ see below v. 17, 2 Pet. ii. 14, 
 Eom. i. 29 /ieo-Toiis (^^ovov. The metaphor here is taken from Ps. Iviii. 
 
in 7-9 NOTES 113 
 
 4, and cxL 3 tos dcnrtSuv viro to. x"'^'? avTwv quoted in Rom, iii. 13> 
 Eccles. X. 11 foil., cf. Lucian Fitgit. 19 iov /uecttov airots to o-ro/ta 
 (speaking of pseudo-philosophers), Test. Gad. p. 680 F to /micros loC 
 8ia/3oXi/cov Tijv KapBiav TrX-qpdi, Acta Philippi T. p. 76 ccttiv Se to KaToooj- 
 TYipiov avTov (i.e. of the Serpent) Ta.pTapo's...<jiivyiT€ ovv air avTov Iva ix,r] 
 o los airov eK^vOrj eirt to o'TO/xa vfiSiv . . .rj twv KaKuiv eTnOvfXca Traca ef auToC 
 TT/DoeX^Xu^ei', Didach6 ii. 4 oi/c ecrij Siyvw/iwv oiSe StyXcoo'a'os* Tayis yap 
 davaTov rj 8iyXo)o-o-ta, Barn. 19, Clem. Al. Paed. 301 P. For ^av., which 
 occurs here only in N.T., cf. Job xxxiii. 23 lav Stcn ;(iA.tot ayyeXot BavaT-q- 
 (fiopoi, 4 Mace. viii. 17 6avaTr](j)6poi aTrdOeia. : it is used by Xen., Plato, <fec. 
 
 9. hi airri €vXo-yoii(j.6v.] What makes the tongue more mischievous is 
 that it serves the purpose of the StyXwo-cros, hiding evil under 
 the mask of good. For instrumental use of eV see Winer p. 485. 
 Here it might be possible to give it a stricter sense, ' in this part we 
 bless God,' did we not also meet with such unmitigated Hebraisms as 
 ■n-aTaa-a-uv or aTroKTeiveiv iv fiaxaipq. Luke xxii. 49, Apoc. xiii. 10, Psal. 
 Sol. ii. 1 iv Kpiw Kure^aXe Teixr] oxvpa. It was customary with the Jews, 
 whenever they uttered the name of God, to add ' Blessed (be) He.' 
 Hence we find o eiXoyiyTos used as a name for God in Mark xiv. 61. 
 This sense of evX. is peculiar to Hellenistic writers, see Westcott, ffeb, 
 p. 203 foil. 
 
 Tov Kiipiov Kal IlaTepo.J This phrase does not occur elsewhere in the 
 Bible : the nearest approach to it is in 1 Chron. xxix. 10 evXoyijTos et, 
 Kupte, o ®eos Icrpa^X, 6 IlaT^p ■^fiSiv, Isa. Ixiii. 16 o-v Kvpie iraT^jp ■^/j.Zv, 
 Matt. xi. 25 f^o/jLoXoyovfiai <toi IlaTep, Kijpte tov ovpavov /cat t^s y^s. We 
 may compare Philo on the name Kvptos koX ®€os (M. 1. p. 581), SiKatot 
 Tw p-ev <jiavXa)v Xeye<TOai Kvpios koI SecnrOTijs, Tuiv 8' iv irpoKOTrais koI 
 /SeXTKOcrecrt 6e6s, twv 8' dpiaTuiv Kal TeXeioTaTwv d/xipoTepov (being governed, 
 as he adds below, by Him as Kvpws, and benefited by Him as Oeos). 
 The name iraTijp is used with reference to man's being made in the 
 image of God. 
 
 Kol Iv avrf.] Emphatic repetition. ' It is through it we bless God, 
 through it we curse men.' Compare Philo M. 2. p. 196 ov yap omov 
 St' ov CTTopaTO'; to UpwraTOV ovo/J-a irpo^epeTai Tts, 8ta. toijtou (jyOeyyeo-Oai tl 
 TWV ala-xpu>v, Sir. xxviii. 12, Erasm. Adag. under the heading ex eodeni 
 ore calidum etfrigidv/m effla/re, Diog. L. i. 105 (Anacharsis) eptoTr/^ets Tt 
 eo-Ttv kv dvOpwirois ayaOov t£ koI (jiavXov, t<j)ri ' yXSicra'a.' Similar stories 
 are told of Pittacus and Bias as to that part of the sacrifice which 
 is at once most useful and most harmful (Plut. Mor. p. 506, ib. p. 38 
 and 146, Fragm. xi. 41, p. 30, Didot). 
 
 KaTap<4(j.69a.] Ps. Ixii. 4 cv (XTOfiaTi avTwv evXoyow Kal Ty KapBia, avTwv 
 KaT7]pS)vTo, Rom. xii. 13 evXoyetTe xai /xij KaTapda-Oe, Sirac. xxxi. 24 £ts 
 evxpixevoi Kal ets Karaptapievoi' Tivo's ^mvrj^ flaaKOvfrerai 6 SccriroTiys / Test. 
 Pair. p. 734 F rj ayaOr) hiAvova ovk tx'^i Svo yXdxraa? eu'Xoytas Kai /caTapas. 
 An example of such cursing is in John vii. 49 6 oxXo^ ovros-.-eTrdpaTOL 
 eto-tc, Shimei's of David 2 Sam. xvi. 5. St. James uses the first person 
 as in ver. 1 . 
 
 Tois KaB' o\u>Ca<riv 0eoB ■y«YovdTas.] Gen. i. 26 Trovf)(Ttoit,£v avOpmwov KaT 
 eiKova rip.eTipav Kal Kad' bp.0Lia(nv, ib. V. 27, ix. 6, Sirac. xvii. 3, Wisd. ii. 
 
 I 
 
114 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 23 o ®£os iKTia-e Tov avOpunrov iw acjiOapaiq, koI e'lKova T'^s tSias tSioTijTos 
 iiroirjCTiv avTov, 4 Esdr. viii. 44, 1 Cor. xi. 7 (on the question of covering 
 the head) avrip e'lKtav koX Sofa ®eov vTrdpxwv, Philo M. 1. p. 16 ij Se ci/cwv 
 XeXeKTat Kara tov t^s ij'v^^rjs rjyefiova vovv, ib. 35 ttSs avOpcoTro? Kara fi(v rrpr 
 hiAvoiav liKUOvrai Oeita Xoyui, t^s fiaKapias ^ucreoDS eK/JuiyeZov rj aTroa-iraa-fia 
 fj aTravyaa-fia yeyovds, Kara, 8e rrjv tov o-uJ/taTos Karao-KevijV aTraVTi t(3 Koa-fua, 
 Clem. Kec. v. 23 si ■were velitis Dei imaginem coUre, homini henefacientes 
 veram in eo Dei imaginem coleretis foil., Clem. Horn. iii. 17 o e'lKova koI 
 TavTa aloiviov j8acr6\e(os vPpl.cra<s ttjv a/J-apTiav tis eKetvov ava(f)epOfJLeuriv €)(€i, 
 oinrep Ka6' op-oiuxTW rj exKuiv lTvy)(av€V ovca, ib. xi. 4, Clem. Al. Str. vi. 
 9, p. 776, Taylor, J.F. p. 70, where R. Aqiba is quoted to the effect 
 ' whosoever sheddeth blood, they reckon it to him as if he diminished 
 the likeness.' A distinction is drawn by Irenaeus jEToer. v. 16, 2 and 
 others of the Fathers between dKwv, the common image belonging to 
 the whole human race in virtue of their being all partakers in reason 
 and conscience, and o/iot'oxris the potentiality of moral assimilation to 
 the Divine goodness, cf . Philo Opif. M. p. 16 iTrii ov a-vpLTraxra ehiuiv 
 ap)(iTVTr(o irapaSuy/iaTL i/J,<j>epi^'s, 7roX.X.al Si el<Av avofiowi, TrpocreTretrjj/ijyvaTO 
 etTTo)]/ T(3 Ka,T e'lKova to Kad' ojj,oLta(TLv eis €iJ,<f>a(TLv (XKptySoBs eK/xayeiov and 
 Hagenbach Hist, of Doctr. § 56, vol. i. p. 214 tr. On the pagan view 
 see Acts xvii. 38 and my nn. on Cic. N.D. I. 1 ad agnitionem animi 
 and I. 90 neo vera inteUego cur maluerit Epicurus decs hominum similes 
 dicere quam homines deorvmi. Though the Divine image is traceable in 
 every child of man (as Bengel says, remanet nobilitas indelebUis), yet 
 it is only perfect in the Second Adam (Heb. i. 3, Col. i. 15, 2 Cor. iv. 
 4), into whose image the believer is being gradually transformed (Col. 
 iii. 10, Eph. iv. 24, 2 Cor. iii. 18). For the argument here cf. Gen. ix. 
 6, Prov. xiv. 31, Matt. xxv. 35 foil., below iv. 11, 12, 1 John iv. 20. 
 
 10. Ik toO avToB o-T<5(i.aTos.] This seems to imply that it is the com- 
 bination of blessing and cursing which is condemned, and that either 
 may be allowable by itself. Can this be the meaning of St. James ? 
 What was the general feeling of the Jews about cursing 1 The old law 
 required the Israelite to curse on Mount Ebal and bless on Mount 
 Gerizim. The fact too that cursing was forbidden in special cases, 
 as against parents (Exod. xxi. 17), the king {ib. xxii. 28), the deaf (Lev. 
 xix. 14), seems to show that it was not generally condemned under the 
 old dispensation. It is referred to without implying blame, Prov. xi. 
 26, xxiv. 24, xxvi. 2, xxx. 10, Eccles. vii. 21, x. 90. Compare also the 
 curse of Canaan by Noah (Gen. ix. 25), that of Simeon and Levi by 
 their father (Gen. xlix. 7), of the builder of Jericho by Joshua (Josh, 
 vi. 26), Abimeleoh by Jotham (Jud. ix. 20, 57), Meroz by Deborah {ib. 
 V. 23), the children by Elisha (2 K. ii. 24), apostate Jews by Nehemiah 
 (Neh. xiii. 25), and the imprecations in the Psalms. Are we then 
 to suppose that St. James here attaches a special force to the words 
 KaO' ofioiuicriv ®eov yeyovora.'s ? Does he mean by this, ' men transformed 
 into the divine image ' 1 This seems precluded by a comparison of the 
 passages cited at the end of the preceding note, in which a similar 
 inference is drawn from man's general relation to the Creator. Must 
 we then conclude that cursing in itself is here condemned as a 
 
Ill 9-11 NOTES 115 
 
 form, and that the worst form, of KaraXaXia and /cpio-ts (below iv. 11)? 
 So St. Paul, Rom. xii. 14 eiXoyeiTe /cai fir/ KarapaorOe, cf. Luke vi. 28. 
 Cursing will then be the overflow of the bitter water spoken of in ver. 
 11,' the water which causeth the curse ' (Numbers v. 18) ; a sign of the 
 irjXos iriKpo's which characterizes the wisdom of this world (below ver. 
 14). Nor is this view of the wrongfulness of cursing unknown in the 
 O.T. : cf. Job xxxi. 29, 30 (' neither have I suffered my mouth to sin by- 
 wishing a curse to his, i.e. my enemy's, soul ') ; it is the mark of the 
 wicked that dpSs to a-T6[t,a. airov ye/xei koX iriKpia^, Ps. x. 7. But then, 
 why is not St. James content to condemn cursing in itself 1 Why does 
 he only condemn it when combined with what is good, blessing t It is 
 because ' the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God ' 
 (above i. 20), because ' bitterness proves that we are lying against the 
 truth ' (below v. 14) ; in the words of St. John (1 ep. iv. 20) because 
 ' he that loveth not his brother cannot love God,' so that the mixture 
 of cursing proves the unreality of the blessing, cf. Matt. xii. 34, ib. v. 
 23, 24. 
 
 elepXETai tiXoyia Kal Kardpa.] Where there is one predicate to several 
 connected subjects, of which the nearest to the verb is in the singular 
 number, the predicate, if it precedes the subjects, may itself be in the 
 singular, as though it referred only to the dearest subject : cf. 1 Tim. 
 vi. 4 ef &v yiveraL (j>66vos, €pis, pXa(r<^y)p.iai, Apoc. ix. 17, ek tSiv crrofiaTiav 
 avTuiv eKiropeveTai irvp kol KaTTvos koi Oeiov, Winer, p. 651, Madv. § 2 b., 
 Krueg. 63. 4. 
 
 ou xp*l Tavra oiirws ylvt(r6a,i.] XPV ^°^ found elsewhere in N.T., occurs 
 in Prov. xxv. 27 rifiav )(pyj Xoyous ivSo^ovg. It is about equivalent to 
 otfieiXo/xev, weaker than Set, which properly implies not merely what 
 ought to be, but what must be, though at times it comes very near to 
 ;^iy, as in Mark xiii. 14 Jo-tws ottov ov Set, 2 Tim. ii. 24 SovXov Kvplov ov 
 Set p.a.j(iar6aL. Some hold that outws is pleonastic with ravra, merely 
 adding emphasis, as where it marks the apodosis (Winer, p. 678) : 
 should it not rather be taken as summing up what was said before of 
 the manner in which the blessings and curses are uttered with an 
 unbridled tongue under the violence of passion ? I think we cannot 
 assume that St. James would have condemned such anathemas as we 
 find in 1 Cor. xvi. 22, Gal. i. 8. Dr. Plummer compares Numb, xxiii. 
 8 ' How shall I curse whom God hath not cursed ? ' 
 
 11. n^Ti ■i\ Tny<fi\ ix. ttjs air^js oirfjs Ppiiei ri yXiiKir Kol tJ> iriKpdv.J For the 
 interrogative jx.ri compare ver. 12 ; the softened form fx-fp-i is common in 
 N.T., cf. the parallel in Matt. vii. 16 /aijrt (TvXkiy(yv(TiV a.Tro aKavOlov 
 (TTarfivX-qv ; ib. xxvi. 22, but comparatively rare in classical writers. 
 For figure cf. Philo M. 1. p. 199 trrj-yri X6y<ov Sidvoia koi (TTOfiiov 
 avTrji Xoyoi, on to, ivOv/Jf^pLaTa iravra Sia. tovtov KaOaTrep voLfiara airo y^s 
 CIS Tovp.(f>avh imppiovTa dvaxeirai, ib. 447. Bpv'et is not found elsewhere 
 in N.T. or LXX. : in classical Greek it is used intransitively with the 
 dative, as in Arist. Ifub. 45 (;8tos) Ppvw pi.e\iTTais, Hom. II. xvii. 56 
 epvos Ppvu avOe'i XevKu, also with gen. (Soph. 0.0. 17 x<'>P°^ ..Ppvtov 
 Sai^vTys, eXat'as), properly in reference to plants bursting into bud and 
 flower, or of the land in spring (Xen. Gyneg. v. 12), then metaphorically 
 
 I 2 
 
116 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 axr; Pp-iu Aesch. Choepli. 62, Opdaei /3pvwv Ag. 177, Xo'yot p-ea-Tol 
 irvevfjiaTO's 6eiov koX jSpvovre's Svvdfiei, Justin M. Tryph. 9. The only 
 instance cited from a classical author for the transitive use is Anacr. 
 (44, 1. 2 Bergk) xaptTcs Ppvovo-L poSa, where however Hermann reads 
 poSov Ppvov(nv : Justin M. [Tryph. 114) has T^'STrirpa^ ^wv vSu>p ^pvovo-Tj'S, 
 cf. Chrysostom (horn, in mart., Migne Patrol, vol. 50, p. 664) ol rdcjiot 
 t5v fjMpTvpoiV Ppvavdiv evXoyiav, Olem. Horn. ii. 45 ■Trrjyas yy Ppva-a.'s 
 ®£os. Eustath. in II. p, p. 1126, 42 {ap. Wetst.) says it is properly 
 used of olive blossoms and, later, of springs, as in Acta Johannis 
 p. 276 T. jSpvovcrav Trjv Trrjyrfv evpov, Acta Thomae p. 22, Clem. Horn, 
 jii. 36. 'Ott'^ 'a cleft in a rock,' elsewhere in N.T. only in Heb. xi. 
 38, also in LXX., Exod. xxxiii. 22, Obad. 3. HiKpov only used here 
 and below in N.T. Its use here in preference to akvKov or aX/jLvp6v is 
 doubtless owing to its often being found in a figurative sense, e.g. 
 ver. 14, Ps. Ixiv. 3, Sirac. iv. 6 Karapaa-dai iv TriKplq. ilrvxrjs. It is 
 descriptive of sea-water, like amarus, our ' brackish.' The Dead Sea 
 however, to ^Vhich St. James is probably alluding, was really bitter 
 and had both salt and fresh springs on its shores. Other examples of 
 bitter waters are Marah (Exod. xv. 23), 'the water that causeth the 
 curse ' (jSTuiub. v. 18-27), Apoc. viii. 11. Pliny Kff. ii; 103 has a fable 
 of a fountain of the Sun which was sweet and cold at noon and bitter 
 and hot at midnight. Antigonus (Mirab. 148 ap. Wetst.) gives an 
 account of such a spring tov Se 'l/xipav e/c /aiSs ■n-rjyrjs cr\i^6/j,ei'ov to fiiv 
 dXuKoi/ tSv puOpiav e^etv, to Se Trdri/iov : in 4 Esdras v. 9 one of the 
 prodigies which announce Messiah's coming is in dulcihus aquis salsae 
 invenientur. 
 
 12. n'fi Sivarai] See on ii. 14. 
 
 o-wK'fj IXa^as iroiiio-at.] Cf. for the use of ttol^lv Matt. iii. 10 ttSv SevSpov 
 p,r] TToiovv KapTTov, Gen. i. 11, Vorst, p. 162 and 830 ; and for the pro- 
 verbial figure Matt. vii. 16, ih. xii. 33, Isa. v. 2, Seneca Ep. 87 non 
 nasoitur ex malo bonum, non magis quamficus ex olea, Epict. Diss. ii. 20 
 TrSs yap Swarai a^TrcXos p.ri d/XTrcXtKws Kiveicr^at dXX' eXaiKus ; ^ cAaia 
 iraXiv firi eXaiKws dXX d/XTreXiKSi's i Plut. Mor. 472 F Tr\v djLnrfXov crC/ca 
 <j>€p€Lv ovK d^wvjxev ovSe T-qv eXatW /SoTpvs, Anton. 8. 15. 
 
 o<iT€ dX-uKov ^Xdkip irotijo-ai. *S(jp.] For this irregular use of ovTe see 
 Winer, p. 614, where the editor cites Tischendorf mihi non dubium est 
 quin fatiscente Graecitate etiam ovtc pro ovSi sit dictum. So Apoc. ix. 
 21 oi jUETevdijcrav e/c toiv </)dvu)v avrSiv ovre €k tSiv <j>app.dK.iav avT&v ovte ek 
 TTopveia's avTS>v, where ov is parallel with otiTe, not overlapping. In our 
 text it may perhaps be explained by the preceding question being re- 
 garded as = oi!t€ avKTJ k.t.X. 'AXvkov clas.sical, but found elsewhere in 
 the Bible only in phrase rj OdXaa-a-a rj akvK-^, as a name for the Dead Sea 
 (Numb. iii. 12, Deut. iii. 17). The rare phrase irotijo-ai vSwp is assimilated 
 to TT. eXatas above : we find it used of rain Arist. Vesp. 261 vSwp dvayKattos 
 e-^ei TOV Oeov iroi^crai. 
 
 Many MSS. and versions read ovtw's ovM, a smaller number insert 
 IxLa ■jTfjyq and kul after oXvkov. The insertion of out(os may have 
 arisen from a dittographia of ovre, but the latter insertions were 
 evidently intended to avoid the difficulty of taking oXvkov as a sub- 
 
Ill 11-13 NOTES 117 
 
 stantive and the subject of Swarat woi^craL. The true relation of the 
 sentences is lost by the insertion outws. The two clauses are not com- 
 pared with each other, but are both used to illustrate the impossibility 
 of genuine worship proceeding from a heart which naturally vents itself 
 in curses. 
 
 13. t£s <ro4>i>s Kol lirio-T^rjuuv iv 4|itv;] The interrogative here takes the 
 place of a condition, as in Luke xi. 11 riva Se If vfimv tov Trarepa air^cret 
 o vloi apTov ; fjLyj kiOov eTriSoicrei awTu ; and ib. 5-8, where the construc- 
 tion is broken, tis ef vfi-wv l^u ^i\ov being changed into a regular con- 
 ditional form in ver. 8 el koI ov Suurei 8ia to cTvai (fiiXov, Siayerijv avaiSeiav 
 avTOV Scucrei, aircS, Deut. XX. 5-8 tis 6 a.vOpunro'i 6 otKoSo/^^eras o'lKiav KaivrjV 
 Koi ovK eveKaivurev avT-qv ; 7ropevicr6<o...Kal tis 6 avOpunroi octtis icjiVTevtrev 
 ap.'TreXZva. koI ovk ev<jipav6ri If avTOv ; iropevicrOto K.T.X.., Jud. vii. 3 tis 6 
 (fto^ovfievoi KOL SetXos; em<Trpa<l>iTU>, Psa. xxxiii. 12 tis eo-Ttv avdpiairo's 6 
 diXtav tfurp/ ; Travtiov Tr]V yXS>cr<rd,v tjov diro KaKov, ib. cvii . 43 tis 0"o<^os / 
 KOI <^uA.afei TavTa koI crvvrjcru to, iXir] tov JUvpiov, Isa. 1. 10 Tts iv vfuv 6 
 (^o/Jov/xevos TOV Kvpiov," v7raKovcra,T(o t^s <j><j>vrji tov iraiSos avToB, Jer. ix. 
 i"2, Hos. xiv. 10, Sir. vi. 33 Tts <Tocf>6s ; airw ■!rpo(TKoXkrj6-i)Ti, other 
 examples in Vorst, p. 211 foil. For a similar use without the inter- 
 rogative pronoun see n. on v. 13 KaKoiraOei Tts cv v/uv ; Trpoa-evxia-dio. 
 Lachmann has no interrogation here, and A. Buttmann (p. 217) argues 
 on the same side, comparing it with other instances in which he thinks 
 Tts is equivalent to an indefinite relative ; but the passages cited above 
 are sufficient to settle the question. The abruptness to which Buttmann 
 objects is a marked characteristic of the writer's style. For Iv vfuv 
 almost equivalent to ipiZv cf. below v. 13, 14, and iiv/jMv above ii. 16. 
 'ETTLa-T^ftoiv here only in N.T., it occurs in Deut. i. 13 (of judges) SoVe 
 avrots avSpas (TO(j>ovs Koi iirta-Ti^fiova's koX avviTovs, ib. iv^ 6 (of Israel) ffiou 
 Xaos cro<^os Koi lirto-TTj/itov, Isa. v. 21 oval ot crwcTot iv lauTots Kai ei/toiriov 
 avTuiv liruTTrip.ovc'i : used in classical Greek for a skilled or scientific 
 person as opposed to one who has no special knowledge or training. 
 Compare for thought and expression Philo M. 2. p. 421 tis yap ovk av 
 etTTOt OTi (ro(f>ov apa ylvos kol e7rt(m//iovtKO)TaTov piovov tovt eo-Ttv, <o ras 
 ^etas Trapatveaets Ifeyci/cTo fir] Kevas Kal ip-qp.ov'i diroXtTreiv tSv otKetSv 
 Trpd^etav akXa TrAijpSo-at Toiis Xdyovs epyots l7ratV£T0ts / 
 
 S«|dTu (K TTJs KaXris dva<rTpo(|>fjs to. ?p70 ovtov.] Cf. above ii. 18. The 
 noun is derived from a.va.<rTpi<^opM.i = L. versor, as in 1 Pet. i. 17, 2 Pet. 
 ii. 18, Prov. xx. 7, and frequently in Polybius with adverb. It occurs 
 often in both epistles of St. Peter, e.g. i. 15 aytoi iv Traxrrj avaa-Tpocj}'!! 
 ya/TjOryre, i. 18 iXvTpwOriTe Ik t^s /x,aTatas dvao-Tpo<^7}s, iii. 2 ttjv Iv <^o^u> 
 dyvijv avaa'Tpo<l>i^v, iii. 16 ttjv ayaOijV iv ^pi<TT(o a.va<rTpo<j)riv, 2 ep. ii. 7, 
 iii. 11, so in Tobit. iv. 14 and Polyb. iv. 82, 1 KaTo. t^v Xovn-ijv avaa-Tpot^v 
 TE^au/iao-jueVos, see Hatch, p. 9. KoA,o's occurs in this epistle ii. 7, 
 
 iv. 17, (faX<is, ii. 3, 8, 17 : the former is joined with dvao-T. in 1 Pet. ii. 
 12. For the general sense cf. Sir. xix. 18 irSo-a o-o^ta <^6jio<s 
 
 Kuptov, Kat Iv irdarj ao<j>ia TTOiijo-ts vofioV koX ovk co-tl o-o<^ta iroviyptas 
 eirurTrjiir) k.t.X., Clem. Rom. i. 38 6 a-ocjioi IvSetKVUo-^to Trjv o-o<^t'av auTov 
 p.ri Iv Xo'yots aXX' iv ipyofs dya^ots. Here the simpler expression would 
 have been, as De "Wette remarks, Sei^oLTM . . .Trjv a-ot^iav avrov, like ii. 18 
 
118 THE EPISTLE OP ST. JAMES 
 
 Secibi EK tS>v ipywv /jbov rrjv ttlo-tw, but it is modified so as to give more 
 emphasis to the two ideas which the writer is here insisting on, viz. 
 deeds v. words, gentleness and modesty v. arrogance and passion, 
 ' let him show his deeds in meekness of wisdom,' i.e. ' let him give 
 practical proof (of his being wise) from his life and conduct in the 
 meekness which proceeds from and is the true mark of wisdom.' 
 
 Iv irpoiiTT)Ti <ro<^£as.] Cf. i. 21, 1 Pet. iii. 16 (defend the faith) fievB, 
 TrpavTrjTOi /cat (f>6ftov, Gal. vi. 1 ol TrvevftAXTiKoX KarapTi^ere tov toiovtov ev 
 TTvevfidTL TrpavrrjTO's, 1 Cor. iv. 21, 2 Tim. ii. 24 foil. SovXoi/ Se Kvpiov ov 
 Set p,ii)(e(r0aL aW rjiriov eivat Trpbs Travras, SiSaKTiKov, aveiiKaKOV, euirpavTifn 
 TraiSevovra Toiis di/TtStaTi^e/Aei/ovs, Pro v. xi. 2 crropM to/ttuvw p^Xer^ 
 cro(j>iay, Sirac. iii. 17 iv TrpavTTjTi to, epya trov Sii$aye, ib. iv. 8 aTroKpidrjTi 
 TTTOix'f dprfVLKo. iv irpavrriTi, also the frequent commendation of the 
 meek in the Psalms, e.g. xxv. 9 oSrjy-^a-ei wpaets iv Kpicra, SiSafet Trpaei^ 
 oSovs avTov. 
 
 14. JfjXov.] 'Jealousy,' as in Rom. xiii. 13 e.v<rxr)fmvu>'s TrepLTraTwfjLev... 
 p,ri fpiSi /cat ^lyXo), 1 Cor. iii. 3 orrov yap iv vfuv ^ijXog kol ?pts oi;j(t trapKiKoC 
 icrre ; see below iv. 2. 
 
 ■iriKpdv.] With allusion to v. 11. Cf. Eph. iv. 31 -inKpia, kcu Bvpo's 
 Kttt opyr], Heb. xii. 14, 15 dprjvqv 8i<i)K€Te...iTn(TKOTrovvT€s p-rj Tts pltp. 
 iriKpiai ivo)(kyj. 
 
 epiBiav.'] ' Party-spirit.' ^ derived from Ipt^os ' a hireling,' especially 
 a woman who spins for hire (Dem. p. 1313, 6, Isa. xxxviii. 12; the 
 idea of hire disappears in a-vvepiOo^, Odys. vi. 32, Callim. JEpig. xvii. 3). 
 Probably the word got to be used, like operae in Cicero, of partisans 
 hired by political leaders; hence ipiO^vopai and its cognates. are em- 
 ployed to denote (1) canvassing by hired partisans, and (2) party spirit 
 generally, cf. Arist. Pol. v. 3, 9 p.eTa^a.XXav(Ti 8' at TroXtraat kol avev 
 (TTacrews Ota re ras ipideia,^ utcrirep iv 'Upaia (e'f alperlov yap Sta tovto 
 ^TTOirjcrav Khqpunai, on ijpowTO tovs ipiBeuop.ivov's) kol 8t' oXiyutpiav, Polyb. 
 X. 25. 9 (speaking of demagogues) ttj's o-Tparr^ytas 6peyop,€voi 8ia TavTijs 
 T^s ap^rji i^epiOevovTai {cooperatores sibi comparant Sch weigh.) Tois viovs 
 Koi Trapaa-KEvd^ova-iv evvovs crvvaywvia-Tas ets to p,iWov, Philo Leg. ad Flac. 
 M. 2. p. 555 Tt 8e ap,€Lvov etpiyi/Tjs; elp'^vrj Sk ef rjyep.ovla's 6p6^^ <f}veTai, 
 ■^yepovta oe dt^iXwet/cos Kat dvepiOevTO'i dp6r] povr], Bi ^s Kat to, oAAa Travra 
 opOovrai. It is used by St. Paul, Phil. i. 17 ot 8e cf ipi6da% tov XptoTov 
 KaTayyeAA.oi;o-tv, Rom. ii. 8, Gal. v. 20 cpts, ^■^A.os, Ov/wt, ipiOiiai, 
 St;!^oo-rao-t'at (where Lightfoot translates ' caballings '), and the same list 
 in 2 Cor. xii. 20, except that KaraXaXtai stands for Sixoo-rao-tat, Phil. i. 
 17 p-qthi Kar' ipi6uav, p.rj8e Kara KevoSoiiav aX\a rfj raTruvorrjTi dXX^Xovs 
 ■^yovp-ivoi. ^Trepep^ovTas iavTcov, imitated in Ignat. Philad. 8 p,r;8ei/ kot' 
 ipiOiiav Trpda-aruv. It is possible that the later meaning may be coloured 
 in the N.T. by a reminiscence of the earlier meaning : cf. Joh. x., where 
 the spirit of the hireling is contrasted with that of the true shepherd. 
 
 ^ WH. read ipiBiav with B\ which however has ipiBela iu ver. 16. See below xaxo- 
 iraStas V. 10, and Tisch. ed. 8, vol. iii. p. 87 foil. 
 
 2 The classical equivalents if)iXoSo|(o, <l>i\oTifila are not found at all in W.T., and 
 the cognates of the latter are only used in a good sense, while tpiAovtixla and its 
 cognates are confined to the sense of quarrelsomeness. 
 
Ill 13-15 NOTES 119 
 
 The verb is used in its original sense of spinning Tobit ii. 11 (mid.) 
 ■tf yvvr/ jxov rjpiOvoero Iv rots yuvaiKetois KCki aTrecTTcWe TOis KvpioK, Heliod. 
 i. 5 (act.) at yi)vaiK€s ipi6euov(jiv, 
 
 |j.^l KaTOKODxo(r9e.] This verb was used above (ii. 13) with gen. to 
 denote the triumph of one principle over another, and so in the only 
 other passage where it occurs in N.T., Rom. xi. 17 /a-^ KaraKavxH) ™v 
 xXaStov. Three other instances of its use are cited, all from the LXX., 
 Zech. X. 12 KaTi<T)(y(r<i} avrovs iv TUvpiia koX iv ovo^ttart avTOv KaTa.Kav)(qaov- 
 Ttti, and Jer. 1. (xxvii.) 11 and 38, where the verb is used absolutely, 
 Kara having only an intensifying force, as in KaraKTuvu), /caraSiyXos. 
 The question whether it should be thus taken here will be considered 
 in connexion with the following clause. 
 
 i)rE>38eo-ec Kara Ttjs dXijOeCas.] If you have bitterness you cannot be truly 
 wise, for wisdom is shown by gentleness ; your profession therefore is 
 a lie : cf. 1 John i. 6 eav uirtufiev on KoivoiVLav e^o/Acj/ /jLeT avrov koi iv 
 (TKoret TrepLira.T<o/j,ev, i/f€u8d/te6a ical oi) Troiovfiev rrjv aXi^Oeiav, ih, iv. 20, 
 Wisd. vi. 25 (fiOovos oi Koivuiv^a-ei a-o^Ca. Some (Wiesinger, Hofmann) 
 take T^s aXrjdda's to mean the Gospel, as above i. 18, explaining it of 
 false teachers, blind leaders of the blind, who, like those referred to in 
 1 Cor. i. 18-23, speak contemptuously of the Gospel and misrepresent 
 its doctrines. Perhaps it is simpler to understand it of ' the facts of 
 the case,' for which Bloomfield compares Diod. i. 2 Ivta KaTeif/eva-Oai rrjs 
 aXfjOua^, Jos. B.J. prooem. 1 (former historians) Karaij/ivSovTai tS>v 
 -Trpay/jMTwv : (' you claim to be enlightened Christians, but enlighten- 
 ment joined with bitterness and self-seeking comes not from God, but 
 from the devil.') The expression is no doubt pleonastic : it would 
 have been enough to say ' your boast of wisdom is at variance with the 
 truth,' but emphasis is added by the fuller phrase, as in the passage 
 quoted from St. John. If we understand it thus it would seem that 
 KaraKavxacrBe must be taken absolutely (' do not boast of wisdom and 
 so lie against the truth ') and not with Kara t^s d\7j6eias in the sense of 
 'triumphing over the truth.' See however Zahn If.K. p. 792 n. 
 
 15. olJK io-Tiv o«Tij if) a-o^la dviaiiv KaTepxojieVT].] ' This wisdom is not one 
 that descends from above,' see on avotOiv io-riv KaTa/3alvov i. 17 ; and cf. 
 above i. 5, Philo M. 1. p. 571 a-o^la dvwOtv 6iJi,/3pri6eta-a (xtt' ovpavov, ib. p. 
 524, and on the opposition of O^ia /cai ovpavm^ a-o^ia to eirtyeios a-otjiia ih.. 
 p. 51 f. and 1 Cor. i. 19 foil. esp. ii. 6 a-ocfiiav XaXov/iev ev tois tcXeiois, 
 a'ocj^iav Se ov Tov atSj/os tovtov ( = hriyaov) . . . aXXa XaXov/jbev trot^iav ® eoB 
 
 K.T.X. 
 
 4ir£Y6ios.] The first stage in the antithesis to aviaOtv KaTep^ofi-evi], cf. 
 Hermas Mand. vs.. 11 17 ttlctti^ avoiOev icrn Trapa tov K.vpiov...ri 8c Bixpvxia 
 imyeiov Truevfid ia-n irapa tov Sta^dXov distinctly borrowed from this 
 passage ; also John viii. 23 d ra iTriyeia, ecTrov vjjIv koX ov TrtarcveTe, ttGsj 
 cav eiTTO) vfilv to. lirovpavia, iruTTivcreTe ; Phil. iii. 19 01 to, emytia cftpovovvTe^, 
 ib. ii. 10 iva TTOLV yaw Ka,p,i^rj eirovpaviiov Kal ejriyeluiv Koi KaTa)(6ovl(i>v, Plut. 
 Mor. 566 D to imyeiov rijs i/'vx^s. Philo (M. 1. p. 49 on Gen. 
 ii. 7 iirXacrev 6 ®eos tov avOptuTTOv ^ow airo T^s y^S Kai Iv^^vuiqfyev et9 to 
 Trp6<T<airov avTOV Trvoijv ^anjs, Koi kyivero 6 avOpunros €ts ij/v)(7jv ^UKjav) distin- 
 guishes two kinds of men, o (/.ev yap icrTiv ovpavioi avOpioTroi, 6 Se yijivos 
 
120 THE EPISTLE OP ST. JAMES 
 
 ...Tov jJiliv oipdviov <j)r]CTtv ov TreTrXdcrOai, kot' e'lKOva Si rervTrSicrOai ©eoC" to 
 8k yrjivov 7rXa(r/u.a...6 8e voCs ovto's ycuJSj^s e<7Tt tw ovti koX cj>6apT0'S, el fir] 6 
 ®£os itreTTvevo-ev airm Svvafuv aX-qOivrj^ ^<d^S) see ib. p. 32. St. Paul uses 
 the equivalent ^oikos 1 Cor. xv. 47 foil. The Gnostic Yalentinus dis- 
 tinguished between an avw and Karta crocj}M, and again between the 
 ^W£ts TTvevfiMTLKai akin to the Pleroma, cfyvcru? xj/v)(lko-i containing a 
 mixture of vk-q, and the (j>v(ru's which were altogether vXiKai (Iren. iii. 
 15), see Neander, vol. ii. pp. 110-145. So Hippolytus v. 6 (p. 134 
 Duncker) says of the Naassenes, who professed to receive their teaching 
 from St. James, 'they divide the first man into three parts, voepov, 
 if/vxLKov, ;)(oiKov : in like manner they divide all that exists into three 
 classes, ayyeXiKov, ij/vxi-Kov and jj^oikov.'. Heracleon ap. Orig. xi. 181 
 (quoted by Stieren on Iren. vol. i. p. 945) speaks of the Holy of Holies 
 as representing the sphere of the Trvev/xaTiKoi and the outer coiu't the 
 \j/vxi-Koi, cf . Iren. i. p. 968 ' when Jesus said to the Jews ye a/re the 
 children of your father tlm devil, he speaks to those who are not <l>va-ei 
 Tovs Siaj36Xov vlovi;, tovs )(o'iKov^, aXXa Trpos Tois tj/v^^iKov^ who make them- 
 selves such by their own fault,' Clem. Al. Mxo. ex Theod. § 54 'three 
 natures spring from Adam, Trptiyrrj /lev 17 aXoyos, ^s ^v Katv, Sevrepa 8e 
 17 XoyiKYj KOI rj SiKaia, ^s rjv AySeX, TpiTrj 8e fj Trvew/tartKiy, ^s rjv "SiTjO' koX 6 
 p-iv ^(oiKos i<TTi /car' eiKova, 6 Si ij/v^iKOs Ka6' op-oimaiv ®tov, 6 8e TTvev/xaTiKOi 
 KaT ISCav (iSeavV),' i6. § 56 ttoXXol p.ev ol vXikoi, ov ttoXXoI Se ol \j/v)^lkol, 
 (TTravioi S\ ol TTVevp-aTiKor to pev ovv TrvevpaTiKOV (jjvcrei cru>^6p,£vov, to Sk 
 iljV)(iKov...KaTa TTjV olKeiav atpecnv, to Sk vXlkov cj>vcrei aTroXXvTai. 
 
 ^v\iK'f\.^ On the various meanings attached to the word ipv^^ see 
 Hatch, pp. 94-130.1 jij^jg ^gg of the adjective is in accordance with the 
 Pauline trichotomy to TrveB/xa koL t) ij/v)(r] koi to crZpa (1 Thess. v. 23), cf. 
 1 Cor. XV. 45 iyivcTO 6 Trpwros avOponros 'ASap, cis ij/v)(ijv t^wcrav, o icr-)(a.T0<; 
 'A8a/x £is TTVivp.a ifnoiroiovv, dXX' ov Trpunov to Trvevpa.Ti.Kov aXXa. to ^v)(i,k6v. 
 The distinction drawn by Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoics between the im- 
 mortal reason, the divine principle in man, and the lower faculties of the 
 soul which perished with the body, certainly coloured the views of some of 
 the Jewish and Christian writers as to the distinction between soul and 
 spirit, which fall in naturally with the wide sense given to the word 
 \livxn in Aristotle's De Anima, and with its use by the Stoics to denote 
 the third grade of existence, the principle of movement in animals, as 
 contrasted with the XoytKTJ i/'t'X'? or voCs which constituted the fourth or 
 highest grade (see my note on Cic. N.JD. II. 33). Compare Tatian ad 
 Gr. 18 Svo TTveupaTiav Si,a<jiopa.i ttrpev wv to p,h> KaXeirat ^v^q], to Sk pu^ov 
 pkv TTJs \j/v)(rji @tov Sk eiKWi/ Koi o/xoicoo-t?, ib. 22 rj >l/u)(r] povr} pkv StaiTiaalvnj 
 
 ' The ambiguous meaning of the word \j>vx^ in such passages as Lev. xvii. 14 \f/vxh 
 iritrris (rapichs aT/ia, and its employment in reference to animals Gen. i. 20, 24, are 
 adduced by Philo and others as proofs of the inferiority of this principle, cf. Philo M. 
 1. p. 480 ^TreiBj) i^ux^; Six^s XEyerai, 5} te 8\I) koI Th riyefioviKhv amris /lepos, h if/ux?^ 
 iaTiv, HSo^f Tif co/iofl^T)) SnrKriv ilvai im\ tV' oialav rrfs if/ux^s, aXpa /j.fi' Th Tfjs SAjjs, 
 TOV Se TjyepoviKtoTdTov TTvevpa 6e7ov' <^?j(rl 7oOy fivTtKpus ij/ux^ irtiffT^s (ra/j/ci)5 ofjua. €5 
 ye rb Trpoffveiiiai t^j ffapKhs ^X^V '''V aVjUaros iirippo^v oiKetov oiKeiify tov 8e vov t^v 
 ohalav Ctirh 0coO &va$ev KaTanvevffBeitrap &v't]ya'Yev...&tTre Strrbv ejvai yevos avdpdirotv 
 rb piv Bilcji niieipaTi Koi Koyiffii^ ^toivTuv, t!> Se alpaTi koI aapichs fiSovfi (dvTaiV' 
 
in 15, 16 NOTES 121 
 
 Trpos TTjv v\riv vevu koitu), f7vvairo6vi^(TKOV(ra. ttj (rapKi- (Tv^vy'lav Se KiKrqix,€vrj 
 TTjV Tov OiLov ■Trvtv/xaTO's oiiK i(TTiv a.^or)6t)To% K.T.\. Justin M.yr. de Resurr. 
 § 10 oiKos TO (jS/xa ij/v)(rji, Trvcv/xaros 8e V'^X^ oTkos (after Plato I'im. 30 
 vovv fiiv h> i/'w^ij) t^vyi]V 8e £v (Tb>ixaTi (rwio-Tas to Trav eTCKTatVtTo), Jos. 
 ^.t7. i. 34 £7rA.atr£V o ®€os tov av&poiTTOv ')(Ovv diro t^s y^s XajSujv Kai ttvA^.o. 
 iviJKiv auTft) Ktti {j/v^-qv, Philo Opif. M. p. 15 tcS a,v6pi!)Trif vovv i^aiperov 
 iSiapeiTO, i/'vx^s Ttva \j/vxi^v, KaOav^p KopTjv ev 6cji0a\fi,£, Nemesius iV^ZT. i. 
 Tiv€s /iev, (uv ccTTi Kol XIXcoTivos, aXA,r)V eivat t^v ij/v^rjv Kal aXXov tov vovv 
 ooyfiaTto'avTt's €k TpiSyv tov a.v6p<i>7rov crvvecrTavai ^ovXovrai o'm/J.aTos (cai i/'^X^* 
 Ktti voD, on which Matthiae quotes Irenaeus Ifaer. v. 9. 1 tria sunt ex 
 quibus per/ectus homo constat, came, anima, spiritu, and Aug. de Symholo, 
 homo habet tres 23artes, spiritum animum et corpus, itaque homo est imago 
 SS. Trinitatis ; but Augustine in his treatise de Eccl. Dogmnt. c. 20 blames 
 Didymus for making spiritus a distinct principle, ApoUinarius having 
 in the meanwhile put forward his theory that the nature of Christ was 
 Jk o-apKOs KoX ^v)(ri's kou. OeoTTjTos ovtI tov vov. . .' and so,' continues Matthiae, 
 ' the separation of soul and spirit came to be thought a heresy.' In the 
 N.T. i/fv;^iKos connotes opposition to the higher principle, cf . Jude 19 i//vx"cot, 
 ■7ri/e?ju.a pirj e^ovT€s, 1 Cor. ii. 10 foil. esp. 14 tj/v^LKb^ avOpoiiro^ ov Se'^eTai 
 Ta TOV -TTvevfj/i.TO's Tov 0£oi)...6 8e 'Trvevp.aTiKos avaKpLvu irdvTa, ib. iii. 1 ovK 
 TjSvvT^Orjv \a\^<Tai vfuv (os TTveu/iaTtKOis aX\' <us o'apKivoK, a)S vrprloK €v 
 Xpio-To!. It was used at a later period in reference to the orthodox by 
 the Montanists who claimed the power of prophecy, Clem. Al. Strom,. 
 iv. p. 605 P 01 $pijy6S...T0US Trj via ■!rpO(j>7jTua. p,r) TrpocrixovTa^ i/zu^tKoiis 
 KaXovo-iv ; so Tertullian ( Je/ttra. 1) gives the name FsycMci to those who 
 refused to keep the fasts of the Montanists. In the LXX. we find it 
 opposed to o-(i)/xaTtKos, as in 4 Mace. i. 32. St. Paul contrasts the o-S/na 
 TTveu/iaTt/cdv with the o-i/xa xIiv^ikov, 1 Cor. xv. 44. Hilgenfeld and 
 others who imagine an allusion to St. Paul in w avBponre Kevi (ii. 20) 
 regard this as a sarcastic reference to 1 Cor. ii. 10-15 ; 'your spiritual 
 wisdom is worse than ij/vxtKi^, it is SaA./jioviaS-q's.' 
 
 8ai|ji.ovica8i]s.] This word is found elsewhere only in the Scholia to 
 Aristoph. JRan. 295 and Symmachus, Ps. xc. 6. See above v. 6 <^Xoyi- 
 tpp^hrrj iwb t^s yeiwrjs, and ii. 19, 1 Tim. iv. 1 (of future apostates) 
 wpoo-e^ovres wvevpaai ■irXdvois /cai SiSao'/caXtais SatjUoviW cv viroKpicrtL tJ/evSo- 
 Xoywv, Eph. ii. 2 f. those who walk according to the course of this 
 world, KaTO. tov apy^ovTa t^s efouo-tas tov aipos, are described as TrotovvTts 
 TO. OikrjfuxTa Tijs arapKos Koi tSv Siavotfiv (appa,rently corresponding to 
 eTTtyetos and \pv)(LK-q here), John viii. 44 ex tov iraTpo^ tov Sia/36kov ea-Te, 
 1 John ii. 16, ib. iii. 8-10, ib. iv. 1-6, where to irv£{l;ua tijs aX-qOeias is 
 distinguished from to 7rveC/ta r^s irXavrys. 
 
 16. aKaTao-Tuo-Ca.] See above ver. 8 and i. 8, 1 Cor. xiv. 33 ov yap 
 ia-Tiv aKaraa-Taa-Las 6 ®£os aXXa eip'^vrjs, 2 Cor. xii. 20 where it is joined 
 with ^■^Xos and IpiBciai, Prov. xxvi. 28 (TTopxt. ao-Tcyov iroiEi aKaTao-Tao-tas, 
 Clem. Rom. i. 3 Jk tovtov ^■^Xos koI (jiOovo'S /cai epis Kal aTao'is, Siaiyp.o's Kal 
 aKaTacrrama, ttoXe/xos Kal aiy(jj.aX(jicria, Epict. Diss. iii. 19. 3 ovSev aXXo 
 Tapa)(rji -q aKaTacTTacTLas aiTtov £0-Tiv ■^ S6yfj.a, Hatch p. 4. 
 
 irav (f>avXov irpaYiia.] Simply ' every evil thing,' there is no need to 
 take Trav = ' eitel ' with Hofmann and Erdmann. Compare Epict. Diss. 
 
122 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 111. 22. 61 oiroD <j)$6voL Kol t;rjXoTvwLai, ttov Ikv. TrapoSos evSaifjLovias ; ojtov 
 av rj crairpa SoyfiaTa, Iku iravTO, ravra eivai, avdyKrj. 
 
 17. 1^ S\ avcoflev a-o^la.] Compare Wisd. vii. 7 — 30 esp. vv. 25 and 26, 
 ib. ix. 10. 
 
 ■irpmTov |j.^v o-yv^.] First the inner characteristic, purity, then the 
 outer, peaceableness, cf. the blessing in Matt. v. 8, 9. It is the pure 
 who attain to the vision of God which constitutes the highest wisdom. 
 Matt. V. 8, Acts xv. 9, 2 Cor. vi 6, 1 Tim. i. 4, Heb. x. 22. We may 
 compare Antoninus viii. 5 o-D/i/ivij/xovciJO-as rt tov ovOpuyKov rj <^v(ris 
 aTrai/ril, irpa^ov tovto d/iCTao-TpeTTTt, koI ctTrt o)s hiKaioTarov (jiaiverai (roi, 
 IJiovov ev/MevSis koi alSrj/JLovmi Koi dvvTroKjoiTws. 
 
 iitara elpTjviK'^.] The omission of Se after cireira is quite classical 
 (Winer p. 721), cf. below iv. 14, John xi. 6 : cTretra Se occurs in Heb. 
 vii. 2. For the association of triith (wisdom) and peace compare Rom. 
 viii. 6 TO (j)p6vrjjMx TOV TTVEvfj^aTOi t,(ari koL elprjvrj, Ps. Ixxxv, 10, Prov. iii. 
 1 7, Isa. xxxii. 1 7, ib. xxvi. 3 avTiXa^Ofievo^ aXr/deia^ koI (jtvXda-a'oiV iiprjviQV, 
 Jer. xxxiii. 6, Mai. ii. 6. The word eipiyviKos is only found elsewhere 
 in N.T. in Heb. xii. 11. 
 
 lirMtKyis.] Aristotle {Eth. vi. 11) says tov lirniKfi fjidXia-Ta ^a/xlv 
 crvyyvwpLoviKov, and [Eth. v. 14) contrasts iirieiKiia 'equity' with strict 
 justice, where Grant quotes the more detailed description given in 
 jRhet. i. 13. 17 foil. : ' It is equity to pardon human failings, and to 
 look to the law-giver and not to the law, to the spirit and not to the 
 letter, to the intention and not to the action, to the whole and not to 
 the part, to the character of the actor in the long run and not in the 
 present moment, to remember good rather than evil, and good that one 
 has received rather than good that one has done, to put up with 
 injurious treatment, to wish to settle a matter by words rather than 
 deeds, lastly to prefer arbitration to judgment.' Cope in loc. renders it 
 'merciful consideration.' In Homer the adj. is used in opposition to 
 aeiK^s ( = seemly, decorous, fitting). It seems not to be used of persons 
 before Herod, i. 8-5 (of the son of Croesus) to, phr dXXa. ewieiKijs, d^wvos 8e 
 (in other respects a goodly youth). Thucydides (viii. 93) uses it of men 
 who would listen to reason ; in Oleon's speech (iii. 90) ofxTos is joined 
 with iTciuKua, (like to eTrteiKcs koX ^vyyviofiov Plato Leg. vi. 757) as one of 
 the things most injurious to a ruling state, cf. ib. v. 86. Plato con- 
 stantly uses it of respectable, well-behaved people, as opposed to those 
 who are rude and violent : in Hep. 397 D one who had before been 
 called fierpio's is referred to as o eirieiK^s, as in Thuc. i. 76 to 
 e7rt€iK€s = TO p,eTpidt,av ' moderation ' ; hence its colloquial use in 
 Plato and Aristotle = cnrovSaios or dyaOo's. In the N.T. it always 
 has the more special sense, and is twice joined with a/xa^os (1 Tim. iii. 
 3, Tit. iii. 2) : in 1 Pet. ii. 18 it is used of a master who is considerate 
 towards his slaves ; Acts xxiv. 4 TertuUus begs Felix to hear him with 
 his usual condescension {hnuKucf) : the most important passage is 2 Cor. 
 X. 1 TrapaKaXZ vp,ds Stct T^s irpaijTr/Tos Koi €TritiK€tas tov ILpurTov, which 
 Matthew Arnold rendered by his phrase of ' sweet reasonableness,' 
 compare Phil. iv. 5, Wisdom ii. 19 vftptL koL /Jao-dvo) hda-wfiev avTov (the 
 just) iVa ynu/tev Trjv iiniiKeiav avTov real SoKip.do'ia/Ji.ev ttjv dvi^iKaKUW airov, 
 
III. 16, 17 NOTES 123 
 
 ib. xii. 18 Secriro^uiv i<T)(yo's iv €irieiK€ia /cptVtts, Philo M. 2. p. 112 (of God) 
 Sia rrjv (rvju.<^uTov iirifiKeiav Koi (j>ikav6p(07riav. It is the Greek equivalent 
 to the Roman dementia (App. E.G. ii. 106). The history of the word 
 shows that it is etymologically connected with cikos, implying that 
 which is fit and reasonable ; but its later meaning was influenced by 
 the idea of a connexion with eiKO) ' to yield,' implying one who does not 
 stand on his rights, but is ready to give way to the wishes of others. 
 
 eiirei.9l|s.] Not found elsewhere in N.T. It is often used of military 
 discipline, as in 4 Mace. 8. 6, Jos. B.J. ii. 20. 7. We find it with a gen. 
 Plato Leg. i. 632 B cvtt. twv vd/x,o)v, with a dat. ib. vii. 801 cutt. tois 
 vo/xots, with prep. ih. vi. 718 povXoifiTjv dv awovis ois eiTreiSecrTaTous 
 Trpos dperrjv ehai. In the last passage it should probably be translated 
 ' easily to be persuaded,' as it follows the words ' our exposition of the 
 law ' TO, fxiv ireiOovcra, to, Sc fjirj xmuKOVTa 7rei6oL. . . j8ta KoXd^ovcra, ryjv iroXiv 
 evSat/xova aTroTeXei. So Philo M. 2. p. 378 StSacr/caXtai eto-t tovs jih/ ewei- 
 6ets fiia.\aK(jOTepov dvaireiOovcrai, Tovs 8e dirct^etrTepoDS ifJ-^piOetTTepov. The 
 opposite airtLdrj's, aireiOeTv, aTreWeiq occur several times in N.T. in the 
 sense of ' disobedience.' Musonius (ap. Stob. Ucl. p. 453, Peerlkamp 
 Frag. p. 227), answering the question whether obedience to a father is 
 always right, says that he alone is to be called ewct^^s who willingly 
 submits to a true fatherly will (6 tm to. Trpo<n^KovTa TrapaLvovvri, Kar-^Kooi 
 u>v Koi eirop-evoi eKOHcrtMS, oStos euTrei^Tjs). As cirtetKijs refers mainly to 
 one in a superior position, so I should understand einreiOrj^ to refer to 
 an inferior, and translate ' submissive,' ' docile,' ' tractable,' old English 
 ' buxom,' Lat. morigera. The quarrels and rivalries in the Church were 
 due to faults on the side of the latter as well as of the former. 
 
 (lewrfi cXeovs koI Kapiruv d7a6uv.] See above vers. 8, ii. 13. 
 
 aSi^KpiTos.] Here only in N.T. The meaning of 8iaKptvo/Aai above (i. 6, 
 ii. 4) makes it probable that we must understand the adj. here in the 
 sense of ' whole-hearted ' (undivided), as in Heracleon ap. Orig.Gomm. in. 
 Joli. xiii. 10 (Brooke's Heracl. p. 73) tTratva t'^v 2a/iapeiTiv (Jio-av evSetfa/^e- 
 viyv T-tp/ aSiaKpLTov . . .WKTTLV, fjirj SiaKpiOeLcrav icj> ots eXeyev o,vTfj, Ignat. Trail. 
 1 d[Ji(j)p.ov Stavoiav Koi dSiaKpiTov iv vTrofJi,ovrj tyvwy ijuas c^ovras, id. Rom. 
 inscr. imrXrjpui/xa'oii ^dpiTO's 0eoD dSiaKpiruis, Philad. inscr. 'Ignatius to the 
 Church ' -qSpacrp-evr) iv ofiovoia ®eoS koI dyaXXwojuevj; iv ti3 irdOu tov K.vpiov 
 rip.S)v dSiaKptTO)?.^ It only occurs once in the LXX., Prov. xxv. 1 axirai ai 
 iraiSeiat ^aXo/xwvTos ai dSid/cpiToi, where it seems to have a secondary 
 passive sense ' the undoubted proverbs.' More commonly it means 
 ' undistinguishable,' and hence ' confused,' ' vague,' as in Polyb. xv. 12. 9 
 dSiaKpcTos cfxavT^ (promiscuus clamor Schw.), Epict. Diss. i. 16. 12, ib. ii. 20. 
 29 {jiavracria /xoi iyevero iXaiov dSiaKptTos ofioioTarq (oleo ita simile ut ah 
 eo discerni nan posset Schw.), Test. Patr. p. 641 dSiaKptTOJS ttSo-i o-TrXay^vi- 
 l6p,evoL 'pitying all without distinction,' Greg. Naz. V. Mos. p. 232 
 /xdo-Ttf dS. ' indiscriminate punishment ' : Lucian Jup. Trag. 25 has 
 afntji'^pLcrTOv eVi /cat dStd/cpiTOj/ KaToXiiriiiv tov Xoyov ' leaving the matter 
 undecided,' almost the opposite force to that which it bears here. 
 
 avtiiroKpiTos.] ' Unfeigned,' ' genuine,' used of love 1 Pet. i. 22 ras 
 
 ^ Dr. PlummeT cites Ign. ad Magn. xv. tppaaBt iv 6fiovoi<} @eot KfKTTiij.4iioi 
 iSidxpnov TTVfviia, Clem. AI. Paed. ii. 3, p. 190, aSiaxplnp itlarei. 
 
124 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 lj/V)(a^s v/xSiv rjyv L Kor ei ev rfj viraKoy t^s aXyjOeiai Sta irvevj/.a,- 
 Tos ets <ji)iXa8eA^tav avvTr 6 k p irov, 2 Cor. vi. 6 iv ayvoT-qri, hf 
 yvmcru ...iv irvevfji.aTi ayi'o), iv ayaTrrj avmroKpiTio : of faith 2 Tim. i. 5, 
 1 Tim. i. 5. It is also found in LXX., Wisd. v. 18, xviii. 16, Clem. 
 Rom. ii. 2, 12 ev Swtri crol/iacrtv awiroKpLru)? fila i/'i'X''?- 
 
 18. Kapirbs Sk Si.Kai.O(rtivr|s ev £ipifjVT| (nrdperai.j Heb. xii. 11 (TraiSeia) 
 KapTTOv eiprjviKov ToTs Si' avT^s yeyvfjivacrfJLevoii diroStSwo-t SiKaio- 
 (jui'Tjs, Phil. i. 11 ire-TrXiypco/xeVoi Kapirov SiKaiocrvvrjg rbv 8ia 'I.X., Prov. xi. 
 30 £K Kapirov 8iKa,LocrvV7]'S <f>vera,t. SevSpov ^(o^s, Amos vi. 2 i^iOTTpiyj/aTt Kap- 
 irov SiKaLocrvvrj^ eis TTiKpiav, Hos. x. 12 crTretpaTc eauTois ets StKatoerwjjj', 
 T/Duy^crare ets Kapirov ^(o^s, Prov. xi. 21 6 anreipuiv SwaiocrwTjv X-^if/erai 
 fiidOov irto-Tov, i6. V. 18, Isa. xxxii. 17 /cat ecrrat to, epya ttJs SiKaioa-vvi]'; 
 dp-qvr] (the converse of what is said here), Job iv. 8, Gal. vi. 7. The 
 difficulty of the expression here consists in the prolepsis which regards 
 the seed as already containing in itself the fruit,i see Jennings on Psa. 
 xcvii. 11 'light is sown for the righteous,' where the note is 'the 
 affliction entailed by the oppression of the wicked is to the righteous 
 as the seed of light.' Compare above i. 20. 
 
 Tois TToioBo-iv «lp^vt|v.] The phrase occurs Eph. ii. 15, 2 Mace. i. 4. 
 "We have the compound dfyqvoiroiS) in Col. i. 20 and dp-qvoirotos Matt. v. 
 9. I think the dat. here is best explained as dat. comm., not of the 
 agent, as in ver. 7. ' A harvest of righteousness ' is the issue of the 
 quiet and gentle ministrations of those who aim at reconciling quarrels 
 and being themselves in peace with all men. 
 
 IV". 1. — irdSev.] St. James is much given to the use of the interroga- 
 tive, see ii. 4, 5, 6, 7, 14, 15, 16, 19, 20, 21, 25, iii. 11, 12, 13, iv. 4, 5, 
 12, 14. For the repetition of iroOev see iii. 9 kv avry, i. 19 ^paSvs. 
 Notice that the severity of this section, as of that which commences 
 below with v. 13, is marked by the absence of the word dSeX^ot. 
 
 irdX£|ioi Kal (idxai.] These need not be limited to their narrow sense : 
 the former denotes any lasting resentment, the latter any outburst of 
 passion. Compare Titus iii. 9 p.wpa.'s 8e ^9jT^cr€is...Kat cpcis /cat p.d^a'i 
 vo/tt/cas irepua-Taa-o, ib. v. 2, 2 Tim. ii. 22 f.. Gal. v. 15, 2 Cor. vii. 5. 
 The verb fx.d.yppM.1 is used of chiding or disputing in Gen. xxxi. 36, Neh. 
 xiii. 11, John vi. 52. So in other writers we have iroXe/Aows /cat o-rdcrets 
 Kat p,a)(a<s ov^ev dAAo irapi^u ij to crSyna Kat at tovtov e7rt6i//Ai'ai Plato 
 Phaedo 66 C (not ' Phaedrus xv.' as Beyschlag), Cic. Fin. i. 13. 43 
 cupiddtates sunt insatiahiles quae non modo singulos homines sed universas 
 familias evertunt, tota/m etiani lahe/actant saepe rem pvMica/m. Ex cupi- 
 ditatibus odia, discidia, diseordiae, seditiones, bella nascuntur,..intus 
 etiam in animis inalusae inter se dissident et discordant, Seneca Ira 3. 
 35 ista quae appetitis quia non.possunt ad alterum nisi alteri erepta 
 trans/erri, eadem affectantibus ^mgna/in et jurgia excitant, Philo M. 2. 
 p. 205 o\ 'EXXijvwv /cat Papj3dpu>v . . .TpayioSrjdivTi's irdXcjiiot Trdvres aTro jiiias 
 Trr]yrjs ippvrjaav, eTrt^v/Atas r/ y^-qjji.dTusv rj Sd^s ij rjSovrj'S (in Concup. p. 449 f . 
 he traces out the evil consequences of each species of iindv/xia at length) ; 
 Bpict. Diss. iii. 20. 18 ttjOos to TratSdjoioi' TrdXe/xos, irpbi Toiis yctrovas, Trpos 
 
 ' Bloomlield compares Antiphnues Fab. Inc. iv. i. M. (rireipftv KapTrhn x«P'tos 
 ' sow the fruit of gratitude.' See also Sir. xxiv. 17 Tti itveij /lou Kapirhs S6^iis. 
 
Ill 17-IV 2 NOTES 125 
 
 Toy's crKu>\j/avTai, Trpos Tovs KarayeXacrai'Tas, ii>. i. 22, Test. Patr. p. 538 
 TO TTUev/w, Tov fj)66vov dypiot Tijv ij/v^riv, opyrjv /cai iroXijxov irapiye.i koI cts 
 aLiJMTa irapo^vei, Olem. Rom. 46 tva rt epets Kai Ov/jloI kol St^ocrTao-tai (cat 
 ar)(i(TiJt.aTa iroXe/j,ds t£ ev i/iiv / 
 
 ouK IvTcvSev.] Pleonastic before Ik t£v rjBovwv, like aiVij in i. 27, oStos 
 in i. 25, avwOtv in i. 17, serving to bring out the predicate into sharper 
 relief. 
 
 TcSv :f|8ovMV Twv (TTpaTeuonlvttiv €v Tots |i^XE<riv.J The potential pleasure 
 seated in each member constitutes a hostile force, a foe lying in 
 ambush against which we have continually to be on our guard. Of. 
 Tit. iii. 3 SouXeiJOVTes iTTidvfji.iat'; Koi ijSovais irotKiXais, 4 Macc. vi. 35 tov 
 Xoyia/Jiov tS>v ijSovSv Kparetv nal /iijSev avrais vireiKUV, ib. v. 22 (<J3iXo<TO<j>ia) 
 <TOi<j)po<TVvrjv eKSiSacTKet (ScTTe iracrSv tSv ■^SovSv Kai iiridv/iiZv Kpa/Tiiv, Xen. 
 Mem. i. 2. 23 cv tu airu (rtu/xari. crvfx,Tri<^VTeviXivai Trj ij^v^rj ai rjSovai ■jniOov- 
 (Tiv avTrjv //.r] cro)(f)pov€LV, ib. 5. 6 SovXevovra ■^Sovcus. For the metaphor cf. 
 the parallel passage in 1 Pet. ii. 11 irapaKaXS) airix^aOai tmv a'apKiKoiv 
 i'jridvp.iSiV alVtves crTpaTevovTai Kara t^s ^vyrj'i, Eom. vii. 23 ^XiTTta eTcpov 
 vojjLov iv Tois ixekeaiv /ji,ov d.vTi(TTpaTeo6[i.€vov T<3 vo/i<i) tov vods /hod, i5. vi. 13, 
 Gal. V. 19 f., Philo M. 1. p. 445 et tis ^ovXrjduri tov o)(Xov /iiSs i/'^X'?^ &<nrcp 
 Kara f^vr; 8iaveT/tat, iroXXas av evpot rafeis dKO(rp.oiJ(7as, wv TjSovat ■^ eiriOvixiai, 
 ri Xvirai rj <ji6^oi. . .Ta^iap^ova-LV. For ev ToTs [iiXiO'iv cf. above iii. 6 and 
 compare Hatch, p. Ill, who cites Philo M. 1. p. 511 to. o-uj/taros TrdOrj 
 crapKOi eK'TreifiVKOTa y TrpotreppL^wvTaL, ib. p. 692 to rj/jLeTfpov (ruifxa Koi to. Iv 
 avT(o KOL 8i' avTO iyyivo/JLeva Trddrj, ib. M. 2. p. 253 dro) iyKaOrjvTai Koi iXXo- 
 p^fiert TrXtove^ML Kai iiriOvixiaL tSiv dSiKiutv. 
 
 2. EirLOv|jieLT€ Kai oIjk ^x^*^^* 4*ovev€T€ Kai %t]Xo€t€, Kai ov Svi/acrOc Iitltdxciv. 
 |i.(ix«o-96 Kol TToXciieiTe.] This is the reading and punctuation of Westcott 
 and Hort, agreeing in essentials with Alford, Tischendorf and the more 
 recent editors. The E. V. has ' ye lust, and have not : ye kill, and covet 
 (marg. 'are jealous'), and cannot obtain: ye fight and war.' The 
 extraordinary anti-climax ' ye kill and covet ' has long exercised the 
 minds of commentators, who have endeavoured to remove it either 
 (1) by weakening the force of <f)oveveTe, or (2) by strengthening the 
 force of ipqXovT€, or (3) by giving a special meaning to the connexion 
 between them. 
 
 (1, a) ' Kill ' means ' hate,' because every one that hateth his brother 
 is a murderer. So Estius, Corn, a Lap., Theile, De "Wette, Wiesingei', 
 Beyschlag, Erdmann. (1, 6) 'Kill' means 'commit moral suicide,' so 
 Oecumenius and Theophylact, ^ovgveiv <jyr]crl tovs t'^v eavrSv ipvyrjv diro 
 
 KTlVVVVTa^ TOLS TOUXVTaiS iTTi^uprjo'cai. 
 
 (2) ^i]XovT€ means ' become ^rjXcoTai,' i.e. assassins ; so Macknight and 
 Dean Scott in the Speaker's Commentary, referring to Josephus, B.J. 
 vii. 8, 1, where the ^rjXmTai are said to have been worse than the a-ucdpioi. 
 
 (3) <j>oviv€Te KOI ^rjXovTt form a hendiadys, ' ye murderously envy,' art 
 necem usqiie invidetis. So Pott, Schneckenburger, Gebser, and not 
 much otherwise Bengel, occiditis per odia et zelum. 
 
 The objections to these expedients are to my mind conclusive. (1) It 
 does not follow, because to show the heinousness of hate it may be repre- 
 sented as virtually equivalent to the murder of which it is the germ, that 
 
126 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 it is therefore allowable in all cases to substitute the word ' murder ' for 
 ' hate.' In the present case it may be safely said that no sane writer, 
 no one who had the slightest feeling for rhetorical effect (and St. James 
 is both eminently sane and eminently rhetorical) could have used 
 cjiovevere in the sense of /xto-ctre before t,7jXovTe. There is no reason here 
 to lay an exaggerated stress on the idea of hate, if nothing more than 
 hate is intended : not only does it make a mere bathos of ^rjXovre, but 
 it weakens the force of the following ij,a.^i(r6e. koX TroXejj.ure. Others 
 have thought it impossible that those addressed by St. James could 
 be guilty of the actual sin of murder. But in ch. v. 6 we read i^ovev- 
 o-are tov SiKaiov, so 1 Pet. iv. 15 jU.'^ yap Tts vfi&v iracrxiTio (us <j>ovtv's yj 
 Kke!rrri<s rj KaKOTroiOi, and Didache iii. 2 /jltj yivov 6fyyLX.os...fiTjSe ^ijXmt^s 
 /«.ij8e ipLiTTiKO's fjLrj&k Ov/jliko^' £K yap rovTiov airdvTwv (fiOVOL yevvSivraL, and 
 I think we should gather from Acts xxi. 20 that some of the assailants 
 of St. Paul at Jerusalem were members of the Christian community. 
 Of (2) it is sufficient to say that there is no evidence of the verb t,y]\6(ii 
 being used in this sense, and nothing to suggest it in the G.T. use of 
 the word ^lyXcor^s. (3) If t,-qXovTe. preceded ifjovevere, something might 
 be said for the theory of ey Sia Svolv : as it is, every one must feel 
 that it is a suggestion of despair. 
 
 Lastly, Alford, Bouman, Schegg r.nd others, feeling the unsatisfactory 
 nature of the above-mentioned explanations, have fallen back on the 
 literal rendering. Schegg is the only commentator known to me who 
 makes any attempt to account for the order of the words, which he 
 defends as fellows : ' Die Lust begehret, d. h. sie sucht werkthatig zu 
 erreichen, wornach sie gelustet ; die Lust fotet, d. h. sie schafft gewalt- 
 sam bei seite was ihr hinderlioh entgegentritt ; die Lust ringet iim das, 
 was sie zu erlangen im Begriffe ist...Da toten und ringen verschiedene 
 Objekte haben, indem sich toten gegen, ringen auf etwas richtet, so 
 hat Jakobus psychologisch richtig die Keihen-und-Stufenfolge der 
 Aeusserungen des Gelvistens eingehalten.' It is by no means certain 
 that fijXoBTe is to be taken here in the sense, which Schegg assigns to 
 it, of striving after a thing : it is often followed by an accusative of the 
 person. But supposing it to be true that the object of S^rjXovT^ is here 
 a thing, and that of (jjovevere a person, I am unable to see why this 
 makes it psychologically right to put tfyovevere first. Surely it is the 
 resistance to our effort to gain an object which suggests to us the 
 necessity of moving the obstacle out of the way. 
 
 I have for many years held the opinion that, assuming the correct- 
 ness of the text, the only way to interpret it is to place a colon after 
 (^oveuere : and I am glad to find that the same idea has occurred to Dr. 
 J. Chr. K. V. Hofmann, whose commentary appeared in 1876. It is 
 also given as an alternative reading in Westcott and Hort's edition 
 (1881). The easiest way of seeing how the words naturally group 
 themselves is to put them side by side without any stopping : eiri6vii,ii.ri 
 Koi ovK e^ere (j^ovevere kol ^ijXovTe koI ov SwacrSe €inTV)(UV fidx^crOe koi 
 iroXefxeLTe. Can any one doubt that the abrupt collocations of <j)ov€vere 
 and p^a^icrOf. are employed to express results of what precedes, and that 
 in the second series ^r;\oDre /cat ov Svva<r9e iinTvy^eiv correspond to brijdv- 
 
IV 2 NOTES 127 
 
 jueire kol ovk Ixere in the first series 'i Uusatisfied desire leads to murder 
 (as in the case of Naboth) ; disappointed ambition leads to quarrelling 
 and fighting. Schegg and Beyschlag and Erdmann object to this 
 grouping of the words as harsh and unlike the style of St. James, but 
 abruptness is a marked characteristic with him, see ii. 1 9 o-ii TrurTeveiq 
 ...®eds' KaXSs iroieTs, v. 6 e^oveuo-are tov SiKaioV ovk dvTtTacra-eTat ijjuv. 
 The only difficulty introduced is that the second series (ftjXoOre k.t.X.) 
 is joined to the first by Koi instead of standing independently by its 
 side. Perhaps this may be accounted for by the fact that the figure 
 asyndeton was already employed to mark the change from the ante- 
 cedents to the consequents. [Dr. Plummer adopts this punctuation.] 
 
 Taking it in this way we may compare Epict. Diss. ii. 17 6i\<o n koI 
 ov yiVcTaf Koi Tt icrriv aOXiiorepov ifiov ; roxno Ktu fj M^Seta ov^ vTro)x,ava(ra 
 rjXdev hrX to airoKT€ivai to, i8ta TCKva... aTrXois jU.'^ Oeke rj a 6 ®eos OeXei, kol 
 Ti's (re K(i)X)j<7£i, TLs ere a,vayKd.(Tei ; Clem. Rom. i. 3 e/cacrTov /SaSt^eiv Kara ras 
 linOvix.ia's avrov to.? Trovrjpd';, ^rjX.ov aSiKOV kol dcre|8^ dvetXi7<^dTa, 8i' ov 
 KOL 6a,vaT0<; eia^X^er ek tov Koa'/Ji.ov : see Lightfoot on this and the 
 following paragraph, where he cites Clem. Horn. iii. 42 KdiV ipfj,r]V€V£Tai 
 ^■ijXos, and Iren. iv. 18. 3 ; also Clem. Rom. i. 4 opare, a,Sek<f>oi, ^ijXo's koI 
 ^96vos dScX^oKTovtW KareLpydcraTO, where their effect is traced through a 
 long series of examples : ib. 6 ^^Xos kol ipis irdXets fieydXas KaTicrTpeijjiv koX 
 iOvr) fieydXa e^ept^oxrcv. 
 
 But may it not be that we ought, with Erasmus, followed by Calvin, 
 Beza, Hottinger, Ewald, to read (j^Oovure, supposing this to have been 
 carelessly written <^ov£tTe (which indeed we find in the text, though not in 
 the note, of Oecumenius), and corrected into <)>ov€veTe 1 A. similar corrup- 
 tion may have given rise to the reading cfiOgvoL, (jtovoi in Gal. v. 21, where 
 ff)6voL is omitted by the best MSS. Conversely in Clem. Hom. ii. 11, 
 <f>66vov is wrongly given in the MS. for cjiovov. Certainly the process of 
 thought is thus made easier. Accepting this change of reading, we 
 shall have only the last result, ' ye fight and war,' following the two ante- 
 cedents, ' ye lust and have not ', ' ye are envious and jealous and cannot 
 obtain ' : ' we thus see the words ■qSovwv o'TpaTevop.evoiv fitly associated 
 with TToXefjLoi KoX fidxai, and these words anticipating p.d)(ia-6e koX TroXe- 
 pL^lTe' (Hoskyns-Abrahall in C.E. iii. p. 314). Internal unrest {rjSoval 
 a-Tparevo/ievai iv toTs fx-iXea-iv) in its two stages — desire without posses- 
 sion (of a thing), envy and jealousy which bring us no nearer our aim 
 (of a person) — is followed by outward disturbance (fj-dx^a-de kol 
 TToXe/ietTc). Compare the stages of kin6vft.La. in i. 14, 15. If it is once 
 recognized that, whatever punctuation we adopt, ^oveiere can only be 
 taken here in its literal sense, it must be allowed that it disturbs the 
 natural order, and strikes, as it were, a false note between the TrdXe/iot 
 and fjiaxo-i of ver. 1 and the fidxea-Oe and iroXe/ieire of v. 2. 
 
 hn6v]>.iiT€ Kal o«k ^x'"-] l^oth words are used absolutely as in Rom. 
 xiii. 9 (iiriO.), Matt. xxv. 29 tov fji,7j ^xovto? /cat o Ip^ei apOiQa-eTat, air avTOv, 
 2 Cor. viii. 12 Ka.$o iav Ixy eiirpdcrSeKros, ov KaOo ovk c'^et. 
 
 (<|)6ovetT6) Kal ?t)Xovt€.] On the difference between them see Thuc. ii. 64 
 TttCra 6 fikv aTrpdyfJiwv piifji^aiT av, 6 Se Spav Ti ySovXo/z.ei'os Koi avTOi 
 ^riXwa-ei- d 8e Tis p-rj KeicrrjTai (j}0ovi^<Tei, Arist. Mhet. ii. 10 and 11 with 
 
128 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Cope's notes, Cic. Tusc. iv. 17 invidentiain esse dicunt aegrvmoniam 
 susceptam propter alterius res secundas, quae nihil noceant invidenti... 
 aeniulatio auiem est aegritudo si eo, quod concupierit, alius potiatur, ipse 
 caveat, Trench, Syn. p. 100. Both are distinguished from iTCiO. as 
 denoting a feeling towards a person rather than a thing. The word 
 ItjXo^ with its cognates embraces the two meanings, emulation^ and 
 jealousy, and it is used also of vehement desire, our ' zeal ', in a good 
 sense. For examples see Acts v. 17 and xiii. 45 iTrX-qa-Oria-av t,riKov, 
 E,om. xiii. 13, 1 Cor. iii. 3, 2 Cor. xii. 20, Gal. v. 20, and above iii. 14, 
 in all which places the R. V. has ' jealousy ' : similarly the verb. Acts 
 vii. 9 ol Trarpiap^ai ^rjXwcravTe's tov 'loicrrjcf) aTreSovro, ib. xvii. 5, 1 Cor. xiii. 
 4, Clem. Rom. ii. 4 /ii) KaraXakeiv aXh/jXaiv, jx-q t,r]Xovv. For ^^Xos in 
 good sense cf . John ii. 1 7 6 f^Xos tov o'lkov aov Karacjxiyerai fi,e. ' the zeal 
 (holy jealousy) for thy house will devour me,' Rom. x. 2 ^rjXov ®eov 
 i)(ovmv, 2 Cor. xi. 2, ih. vii. 7 tov vfiSiv ^rjXov mrip e/ioC, v. 11, Phil. iii. 
 6 Kara t^TjXo's Siuikidv t^v iKKXrjdLav ; SO ^rjXioTrji; tov ®£ov Acts xxii. 3, tov 
 vofjLov ib. xxi. 20, KaX5>v epyav Tit. ii. 14. The verb takes an ace. in the 
 sense of ' seek eagerly,' to, xapia-fjtaTa 1 Cor. xii. 31, t,r]XS) u/^as 2 Cor. xi. 
 2, Gal. iv. 17, it,-^X(iicra to ayaOSv, Sir. Ii. 18, /x,^ t,r]XovTe Oavwrov, Wisd. 
 i. 12. 
 
 liriTvxeiv.J Used absolutely Gen. xxxix. 2 {'Jaia-Tjif)) rjv avrip eKirvyxa-vtov 
 ('prosperous'); with gen. Heb. xi. 33 iirervxov iwayyeXiZv, ib. vi. 15; 
 with ace. Rom. xi. 7 tovto ovk iTreTvxev. 
 
 oiK ?x'"-] Repeated like alTeirw in i. 5, 6. It is not a further step. 
 
 SiA rh n'fi alnto-Sai 4|jias.] The subject of the infinitive is expressed 
 as in iii. 3, where see n. 
 
 3. ttlT6iT€ Kal ov XaiipAvere.] Yet in i. 5 he had said, quoting from the 
 Sermon on the Mount, alTeiTO) koI SoOrja-eTai. But the promise is not 
 unconditional. In the former passage stress is laid on the need for 
 simple faith in the worshippers, here on the right choice of things to 
 pray for. 
 
 Why is the active voice used here, and the middle immediately 
 before and afterwards ? The latter has a slight additional shade 
 of meaning, which may be illustrated by the distinction (noted hy 
 Dobree in Arnold's n. on Thuc. v. 43) between Sttvo. iiriiow 'they 
 expressed,' and Setvo, hroiovvTo 'they felt indignation' ; and by Donald- 
 son's distinction between tSeiv ' to see ' and iSeV^ai ' to behold,' ' see 
 with interest ' (' in this particular use of the middle it will generally 
 be found to imply a certain special diligence and earnestness in the 
 action ' Winer, p. 318) : cf. for this ' dynamic ' or ' subjective' middle 
 Kriiger Gr. § 52. 8 and 10. Sturz in Lex. Xen. s.v. quotes Schol. 
 Aristoph. 156 aiTovixai to avTO (tco aiTto), uicnnp ttolu) koI Troiov/jLai, 'irXi/v on 
 TO /J.€v aiTui TO d.TrX&'S t,rjTC>, to 8c aiTovfiai to /jhO' tK€(rias, Phavorin. aiToi)/*at 
 TO /jLiTo, irapaKXiJo-etos alrS) koL iKeTEwto. When aiTciTe is thus opposed to 
 aiTtio-^e, it implies using the words, without the spirit, of prayer. Other- 
 wise, where there is no special reason to emphasize this shade of meaning, 
 the active may be used to include the force of the middle, just as jnera- 
 ire^TTcj is used in the sense of ' send for,' which strictly belongs to 
 ^£Ta7r6yuiro|U.ai, I add a few examples of the combination of the two 
 
IV 2-4 NOTES 129 
 
 voices : 1 John v. 15 eav o"8a/i£v on a/covct rjfiuiv o &v aiTd/xeOa, otSafiev on 
 f-XOf'^ TO, aiTTj/xa-ra a yrriKafiev Trap' airov, and again aiTijo-ei. (act.) in v. 16, 
 Mark vi. 22-24 ainqcrov /X€ o lav ^eXij^.-.ttTrcv ry fiLrjTpL, ri ah-rjcrwfiaL ; 
 ih. X. 35, 38, John xvi. 24, 26, Justin M. Trypho 49 17 /n'^rr/p vitk^aKs/ 
 avrfj aiTijo-ao-^ai...Kai atTTjcrao-jys €7re/in/'€ k.t.A.., Hermas Fi's. iii. 10. 7 rt o-u 
 aiTEis aTTOKaA.vi/'ets ; jSXewe fj-rj ti ttoWo, aiTOv/xtvos ^\d\p'g^ (rov ttjv (rdpKa, 
 and just before Trao'a ipwrrjcn's Tair€Lvo(j>pO(rvvrjs Scirai" v^arrevo'ov ovv Koi 
 \rjfi.tjrrj b aireis, ii. Mand. ix. 4 cru ovv KaOdpurov <tov rr/v Kaphiav airo Trav- 
 T(oi/ tGv fiaTCLLa/xaTcav Tov amvoi tovtov , . . Kai airov irapa tov ILvpiov, /cai 
 an-oXrjijrri ■irdvTa...iav dSicrTa/CTcos aiT^OTjs [here I should prefer to read 
 aiT'^oTj], i6. § 7, Clem. Al. Strom, vi. § 63 p. 771 P 6 i/'aX/u.wSos atrci Xeywv 
 ...Kai TO TToXvTrupov T^s •yV(uo-eu)s airov/icvos 6 AajSiS ypd(f>€L k.t.X. 
 
 KOKws.] ' Wrongly,' as in John xviii. 23 ei xaKois eXaXr;o-a. It is 
 explained by the words which follow, and is the opposite to 1 John v. 
 14 iav n alrw/jLiOa Kara to iXt] fi,a avTOv aKovu fjfx.S)V, cf. Isa. lix. 
 2, Max. Tyr. 30 o ®e6s Xiya, el dyaOa iir' ayaOto atTcis, XdfJijBave, 
 Theophylact on Luke xviii. 42 iircl aXXa aiTOWTcs oXAa Xaii^dvofiev 
 TrpoSrjXov on ov KaXSs oiSe Tria-Tws aiTovfji.ev. This wrong prayer is 
 without submission (v. 7) : the petitioner uses it as an instrument 
 of selfishness ; he would make religion a help to serving the world, cf . 
 ,1 Tim. vi. 4, 5. 
 
 tva Iv Tots TJSovais ijicov Sairav/jo-riTe.i] Of, Luke XV., where Sa-nrav^aav- 
 Tos auTov TravTO. (v. 14) is explained by 6 KaTa(j>ayd>v (rov tov piqv fj-eTo, 
 -TTopvZv (v. 30). The object here is understood from aiTtiTc. In Acts 
 xxi. 24 8air. is followed by im, in classical writers usually by tts, but 
 also by irpos, dfuj>i, or the simple dat. ; there is however no occasion to 
 separate ev from the verb (as Alf.), cf. Thuc. vii. 48. 5 kv irepnroXioL^ 
 dvaXia-KovTa?, where Poppo cites Arist. JEih. iv. 2. 20 iv tois fiLKpoXi tw 
 Sairavri/jidTiDV ttoXXo, dvaXicTKn, Aristid. adv. Lept. p. 62 t-ijv ev TOts toiou- 
 Tots ^airdvYjv, and compares Lat. consumere in re. The extreme of this 
 Sairdvrjcrii is seen in the eTpiK^iyo-arc and ia-TraTaXi^a-aTe of v. 5. Prayer 
 for this is the opposite to prayer for daily bread, and to Matt. vi. 32, 
 33 ' seek first the kingdom of God, and all these things shall be added 
 unto you, for your Father knoweth ye have need of these things. 
 Oompare the conclusion of Juvenal's tenth Satire. 
 
 4. |ji.oixaX(8es.] Recent editors follow A. B. Sin. in omitting /^toi^oi 
 Kai, and understand the word in a figurative sense of adulterous souls, 
 in accordance with the language of the O.T., which speaks of Israel as 
 married to Jehovah (Isa. Ivii. 3-9, Jer. iii. 20, Ezek. 16 esp. vv. 32, 35, 
 38, ib ch. 23, Hosea ch. 2), and of the N.T. which speaks of the Church 
 as the Lamb's Wife (2 Cor. xi. 1 2, Eph. v. 22-32, Apoc. xix. 7, ib. 
 xxi. 9). It is less usual to find this figure used to express the 
 relation of the individual soul to God, but cf. Psa. Ixxiii. 27, Rom. 
 vii. 2—4, Clem. Hom. iii. 28 oiroTai' rj ipv)(rj v(J3 irepiov (Tiraprj, rote, ws 
 Tropvevaaa-a 7] [i,oi\evcraiJi,ivrj, viro tov Hvev/J-aTos iyKaTaXeiTreTai. The 
 insertion of ^ovxpi was natural when i{,ou)(a.Xii was understood literally, 
 but the context and especially ver. 5 are in favour of the figurative 
 ^ B has the fut. iairavi\<TeTe, as in 1 Pet. iii. 1 'tva K€pSri0'l)<TovTai, Gal. ii. 4 'Iva koto* 
 
130 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 meaning. The word, whicli is unclassical (Lob. Fhryn. p. 452), is 
 found in LXX. Mai. iii. 5 (where jnoixov's is read by some), Rom. vii. 3, 
 2 Pet. ii. 14 o<^ea\/toi /^co-Toi /iotxaA.t8os, (Plut.) Plac. Phil. I 7, p. 881 D 
 iiro ixoixov KoX ixoixa'K&o% ihoXo^ovcvOiq, and in figurative use Matt. xii. 
 39, xvi. 4 yci/Eo, irovrfpa koX /Aoti(aA.ts. 
 
 otSare.] See n. on i. 19. The reference is to our Lord's words Matt, 
 vi. 24. 
 
 ■i\ (j>iXCa Tov Kd<r|iov.] The word ^iKia is defined by Aristotle {Eth. N. 
 xiii. 2) cuvoiav /ti) XavOavova-av Iv avmreTrovOoa-i <j)i\iav eivai, involving 
 the idea of loving as well as of being loved, cf. John xv. 19 6 kouixo's av 
 TO iStov icf>iX.€i, 2 Tim. iv. 10 Arjiwi.s...aya,Tn^<raJS tov vvv aiSiva. It is not 
 found elsewhere in N.T. but. occurs in LXX. (Prov. xxvii. 5). See 
 above i. 27, 2 Pet. i. 4 iva yerrjcc^c Ocia'; KOivmvol ij>va-e(iis dTro^iryovres t^s 
 €V KO(r/i(D iv iiri6vfjuq, <^^opas. Tit. ii. 12 iVa apvrjcrdiJ.a'oi ras K0(7/AiKas iiriBv- 
 fiia^ eio:e/85s ^ijcu/acv. 
 
 ix6pa ToS 0«ov loTivy] Rom. viii. 7 to <j>p6vrjfia Trji erapKOi ^X^P°- *'' 
 ®eoi'...oi Si iv xru-pKi. ovrei ©em api<ra,i ov Svvavrai, 1 John ii. 15, Luke vi. 
 26, John xii. 43, above ii. 5, Const. Ap. ii. 6 iravra ra Toiavra ixBpa 
 TOV ®€oO inrdpx^i «ai Sai/joviov (f>iXa. 
 
 8s liv o€v PouXtiBtj 4>CXos elvai tou Koorpiov.] Eor the use of idv instead of 
 av with relatives see Winer, p. 390. It is very common in N.T., espe- 
 cially after a vowel (WH.. app. p. 173), also in LXX., as 1 Sam. xix. 3 
 a^Trj<jO[W.L iv d,ypm. ov iav ijs cKei. ..icai oi/'o/tat o ti iav r). Job xxxvii. 10 
 oiaKL^u TO v8<op o)s iav ^ovX.7]TaL, Sirac. ii. 7 ttolv o iav i7rax6y (toi Sefat, ib. 
 xiv. 11 KaOuis iav exps ev ttolu, ib. xv. 16, 17, and in the patristic writings, 
 Clem. Rom. xii. (on Rahab) o)s iav (' whenever ') ovv yevrjTai Xa^eiv atrrijv 
 vpoL's Stao-wcraTe /*e, and just below As iav yvios irapayivop.ivov'S 17/u.Ss, 
 Hermas Vis. 3. 13 ws idv tivl XvTrovp,iv(a iKO-Q ayytXia, ayaBrj tis, f.v6vi imXd- 
 Oeto tSiv irpotipwv XvirSiv, ihi § 8, ib. § 2 os idv ifdBrj, § 3 ocroi idv ipyd(TOiVTai 
 »6. § 1. Numerous examples from classical authors are cited in 
 Viger, p. 516, but they are all corrected (against the MSS.) in the later 
 editions, see Hermann in Vig. p. 833, and Kiihner on Xen. Mem. iii. 10, 
 12. It stands in the newly discovered treatise of Aristotle 'A6. UoX. 
 C. 30 Toiis 'EA.Xiji'OTa/x.tag ot idv Sta^eipt^Mcri to, ;(p->;/taTa p,ri (ruiJ,Pov\€v€iv, 
 ib. c. 31 Tois VO/X.01S 01 idv TiOuxTiv ;(p^tr6at, in Poly b. vii. 9, 6 Trpos ovorTivas 
 i)p2v idv yivrjTai ^iXi'a, Anton. 9. 23 ijtis idv Trpafis ptr) ixV ''^^ dvatjiopdv, 
 Artem. i. 78 oia ovv idv ij •^ yvvrj koI owojs St/iKup-ivr], owtws kol rj irpSfis, 
 Fabricius' text of Sext. Emp. Hyp. ii. 163, iii. 37. This use may have 
 arisen from a wish to distinguish between dv qualifying a relative, 
 and dv qualifying the optative or indicative. As the former frequently 
 introduced a quasi-hypothetical proposition, it was not unnatural to 
 mark it by the addition of a hypothetical particle, particularly as 
 this had already become nearly otiose in such phrases as ko.v d, uxj-irfp 
 dv el, while on the other hand av itself was often used as equivalent 
 to idv. BovX-qd^ (' makes it his aim ') is important, since a Demetrius 
 may have ' good report of all men as well as of the truth itself,' but 
 no man who makes worldly success his aim can be also a friend of 
 God. Compare Plut. Mor. 6 to toTs iroXXots dpio'KUV tois <TO(j)oii eortv 
 aTrapecrKeiv. 
 
IV 4, 5 NOTES 131 
 
 Ka9£oTaToi.] 'Thereby becomes,' lit. 'is constituted,' see on iii. 6. 
 
 5. i^ SoKciTc] The alternatives are, either the friendship of the world 
 is enmity with God, or the Scripture speaks without meaning. Cf. 
 Matt. xxvi. 53 ^ SoKeis ort ov 8vvafj.ai; 2 Cor. xi. 7, Rom. vi. 3. For 
 SoK. see aliove i. 26. 
 
 Kevws.] Epict. Diss. ii. 17. 6 ij k€i/Gs tjiOeyyoixiOa. ; 
 
 ■Jj 7pa^f| X^-yci.] The same phrase is used Rom. iv. 3, v. 17, x. 11, Gal. 
 iv. 30, 1 Tim. v. 18, cf. above ii. 23, and Westcott Heb. p. 474 on 
 modes of citation. For the personification see Lightfoot on Gal. iii. 8. 
 To show the incompatibility of being at the same time friends with 
 the world and friends of God, the writer refers to the mode of speaking 
 common in the O.T. where jealousy is ascribed to God. 
 
 No passage in the O.T. exactly corresponds to this. The nearest are 
 Gen. vi. 3—7, Exod. xx. 5 eyo) yap el/ju Kvptos 6 ®eos <7ov, ®£os ^lyXuriJs, 
 expanded in the Song of Moses, Deut. xxxii. (esp. vv. 11, 12, 16, 19, 
 21 Trape^^Xucrav /ie iir ov ®£u, cf. 1 Cor. X. 22), Exod. xxxiv. 14, 15, Isa. 
 Ixiii. 8—16, Zech. viii. 2 i^i^XiaKa rrjv ^litv ^rjX.ov ixiyav Koi Ovfj-ia /jLeydkio 
 i^r/XaKa avrr/v. . eTTwrpetj/ii) iiri 2ia)v Koi KaraaiajviicriO iv fn-^crw IepovcraA.-^//i. 
 Some commentators (e.g. Ewald) have thought the allusion must be to 
 some lost writing. Others (Kern, Bouman, Wiesinger, Hofmann) think 
 that the words following ^ ypa<l>r] \iyei down to 8id are parenthetic, and 
 that St. James is already referring to the quotation from Prov. iii. 34 given 
 in V. 6. But there seems no justification for such a sudden break ; and 
 we have other instances of quotations in the N.T. which remind us 
 rather of the general sense of several passages, than of the actual words 
 of any one particular passage in the O.T. : see Alf . on 1 Cor. ii. 9 (which 
 Jerome rightly takes as a paraphrase of Isa. Ixiv. 4, while Chrysostom 
 was in doubt whether it was not from some lost book) ; Eph. v. 14 prob- 
 ably a loose paraphrase from Isa. Ix. 1, 2 ; Rom. xi. 8 made up of Isa. 
 xxix. 10 (Alf., but vi. 10 Jowett) and Deut. xxix. 4 ; John vii. 38 where 
 Westcott's n. is ' the reference is not to any one isolated passage, but 
 to the general tenor of such passages as Isa. Iviii. 11, Zech. xiv. 8 taken 
 in connexion with the original image (Exod. xvii. 6, Num. xx. 11)'; 
 Matt. ii. 23 (which Alf. leaves ' as an unsolved difficulty ') ; and the 
 differing versions of the same quotation in Heb. viii. 8 f. and x. 16 f. 
 For an account of the various explanations offered here, see Wolf. 
 Cti/r. Phil. V. p. 58 foil., Heisen, p. 883-928, Pott, 329-355, Theile, 
 215-229. 
 
 xpbs <|>8($vov liriiroOci. ] 'Jealously desires,' cf. 1 Pet. ii. 2 (as new-born 
 babes) to XoyiKov aSoXov ydXa eTrnroOriuaTe, Phil. i. 8 (God is my witness) 
 o)S iTTLiroOS) TravTas vp.a's kv (nrXay^oii Xjoicttov Ii;croC, which Lightfoot 
 translates 'I yearn after,' adding 'the preposition in itself signifies 
 merely direction, but the idea of straining after the object being thereby 
 suggested, it gets to imply eagerness, cf. Diod. xvii. 101 Trapovn ph/ ov 
 Xpr]<rdf]i£voi, dirovTa Se kTniro6rj(rai.' He notices the fact that while the 
 simple TToOos, ttoOHv, &c. are not found in the N.T., the compounds 
 hrvKoduv, hrnroOla, hrnr66ri<ji<s, i-TnTToOrjTos are not uncommon. So in 
 LXX., Psa. xlii. 1 ov rpoirov eTniroOu r/ IXat^os eiri tos ■mjydt.i, ovtwi eirmoOii 
 ri ij/v)(T^ p,ov irpos ere o 0£os, Deut. xxxii. 1 1 <os deros eTrt toTs voacrol'S eTrcTro- 
 
 K 2 
 
132 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 6r]<re (' fluttereth over ') i ; rarely used in a bad sense as Sir. xxv. 20 
 yui/ai/ca ev kolWu /Jirj imTroB-^drji. With the adverbial phrase compare 
 irpos opyriv, irpo's ^iav, irpbs ijSov^i/, and SO with SiKijr, eva-e/Seiav, inrep/So- 
 X-^v, a<J36oviav, Katpov, <j)vcnv, tu^'/i', Svvafuv, v^piv, a^OnjBova, xo-pw, ^ikiav, 
 aXi^Oeiav, <j>i\ov€tKiav. We might perhaps have expected ^rjXos here 
 rather than <j>66vo'3, as we have ^TjXbm^'s and not (j)6ovep6s in Exod. xx. 
 
 5, but the former always has a bad sense in St. James, and the latter 
 is often used of the feeling towards a rival, see Eur. Alcest. 306 /liy 
 
 ■7nyrjp,rig ToiaSe fJbrjTpvLav reKVOL?, tjth KaKiiov over' ifjLOv yvvr] cf)6ov(o toTs 
 o-oio-t icdfjiol'S Tratcrt X"P" TrpocrPaXeZ, Iphig. T. 1268, Ion 1025, /rag. inc. 
 887 Dind. av ptrj ^66vu (addressed to the mother) ' be not jealous if I 
 love you less than my father,' Plato Symp. 213 D, Phaedr. 243 C. So, 
 constantly, of divine Nemesis tj^Oovo^ 6euiv or $€66£v (Ale. 1135, Orestes 
 974, Iph. A. 1097), of which Herodotus writes (vii. 10) <j>iXeeL 6 Oeo's to. 
 iirepexpvTa Travra KoXoveiv (see below v. 6). 
 
 t{) irvtOiJia 8 KaTuKiirev kv i?i|itv.] It seems best to take to Trvevfia as the 
 subject to eTTUToOu C the Spirit which he made to dwell in us jealously 
 yearns for the entire devotion of the heart'), cf. Rom. viii. 11 foil. 
 el TO TTvevfia rov iyeipavTO's 'Irjcrovv €K tS>v veKpZv ot/cet ey vfjuv...ikdPeT£ 
 TO TTvevfia viodeo'ia'S, 1 Cor. iii. 16 ro Trvevfia tov ®eov oi/cet ev vfuv, Gal. iv. 
 
 6, Eph. iv. 30, John vii. 39, xvi. 7, Ezek. xxxvi. 27 to -Trvev/jui //.ov Sajo-u 
 iv v/jiiv, Isa. Ixiii. 11 ttov eerriv o Oels iv avToi's to Trvevfia to ayiov ; Psa. 
 li. 11, 12, De Akatorihus 3 nolite contristare spiritum sanctum qui 
 in vobis est et nolite exstinguere lumen quod in vobis eilulsit, 
 Hermas SiTn. 5. 6 § 5 to ■Trvev/j.a to o,yiov...KaTiaKi,(Tev 6 ©cos ets 
 (rapica. r/v rfPovXero (Jesus), ib. 7, Mand. 3. 1 aXriBuav a.ya.Tra...iva to 
 TTvevfia 6 ©€05 KaTWKicrev iv rg aapKi TavTTj dXyjOk'S evpedfj. ..Koi ovt<j)^ So^aa- 
 6ij<r£Tat 6 Kvptos o Iv o"ot KaTOiKU)v, ib. 5. 2 iav p.aKp66vjj,o<i eoy/, to Trvevfia 
 TO ayiov TO KaToiKovv 'iv croi Ka6a,pov tVTat fir) sTno'KOTOvfievov vtto €T€pov 
 TTOvqpov TFveup.aTO's. . .ia.v 8e ofu;!^oXi'a Tis irpocriXdrj, evStis to TrreCjua to dyiov 
 Tpv^epbv ov^ o-TcvoxwpetTat K.T.X., Test. Jos. X., Benj. vi. If on the other 
 hand we make God or the Scripture the subject and to irveviJia the object 
 of iTTuroOu we may compare Eccl. xii. 12, Isa. xlii. 5, Ivii. 16. If we 
 read /caTMKjyo-ev with the majority of MSS. and versions, the sense will 
 remain practically unaltered : ' the Spirit which has taken up his abode 
 in us jealously yearns, &o.' 
 
 The interpretation given above is that of Cajetan, Corn, a Lap. 
 Iputatisne, Christiani, frustra in Scriptura Deum voeari zelotypii/m 
 vestri, osorem mundi illiqiie quasi invidentem possessionem cordis vestri ?), 
 Schneckenburger, Kern, Wiesinger, Alford, Hofmann, Ewald, Bruckner, 
 Erdmann, Schegg, Beyschlag : with whom agree (so far as irpos <l)66vov 
 is concerned) Theophylact, Euthymius, Methodius, Oecumenius, Heisen, 
 Gebser, Theile, Winer. It is in my opinion the only interpretation 
 which is alike in harmony with the context and permissible according 
 to the usage of the Greek language ; but as some readers may find a 
 
 ' [The same Hebrew word is used of the Spirit in Gen. i. 2, where the like 
 rendering would give vytviia fleoC ^iriiroeci. This might be applied to men with 
 reference to the Spirit and the water of baptism. C.T.] 
 
 " Compare irphs <p66yov above. 
 
IV 5 NOTES 133 
 
 difficulty in the word tf>66voi, it may be well to give here a brief con- 
 spectus of the other explanations which have been proposed, 
 
 Bede says on the words ' Ad invidiam concupiscit sjnritus qui habitat 
 in vobis ? ' Inteiyogative per increpationern legendum est, quasi dioeret, 
 ' numquid Spiritus gratiae quo significati estis . . .hoc concupiscit ut in- 
 videatis alterutrum ? Non utique bonus spiritus invidiae vitiuni in vobis 
 sed malus operatur.' He then mentions that others read it without a 
 question in the sense : adversus invidiam concupiscit, hoc est, invidiae 
 morbum debellari atque a vestris mentibus extirpa/ri desiderat. Alii de 
 spiritu hominis dictum, intelligunt, ut sit sensus 'nolite concupiscere, 
 nolit", mundi hujus amicitiis adhaerere, quia spiritus mentis vestrae, dum 
 terrena concupiscit, ad invidiam usque concupiscit, dum ea quae ipsi 
 acquirer e concupiscitis alios invidetis habere.' 
 
 Cyril ap. Theophyl. d <ji66v(a SiajSdXoi; Odvaros eltrrjXOev e« rbv k6(tix,ov, 
 Kol et KaTWKrjo-ev els tov e<T<a rjjxSiiv avOpwirov o XpwTTOS Kara rets ypatpai, oia 
 TOVTO KariDKrj(T€V Lva TOV Ik tov <f>66vov wpoerytvo/uevov OavaTOV KaTapyrj<rrj . . . 
 OTL ok iimroO-^cro.'S ■^/x.S.'S 6 ®eos Ka,TU>Kr](ja' iv rj/uv 'Ho"aias eS^Awcrfv ehroiv 
 OVK ayyeXos, ov irpeo-ySvs, aXk' awTOS 6 ©eos icrwcrev ■^/iSs. 
 
 Severianus (in Cramer's Catena) : iiniroOei fx.ev Koi e^icrat to irvf.vft.a 
 TO iv Tjiuv Tq's Trpbs ®ebv oiKewrrjTos, T-ijv tov Koa/iov tftiXcav aTrocrTpecfto/jiivov, 
 avTos oe jxu^ova St'Soxrt X^P'" ('''¥ ^^'"? yeyovoTi t^s koo'/jlik^'s t.onji). 
 
 Theophylact : ov yap kevws ijtoi ytiaratMS, ■^ irpos <j>66vov, fj ypa<j>rj to. 
 aixtjxava r/fuv Siayopevei, dXX' iirnroOovrra ttjv Sio, irapaKXiycrecos avT^s 
 iyKaTOiKit,op.evqv r/fuv )(dpiv. 
 
 Oecumenius has the same, with a fuller explanation : rj SoKeirc on 
 KivSiq rj ypatfiT] Xeyet fj Trpbs (l>66vov ; ov8kv tovtwv' dX\ iTmroOei rjTOt eirt- 
 • ^r/reL tyjv Sio. t^s TrapaKX-qtreui^ auT^s lyKaToiKicrOeicrav vfuv ^dpiv. 
 
 Euthym. Zig. (also in Cramer's Catena) : rj SoKcTre k.t.X. ctvTt tov, -^ 
 vo/jLi^eTC OTL ixaTaiwi rj ypa<j>rj <j>6ovovcra r)plv \iyu...ov /iao'Kaivei, (j>r](TLV, rj 
 ypa(f>y, TO yap rrveupM to XaXrjirav avT-qv, o koI KaTiiKwev ^ iv rj/juv 6 ©cos Kat 
 TlaTr/p, iTrnroOev Trjv cnoTT^piav Tu>v rjixerip(ov ij/v^Zv Kai fjuec^ova tSiv Kara 
 ®€0V fjix,!i>v rrpd^ewv 8iS<i)crt to. )(api<T/ji.aTa. 
 
 JVTethodius of Patara (in Matthaei's Scholia) : rj irapa tov ©eov h/cnra- 
 peicra Trj <^vcret voepa Swa/iis (f>6ov€l rg Trapa tov avTiKeijJt^fvov vnro;SaAXo/J.evTj 
 Kal Trpos rjSovas i/x5s xai rrdOrj KaTaa~vpov<7rj (so Gebser for KaTaa-vpu) Kai 
 PovXiTai fjLova ■fj/xa.'S to. Kaka ivepyeiv. 
 
 The views of later commentators may be more briefly classified in 
 reference (1) to the construction of Trpos (jidovov, (2) to the meaning of 
 ■TT/Dos K^dovov, (3) to the subject of imTroQu. 
 
 (1) It will have been noticed that Theophylact and others put a stop 
 after wpos <l>66vov, connecting it with Xeyet and not with iTrnro&u, and so 
 we read in A and other MSS. Gebser agrees, translating ' Think ye 
 that the Scripture speaks without reason, enviously ? ' and regards the 
 following words as parenthetic. Du Mont and Heumont {ap. Wolf. 
 p. 59) translate 'Think ye the Scripture speaks against envy to no 
 purpose?' For the view of Michaelis see below (2, d). The decisive 
 objection to these, as to all other interpretations except that which I 
 have given above, is that they do not carry on the thought of the pre- 
 1 The claiise in brackets is supplied by Euth. Zig. ^ So I read for KwripKriasv. 
 
134 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 ceding verse. Moreover such a division spoils both sentences : and all 
 commentators are now agreed that Trpos 4>^6vov can only be taken with 
 
 (2) Scarcely less unanimous is the opinion of modern scholars that 
 Theophylact, Oecumenius and Euthymius were right in taking irpos <^66vov 
 as equivalent to <l>6ovipm. Others have understood Trpds to mean 'against,' 
 (a) as Cyril above and the second interpreter in Bede, with Luther, 
 ]3engel, Pott, Stier and Lange in later times. But ir/aos can only mean 
 ' against ' when joined with a word which implies hostility : it cannot 
 have this force when joined with a word which implies strong affection 
 like liTiTTodei.^ (6) Others again understand ■n-pos to mean ' towards ' or 
 ' with a view to,' as Bede above, ' Does the Spirit desire that you should 
 be envious one of another ? ' Calvin ' Is the Spirit of God disposed to 
 envy?' so too Bloomfield: Beza and Estius translate ' spiritus humanus 
 ad invidiam proclivis : Bouman after Wolf and Witsius ' Does the Spirit 
 move you to envy % ' As to this interpretation, while it may be granted 
 that iTTiiroOel is occasionally followed by Trpbs in Hellenistic writers (as 
 in Psa. xlii. 1 quoted above), this is only allowable in describing warm 
 affection towards a person, never in speaking of a tendency to a certain 
 state of mind. Still less can iirnroOei have the causative force assigned 
 to it by Wolf. 
 
 (c) Others take Trpos to mean ' up to,' Lat. tisque, as the third inter- 
 preter in Bede quoted above, and von Soden ' bis zur Eifersucht Hebt 
 er den Geist.' Practically this is much the same as the correct interpreta- 
 tion, but the former is without precedent, while the latter is in accord- 
 ance with analogy, and flows naturally from the ordinary use of Trpos 
 to express 'in conformity with.' 
 
 (d) Michaelis and Semler translate ' in reference to envy,' connecting 
 it with kiyei. This interpretation is open to the objections stated 
 under (1). 
 
 (3) Bede, Cyril, Methodius and Euthymius rightly regard to Ttvevpa 
 (the Divine Spirit) as the subject of iiniroOu. Others make rj ypa^jtri the 
 subject, as Theophylact, Oecumenius, and in later times Gebser and 
 Theile {a). Others, as Kern and Wiesinger, take God to be the 
 subject understood and to irveufm (the human spirit) the object (6). 
 Practically there is not much difference between these interpretations 
 and that which I regard as the right one. Of the two (6) has far more 
 
 1 Resell however thinks this po.ssible. He regards these words as a quotation 
 from a lost Hebrew gospel (p. 256), of which he finds another rendering in Gal. v. 17 
 ri trvevfta {iirieviie!) Karh ttjs trapicSs. Dr. Taylor notes that in Psa. cxix. 174 the 
 Hebrew word translated 'I have longed' (A.V.) is variously rendered lneT6Bnaa 
 (LXX. ) and iirepeireSiiJt.iiiTa (Symm.) He further notes that in ver. 20, where the LXX. 
 has i'ire'n66'i)ffev 7} ^vx'h f^ov rov iTTiOvfirjffat rci Kplfiard irou, the Hebrew construction 
 would be more literally rendered eis iiriSvinlav, and that the Hebr. DNrii there 
 translated itn0. and used in a good sense, is translated by $S€hiff<Tonm in Amos vi. 8 
 (j35. iraffav t^v S0piv 'laKtip). He suggests too that in an original Hebrew phrase to 
 the effect 'the Spirit which he made to dwell in this fiesh' the word translated 'in' 
 (3) might also be translated 'against,' as where it is used after a verb meaning to 
 envy in Gen. xxx. 1, Numb. v. 14 Psa. xxxvii. 1, Ixxiii. 3. Still this leaves 
 several steps wanting before we could accept Eesch's view. 
 
IV 5-7 NOTES 135 
 
 claim to consideration tlian (a). A third view (c) which makes the 
 human spirit the subject seems to me entirely to destroy the meaning 
 of the passage. 
 
 6. iiEi^ova Sk tlSmriv x^pw.] More, in consequence of this jealous affec- 
 tion, which shows itself not in the abandonment of the unfaithful 
 spouse, but in further bounteousness ; of. Isa. liv. 7, 8 ' for a small 
 moment have I forsaken thee, but with great mercies will I gather thee,' 
 &c., ix. 6, 7, on the effect of the Divine 'jealousy,' Zech. i. 14, viii. 2, 
 where the declaration of God's jealousy of Zion is followed by 
 promises of her future glory. The absolute self-surrender demanded 
 of the Christian is rewarded by richer supplies of divine grace than he 
 could otherwise receive. For the pregnant use of fiei^mv of. above iii. 1. 
 
 Sib X^7».] The subject understood is probably God, as above i. 12 
 iTrriyyeiX.aTo, and Eph. iv. 8, v. 14, where the same phrase occurs ; others 
 take it as 77 ypa<f>7j, cf. above v«r. 5. 
 
 o 0ebs ■6'ir«pt|(|)dvoi.s dvTiT(i<rcr«Toi. raireivois SJ StSoicriv x^p^v. J Cited in the 
 same form 1 Pet. v. -5. The LXX. (Prov. iii. 34) has Kvpios for ©eds. 
 Clement of Rome (I. 30), who also has ©cos, has probably borrowed the 
 quotation from St. James, as his next sentence reminds us of our epistle, 
 KaTaXaA.tas iroppia laurovs iroiowres, epyoK ScKeuovfi^voi Koi ov \dyois. Eor 
 avriT. ' sets himself against ' see Acts xviii. 6, Rom. xiii. 2. For 
 VTTiprjt^. ' conspicuous beyond others,' ' outshining them,' and so ' proud,' 
 ' haughty,' -^ see Sirac. x. 7 iLvrTyr-q ivavri Kvpiov koI avOpdyn-wv vireprjtjiavia, 
 ih. V. 12 apx^ inrepritjiavia'S avOpwirov a<jiLcrTafji,evov airo Tov JUvpiov, 
 Koi diro TOV iron^aravro^ airbv aTricTTr] r) KapSia, avrov, v. 18 ovk tKTUTTai 
 avflpctfTTots vir€pr]<j>avCa, Psalm. Sol. ii. 25, iv. 28, where it is used of 
 de6ant wickedness. In St. Peter the quotation simply enforces 
 an exhortation to humility, ' be humble, for grace follows ' : here 
 we have to suppose vTre.prj<^avCa ('pride of life,' 1 John i. 16) 
 identified with ij <^tA.ta iroC k6<tiji.ov in v., 4 ; see the passage just 
 quoted from Sirac. x. 12. The friend of the world is proud because 
 he makes himself his own centre, disowning his dependence upon God, 
 see Trench Syn. p. 113 foil., Cheyne on Isaiah ii. 12. 
 
 7. {iiroT47i)Te.] A favourite word with St. Peter. 
 
 ovrCoTUTe Sk t^ SiaPtSXi;).] Opposed first to the previous clause, and 
 then the addition of koI ^evfei-ai suggests a new contrast to the clause 
 which follows. Compare the parallel passage in 1 Pet. v. 8, 9, also Eph. 
 vi. 11, 12. The devil is the ap^mv tov Koa-fwv tovtov (above ver. 4, John 
 xiv. 30), he inspires hatred and discord (above iii. 15, John viii. 44), the 
 proud fall into his condemnation (above ver. 6, 1 Tim. iii. 6). 
 
 Kol iJ>€v|ETai d(|>' ijifflv.] The imperative followed by koL is an energetic 
 form of the conditional sentence, see A. Buttmann, p. 196, and compare 
 John ii. 19 Xuo-are tov vaov kol eyepfl avTov, also below w. 8, 10. The 
 promise gives an answer to those who might plead in excuse the power 
 of the tempter, as others pleaded the force of circumstances ordained 
 by God (above i. 13). Christ's temptation is an example of submission 
 to God's appointment, followed by the flight of the devil. We find a 
 
 ^ It seems to he derived from the adjectival form Sirepos and ijialva like 4\a(l>Ti$6Kos 
 from iKa<pos and PiWa. 
 
136 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 i-eminiscence of this verse in Hermas Ma/ad. xii. 5 ov Swarat (o Sia- 
 /8oA.os) KaraSwao-Teucii/ Tail' SovXujv toB ®eoC rS>v ef oAiys KapSiai ikirc^ovTiuv 
 €7r' auTOV. Swarai o StaySoXog dvTiTraAaitrai, KaTairaXartrat oe ov ovvarai. iav 
 ovv o.vTL(TTaOrJT€ avT<3, viKrjOtli (jtev^iTai, foil., t6. xii. 2, 4, 6, vii. 2, 3, 
 Testam. Nephth. 8 cav ipyd^rjo-Oe to KaXov..6 Sia/SoXos ipev^erai a.<j> v/jlSiv, 
 Test. Iss. 7 ravTa iroi7;<raT€ Kal Trav Trvev/xa BtXiap (ftev^eraL, T. Benj. 5. 
 T. Dan. 5. 
 
 8. e'yyfcaTe tw 0e$ Kal lY-yfo-ci -uptv.] Cf . Psa. cxlv. 1 8 cyyis Kvpios Tracrt 
 ToTs eTTiKoXoD/ieVois avTov iv aXrjOeia, Lsa,. xxix. 13 (quoted in Matt. xv. 8), 
 Hos. xii. 6 cyyife Trpos Tor ©eov crou 8ta iravTos, Deut. iv. 7 irotov £6'vos 
 jueya cS ottij/ avT<3 ®e6s eyyC^wv us Kijptos 6 ©eos 7)fJi.5ni ; on whicll PMlo 
 commenting says (M. 1. p. 445) the greatness of a nation consists in to tS 
 ®€(3 crvveyyiteiv rj <S ©eps cruvcyyi^et, 2 Chron. xv. 2, lsa. lix. 2, Zech. i. 3, 
 Mai. iii. 7. The phrase was first used of the, priestly office Exod. xix. 
 22, Ezek. xliv. 13, then of all spiritual worship, as in Heb. iv. 16, vii. 
 19 (where see Alf.). 
 
 KaflapCo-aTE x«^P»s.] In the literal sense this was an ordinary ritual 
 observance, see Mark vii. 3, Exod. xxx. 19-21 (when the priests go 
 into the tabernacle they shall wash their hands and their feet that they 
 die not), ib. xl. 30 foil., Lev. xvi. i: then used of moral purity Psa. 
 xxvi. 6, Job xxii. 30, lsa. i. 16, Jer. iv. 14, 1 Tim. ii. 8, 1 John iii. 3. 
 The same change from ceremonial to moral purity is found in the Lat. 
 castus, cf. Cic. iV^.Z). I. 3, II. 71. Purifying before the Passover was 
 general (John xi. 55), see also Acts xxi. 24, xxiv. 16, and Heb. x. 22 (of 
 baptism) irpotfepp^d/tc^a ippavTur/JLevoi ras KapSias airo crrvciSiJcrews Trovrjpas 
 Kal XeXoxj/iieVoi to crto^a vSan KaOapZ, Matt, xxvii. 4 (of Pilate). Philo M. 
 2. p. 406 explains ^iipa^ in the following words, Xoyou phr a-Top-a crvp-^o- 
 Xov, KapSia Si /3ovX.evp.aT0)v, Trpd^eiov Sk ^(eipts, ib, M. 1. p. 214. Thus it 
 suits with the word djuaprwXos, which is used of open, notorious sinners 
 in the Gospels and in 1 Tim. i. 9 Sifcauo vopLos ov KUTai, avop.oL's hi...Kal 
 d/j,apTa)Xots K.T.k., 1 Pet. iv. 18, Jude 15. Kadapi^io found in Hellenistic 
 writers instead of classical Kadaipto (cf. Westcott Heb. p. 346 f.) is less 
 technical than dyvifco, which is also unclassical. 
 
 a-yvCo-are KapSCas 8£i|/uxoi.] This and the preceding clause are com- 
 bined in Psa. xxiv. 4, Ixxiii. 13. The verb dyvt'^wand the cognate dyvicr- 
 p.oi are generally used of ceremonial purification ; but figuratively, as 
 here, in 1 Pet. i. 22 i-cts \j/V)(a's vp.!ov r/yviKore^ iv Trj viraKoy -rijs dXij^eias 
 and 1 John iii. 3. For Siif/. see above i. 8 and compare Hos. x. 2 lp,fpia-av 
 KapSia? avTu>v : here its full sense comes out as applied to one divided 
 between God and the world, cf. Herm. Mand. ix. 7 KaOdpurov ttjv Kaphiav 
 crou diro T^s Suj/vxias, For the anarthrous KapSt'as see Essay on Grammar. 
 
 9. TaXaiirwp^craTs.] The word, which only occurs here in N.T,, is 
 quite classical; it is regularly used of undergoing hardship, of. Thuc. ii. 
 101 ^ o-TpaTid crtTov T£ ovk cT^iV Kal vTro ^ei/uSj/os craXaiirwpct, Jer. iv. 13 
 ouai rip,2v on TaX.aiirmpovp.ev, V. 20 T€TaXai7r<ipijK€ irSo-a ■^ y^ ('is spoiled '), 
 Micah ii. 4 TaXaiirmpiq, eraXav7r(i>pr)(Tap.fv (' we be utterly spoiled ') ; so 
 TaXaiirwpia below V. 1. In Isa. xxxiii. 1 it has a transitive force 'to 
 afflict another.' This is perhaps the only place in which the imperative 
 is used, and I think it is best understood of voluntary abstinence from 
 
IV 7-11 NOTES 137 
 
 comforts and luxuries (the Sairavav of iv. 3, rpvipav of v. 5) ; so Erasmus, 
 Grotius {affligite ipsos vosmet jejuniis et aliis corporis o-KXrjpayioyiais), 
 Com. a Lap. and the Romanists generally. On the other hand Alf., 
 following Huther as usual, translates ' be wretched in your minds from 
 a sense of your sinfulness'; but if we consider that St. James himself 
 was noted for his asceticism, that St. Paul bids Timothy KaKoiraOrjcrov 
 <5)s KoXos (TTpanwrrjs XpiiTTOv 'Iiyo-oS (2 Tim. ii. 3, 4, 5), and himself kept 
 his body in subjection (1 Cor. ix. 27) ; that fasting, sackcloth and ashes 
 were ordinary accompaniments of repentance (Luke x. 13, Dan. ix. 3, 
 Joel i. 13, 14, Jer. iv. 8, Isa. xxii. 12, cf. Psa. xxxv. 13, 14) ; lastly that 
 our Lord's charge to those who would follow him was to deny them- 
 selves and take up their cross, we shall see no difficulty in adhering to 
 the usual meaning of the word. 
 
 ■ir6v8<i<roT« Kal KXaio-art.] ' Mourn and weep,' coupled in Luke vi. 25 
 oval vfjlv 01 yiKtavTi's vvV, on irevdria-fTe kol Kkavcrere, Mark xvi. 10. This 
 is a call to the godly sorrow spoken of 2 Cor. vii. 10 and Matt. v. 4. 
 
 6 Y^Xois 4|ifflv els ir^Oos |j.«Ta<rTpa<j)<)Ta),] For the thought cf. Eccles. ii. 
 2, vii. 2-6, Tobit ii. 6, Sirac. xxi. 20, xxvii. 13, Luke vi. 21, 25 ; and 
 for the expression Joel ii. 28 o ■^Xios /xfrao-Tpai^'^oreTai eis o-kotos, 1 Mace. 
 ix. 41 /i£Te<rTpa<^ij 6 ya/xos ets irei/^os koX rj (jiiovij /jlovctlkSiv ets Bprjvov. The 
 reading of B neTaTpavi^TO) is less vigorous, and the verb does not occur 
 at all in the N.T., nor, I think, in this construction elsewhere. 
 
 Ka'Hjctjciav.] Classical, only found here in the Bible. It describes the 
 condition of one with eyes cast down like the publican in Luke xviii. 
 13, cf. Philo M. 2. p. 331 X.virov/J.iviav o^^oXyiioi (rwvoiai yejiioDO-i kol Karrj- 
 
 10. Tairciv(S6T|Te evciiriov KupCow.] Cf, i. 9, 1 Pet. V. 6 TaTr€ivu>6yjTe vtto 
 Tffv KparauLV 'xupa tov ©eoS, iva vfnai vi/fcooTj hf Kaipto iirUTKOir^'S, Matt, xxiii. 
 12, Luke xiv. 11, 1 Sam. ii. 7, 8, Job xxii. 28, 2*9, Prov. xxix. 23, Ezra 
 xvii. 24, Isa. Ivii. 15, Sirac. ii. 17 oi <^oj8ov//.ei'Ot Kupiov eroipAxTomcri KapSla^ 
 avrHv Kai h/unriov avrov Taireivwcrovcn Tots ij/v)^a.s avTiov. The adv. cvanrtov 
 is Hellenistic, it has much the same sense as irapa ®£<3 in i. 27, cf. 
 Luke i. 6 StKatoi ev. ®eov, 1 Cor. i. 29, 2 Cor. i. 2, &c. The adj. evcoTrtos 
 is found in Theocr. xxii. 152. For the use of the passive aorist with 
 middle sense see Winer, p. 327. 
 
 Kal i\|/(&(rei {ifids.] Sums up the preceding promises. 
 
 11. (ji^i KaTaXoXeCTc dXX^Xuv.] Returns to the topic of i. 26, ii. 12, iii. 
 1-10, 14 : cf. 1 Pet. ii. 1 airoOefji,ei/oi irao-as KaraAaXias, ib. ver. 12, iii. 16, 
 2 Cor. xii. 20, Rom. i. 30 /caraXaXos, ib. xiv. 3-10, 13, Matt. vii. 1, Psa. 
 xlix. 20 Kara, tov d8eX<^oi! (rov KaTaXaXets, ib. ci. 5, ib. Ixxviii. 19 n. ®eov, 
 Hermas Momd. ii. 2 irpSurov fih> /atjSevos kotoXoXci /xijSe ^Secos aKove Kara- 
 XaXovvTos ..■JTOVT^pa "^ KaraXaXid, aKarao'TaTOV Sat/idviov ianv, jtiiySeTTOTe 
 eiprjvevov, Clem. Rom. ii. 4 /xij KaToXaXetv dXX^Xojv, Barn. 20 cu^^epeis iv 
 KaraXaXta, Test. Gad. 3 (o fiio'lov) tu KaropOowTi <^6ova, KaTaXaXiav doTra- 
 tfrai. Field, Ot. Norv., quotes the definition KardXaXoi : ol Sta^oXais 
 Kara rSsv avovrtav dScGs Ke^rj/ievoi. The word is not used by classical 
 writers. This evil-speaking flows from the pride condemned in v. 16 
 and is an expression of the hate denounced in vv. 1, 2. It is shown 
 in what follows to imply a usurpation of God's right to judge. 
 
138 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 A8€\<|)oC.] The three-fold repetition of the word n this sentence is in 
 part required by the different constructions of KaTa\aXu> and Kpivto, like 
 the fourfold repetition of vo/ios, but it also adds weight to the writer's 
 appeal to their feeling of brotherhood. The appeal is heightened in 
 the third case by the addition of tov dS. avrov, not simply a, but his, 
 brother. 
 
 KaToXaXet vi5|jiou KaV xplvti v(!(jiov.] Whoever deliberately breaks a law 
 and does not repent of it, thereby speaks against it and treats it as a 
 bad law, since it is the essence of a law to require obedience, and he 
 who refuses obedience virtually says it ought not to be law. Thus he who 
 speaks against a brother virtually speaks against the law of brotherhood. 
 The law which the writer has in mind is the royal law spoken of in ii. 
 8, to which reference is made by the word TrXiyo-tW in v. 12. The 
 offence against man is also an offence against God, cf. above iii. 9, Matt. 
 XXV. 42-45, 1 John iv. 20, Prov. xvii. 5. The phrase ' speaks against 
 the law' is evidently adapted to the special context, cf. i. iriXeiov and 
 TeXeios, V. 11 iLapavQ-qderai, W. 12-14 ireipd^oi, 15 and 18 dTrCKUijo-ev, iv. 
 1 arTparfvofLo/imi after TrdA,€ju.ot. 
 
 ouK tl Troi.T|T*|s v(5|jiov.] = iToiTjT^s \6yov In i. 22, see Rom. ii. 13, 1 Mace, 
 ii. 67. The critical attitude is adverse to the dutiful performance of 
 the law. It is only by doing the will of God, so far as it is known to 
 us, that we learn to understand the reasons of it, John vii. 17. 
 
 dXXa KpiTyjs.] Cf. Clem. Horn. xii. 26 foil. ' If you seek to benefit the 
 good only and not the bad, you undertake to perform the office of a 
 judge {KpiTov TO epyov) and not of kindness,' &c.. Const. Apost. ii. 36 
 iav KpLVYj's TOV dSeXc^ov, Kpirrjs iyivov, /iijScvos ere irpo)(£ipurafi€vov, rots yap 
 lep€va^tv iTrerpa/Trq Kplveiv [jlovols- 
 
 ets ?crTiv vo(jio9«Ti)s.] One who criticises the law is really proposing to 
 enact a better law ; but there is only one lawgiver and judge (John 
 V. 22, 1 Cor. iv. 3-5, Taylor J. F. p. 83), viz. he who is Lord of life 
 and death, i.e. whose sentence takes effect ; just as he is the ruler who 
 exercises the right of sovereignty (Matt. xxii. 21). The noun vofioO. 
 does not occur elsewhere in N.T., though both voix,o6eriia and vojuoflccria 
 are found. 
 
 12. 6 Swd|j[,£vos o-wo-ai koI diroXeo-at.] Cf. Deut. xxxii. 39, Psa. Ixviii. 
 20, 1 Sam. ii. 6, 2 Kings v. 7, Matt. x. 28 <^o/3^6»;t€ fx.dX\ov tov 
 8wa/*ei/ov Kol ^yyjv koX crS/ia airoKicrai iv yeevvr), Luke vi. 9 t^co-ri rots 
 a-a/B/Saa-LV ij/V)(r]V crZcrai rj aTToXecai ; John xix. 1 e^ovtrtav i)(o> crravpmo'ai 
 (TE Kol mroXvcrai ere, Hermas Sim. ix. 23. 4 et 6 ®€os kol o Kvptos r/p-Siv, 
 6 irdvTMV Kvpievbiv koI e)((i>v Trdcrr/s t^s /crtcTEtos avTov ttjv i^ova-iav, ov pi.vy)(Ti- 
 KttKci dAA' tAecos ytVerai, avOputiro^ (f>6apTos lav kol irXi^pTjs d/iapTiulv dvOpwirt^ 
 pivrjcriKaKei, d)s Swdfievos diroXecrai 17 cruio-at avroi'; for aSxrai, see i. 21, 
 ii. 14. 
 
 <ri Sk tCs ety] How weak and incompetent ! cf. Rom. xiv. 4 (tv tli el 
 6 Kpivaiv dWoTpiov olKirrjv ; ih. ver. 10, Acts xix. 15, John viii. 53 riva 
 (TiovTov TToiels; see above iii. 5 r/XiKov. 
 
 13. a^e vBv 01 X^'yovres.] For the inter jectional use of aye cf. Jud. 
 xix. 6, 2 Kings iv. 24 ; for its use with a plural see below v. 1, Hom. 
 II. i. 62 dAA' aye 8j; Tiva ii,a.vTiv epeio//.£V, Xen. Apol. 14 aye 8^ dKowcrare 
 
IV 11-13 NOTES 139 
 
 KoX aXka, similarly age in Latin, of which Servius says (on Aen. ii. 707) 
 ' age ' non est modo verbum imperantis sed adverhium horta/ntis, adeo lit 
 plerumque ' agefacite' dicamus et singula/rem numerum copulemus plurali. 
 In like manner we have Matt. xxvi. 65 iSe vvv ^KouVare, Arist. Ach. 318 
 eiTre ^oi ti <^eiSd/tEcrda rStv \W(ov S STj/norai ; Pax 385 ehri fioi Tt ■jrd.cT)^eT' 
 SvSpes; Plat. Gorg. 455 B c^epe 8^ tSiDfiev, Xen. ilfeni. iii. 4. 7 Mi 8^ cfera- 
 (r<ofi,€v. It is usually followed by an imperative or an interrogative, as 
 in Cyrop. ii. 1. 6 aye h-q, r^s (T^s 8vvaj«,€0)s Ti <^jjs irX'^^os eivai; and in the 
 plural as Xen. Anah. v. 4. 9 ayere 8^, ri yjixJutv 8e^creo-6e; Here it would 
 seem that the following parenthesis has destroyed the construction and 
 changed the question ovk oiSare ort a,T/tis cortv ij tfarj vfiSiv into the state- 
 ment ovK eTTioTacrfle to t^s avpiov k.t.\. 
 
 a-f\\i.epov '(\ afipiov.] The reading ■^ of Sin. B. &c. gives a better sense 
 than Kttt, which occurs in the same phrase Luke xii. 28, xiii. 32, 33 ; so 
 ;^^es KOI cr-qfjiepov Heb. xiii. 8. For the warning cf. Luke xii. 16 foil., 
 Prov. xxvii. 1 /xr] Kav)(!o to. ets avpiov, ov yap yivtuo-jccts ti T£^£Tat ij eirioijera. 
 Sir. xi. 16, 17, Philo M. 1. p. 132 o yeijirdvos c^ijo-t- (nrip/jLara ySoXov/iat, 
 xjyvTevcro), av^crti to. tfyvra, Kapirovs ravra oi(Tei...eXT e^ai<pvt)<s (j>X6i 77 t,dXri 
 7) €iro/i/3ptai OTJve^^eis SieijiOeipav iraVTa' ecm Se ore... 6 ravra Xoytcra/Aevos 
 OVK wvaro oAAo. irpowTriOave, Seneca Ep. 101 esp. § 4 qim/m stidtv/m, est 
 aetatem disponere ne crastini quidem dondnv/m, Sen. Thyestes 619 nemo 
 ta/m divos habuit fa/oentes crastinwm ut possit sibi polliceri. Soph. Oed. 
 G. 566 IfotS aVT]p wv, X'tiTi TTji es avpiov ovSey irXiov jJiOi aoi) //.ereorrtv 
 ■^fiepai;. Wetst. quotes many similar passages, among them one from 
 a Jewish story of R. Simeon ben Chal. hearing from the angel of death 
 that his office was to slay those who boasted of the things they were 
 about to do. 
 
 iropcvo-(S|jL«8a els T^vSe ri\v ir6\iv.] 'We will go to this city,' pointing 
 it out on the map. So rd8£ in Aristotle gets the force of the particidar 
 as opposed to the general. Erdmann and Beyschlag, reading Kai above, 
 wrongly translate 'we will journey for two days.' The dispersion of 
 the Jews, which gave them connexions all over the world and let them 
 know at once of any new opening for trade, led to their being con- 
 stantly on the move. Thus we read of Aquila and Priscilla at Rome 
 and at Corinth (Acts xviii. 1, 2), at Ephesus {ib. v. 18), again at Rome 
 (Rom. xvi. 3) and at Ephesus (2 Tim. iv. 19), see above i. 11 iv rats 
 irop€tats. [See Zahn, Weltverkehr vmd Kirche, Hanov. 1877. S.] 
 
 iroi'^o-0|iev IkeI evtaurov.] Cf. Acts XX. 3 Trot^o-as p.rjva'i rpeis, ib. XV. 33, 
 xviii. 23, Prov. xiii. 23 8i/catot Trotijo-ovo-iv ev TrXovru err] TroAAa. The 
 usage appears to be confined to later Greek, see Shilleto on Dem, F.L. 
 p. 392, Vorst, p. 158 foil. There is a similar phrase in Latin, cf. Sen. 
 Ep. 66. 4 qua/mms paucissimos una fecerwrms dies, tamen multi nobis 
 sermoTiesfv^runt. 
 
 l|>,iropEv(r<S|i£Oa.] Elsewhere in N.T. only in 2 Pet. ii. 3, where it has 
 a transitive force. , In LXX. (Gen. xxxiv. 10) and in profane authors 
 it is intransitive as here. 
 
 K£pS^o-o|i.(v.] No other example of this form of the future is cited. 
 The Attic is KepSavZ, with Aor. eK€p8ava, Ion. and late Att. KcpS^o-o/iat, 
 Aor. iKepStjo-a (the latter occurs often in N.T.). R. and P. give 
 
140 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 aTToicepS^cra) as fut. of the compound. The pass. fut. KepSrjB-^a-ofmi occurs 
 in 1 Pet. iii. 2. Dr. Plummer calls attention to the repeated KaC 
 separating ' the different items of the plan, which are rehearsed thus 
 one by one with manifest satisfaction.' 
 
 14. otrives oiK «r£<rTa.<re« tJ> tIjs oOpiov.] ' People that know not 
 (= 'whereas ye know not,' Lat. qui non intelligatis) what belongs to 
 the morrow'; or, reading to. with some MSS., 'the things of the 
 morrow.' The phrase is in apposition with 61 Xeyovrcs, as av-qp Si>l/v\o's 
 with 6 avSpiOTTos Ikuvos in i. 7, 8. For the neuter article cf. Matt. xxi. 
 
 21 TO T^s crvKrji, 2 Pet. ii. 22 to t^s irapoi/tias, Rom. viii. 5 to, t^s 
 crapKos ^povov(TiV, xiv. 19 to. tJjs tlprjvri<s Slwko/ji.cv, 2 Cor. ii. 30. For 
 ellipse of rjpepai see Winer p. 738. ^ 
 
 aT|iVs yi.p lo-Te.] Often used for smoke, as in a. KafxCvov Gen. xix. 28, 
 A. KaTTvov Acts ii. 17, d. T. Ovft.iAp.aTO's Ezek. viii. 11, elsewhere for steam 
 or breath as in Clem. Rom. 17 (a quotation, as Lightfoot suggests, from 
 Eldad and Modad) dr/Ais diro Kv6pa<s ' steam from a kettle.' It is 
 found in the versions of Symmachus and Aquila, where the Eng. has 
 ' vanity,' as in Eccl. i. 2, ix. 9, xii. 8, Ps. xxxix. 5, Ixii. 9, cxliv. 4, 
 Job vii, 16. For the thought see Wisd. ii. 4 Trapekeva-eTai 6 jSioi rip.u>v 
 ois "'OO'V ''^^^A.ij! Kai (OS 6fii)(X.rj SiacrKeSacr^ijo-eTai Siw^deLfra inro aKTtvwv 
 ■fjXiov, ib. v. 9-14 and passages quoted in Wetstein. The force of yap 
 here is to give significance to the preceding irota. The reading io-Te is 
 more vigorous than eo-rt, and may be compared with the substitution of 
 6 TrXouo-tos for TrXovroi in i. 10, where the thought is the same as here. 
 
 irpbs 4X£yov.J So Heb. xii. 10 ol /xev tt/dos oXtyas ■^p-epas iTraiSevov, 
 Apoc. xvii. 10 6\iyov airrov Set p-etvai. 
 
 SireiTa Kal a(f>avi£o|ji^vTi.] We might have expected vo-Tepov Si, but the 
 S4 is often omitted after cTreira as in iii. 17, and the koI implies ' as it 
 appears, so also it disappears ' : the character of our life is transiency. 
 Elsewhere in N.T. the verb denotes 'to destroy' or 'to disfigure.' It 
 is used of an eclipse in Aristotle and Cleomedes, and generally of the 
 obscuration of the heavenly bodies in Pseudo- Aristotle de Mundo vi. 
 
 22 Tratra KiveiTai evSeXe)^S>s iv kvkXok iStois, iroTe p,lv d<^avt^o/*evi; irore 8e 
 {fMLvopevrj, pvpiai iSeas dva(f>a£vovcrd tc kol TrdX.iv dTroKpvTTTOviTa Ik p.ia'S 
 dp)^i- Aristotle also uses it of the migration of birds (Hist. An. Yi. 7 
 6 KOKKV^ (^aiVerat eir' oklyov ^(povoj' tov Oepov^, tov Se )(eipu>va atftavi^eTai). 
 
 15. ovri TOV Xe'yciv ii(iids.] Cf. Ps. cviii. 4 dvTi tov dyairav p,€ evSU^aXkov 
 /At, and above iii. 3 cts to TruQecrOai avrous rfp-lv, where see n. A 
 
 ^ WH. read hero in their text obx M<rTa<rSf ttjs aHpiov iroia ti fa)) i/iav. &Tfi,\s 
 yap icrre irphs oKlyov (paivo/ifvn, agreeing with B except that the latter omits ri before 
 (ail. This seems to me to give a harsh construction for the genitive, and also to 
 weaken the force of the passage. The folly of boasting as to the morrow is naturally 
 exposed by pointing to our ignorance of what will hnppen on the morrow, and this 
 is itself a consequence of the uncertainty of our life, appearing and disappearing like 
 a shifting mist. The omission of the first step confuses the expression. It was easy 
 for t6 or rd to be lost before rrjs, and then ydp would be dropped in order to supply 
 some sort of construction. Again, the weight of evidence seems to me in favour of 
 retaining fi before irpiJs (which also facilitates the reading of Sin. iroia ri fcojj v/jl&v ri 
 irphs iKiyov ipcuvoiihi]). The difference in meaning made by the retention of the 
 article is that the tendency to appear and disappear is made a property of the vapour, 
 not a mere accidental circumstance. 
 
IV 13-17 NOTES 141 
 
 classical writer would rather have said Se'ov Xeytiv or oirivcs ySeXriov av 
 
 eiTTOV. 
 
 eiv 6 Kilpios e«X^o-(].J Of. Acts xviii. 21 tov ©eov OiXovTO's, 1 Cor. iv. 19 
 eav 6 Kvfuos 6eX.iQ<rrj, ib. xvi. 17 eav o Kvptos iTriTpeirri, Heb. vi. 3, Phil, 
 ii. 24 ■TriwoiOa iv T<a Kupto) oTi...eA.eiJo-0/xat, but elsewhere we find St. 
 Paul speaking of his future plans without the use of any such phrase, 
 e.g. Acts xix. 21, Rom. xv. 28, 1 Cor. xvi. 5. A similar phrase was 
 customary with the Greeks and Romans, cf. Arist. Fluf. 114 oT/uat 
 ■yap, oTfJiai, crvv 6eia 8' iiprjcrerai, ravTr^s a,waXX.a.^e.iv ere r^s 6<^^a\/xias. lb. 
 347, 405, 1188 rjv ficos ^eArj, Xen. Hippwrch. ix. 8 raCra 8c iravTa 6eSv 
 o-ure^eXovTaJV yivoiT av ti 8e Tts tovto Oav/Jid^ei on ttoX.X.o.ki'S yiypairTai to 
 oriiv Oeia ■Trpa.TTHV, €v icrro) on, rjv TroXXaKis KivSwewiy, ^ttov tovto BavfiatreTai, 
 Plat. T/ieaet. 151, Laches 201 dXXa Tronqcrui S> Avo-t|u.a;^e raCra Kai ^^o) 
 irapa (re avpiov tjv ^eos iOiXy, Hipp. Maj. 286 /ieXXo) eTriSeiKVwat £is Tpirrjv 
 ^/iepav...07rft)S irapeaei kol airos Kal aXXovs afeis. 'AXXa ravr' ecTat av 
 ^€05 iOiXrj, Aleib. I. p. 135 Jav jSovXy crv 3> SuKpares. Oi /caXSs Xtycts S 
 ' AkKiSidSr]. 'AXXa xSs ;(p^ Xcyctv; "On iav Oib's i6i)<.y, Eur. .4fc. 783, 
 Minuc. F. 18 'si ZJeiis dederit:' vulgi iste naturalis sermo est, Senec. 
 Tranquill. 13 tutissimum est de fortuna cogitwre et nihil sibi de fide ejus 
 promittere : navigabo nisi si quid incident, &c. Cf. Brisson i. 57. The 
 same language is customary among Jews and Arabs. Ben Sira is 
 quoted to the effect : ^ ' Let no man say he will do anything without 
 prefixing to it " If the Lord will." ' 
 
 Kol lr\iroii.iv Kal ■iroi^<ro|ji.Ev.J The boaster forgets that life depends on 
 the will of God. The right feeling is, both my life and my actions 
 are determined by Him. To put ^■^o-o/uev or ^■^a-io/nev into the pro- 
 
 tasis is to make life independent of God's will, a second factor which 
 needs to be taken into account. 
 
 16. vBv 8e'.] . ' But as the case really stands,' cf. 1 Cor. xiv. 6. 
 
 kv rais oXaWots.^] Does not denote the subject of glorying like iv 
 TM vij/eL i. 9, but the manner in which glorying was shown, ' in your 
 self-confident speeches or imaginations ' = aX.a^ovevo/j.evoi, cf. Clem. 
 Rom. 21 dvSpwTTOis ey/cau^co/x.ei'ots iv dXafoveio. tov Xdyon avTwv. In N.T. 
 only found here and 1 John ii. 16 ■^ dXa^oveia tov /Slov. The adj. is 
 also found twice, each time joined with m:ipri4>avo's, see above ver. 6. 
 Aristotle defines it Eth. N. iv. 7. 2 Sokei 6 dXa^wv irpoa-Troi-qTiKoi tS>v 
 ivio^wv etvat Kai /jlt) mrapy^ovTiov koX fiat,6v<ov f] VTrdpy^ei, see Trench Syn. 
 p. 113 foil. It implies confidence in one's cleverness, luck, strength, 
 skill, &c. For the plural see above ii. 1 Trpoq-oiiroXrjfulflaK : Bengel 
 says arrogantiae exprimuntur in illis verbis, prqfiscisceTnur, lucrabimur ; 
 gloriatio in praesumptione temporis. 
 
 ToioiTt].] ' Every such boasting,' because there may be a good Ka-i- 
 ^i^tris, as in i. 9 ; cf. 1 Cor. v. 6 ov koKov to Kav)(rjfji,a vfiSiV. 
 
 17. elSoTi oSv.] 'So it seems, if one knows to do good and does it 
 not, there is guilt to him.' The verse sums up all that has been said 
 before, going back as far as i. 22, ii. 14, iii. 1, 13, iv. 11. Instead of 
 ctSoTt KaXov ?roi£tj'...dju,apTta ecTTtV, we should rather have expected to 
 
 ^ Grotius ap. TlieUe in loc. 
 
 2 So WH. read with B'. Similarly they read ipiela iii. 16 and KUKovaeias v. 10. 
 
142 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 iiSevai. . .dfiapTLa Icttiv, or o eiSws a/jbapnav e^"; ^^ ^^ John ix. 41 el TU<^A.ot 
 yre ovK. av d)(e.Te. a/jLapriav, ib. XV. 22, 24, 1 John i. 8. Eorthe dative 
 cf. Rom. xiv. 14 ov&ev koivov Si eavTov ei /jltj ria Xoyi^o/jiiixo rt koivov elvai, 
 €Keiv(o KOIVOV, 1 Cor. iv. 3 e/Aoi 8e eis lXa-)^i<rT6v Icttlv iva vfj> v/jmiv avaKpiOZ 
 where see Alf., Clem. Rom. 44 ap-apria ov pLiKpa v/uv ecrrat iav... 
 aTTo/JaXo/Aev, Hermas Vis. iii. 3 rt /x,oi o^eXos ravra iiopaKon kol p-r] 
 ■yivuHTKovn (where, as here, the infinitive would have been easier than 
 the participle). The phrase ecrTai crot (or ev troi) afmpria is common 
 in LXX., e.g. Deut. xv. 9, xxiii. 21, 22, xxiv. 15 ; also dpapriav 
 kap,^d.vav Lev. xix. 17, xxii. 9, xxiv. 15, so Rom. xiv. 20 irav 8e o ovk 
 Ik iricTTews a.p,apTia ccrrt. 
 
 For the pleonasm of avrm of. John xv. 2 ttov KXrjp.a p.rj (f>epov 
 KapTTOv aipci avTO, Matt. iv. 16, Apoc. ii. 7 tw vlkuivti hiairto avrS 
 tjjayiiv, esp. after a relative, as Mark vii. 25 yvvrj ^s "X^ ^ ^yo^' 
 rpiov avTrj's TTvevpLa aKadapTov, very common in LXX., as Exod. iv. 17 
 paySSov £V jj TTOi^crets tv airij ra (TrfjjLiLa, Amos. iv. 7 p,epls i<j>' rjv ov Ppi^ta 
 hr avrrjv ir]pav6i^a-erai, see Winer p. 184, who gives instances from 
 classical Greek. Examples of the infinitive after oTSa in this sense are 
 found in 2 Pet. ii. 9, Matt. vii. 11. The word KaXov is common with 
 St. James (ii. 7, iii. 13) as with St. Paul (Rom. vii. 18, 19,. 21, 2 Cor. 
 xiii. 7, Gal. vi. 9, where the phrase Troieiv to KaXov occurs). The anar- 
 throus neuter occurs in the similar phrase ;ras irotSiv irovrjpov Mai. ii. 17. 
 For the thought see Luke xii. 47, John ix. 41, Philo M. 2. p. 518 tm 
 p,iv dyvoiq, tov KpeiTTOVOS Sia/juxpTiivovTi <7vyyvij>iJi/q Si'SoTaf 6 S' ef iTrurTijiJ,rji 
 dSLKuiv airoXoyiav ovk c^^'- T^^ appeal to knowledge here, as above 
 i. 19, is a proof that the writer is addressing Christians. 
 
 Y. 1. — It is a question whether the rich here addressed are Christians 
 or not. That there were rich members of the Church appears from i. 10, 
 ii. 2, iv. 13 and St. Paul's warnings against the love of riches. On the 
 other hand ' the brethren ' in v. 7 seem to be opposed to ' the rich ' 
 here ; and the prophets, whom St. James imitates, did not confine 
 their threats and warnings to Israel : we have the burden of Moab and 
 Egypt as well as of Israel. If we suppose the words uttered first of all 
 with reference to disbelievers, they will still be applicable to all who 
 in any respect follow in their footsteps. 
 
 4y« vBv.] See above iv. 1 3. For severity towards the rich cf . Luke 
 vi. 24, xviii. 24, 1 Tim. vi. 9, 10, Prov. xi. 28, Amos iii. 10, v. 11, viii. 
 4 foil., Isa. V. 8, xxxiii. 1, Jer. iv. 8. 
 
 6Xo\vJovT€s.] Only here in K.T. : it is used in Hom. II. vi. 297 and 
 Herod, iv. 189, of the joyful outcries of women in the worship of 
 Athene ; in the LXX. it occurs only as the expression of violent grief, 
 as in Joel i. 5, 13, Isa. xiii. 6 (of Babylon) oXoXvi^en' eyyus yap ■^p.epa 
 JS-Vpiov, ib. xiv. 31 oXoXv^are TrvXai, TroXemv, ib. xv. 3 oXoXv^an pLiTo, KXavO- 
 fiov, ib. xvi. 7, Jer. iv. 8. So Latin ululatus. 
 
 ka\ xais ToXanrupCois rats 4ir6pxo(ifvois.] The early Christians were in 
 momentary expectation of the second coming of the Lord, when the 
 world and its lusts would pass away (v. 8) : cf. on the coStvcs, the suffer- 
 ings which precede his appearance, 4 Ezra v. and the prophecies of Dan. 
 xii. 1, Matt. xxiv. partially fulfilled in the siege of Jerusalem, in 
 
IV 17-V 3 NOTES ' 143 
 
 which some of those here addressed would probably be involved, as 
 many who had come up for the Feast were surprised by the rapid con- 
 centration of the Roman armies. 
 
 2. Ho-ipre.] Prophetical perfect as in Isa. xl.2, xliv. 23, xlvi. 1, xlix. 
 13, lii. 9, liii. 3-10, Ix. 1. The verb o-. is only found here in N.T., the 
 active occurs with transitive force Job xl. 7 arTJijjov ToiJs dtreyStis, the pass. 
 ib. xxxiii. 21, Psa. xxxvii. 5, Sirac. xiv. 19 ira>/ epyov arrpr6ii.ivov iKX.u7r€i. 
 It is questioned whether the expression is intended literally of wealth 
 which, like the manna, will not keep, e.g. of stores accumulated to sell 
 at a profit ; or whether it is abstract and symbolical, all wealth having 
 iu itself the character of corruptibility. The terms chosen have refer- 
 ence to the different kinds of wealth, trecnjTre to corn and other products 
 of the earth, cnjTo/SpcoTa to rich fabrics, tioTai to metals ; giving examples 
 of corruption arising from an external cause (the moth), or internal, 
 whether deep-seated rottenness or superficial rust. In Matt. vi. 19 
 another danger, that from thieves, is mentioned. Compare with the 
 whole passage Sirac. xiv. 3-19. 
 
 ifidria (r4)Tdpp(i)Ta.] Eich garments were handed down as heirlooms, 
 cf. Acts XX. 33 'I coveted no man's silver or gold or apparel,' Judges 
 xiv. 12, above ch. ii. 2, Hor. Ep. i. 6. 40. No other instance of the adj. 
 cnjT. is cited except Job xiii. 28 TraXatoCrai, wcrirep ifidTiov (rqTofipmTov ^, 
 cf. Sibyll. prooem. 64 (of wooden idols), Isa. li. 8 ms yap lixanov PpuiBrj- 
 (rerai mro ^ovov koL o)s epia jSptaOiqcreTai viro (rrjTOs, Sir. xlii. l3 airo IfnaTLUiv 
 (Trji iKiropeuerai, Hor. Sat. ii. 3. 118 strayula vestis hlatta/rum ac tinearum 
 epulae. On the cr^s or tinea see Arist. H.A. v. 32. 1, Cato R.R. 98, 
 Pliny N.H. xi. 35 § 117. 
 
 3. 6 xp'xo'bs KarCwToi.] The word is used in Sir. xii. 11 of a mirror 
 dimmed with rust, cf. ib. ver. 10 ws o x«Xkos imn-ai ovrtai -^ Trovrjpia 
 avTov, ib. xxix. 10 aTrdXeo-oi/ apyvpiov 8ia i^iXov koX jjjq ito6ijT<a vtto tov 
 kWov CIS (i7ruJA.€iav, Plut. Mor. 164 F vTrbXa/iySavei tov irkovTOv ayaOov ehai 
 p.e.yuTTOv' rovTO ro tj/evSos lov tx'^i, ve/tcTai (cf. below tjtayeraC) t^v ij/vx^, 
 igicrrrjcra', lb. 819 E ttjv tfiiXoxprifiaTLav uxrirep jtiterTov lov vocrrjfia rrjs '/"JMS 
 aTToSva-d/jLevo^ aTropp7\j/ov, Hor. A.F. 330 haec animos aerugo et cura peculi 
 cum semel imbuerit, speramus carmina fingi posse 1 Epict. Diss. 4. 6. 14 
 (principles not put into practice) ws oTrXdpia diroKet/ttva Kariwrai.. The 
 force of Kara, is intensive, as in Kwrea-OLU), KaraySpep^ft), KaTairi[ji,Trp7]fii, Kwra- 
 Kav)(u>fjLai above iv. 14. 
 
 St. James here uses popular language like the author of the apocry- 
 phal Epist. Jerem.2 v. 11 Oeovs apyvpovs /cat Oeov's xpi'O'ovi koi iuXl- 
 vovi. ovTOi Se ov Siacr<o^ovTaL dir lov /cat Ppu>iJ.d.T(ov, ib. v. 24 to yap )(pvcrLov 
 o irepLKeivTai tis KaXkos, iav [jlt] iKfrntg tov lov, ov fir) a-nXtj/aia-LV : strictly 
 speaking it is a property of gold not to rust, Philo M. p. 503 xpva-oi lov 
 ov 7rapa8c)(iTai, Theognis 451 evprjo-u^ Si yiie Traa-iv iir' tpyixacnv laa-Trep S,ir€<j>- 
 6ov )(pva-6v, ipvOpbv tSetv TpiP6p.ivov jSaxrdvw, tov ■/(poirj's KaOvirepBe /teXas 
 oi;^ a-KTerai los oiS' dvpm, aul 8' av^os €xei KaOapov, Pindar yV. 207 Bergk 
 Atos -jrats o ;^vcros' kuvov ov (Tr/'S ov Kts SaTrret. Strabo however speaks 
 (xvi. 2. 42) of a fuliginous vapour rising from the Dead Sea i<^' ijs 
 
 1 For a similar formation cf. <rKta\riK6$pa>Tos Acts xii. 23. 
 
 " ' May be assigned with probability to the first century B.C.' Westoott inZ>. of B. 
 
Ui THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Kariovrai koI )(a,X.KOi /cat apyvpos kol irav to o-tiXttvov /i«XP' Kci 'xpv^ov, SO 
 Diod. ii. 48 : Dioscorides v. 91 describes gold rusted by chemicals. 
 Compare Lam. 4. 1 ttms d.fn.avpad'qa'eTai, )(pvcrtov ; 
 
 6 lis airSv «ts (lapripiov 4|i.tv So-rai.] tos (Lat. inrus), which was used 
 in the sense of poison in iii. 8, and possibly in some of the passages 
 quoted in the preceding note, here stands for rust. The thought is ' You 
 think only of outer riches, your heart is set on treasure here : that trea- 
 sure is perishing before your eyes : it is a witness of the perishableness 
 of all earthly things, including the body which makes use of it. You 
 yourselves are doomed to a like decay, which will consume that flesh 
 with which you identify yourselves (Job xv. 25, 26, Psa. Ixxiii. 7) no 
 less certainly than the funeral pyre of the Gentiles, or that which 
 burns to consume the garbage in the Yale of Hinnom. If you had been 
 willing to lose your lower life, you would have found a higher : the 
 corrupting body would have been nothing to the true self.' Compare 
 Gal. vi. 8 ' he that soweth to the flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption.' 
 May we attach to this general conception a more special application of 
 the figurative rust ? It is a witness that you have not used your wealth 
 but selfishly stored it up (cf. Theophr. Cha/r, x. rZv p.LKpo\6ywv koI ras 
 apyvpodriKaii tariv tSeiv evpmTLiMra's kol kXeis IwfjLeva^) ', SO Calvin neque Deus 
 awrum destinavit aerugini neque veates tineis, quin potius haeo voluit esse 
 hwmanae vitae subsidia. Qua/re ipsa sine usu consumptio testis ipsorum 
 inhumcmitatis erit. Awri et a/rgenti putredo quasi materia eril infia-m- 
 mamdae irae Domini ut insta/r ignis eos consumat. As the rust eats into 
 the metal, so that selfish covetousness, of which it is the sign, shall eat 
 into your matei'ialized soul like a canker, destroying all the finer and 
 more generous qualities. For instances of the phrase eis p-aprvpiov afirois 
 cf. Matt. viii. 4 ' show thyself to the priest as a testimony unto them,' 
 X. 18 'ye shall be brought before kings for a witness unto them and 
 the Gentiles,' xxiv. 14, 'the Gospel shall be preached as a witness to all 
 nations,' Luke ix. 5 ' shake off the dust of your feet ' €is p-aprvpiov kir 
 avTov<s ' as a witness against them ' (in the parallel passage Mark vi. 1 1 
 the dative simply is used), Luke xxi. 13 diroySijo-cTat vplv th ixaprvpiov 
 ' it shall turn to you for a testimony ' (in your favour). There is no 
 need to translate ifuv ' against you ' ; the rust is a witness first to you 
 and then to all observers. 
 
 <j)d76Tai tAs o-ipKos 4|iav.] This form of the f ut. of icrOiu) is Hellenistic 
 and is found in Luke xiv. 15 and xvii. 8 Siaxovct /xoi Iws <^ayci) kol mo) 
 Kol jxeTo. TawTa <^dy£(rai /cai irt60"ai cru, 2 Kings ix. 36 KaTa<j>oiyovTai at Kvvei 
 Tcts cra/DKas 'Ic^a/iek, Lev. xxvi. 29 t^ayecr^e ras o-apKas tmi' vlSiv, Apoc. 
 xvii. 16 ras a-dpKas t^s vopv-qi ^ayovrai, ih. xix. 18, 21. The form 
 i^ayoBynat appears in Gen. iii. 2. Both are condemned by Phrynichus 
 (p. 327 Lob.). Cf. a-qTopptnTa above, Judith xvi. 17 Kvptos 6K8tKij(ret 
 avroiis Iv r)p,ipq. Kpia-ews SovvaL ■TTvp Koi crKihXrjKai ets (TapKas avTwv, Micah 
 iii. 2, 3, Plut. Mor. p. 164 F quoted on KariWai, Stob. Serm. 38. 53 wcnrep 6 
 los (TiSripov, ovTwi 6 cj>66vo^ rrjv f)(ov(Tav avTov \pv-)(r]v efavai/f^p^Et, Basil, liom. 
 de invid. p. 445 quoted by Suicer s.v. <^6ovos. Sir. xxxiv. 1 aypinrvia 
 irkovTov Ikttqkci criXjO/cas. The pi. tra/DKes is used for the fleshy parts of 
 the body both in classical and later writers, e.g. Horn. H. viii. 380 ^ ns 
 
V 3-4 NOTES 145 
 
 Kai Tpaxav Kopiti Kwas rjK oiuroiis 8»;j«,(3 koI aapK^cra-L, Aesch. Cho. 280, 
 Theophil. Ant. i. 13 v6(t<o inpnrtduiv aTruJAecras ras crapKa^, and the pre- 
 ceding quotations from the LXX. ; while the bing. trdp^ is used for 
 the whole body. Cf. also Menander p. 198 M., Antisth. op. Laert. vi. 5. 
 
 us irOp.] I think the parallel passages lead us to connect this with 
 what precedes rather than (as WH. and others after Cod. A. and 
 Pesh.) with what follows, cf . Isa. x. 1 6, 1 7, xxx. 27 ■^ opyr) tov dvixov ws irvp 
 iherai, ib. xxxiii. 11, Ezek. xv. 7 Trvp airovs KaraffxiyeraL, Jer. v. 14, Ps. 
 xxi. 9, Amos i. 12, 14, v. 6, vii. 4, Heb. x. 27 i^o/Stpa tis IkSoxtj 
 Kpia-iia% KoX irvpoi ^ijXos i(r6iii.v jU.eAA,ovTos Tois vTrevavTwvi. It is not merely 
 gradual unperceived decay which is to be feared, but this is changed 
 into gnawing pain and swift destruction as by fire in the approaching 
 judgment. Cf. Jude 7 Trvpos aiuivLov Slktjv ii7r€;^0Dcrai, Matt. xxv. 41, 
 Mark ix. 44 ottov 6 (TKU>\,rj^ avrSiv ov teAcutoi koL to Trvp ov cr^h/vvTai, 
 
 «8T|(raupi<raT6.] Absolute, as in Luke xii. 21 oiVcos 6 Onja-avpi^oiv iavTw, 
 2 Cor. xii. 14. In Matt. vi. 19 we have the full phrase /xij Orjo-avpi^eTe 
 Orjiravpovi, cf. Rom. ii. 5 drj(Tavpi^cis (reavrio 6pyr)V iv rip,epa opy^i, Prov. 
 i. I 8 ot (f>6vov jU,eTr)(oi/Tes OrjcravpL^ovcrLV eavTol's KaKO,, Amos jii. 10, Tobit 
 iv. 9, Psalm. Sol. ix. 9. ' The aor. is used as if from the standing- 
 point of the day of judgment, looking back over this life,' Alf . Perhaps 
 it is more correct to say that it refers back to the perfects o-etrijire, 
 KttTtWat. The laying up of treasures is anterior to these. The word 
 iOria-avpiaraTi is pregnant with irony : ' You heap up treasure, but 
 the time for enjoying such treasure has come to an end ; it is now 
 only a treasure of wrath in the day of wrath.' For the asyndeton 
 cf. below v. 6. 
 
 Iv lirxoTois ■qii.lpois.] Cf. Acts ii. 17 icrrai iv rats icrxorais ■^p.ipais, 
 2 Tim. iii. 1 iv eo-T^arats YifjiipaK ivcrT^crovTai Kaipol ^aXeTroi, Didach6 16. 3 
 iv T. i(r)(. -^ixepais TrXTjOvvOi^a-ovTai oi ij/€vSo7rpo<l>^Tai. The singular iv rrj 
 icrxo-Tr] rip.ipq. is often used in St. John's Gospel ; other forms are iv 
 Kaipw i<T)(a,Tta 1 Pet. i. 5, iir icrxa/nav t&v ;)(pov(«v ib. V. 20, iir icrxO'Tinv 
 tS>v ■qp.epwv 2 Pet. iii. 3, Iir' icrxdrov )(p6vov Jllde 18, cf. Deut. iv. 30, 
 Numb. xxiv. 14, Isa. xii. 23, 4 Esdr. xiii. 18, Vorst p. 109 foil., West- 
 cott on 1 Joh. ii. 1 8 ia-xdrr] &pa. For the general sense see below on 
 17/iepa a-cjiayrj^, and for omission of article Essay on Grammar. 
 
 4. ISoii.] Eor the sing, see above on aye iv. 13. 
 
 6 |i.ur6i>s Twv Ip-yarfflv.] A reminiscence of the proverb oftos 6 ipydrrjs 
 TOV p,L(rOov avTov Luke x. 7, 1 Tim. v. 18. The word is used especially 
 of husbandmen as in Matt. ix. 37. 
 
 TMv a(i.iicrAvTwv.l It does not seem that any distinction is to be drawn 
 between this and OepuravTuiv below, a/nao) appeal s to mean originally 
 'gathering,' 'heaping together,' as of the ant Hes. Opera 778 iSpis 
 (Tiapov afiaTai, of 'pressing the curds together' dp.rjcrdp.tvo's Od. ix. 247, 
 of preparing a couch evvrjv iirap-rjcraTo Od. v. 482 ; hence (in compounds) 
 of heaping up earth round the roots of a plant Xen. Oecon. xix. 11 
 iirafi,i^(ra(,o 8' av /jlovov, €<firj, tyjv yrjv, 17 Koi tra^ais av ev fji,a\a irept to <f>VT6v ; 
 ib. xvii. 13 avTnrpoaap,ri(Ta.p,e.voi, Trp/ yrjvTM i\pi\iiip.ev(o ras pitp.^, of heaping 
 earth on a corpse Herod, viii. 24 rdc^pous opv^dfievo'S eOaij/e -yfjv 
 
146 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 cVa/Aijora/xcj/os : in its commonest sense of reaping or mowing, getting in 
 the harvest, the active voice is used as in Homer II. xviii. 551 ipiBoi 
 rj/jiiiiv o^cias Sptirdvas hi ■)(€pa-\v I^^ovtes, ib. xxiv. 451 \a)(yrievT opo<l>ov 
 (reeds) Xet/Auvd^ei/ d/x,rja-ai/Tcs, Herod, vi. 28 dp,. ctItov, Arist. Eq. 392 dp., 
 tiepos. The word Oeplt^uv is rather more common for reaping and 
 harvesting, and is given as a synonym of d/xav by Hesych. Both are 
 used alike of the reaping of corn {dp., in Lev. xxv. 11, Deut. xxiv. 19, 
 Isa. xvii. 5) and the mowing of grass (dip. in Ps. cxxix. 7). Both are 
 used also in a metaphorical sense of cutting sheer off, as in Hes. Theog. 
 181 (of Cronos mutilating his father) ripu-qae, Soph. Aj. 239 (of Ajax) 
 yXSero-av ptWrei Oepicas. 
 
 Tas x<l>pai iijiuv.] Used here of a field, plot of ground, like ^(wpiov in 
 Acts i. 18, iv. 3i, xxviii. 7, and in classical writers. So we find Luke 
 xxi. 21 oi Iv Tats y^wpai'S, ib. xii. 16 dvOpwnrov tlvos £v4>oprj<T€v r/ X"/""' 
 John iv. 35 OtdcracrOe ras X'^P'^5 on XevKai eicri tt/dos 6epicrp.6v, Evang. 
 Thomae c. 12 Iva (rirelpr] (tItov ets t^v y(<i>pav avrSyv. In Amos lii. 9, x. 
 11 it stands where the A.V. has 'palaces' : Josephus (Ant. vii. 8. 5) 
 vises it of Joab's field, called /sept's 2 Sam. xiv. 30. 
 
 6 a4>\i(rTepT)(i«Vos d<|>* 6hmv.] ' Which is kept back by you,' ' comes too 
 late from you.' The verb is only found here in N.T. In classical 
 writers vcmpiui and its compounds are intransitive, as also in Sir. xiv. 
 li pij d^vcTTepT^crrj'i aTro dyaO^s ij/tepas ' be not late for a feast,' Heb. xii. 
 15 ia-repiov aTro ■nj'S x"-P'-'''°^ toS 0eoC 'falling short of,' Luke xxii. 25 p,^ 
 Tivos va-repT^craTe ; 'did ye come short in anything]', Sir. xxvi. 19 dvrjp 
 iroXep.urTr]'! vcrTepSiv 8t' ivSeiav. Of the transitive use we have an example 
 m Neh. ix. 20 to pdwa crov ovk d^vcrTipyjcra^ diro CTop.aTO'i avrwv. The 
 passive occurs Diod. xviii. 71 varepovvTo rijs XP^'^'^j Eurip. Iph. A. 1203 
 iraiSos va-Tcp-qa-opaL (?), 2 Cor. xi. 8 ' when I was in want (vcrTepriOeK) I was 
 not a burden on any man,' Heb. xi. 37 va-repov pevoi, ^XtySd/Acvoi, Luke xv. 
 14, 1 Cor. viii. 8, Phil. iv. 12, Sir. xi. 11 eo-ti o-tteijScov koi toctio p,aXXov va-re- 
 pEiTttt. Some take diro = vtto comparing Luke xvii. 25 diroSoKt/xacr^vat aTro 
 TTJ? yEVEas Tavrrji. In both cases I should prefer to explain it as denoting 
 not properly the agent, but the quarter from which the action proceeds. 
 I cannot agree with Huther, Lange and Alford in connecting it with 
 Kpd^u ' cries from your coffers.' The law required the prompt payment 
 of the workman, Deut. xxiv. 15 avdrjpepbv dTroSaJo-ets tov pia-Oov avrov- ovk 
 ETTiSvo-ETat ^Xios Itt' ovtm, OTt TTevrj? ifTTL KOL Ev avTw E^et TrjV iXTTiSa 
 KOL KaTa^orjcreTai Kara crov Trpos Kvpiov koL £0"Tai iv croi dfiaprCa, Levit. 
 xix. 13, Jer. xxii. 13, Mai. iii. 5, Prov. iii. 27, 28, Sir. xxxi. (xxxiv.) 
 22 eKxiwv alpa b d-!roar£pu)v p.ia-6ov pia-diov, Tobit iv. 14, Hermas 
 Vis. iu. 9 pXerren vp-eis ot yavpovpevoi iv Tu jtXouto) vpS>v /aijttote 
 o-TEi/dfoixrti' 01 vcmpovp,€voi koX 6 arevayp.os avrlav dva/S^o-ETat irpos tov 
 Kvpiov. Immediately afterwards he speaks of the ids received into 
 their heart. 
 
 KpAJei.] The withholding of wages is one of the four sins which are 
 said to cry to heaven. See Deut. I.e., Gen. iv. 10 thy brother's blood 
 /?oa Trpds /AE iK T^s yrji, ib. xviii. 20 (cry of Sodom), Job. xvi. 18 foil., 
 xxxi. 38, Sirac. xxxii. 17 irpoo-Ev^^ TaTTEtvov V£<^E'Xas Si7J\6e...Kal ov pr) 
 
V 4-5 NOTES 147 
 
 d.iro<TTg ews hrLa^Kiipryrai 6 vi/'«7Tos Kat...voLrj(7eL Kpia-iv. For the oppression 
 of the hireling cf. Job; vii. 2, ih. xxiv. 6-12, Sirac. xxxiv. 26. 
 
 oi pottf.] Only here in N.T., cf. Exod. ii. 23 aviPrj -fj /8o^ avT&v irpos 
 Tov ®eov a-TTo tZv ipytav, 1 Sam. ix. 16 i7r€J3X.e{j/a etti ttjv raTnivuiaiv tov 
 Xaov fxov, OTi ^XOe /3or] aiiTuiv irpo's juc. 
 
 eis Tol ^Ta EvpCou 2apac&6.] From Isa. v. 9 ^KOvaOrj yap tis to, Sira 
 Kvpiov 'Sia^aiLO. The onlyother passage in N.T. where the form occurs 
 is Kom. ix. 29, a quotation from Isa. i. 9. In the LXX. it is found in 
 
 1 Sam. i. 3, 11 'ASwvai Kvpie 'EX(ut SaySau^, ib. XV. 2, and in Isa. ii. 
 12, vi. 3 &c. : more often it is translated either by TravTOKparbip, as in 
 
 2 Sam. V. 10, Apoc. iv. 8 compared with Isa. vi. 3, and in Jeremiah 
 and the Minor Prophets, esp. Malachi ; or by Swa/icwv, as in Ps. lix. 5, 
 Ixxx. 7, (fee, Hermas Vis. i. 3 : sometimes it is omitted, as frequently in 
 Jeremiah. By later writers it is used as an independent name of God 
 in the nom. or voc. sing, as in Act. Apoc. T. p. 86, Sibyll. i. 316 o /ie'yas 
 "Sia^aiiO. Its immediate reference is to the hosts of heaven, whether 
 angels or the stars over which they preside ; then it is used more 
 generally to express the Divine Omnipotence, cf. Matt, xxvii. 53, Luke 
 vii. 7, 2 Kings vi. 17, Josh. v. 14. See Cheyne's Isaiah, app. on I. 9. 
 The use of this name is one among many indications serving to show 
 that the epistle is addressed to Jews. 
 
 elcreX'/iXveov.] In later Greek the regular forms of the imperf., 2nd 
 aor., and perf. were often changed to the type of the 1st aor., as elSav, 
 hrea-av, iXdjSocrav, evpoa-av, etxocrav, cf. Winer, pp. 86-91, and for examples 
 of the perf. John xvii. 7 eyvwKav, ib. xvii. 6 TfTrjprqKav, Luke ix. 36 
 iwpaKav, Rom. xvi. 7 yiyovav, Barnabas vii. 3 ■7rt<j>avipu>Kca'. Meister- 
 hans (6V. Att. Inscr. p. 147) cites ■jrap€iX.rj<f>av from Smyrna 230 B.C., 
 SiaTETeA-eicav, IvTerevp^av, €L(7y(rjKav, TreirolrjKav, all B.C. from Laconia. 
 
 5. «TpTK(>'/i<raT6.] Only here in N.T. The noun occurs 2 Pet. ii. 13 
 TjSovriv ■fiyovp.evoi Tr]v iv vi^^pq- Tpvtf>T^, Luke vii. 25. It is used in blame 
 here, as generally in classical authors: in good sense in Isa. Ixvi. 11 
 iva EK^iyXacraVTCs Tpvcjyi^criQTe mro eicrdSou So^s avTrj^ and Neh. ix. 25. 
 Hermas joins it with cnraTaXaia in Sim. 6. 1, no doubt a reminiscence of 
 this passage, to, 'irpoPara wtrci Tpv(j)U)VTa -qv ko-i Kiav criraTaKwvTa, which is 
 interpreted of those who have given themselves up to the lusts of the 
 world and are afterwards delivered over to the angel of vengeance. 
 
 lirV TTjs 7iis.] In contrast to the judgment in heaven of the Lord of 
 Sabaoth, cf. Matt. vi. \Q p,rj OrjcravpileTe eVi ■nj'S yrjs. 
 
 lo-iraraX^icraTe.] Found elsewhere in N.T. only in 1 Tim. v. 6-17 he 
 a-TraraXloa-a tfitcra riOvrjKev. It occurs also in Ezek. xvi. 49 IcnraToXwv 
 avTT] Kol al Ovyarepe'S, Sir. xxi. 15 T^KOvtrev 6 o-iraToXuiv, Barn. x. 3 oTav 
 (TTraTaXSxytv XavOavovrai tov Kvpiov, but is much rarer than rpvcfxio), and 
 is never found in a good sense. The noun occurs Sir. xxvii. 13 yeXeos 
 avrSiv iv a-jraTdky a/tapTias, and Varro ap. Non. p. 46. 12 spatule 
 eviravit omnes Venerivaga pueros; the compound verb Karao-TraraXcLb) 
 Prov. xxix. 21, Amos vi. 4. The classical word of the same root, 
 criraJdaut (fr. (nrdOri, the batten, used in weaving for the purpose of driving 
 home the threads of the woof), occurs in Dem. F.L. p. 354, where 
 Shilleto says that the only example of the literal sense is the play on 
 
 L 2 
 
148 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 words in the Nules 55 5 ywat XtW (riraOa?, and that elsewhere it only 
 means 'to squander.' In our word however the prominent idea is 
 that of self-indulgence without distinct reference to squandering. 
 
 iep^i|/aT«TasKop8£os.] No other instance of this phrase is recorded. 
 Oecumenius gives iriatVo/xai as the equivalent of rpe^u), and this agrees 
 with its use in Horn. Od. ix. 246 -^/xtc-v Opdij/ai yaXaKTos of turning milk 
 into cheese (whence rpoc^aXts = cheese). Ifwould thus have the same 
 force as iraxwtiv rrjv KapSiav Matt. xiii. 15 quoted from Isa. vi. 10, cf. 
 Luke xxi. 34 irpocrix^Te /A7;iroT€ fSapwBuicnv vfiwv at KapSlai iv KpanraX.rj icai 
 fjieplfivais /SioyTLKai^, koI ai<f)ViSLOs e<f> i/u,as iiruTTy rj ■fjp.epa iKeivrj, Acts XIV. 
 17, Psa. civ. 15. 
 
 ev intipa a-^ayifs.] Psa. xliv. 22, Prov. vii. 22 w<nr€p /3ov^ i-irl ac^ayrjv 
 ayerat, jer. xii. 3 ayvwrov avroiis ds ■^/Jiepav (Tc^ayijs, ib. XXV. (xxxii.) 34 
 aka\oiiaT€ . . .OTt €TrXr]p(j>6r](rav al rifxepai, v/jiSiv eis atjiayrjv, Philo M. 2. p. 543 
 (TiTia fioi Kol TTOTa KaOoLTrep tcis OpipLfixunv eTrl crt^ay-qv Sidorai, lb. ap. 
 Eiiseb. P.E. viii. 14, 26 tujv Ope/jbfmToiv to. irpbs Upovpylav Tnaivofxa/a t^s 
 TrXeicTTi/s £7rt/x,eA.£tas eirt tw acjiayrjvai Tvy)(a.V€i Sto. iroX-vKpeoiv evw^tav, 
 Philemon ap. Stob. 51. p. 356, 47 (Meineke, p. 418) o-TpaTiSra kovk 
 avOpuyire koX criTOV/xcve, d)s ra y' lepel', tv' OTrdrav ij Kaipoi rvOfj^, Anthol. 1. 
 37. 2 TTavTes T(0 6a.va.Tia Tyjpov/j,e6a /cat TpetfjofJiecrOa, u)s ayiXr) xoipoiv <T^at,o- 
 /jLevwv dXdyttfs, Minucius 37 § 7 (Deum nescientes) ut victimae ad suppli- 
 cium saginantur, ut /lostiae ad poenam coronantur. For Iv fjixipa. cf. 
 1 Pet. ii. 12, Rom. ii. 5. The rich are represented as sinning (1) in 
 getting their wealth by injustice, (2) in spending it merely on their 
 own pleasures. Their folly is showti (1) in laying up their treasures 
 on earth, (2) especially in doing so in the very day of judgment, 
 fattening themselves like sheep unconscious of their doom. Dr. 
 Plummer illustrates from Jos. B. J. v. 10. 2, ' Josephus tells us ib was 
 all one whether the richer Jews stayed in the city during the siege or 
 tried to escape to the Romans ; they were equally destroyed in either 
 case. Every such person was put to death on the pretext that he was 
 preparing to desert, but in reality that the plunderers might get his 
 possessions. . . Those whose bodies showed no sigus of privation were 
 tortured to make them reveal the treasures they were supposed to 
 have concealed.' Even more horrible is the description in v. 13. 4. 
 
 6. KaTeBiKao-are.] The word occurs Matt. xii. 7, Wisd. xi. 11, xii. 15, 
 and in the remarkable par,\llel ii. 20 davdrto dcr;^7y;aovt /caTaSiKacrw/i.ei' 
 avTov {tov SiKaiov). The middle is used Job xxxiv. 29, Psa. xciii. 21. 
 In classical writers it is followed by a genitive of the person. 
 
 £(|)ove«(raT«.] See n. on iv. 2, and for the asyndeton Essay on Grammar. 
 TOV StKuiov.] Of. Wisd. ii. 10—20, esp. KaTaSwacrTeva-in/xev TrivrjTa StKatov 
 . , , iveBpevcrm/jiev tov Sixatov OTt 8vcrxp7j<TTOi -qiuv itTTiv . . . oka^ovivtTai iraripa 
 0£dv...€t yap icmv 6 Stxatos utos ®£oC, avTi^jji/zETat avTov k.t.A.., a passage 
 regarded by some of the Fathers and by many in later times as prophetic 
 of Ohrist ; by others it has been thought to be a Christian interpola- 
 tion. We may compare other parts of the same book, e.g. iii. 1, iv. 7, 
 .IS well as Isa. iii. 10 Sijo-m/aev tov StKaiov oTt Svtrp^pjjtrTos rj/uv ia-Tiv (from 
 which the passage in Wisdom is borrowed), ib. ch. liii., Prov. i. 11, 
 Amos V. 12, Matt, xxiii. 35, xxvii. 19, 24, 1 John ii. 1, iii. 12, Acts iii. 
 
V 5-7 NOTES 149 
 
 14, vii. 52, xxii. 14, 1 Pet. iii. 18, Luke xxiii. 47. These passages 
 might suggest that we have here a direct reference to the Crucifixion, 
 but in any case 6 Sixatos must be regarded as generic acd not confined 
 to one individual. Thus the words are applicable to tlie writer him- 
 self, who was known to all the Jews as the Just ; cf . the account 
 of his death in Euseb. H.E. ii. 23, taken from Hegesippus : 8ia t^v 
 vTrep^oXrjv r^s SiKaio(rvvT]i avTov iKoXeiTo AiVaios Kal '0/SA.tas, the Jews 
 ran upon him crying out w &> kol 6 Si/caios iTrXav7Jdrj...XiOa.cr(a[Jiiv tov 
 StKaiov, herein fulfilling the prophesy in Isa. iii. 10 (as Hegesippus 
 says). One of the priests in vain tried to save him with the words 
 TTav&atrOi, tI Troteirc ; cvp^crat VTre.p i/AuJv 6 SiKaios. See below V. 16. 
 
 ovK ovTiTOo-o-eTai. 4|i.iv.] The subject here is 6 SiKatos. A more regular 
 construction would be ovk dj/TiTacro-d^uevov, but the abrupt change to 
 direct statement is a far more graphic way of putting the fact. For 
 the change from aor. to present we may compare the similar passage 
 in Isa. liii. 5—7 iTpavfJiaTLaOrj Sio. xas d/xaprias rjji.uiv...Ka). airos 8ia to k^ko.- 
 KwcrOai OVK avolyu to (TTOfia- o)s 7rp6/3aTOV iirl acjiayrjv r^x^V' *""' ^^ a/Avos 
 ...OVK avoiyei to o-To/xa. The present brings the action before our eyes 
 and makes us dwell upon this, as the central point, in contrast with 
 the accompanying circumstances. Others (Hofmann, Erdmann, &c.) 
 take the veib as an impersonal passive, like a<f>€drj(TtTai below v. 15, 
 meaning ' no opposition is needed,' ' you have your way ' ; but no 
 instance of this use has been pointed out. It is the middle, not the 
 active, which means to resist, as above iv. 6, and Rom. xiii. 2, Acts 
 xviii. 6, 1 Kings xi. 34, Hos. i. 6. The only example of the passive in 
 the LXX. is Prov. iii. 15, where it means ' shall not be compared with 
 her,' lit. ' set against her.' The clause is made interrogatively WH., as 
 by Benson, understanding 6 Kvptos (cf. above iv. 6),^ which was actually 
 substituted for oijk by Bentley (OKS for OYK), but I agree with Herder 
 that this gives a less natural and a less pathetic sense than the reading 
 of the MSS. For the thought see Matt. v. 39, Rom. xii. 19, 1 Pet. 
 ii. 23 ; and for asyndeton the Essay on Grammar and ii. 13 above. 
 
 7. iioKpoeuii-^o-ttTe oSv.] Turning to the oppressed brethren St. James 
 urges patience upon them by the example of ' the just,' and because it 
 is now the last time, the day of slaughter, and their cries have gone 
 up to the Lord of Sabaoth. As yXvKvBvp.o's means ' sweet-tempered,' 
 o^vOvfios ' quick-tempered,' so fmKp66vpx)<i is literally ' long-tempered,' 
 the opposite to our 'short-tempered.' In N. T. we find p,aKp66vfws used 
 of God (Rom. ii. 4, 1 Pet. iii. 20), of man (below v. 10 and 2 Cor. vi. 6, 
 also the adv. p.aKpodvp.u)'; Acts xxvi. 3). The verb [ia.Kpo6vp,iiii is used 
 of God 2 Pet. iii. 9, of man 1 Cor. xiii. 4. In LXX. we find 
 fnaKpoOvfws of God Exod. xxxiv. 6, Ps. ciii. 8 ; of man Prov. xiv. 29, 
 xvi. 32, xix. 11. The word is rare in classical Greek, but /xaKpo^D/Aio, 
 occurs in Menander p. 203 Mein., and p.a.Kpo6vp.iix> in Plutarch. On the 
 relation of p,aKpo6vp,ia to virop-ov-q see Lightfoot on Col. i. 11, and 
 2 Tim. iii. 11. 
 
 ias Tijs irapovo-ios] €ft)s seems to be first used as a preposition by 
 
 1 Dr. Abbott would understand A Si/cbioj with mucli the same sense. 
 
150 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 Arist. Top. ii. 2, p. 109 J eug tu>v dTo/twv,^ then by Polyb. i. 18. 2 ovk 
 avr£fr;€o-av irX^v ems aKpo^oXurfiov, often in LXX. and .N.T. The word 
 irapovaia ' visible presence ' is regularly used for the Second Coming, 
 as below v. 8, Matt. xxiv. 3, xxxvii. 39. 1 Thess. ii. 19, iv. 15, <fec., 
 2 Pet. iii. 4. Other expressions are diroKa.\v{j/Ls 'Irjirov Xpia-rov 1 Pet. 
 i. 7, 13; €7n,(^av€ia Tit. ii. 13, 2 Tim. iv. 1 ; 17 €7ri<^ai/cia Trji TrapovtTia<;, 
 2 Thess. ii. 9. 
 
 180V.] As in iii. 4, 5, directs attention to the following illustration. 
 
 6 -ycup'yds.] For the comparison see Sir. vi. 18 is 6 aporpmv kol 6 
 crireipiav irpocrikOe rrj iraiSelq. Koi avafievt tovs ayadovi; KapToiis avrrji, Psa. 
 cxxvi. 5, 6, Matt. xiii. 30, ib. xxiv. 32, John iv, 35 foil., 1 Cor. iii. 5-9, 
 Gal. vi. 7, 2 Tim. ii. 6, Menander p. 245 Mein. 6 tS>v ynnpySiv ^Sovr]v £;^et 
 /8to;, rais eXirttrtv TaXyeim Trapap,v6ovp,^vo%, Tibull. ii. 6. 21 S2)es alit 
 agricolas, &c. 
 
 iKSe'xtTai.] Cf. what seems like a reminiscence in Clem. Rom. ii. 20, 
 yvixvatpp-iOa tiS vvv fSiiO iva T(3 /xeWovTi (7Te<f>avw6S>iJ.ev oiSets rutv SiKaiuiV 
 Ta)(vv Kapirbv cka/Sev dXX' iKSi)(eTai avTOV. He goes on to give the 
 reason for this, el yap tov /iicrOov tSiv St/catW o 0£os crvvTo//.a)s wTreSiSov, 
 €v6eo}s ift-TToplav ■rjcTKOvp.e.v koX ov Oeoa-i^eiav. The word e/c8. is also found 
 Heb. X. 13, xi. 10, 1 Cor. xvi. 11 &c. 
 
 tC|j.iov.] Coupled with alfia 1 Pet. i. 19, with iTrdyyeXfjia 2 Pet. i. 4. 
 The preoiousness of the fruit justifies waiting. 
 
 )i,aKpoev|ji.Ei 4ir' oiiTcJ.] Same phrase in Luke xviii. 7, Sir. xviii. 10, 
 xxix. 8 iirl TaTreiVo) /jLaKpoOvp-rjcrov. See Winer p. 491 on the use of iiri 
 with verbs denoting emotion. 
 
 ias \&Pt\.] The subject is xapTros (cf. above iii. 18) contained in the 
 nearest object ai™, not (as Luther) the husbandman, nor (as Erdmann) 
 the earth. On the omission of av see on ii. 10, and cf. Winer 370, 387, 
 Goodwin § 620. 
 
 irpdi(<.ov.] WH. read TrpoXfiov here with B^, though retaining the w in 
 Trpuiros Apoc. ii. 28, xxii. 16 : see their Appendix, p. 152. Xenophon 
 uses it of crops Oecon. xvii. 4 ttoXXoi Sia^cpovrat irepl tov a-iropov, Trorepov 
 6 irpwift-oi Kpd.TLCTTO's rj 6 //.ecros ^ 6 oi/'t/iuiraTos, and so Hofmann here 
 understands it, as ■n-poiifji.a is used of early figs (Jer. xxiv. 2) and oil/i/jLa 
 of wheat and rye (Exod. ix. 32). But the reference is more commonly 
 to rain, as in Deut. xi. 14 Scoctei tov verov rij yij aov Kaff Sipav irpmi/xov 
 Koi o^ijiov, KoX eicroicreLi tov criTov crov, Hos. vi. 4 ^fet o Kvpios <us ieros 
 rjfuv TTpwip.o's Kol o^ifio^ (perhaps referred to here), Jer. v. 24, Joel ii. 
 23, Zech. X. 1. The former rain comes after the sowing, the latter 
 just before the ripening, see D. of B. under ' rain.' For the ellipsis 
 of vETos see Winer p. 738 foil, and above iii. 11 to yXvKv koi to 
 
 TTlKpOV. 
 
 8. irTT|p(£aTc ToLs KopSCas.J This is more usually ascribed to the Divine 
 working, as in 1 Thess. iii. 13 eis to a-T-qpi^ai vi/.Zv Tcts KapSias, 1 Pet. v. 
 10, 2 Thess. ii. 17, Ps. Ii. 12, cf. Ps. xxvi. 14. It is the true cure for 
 Supvxia,' The noun o-rripLy p.o'i occurs in the same sense 2 Pet. iii. 17. 
 
 ' The. instance quoted from Demosthenes p. 262 is contained in one of the 
 documents of the Ve Corona, 
 
V 7-10 NOTES 151 
 
 In the inflexions of this verb o- is sometimes found instead of f, as 
 o-T^pKTov Apoc. iii. 2 (Winer p. 110). 
 
 iJYYi'Kev.j 1 Pet. iv. 7 iravrmv to teXos ■^yyiKev a-w^povriaaTi ovv, Matf. 
 iii. 2 and often rfyyiK^v r/ PaaiXua rfiv ovpavuiv, Luke xxi. 28, Heb. x. 25, 
 Phil. iv. 6 6 Ki;p(os eyyvs- fi'^ fiepifivare, 1 Cor. xvi. 22, Barn. xxi. 3 
 iyyvs Tj rji^epa iv jj crui/aTroXciTai irafTa t<3 Trovrjpio' eyyvs o Ki'pcos Kat o 
 fiicr^os auToC. For the general belief in the approaching coming of the 
 Lord see 1 Cor. xv. 52, 1 Th. iv. 15, Eom. xiii. 11, 1 John ii. 18; one 
 argument for the lateness of the second epistle of St. Peter is the doubt 
 expressed on this subject (iii. 4) 'ttov ia-riv rj. iirayyeXia r^s Trapovaiaq 
 avTov; 'since the fathers fell asleep all things continue as they were.' 
 
 9. (i.-f| <rr«vdJeT£ kut dW'fjXuv.] Cf. above iv. 1 1 iji.r] KaraXaXeiTe and the 
 reasons there assigned. The word denotes feeling which is internal 
 and vinexpressed, cf. Eom. viii. 23 ; used of secret prayer Mark 
 vii. 34. 
 
 Hvo |jif| Kpi6i)T€.] Se below v. 12 iva. /jltj v-ito Kpicriv iricn)T€. It is a 
 repetition of the words in the Sermon on the Mount, Matt. vii. 1, cf. ib. 
 V. 23 foil. 
 
 irpb TOV BupoJv ?(rTT)Kev.] Matt. xxiv. 33 orav iSi^T£ iravTa to-Vto. ywiixTKen 
 OTL eyyus i(TTiv eiri dvpaii, Apoc. iii. 20 iSov ccrTTjKa iirl rrjv dvpav /cat Kpovut, 
 Plut. Mor. 128 F h/toi it,6\i<s...iTvp€T0v Trepl 6vpa<; OVTOS ■^8»;, 6opvpovix,€voi 
 o-TcAAouo-tv eavTows. Even to the brethren the Comiug is a waruing as 
 well as a comfort and encouragement. Winer p. 152 mentions Ovpai 
 in his list of anarthrous words. 
 
 10. virdS£i7|Jia.] John xiii. 15 vTroSeiy/jLa eSuKa vfuv iva Ka^ws iyoy 
 iiroiijcra v/uv kol vfi.fi's TroiTJre, 2 Pet. ii. 6, Sir. xliv. 16 'Evw^ ^vT]p€crTrj(Ti 
 Kupiu), vir6SeiyiJ.a p.iTo.voia's rati ytveats. Phryniohus says the correct 
 form is Trapa.Say/j.a, we find however in Xen. de re eq. ii. 2 ravra 
 VTroSeiy/jLaTa ecrrat r(3 iroiX.oSdiJi.vg. 
 
 KaKOTaSCas.] Only here in N.T., used by Malachi i. 13. For the 
 spelling see WH. App. p. 153 foil., and compare above ipiOia iii. 16, 
 aXa^oviais, iv. 16. The verb occurs below v. 13. Both are classical. 
 
 Tois •irpo<j)'fiTas.] How is it that no mention is made of the great 
 example to which St. Peter refers in the words Xptcrros iiradev vwep v/jlSiv 
 v/uv vTro\ifx.iTa.v(i>v viroypa.ij,/j,6v ? Was it less familiar, less effective, less 
 acceptable ? But how then could they be Christians ? Is it that Christ 
 has already been alluded to as the Just, or that St James wishes to fix 
 their thoughts on Him rather as the Lord of Glory than as the pattern 
 of suffering? The example of the prophets is referred to Matt. v. 12, 
 xxiii. 34, Acts vii. 52, esp. Heb. xi. Noah, Abraham, Jacob, Moses, 
 Isaiah, Jeremiah are preeminent patterns of endurance. Cf. Isa. 1. 
 5 foil.. Lam. iii. 27 foil., Heb. vi. 12 /Ai^itrjTai tS>v 8ia tticttvos kol /jLaxpo- 
 Ov/ji-iai KX,r]povoiiovvTO)v ras iirayyeXias. In Heb. xiii. 7 [ji,vr]iJi,ov£V€Te twv 
 ■^yovfievwv v[j,S>v. ..wv avaOeiopovvTa tt/v tKySacrtv rijs a,va(7Tpo(j>rjs fiifieicrde rrjv 
 iria-Tiv, it is possible that there is allusion to the life and death of St. 
 James himself. Compare Introduction p. cxxiii. 
 
 cXdXTjirav Iv to ov(S)i.aTi.] Honoured as they were they still had to 
 bear persecution. Speaking ' in the name ' means speaking as repre- 
 sentatives of Him who sent them, cf. below v. 14. The simple dative 
 
152 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 is found Matt. vii. 22, Jer. xliv. (li.) 16 6 Xoyos ov iXdXrja-a's irpos ^iftas 
 ovo/nari Kvpiov. This approaches the force of i^n-l t£ ovo/Aart (depending 
 on his name, i.e. through his power), which occurs both in N.T., as in 
 Acts iv. 17, 18, and in classical writers, as Dem. Lept 495. 7, Isae. 58. 
 28 and 85. 3 with Sclibmann's n. Diodorus xviii. 57 has ypafas 
 iTnrrToXrjv Ik tov tIov ySacriXeuv ovo/iaros. 
 
 11. |j.aKap(^a|i.cv Tovs iiro|i«£vavTas.] As in i. 12, and Dan. xii. 12, cf. Matt, 
 xxiv. 1 3 6 Se viro/JLeivas ets reXos oStos crto^^treTat. iTrofJ-ovr] is found in 
 connexion with fj^aKpoOvfjiia 2 Cor. vi. 4ff., Col. i. 11, 2 Tim. iii. 10. 
 
 'I(ip.] Job is not an example of what we should call patience except 
 in his first acceptance of calamity (i. 21, ii. 10). We should rather say 
 that his complaint in ch. iii., his indignation against his friends for 
 their want of faith in him, his agony at the thought that God had 
 forsaken him, were symptoms of an extremely sensitive, vehement, 
 impatietit character, which has very little either of Stoic wTrdOeia or of 
 Christian TrpavTrjs, but excites our admiration by its passionate outbursts 
 of exalted feeling. The word means however endurance, and may well 
 be applied to the persistent trust in God shown in ch. xiii. 10, 15, xvi. 
 19-21, xix. 25 foil. It corresponds to e/caprepijcre, used of Moses, Heb. 
 xi. 25. For the reference to Job, cf. Tanchuma 29. 4 ap. Schoettgen 
 S.H. 1009 foil, si pauper stat in tentatione et non recalcitrat, ille duplum, 
 accipiet in inundo futuro. Ex cujus exemplo hoc addiscis ? Exemph 
 Johi qui tentatus est in hoc mundo, Deus vero duplum ipsi reddidit. 
 
 ■f|Koilo-aTe.] So in the Seimon on the Mount ■^Kovo-are on ippriOrj. It 
 is properly used of oral instruction in the synagogue. The aor. here 
 must be translated, as in many other instances, by the Eng. perfect. 
 
 tJi t4\os Kupfov el!86T£.] ' You are acquainted with the story and have 
 seen in it how God makes all turn out for good.' Alf. reads iSere with 
 AB^, translating ' see also,' which gives a very uncouth sentence, and 
 would imply that they could have heard the story without seeing 
 the end. On the confusion between et and i in the MSS. see note on 
 iii. 3 i8e. Ewald understands teXos as ' das Ziel welches Gott bei Job's 
 Leiden hatte, namlich seine Uebe zu zeigen,' so Schegg and others, 
 comparing 1 Tim. i. 5 to tcXos t^s TrapayyeXi'a? ccttiv dyair^, but 
 it is better understood (as in the Peshitto version exitum quemi ei 
 fecit dominus) of the end appointed by the Lord, viz. Job's final 
 prosperity and the declaration of his integrity against Satan and the 
 friends, cf. Heb. xiii. 7 uii' ava$eo)povvTes rrjv lic/8ao-tv t^s dvaorrpo^'^s 
 /ti/AeicrSc Trp' TricrTiv and Job xiii. 12 6 8e Kvpio5 eiXdyryert ra ccrxara 'I(o/8 
 r] TO, cfji/TTpoo'dev, 2 Cor. xi. 15 wv to TeA,os ^crrai Kara to. ipya avrcuv, 1 Pet, 
 iv. 17 Ti TO TcXos Tuiv aTreiOovvTuiv ; For the subjective genitive K.vpiov 
 cf. 1 Pet. iii. 14 tov tjto^ov avTwv firj (^oyS^Sijrc, 2 Cor. xi. 26 kivSvvoi's 
 TTorafjiSiv, XiyerrSv, k.t.X., Test. Gad. p. 685 opov Kvpiov eK^i^aoOe ' wait 
 the limit appointed by the Lord,' so SiKaioa-uvr], dprpn) ©eoC. Many of 
 the older commentators and Bassett take Kvpiov of Christ, contrasting 
 what the readers had seen of his sufferings with what they had heard 
 about Job. But this, instead of giving one perfect illustration of the 
 result of suffering rightly borne, gives two imperfect and barely intel- 
 ligible illustrations. If reAos is supposed to refer to the Resurrection 
 
V 10-12 NOTES 1&3 
 
 and Ascension, the main point of the comparison (suffering) is omitted : 
 if it refers to the Crucifixion, the encouragement is wanting. Moreover 
 if Kvpwv is to bear this force here, we should at least have expected 
 the article with it ; and the writer in the preceding verse bid them 
 look to the prophets as their examples, not to Christ. 
 
 8ti.] Epexegetic of reXos. ' Ye have see the final result of God's 
 working, (showing) that God is merciful.' Alford, taking it in the sense 
 ' because,' gives a very forced explanation ' look on to the end which 
 God gave Job; and it is well worth your while to do so, for you will 
 find that he is very pitiful.' 
 
 iroWo-irXaxvos.] 'Sympathetic' Occurs elsewhere only in Hermas J/aMcZ. 
 iv. 3. 5, Sim. v. 7. 4. The equivalent 7roXveA.eos is found in Psa. ciii. 8, 
 Joel ii. 13. The substantive ■KoXva-irXxx.yxvia is found in Herm. Vis. i. 3. 2, 
 ih. ii. 2. 8, iv. 2. 3, Mand. ix. 2, Justin M. Tryph § 55 ; TfoXueu'cnrXay- 
 yyo<i Herm. Sim,, v. 4, 7roXi;eDo-irXay;^i/ta in Sim., viii. 6. 1, see the n. 
 on Yis. i. 3. 2, and cf. £vcnrXa-y;j(vos Eph. iv. 32, 1 Pet. iii. 8, (nrXa.yxviifiii.a.i 
 common in the Gospels, both derived from such phrases as (nrXdyyfya ikeov; 
 Luke i. 78, tnrA.. oiKTipixuiv Col. iii. 12, ra crirXay^va tSv ayiwv dvairavcTat 
 Philem. 7, KX^ieiv to, cnrkdyxya 1 John iii. 17, to. a-TrXdyxva. avrov ■Trepurcro- 
 repus eis i/iSs icrnv 2 Cor. vii. 15, avrov, tovt ecm to. e/xa a-irXdyxva 'my 
 very heart' Philem. 12, Prov. xii. 10, Isa. Ixiii. 15, where Vulg. has 
 WMltitudo viscerum, tuorum. The sing, is used in the same sense in 
 Test. Zab. 8 o ®eos aTroo'rcXXct to (nrXdyyvov avrov cm T^s y^s koX ottov 
 cipij crirXdy)(ya iXeovs iv ai™ KaroiKei, Herm. Sim. ix. 24 (nr\dy)(yov cjj^ovTes 
 eiri irdvTa avOpoyn-ov. The word is sometimes used metaphorically by 
 classical writers, as by Eur. Med. 220 irplv dvBp6<s a-irXdyxyov eK[x.a6iiv, 
 but this is of disposition in a wider sense, not specially of compassion. 
 See Vorst, p. 35 foil. 
 
 oIkt(p|i.(i>v.] 'Compassionate.' Occurs elsewhere in N.T. only in Luke 
 vi. 36, found in LXX. Clem. R. i. 23 and Theocritus. 
 
 12. irpb iravToiv 8^ (ji'f| o|tvvETE.] This is a reminiscence of our Lord's 
 words (Matt. v. 34) in which, instead of the old rule ovk hnopK-qa-ei^, he 
 lays down the Christian rule /xi) op.6(rai 0X10% . . . tcrTio Sk 6 Xdyos vp-wv val 
 vai, ov ov, TO Se Trepurcrov tovtuiv iK tov irovrjpov ia-riv. The language 
 of the O.T. itself is not by any means uniform on this subject. A Jew 
 might defend the use of oaths by appealing to Deut. vi. 13 (bidding 
 the people swear by the name of God), Psa. Ixiii. 11 eTratve^ijVcTai Tras 6 
 6p.vvu)v iv avrS, Isa. Ixv. 16, Jer. xii. 16 (though in these passages it is 
 rather the faith in Jehovah symbolized by the oath than the oath 
 itself which is meant) ; also to the practice of Elijah (1 Kings xvii. 
 1), Micaiah (ib. xxii. 14), and the words ascribed (dv^pcoirtKoiTepov, -as 
 Athanasius says, ap. Suic. ii. p 513) to God himself. Gen. xxii. 16, 
 Psa. cv. 9, Isa. xl. 23, see particularly Heb. vi. 16 f., vii. 21. On the 
 other hand we read in Sir. xxiii. 7 iratSetW o-To/xaros aKovcraTt TiKVa...iv 
 TOts )(€iX€<riV avTOv KaTaXrj<f>Oi^oreTai d/tapTuXos, Ka\ XoiSopos Kal v7rfpr)<j>avo<s 
 (TKavSaXur6i^(T0VTai iv a^TOts. opKia p,rj iOicrrjs to trTop-a aov koI ovop-acria toB 
 0eoC /A'^ crvve0ia'6fii...dvyip iroXvopKos irXiqtrOritTerai avop,ia<; k.t.X., Prov. 
 XXX. 9 Xva p.^] irei/Tj^Eis KXhpw Kal 6/w(T(i> to ovopa tov ®eov, which 
 Delitzsch understands of blaspheming against God, cursing him as the 
 
154 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 cause of his misfortunes, Levit. xxiv. 15 avOpiawos os eai' Karapaa-qTai 
 @eov afj.apTiav \iQfj.ij/eTai, 6vofJi.d^(j>v 8e ovofia JS.vpiov 6avaT<a OavarovcrOu). 
 This prohibition gave rise to a variety of forms of swearing in which 
 the name of God was not expressed, see Matt. v. 35, 36, xxiii. 16-22, 
 Philo Spec. Legg. M. 2. p 271 'if a man must swear, let him not swear 
 by God, but by the earth, the sun, the moon, the stars, the heaven.' 
 Elsewhere however Philo gives the higher view (M. 2. p. 184) koXKuttov 
 or] Kai /3LUi<j>e\i(rTaTov Koi ap/iOTTOv XoyiKrj <j)vcrei to avia/xoTOV, out<i)s 
 aXTjdevetv i(f>' CKao-roi; SeSLSayfiivy a)s Tovs Xdyovs opKov; etvai vo^t'^ecr^af 
 oeuTepo9 Se ttXov's ro evopKeiv, ib. p. 271 ov TruTTews rj iroXvopKia TiKp-ripiov 
 aXK a-TncTTia'; ia-rl irapa tois iv tjjpovova-iv, and he goes on to point out 
 the motives, such as hatred, which often lead to swearing. Similarly 
 the Essenes are said to have forbidden all swearing, Joseph. B.J. ii> 8. 
 6 Trav TO prjOkv mr avTwv Icry^vpoTipov opKOv, to Se OfJivvuv TrepuaravTaL )(€ip6v 
 TL ■nj's iirtopKia's viroXafn^dvovTe^, SO Philo M. 2. p. 458 ; hence Herod 
 excused their taking the oath of allegiance (Jos. Ant. xv. 10. 4). It is 
 difficult to reconcile with this what Josephus says of the oaths they 
 had to take in the course of initiation {B.J. ii. 8. 7). So the ancient 
 Greeks, see Pythag. ap. Diog. L. viii. 22 pij op-vvvai Oiovi, do-Keiv yap 
 avTov SeTv d^Loma-Tov Trapi)(eiv, Diod. Sic. x. fr. 16, Epict. Bnch. 33, cf. 
 Wetst. on Matt. v. 37, and the story told of Xenocrates (Cic. pro 
 Balh. 5) cum jurandi causa ad aras accederet una voce omnes judices 
 ne is jv/raret reelamasse. 
 
 On the teaching and practice of the early Christians see Diet, oj 
 Christ. Ant. under 'Oaths,' Nicod. Evang. p. 532 Thilo (on Pilate's 
 adjuring certain witnesses opKitfo v/ias /carot t^s (ToiTr/pia'S Kawrapos, they 
 answer) r/p-eK v6p.ov i)(op,e.v pij 6p.vvuv on apapria ia-ri, Clem. Al. Strom. 
 Vli. 8. p. 861 P. esp. § 51 Treirei.crp.evo's irdvTrj tov ®£ov Eij/ai Trai-rOTe koX 
 aiSovpevo^ prj dXtjOevEiv, dvd^LOv T£ avTov kol \j/evSe(T6a.L yiviicTKcov, rrj 
 (TweiS^crei Trj Oeia, Kai Trj eavrov apKurai p6vaii...TavTr] Se oiSe 6p.vva-iv 
 opKov dTraiTrj6dq, Orig. on Jerem. iv. 2 (where Israel is bidden to 
 swear righteously and truly) says rdxa Trpwrov Sei opoa-ai iv aXyjOua 
 . . . iva ^ttera tovto TrpoKOij/a? ris af los yivrjTai tov p-q opvvnv oX<i)S dXX' 
 e)(ri vol prj Seopevov papTvpiav rov tti/di to vat (Lomm. vol. XV. p. 166), 
 Chrysost. Horn. viii. in Act. (ap. Suic. ii. 510) )(aXa>ov eirt^S/xcv rrj 
 ykiaTTTj- prjSel'; 6p,vvTia tov ®€ov, Photius Epist. i. 34 6 Se eiora^^s Kai 
 iLiEyaXoi/^DT^os dvrip ala~)(yv6Tj<7e.Tai tows Xoyovs op/cu) tio-tovs dirotpaiveiv Kai 
 Trjv Sia. tSv oiKcicDv Tpoiruiv tticttiv dTip.d^iiv, Theodovet Epit. div. deer. 16, 
 o p,€V TraXaios vop,os dTrayopevei to ij/evSo'S, 6 8e ye veos kol tov opKov. 
 Tertullian is inconsistent, denying the lawfulness of oaths in Idol. xi. 
 taceo de perjurio, quando ne jurare quidem liceat, but allowing it in 
 Apol. 33 sed et juramus sic, ut non per genios Caesarum, ita per salulem 
 eorum. For a further discussion see Comment below. 
 
 St. Augustine has some interesting remarks on this verse (Serm. 
 180). He had always, he says, shrunk from taking it as the subject 
 of a sermon, but as it came in the lesson for the day he felt it 
 his duty to oifer some explanation. He sees no harm in oaths if 
 it were not for the danger of committing perjury. They are some- 
 times reijuired in order to induce belief of an important matter, but 
 
V 12 NOTES 155 
 
 as they are certainly too common, it is better to keep on the safe 
 side and avoid them altogether. What especially puzzles him is the 
 ante omnia. ' Is swearing worse than stealing or adultery 1 We must 
 regard it as a hyperbolical phrase used to add weight to the apostolic 
 injunction.' The truer explanation of the Trpo iravriav is to limit the 
 comparison to what immediately precedes. St. James is not thinking 
 of offences against the moral law generally, but only of those modes of 
 expressing impatience of which he had spoken in the preceding verses 
 fiTj oreva^cTe, &C., cf. 1 Pet. iv. 8 rrpo Travrtav rrjv eis eauroiis ayaTrrjv iKTfvrj 
 e^^ovTas, where this precept is compared with the preceding crw^poy-^o-aTe 
 Koi viyi/^are, not with the tirst and great commandment, ' Thou shalt love 
 the Lord thy God.' It must be confessed however that we might 
 rather have expected the angry feeling of injustice to have expressed 
 itself in curses than in oaths. The latter seem lather to betoken 
 irreverence and a low tone as to ordinary truthfulness, which would 
 have come more naturally in speaking of the sins of traders in iv. 13, 
 cf. Clem. Al. Paed. 3. § 79, p. 299 P i-iraino^ Se op/cos Trepl ttcii/tuj' tov 
 7r(i)\ovju.€vou aTTOTTO), and Tert. Idol. xi. For examples of hasty, ir- 
 reverent oaths see 1 Sam. xxvi. 16, 2 Kings v. '20. Still the oath 
 supplies a heightened form of expression for almost any feeling, and 
 especially in the case of angry threats, cf. Philo M. 2. p. 271 cited 
 above. For construction of ofj-vvw cf. Hos. iv. 15 /jltj o/xvveTe Kvpiov: 
 the ace. is common also in classical writers. Other constructions are 
 with Kara, eis, iv. For position of Se see Index s.v. 
 
 fi.i\Te rhv ovpavbv |iTJTe ttjv yffii.] Both are referred to in Matt. v. 34, 35, 
 where, and in Matt, xxiii. 16 foil., other common forms of swearing are 
 specified. 
 
 iJTO).] The only examples cited of this form are 1 Cor. xvi. 22 ijto) 
 dva^E/ta, Psa. ciii. 31, 1 Mace. x. 31 'lepova-aXrjfi ^toi ayia, Aretaeus 
 i. 2. 79, Hippocr. 8. 340 L. Clem. Al. Strom, i. 7. p. 339 P ^tco tis 
 
 TTltTTOS, IJTO) SwaTOS TIS yVUXTlV i^UITiLV, ^TU> CTOt^OS iv 8laKpt(TU koyWV, IJTW 
 
 yopyos iv Ipyovs, quoted from Clem. Rom. 48 with the omission of a final 
 clause rfTut dyvos : in Strom,, vi. 8. p. 778 the same quotation occurs with 
 eo-TO) for r)Tiii in the first two clauses. Hermas {Vis. iii. 3 has p-ovov yj 
 KapSia TT/jos tov ©€ov -^tw, and it occurs in the treatise Ad Diogn. 12 rjrw 
 croi KapSia yvwcrts, ^lor] Se Yoyo's aX.rjOiQ's, and in Epiphanius quoted below. 
 It was formerly read in Plato liep. iii. 361 D, but Stallb. now reads 
 eo-TO), Zur. iTo). Sterrett Epigr. J. in As. Mi. has one instance (no. 31) 
 €1 8c Tis KaKovpyrjCTii, ^to) h'0)(O'S 'HXt'co SeX^vj;, and Prof. W. M. Ramsay 
 {Zt. f. Vgl. Sprachforschwng 1887, p. 386) cites another from Tiberio- 
 polis in Phrygia KaTr/pap.eyos ■^toj auTos koi to, reKva avrov. He also 
 gives several examples of the Phrygian form etroi;. Dr. E. L. Hicks in 
 a private letter suggests that 'it was a late form adopted through false 
 analogy from ^rjOi /Bi^oi, o-rrjOL (TTr/ria. The resemblance of S j8G o-tS, 
 r^v (.p-qv ecTTrjv, ^/xevat ^T^/xevai might well lead to this.' 
 
 TO vol val Kal Tb o8 o6.] ' Let your yea be a yea and your nay a nay ' 
 (and nothing more). I prefer this, which is the ordinary way of taking 
 it, as the simplest and plainest, but Schegg would translate it as a 
 direct quotation from Matt, v, 37 'let yours be the "yea yea" and the 
 
156 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 "nay nay",' and so apparently WH. reading to Nat val koi to Ov ov. 
 Justin M. while quoting from St. Matt, insei-ts the article with St. 
 James {Apol. i. 16 D) and so Clem. Al. Sir. v. 100 quotes to tov 
 K.vpiov ftrjTov, 'icTTio vfjiSiv to val val Kal ov ov, ib. vii. 67 oiKauoiTvvTj'S rjv 
 iiriTOfir] (jidvaL "Eo-tod vfji.S>v to val val Kal ov ov, and Clem. Hem. xix. 2 
 ToTs 8e vo)iiC,ov(Tiv a)S at ypa^al SiSda-KOvcriv oto 6 ©eos 6fi,vv€i t<f>r], ecTTO) 
 vjnoiv TO vol val koX to ov ov. So also Epiphanius Haer. i. p. 44 tov 
 Kvpiov Xeyovros M^ ofivvvai jh^te tov ovpavov /jbi^Te Tyjv yrjv li-yfre erepov Tiva 
 opKov, dXX' TjTO) vjxuiv TO vttt Vat KoX TO OV OV. Rcsch (Zeitschr. f. hirchl. 
 Wissenschaft u. k. Lehen 1888, pp. 283 — 288) regards this variety as a 
 proof that we have in them different renderings of the same Aiamaic 
 logion. Similarly he regards the oXos of Matt, and the Trpo iravToyv of 
 James as standing for the same word in the original ; and compares to 
 val with o 'A/nTjv in Apoc. iii. 14. If Stanley and Alford are right in their 
 explanation of 2 Cor. i. 17 (^ a ^ovXevo/jLai Kara crdpKa fiovXevofiai, iva y 
 Trap' ip.ol TO val val, Kal to ov ov ;) it has no reference to our Lord's words, 
 and is indeed used in an opposite sense, implying either blamable in- 
 consistency or, as others think, over-confidence and obstinacy. 
 • tvo pi'fi 4irb KpCo-iv irio-TiTe.] = tVa fi-r) KplOrjTe above v. 9 : cf. Sir. xkIx. 
 19 djuaprooXos e/iTreo-eiTat £ts Kpla-ui. The judgment would be for the 
 breach of the third commandment. 
 
 13. KaKoiroflet Tis.] See on KaKoiraBla above v. 10. The verb occurs 
 in N.T. only here and in the Second Epistle to Timothy ii. 3 KaKOTrdOrjo-ov 
 (U9 KaXbi (rTpaTuoTrjs, v. 9 KaKOTraOS) p-i'xpi BecrpMv, ib. iv. 5 v^tfie koI KaKO- 
 TrdOrjcrov. For examples of a hypothesis contained in an indicative 
 clause without any hypothetical particle, see above iii. 13 n., 1 Cor. vii. 
 18 TrcptTCT/ATj/AtVos Tts ckX^^ij j fir] iiTLO'irda'do)- iv aKpojivcrTla KeKXrjTal rts; 
 fir] TTepiTeiivetrOw, ib. ver. 27 SeStcrat yvvaiKl ; firj ^^ret Xvcriv. XcXtJO-at aTro 
 yvvaiKO's ; fir] t,r]yu yvvaiKa, ib. ver. 2 1 SovXos iKX,i^Orji ; p/q croi jxiKiTW, Sir. 
 vii. 22 — 26 : also in profane Greek Dem. Cor. p. 317. 1.5 dSiKct rts eKaJi/ ; 
 opyrj Kal Tifjutopla Kara tovtov e^-qp-apTC Tts aKwv ; (Tvyyvoifirj dvTl r^s Tip.iapla<; 
 TovTM, id. Androt. 601 da-Oevio'Tepo'; el; rots ap^ovauv iffirjyov- c^ojSij /cat 
 TovTo ; ypd<l>ov, Juv. 3. 100 rides, maiore oachinno excutitur with Mayor's 
 n., Roby Gr. § 1553, 1555. In Laiin the protasis is usually regarded 
 as a c.itegorical assumption, and so some would take it here, and even 
 in such forms as that in iii. 13, .where the sentence begins with the 
 interrogative f)ronoun. The interrogative is more in accordance with 
 the vivacity whjch characterizes St. James. 
 
 (V 4(i,tv.] See above iii. 13. and 1 Cor. xv. 12 \eyova-lv rtvcs iv bp-lv. 
 
 irpoo-evx^o-Oio.] Instead of breaking out into oaths. 
 
 ev8«(i.et.] Classical, found elsewhere in N.T. only in Acts xxvii. 22, 25. 
 
 >|#a\\^T<ii.] Properly used of playing on a stringed instrument, as 
 Luc. Paras. 1 7 ovre ydp avXeiv ivi ^wpl'S aiXlov ovt€ tj/aXXeiv dviv kvpas. 
 We find it also vised of singing with the voice and with the heart, 
 Bph. V. 19, 1 Cor. xiv. 15. The word is only used of sacred music in 
 N.T., but in Sir. ix. 4 of a hired citharistria, /jlcto. \j/akX.ovcrr)^ p.T] 
 ivSt\i)(i,^€, 
 
 14. do-ecvci.] 'Sick,' as in Matt. x. 8 and often both in classical 
 and Hellenistic Greek. A special case of Ka,Koira6la, 
 
V 12—14 NOTES 157 
 
 Tois irpeo-pvT^pous Tfjs 6KK\Tio-£as.] The same phrase occurs Acts xx. 17 
 (of Ephesiis). The ecclesiiistical constitution of the Jewit^h churches 
 was developed out of the synagogue, in which, if the place was |ioiiulous, 
 there was the council of elders (Luke vii. 3) one or more of whom, 
 entitled apxia-vvayuyyoi, like Jairus (Luke viii. 41, 49), wiis intrusted 
 with the superintendence of the religious meetings,! cf . J), of E. under 
 ' Bishop ' and 'Synagogue,' also Diet. ofChr. ^rai.pp. 1699 foil. and Kothe 
 Die Anfange der christlichen Kirche, pp. 147 foil. Other references to 
 Christian elders are Acts xi. 30 (the church at Autioch send their con- 
 tributions to the elders at Jerusalem), ib. xxi. 18 (the elders were pi esent 
 during Paul's interview with James), 1 Pet. v. 1 irpctr/SuTepous cv vfuv 
 TrapaKaXto 6 a-vfnrpea-^vrepo^. Ranch contests the genuineness of this 
 passage on the ground that the writer elsewhere speaks of SiSao-KoXoi 
 and (rvvayu>yq, not as here of TrpccrySvTtpot and iKKXrjo'ia ; bvxt Ikk. and 
 a-vv. are convertible terms, not only in early Christian literature (for 
 which see note on ii. 2, Schiirer I.e. p. 58 and Harnack in 2t. f. wissensch. 
 Theol. 1876, p. 104), but in the LXX. A reason for the use of ckk. here 
 may be that it is a general word for the permanent body of the Church, 
 iind is appropriately used for the title of its ministers (cf. Matt. xvii. 17 
 'if thy brother sin against thee ' . . . eiTre i-g iKKkrjcria., which has much the 
 same force as ' the elders of the Church ' here), while crway. refers 
 strictly to the congregation in a particular building. If James pre- 
 sided over the council at Jerusalem and wrote the letter preserved in 
 the Acts, he cannot have been ignorant of trpea-fivTepoi. We need not 
 of course suppose the word to be used in its later hierarchical sense 
 (see Diet, of Ghr. Ant. under 'Priest') : Bede in loe. understands it 
 simply of age and experience, iriatato praeeipiens ut ipse pro se oret et 
 psallat, infirmamti autem vel eorpore vel fide Tnandcms ut, qui majorem 
 sustinuit plagam, plurimorum se adjutorio et hoe senioruvi eurare inemin- 
 erit ; neque ad juniores minusque doctos causam suae imbeeillitatis 
 referat, ne forte quid per eos alloeutionis aut eonsilii nocentis aceipiat. 
 It seems better however to regard it as an official title, denoting the 
 leaders of the local Christian society (oi Trpoio-ra/ievoi 1 Thes. v. 12, ot 
 fiyovfLivoi Heb. xiii. 17), who would exercise a general superintendence 
 over the activity of the individual members and over the use to be 
 made of the ^^apicr/iara. Those who possessed these gifts in the largest 
 measure would doubtless be themselves included in the council of 
 elders (to irpea-pvripiov 1 Tim. iv. 14). On notification of a case of sick- 
 ness, the council would, we may suppose, consider whether it was a fit 
 case for the exercise of the ^dpurfia, and would depute some of their 
 body to attend to the case and unite in prayer for the sick person 
 (Matt, xviii. 20). Schneckenburger is, I think, right in his view that 
 the writer is not here commending a new remedy, but remedii semper 
 usitati reetuni usum commendare...Noluit twmultario charismatum usu 
 ordinem,jam doeendi promiscue prurituiiii. 1) lahefaetatum, magisturhari. 
 
 1 Cf. Schftrer Jewish FeopU Div. II. vol 2 § 27, \>\<. 53—65, § 31, pii. 243—252, 
 Eng. tr. ed. I. We learn from Epiphanius that the Jewish titles were still retained 
 iu his time by the Ebionites of Palestine (Haer. xxx. 18 irpetr^vTepovs yap oBtoi 
 ^Xovai Kol apx'crvP'^y'iyovs). 
 
158 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 In Clem. Horn. Ejo. ad Jao. 12 it is said to be the duty of the deacons, 
 as the eyes of the bishop, to inform the congregation of all cases of 
 sickness, in order that they may visit the sick and give such 
 assistance as the president may think fit. Wetst. quotes from Rabbi- 
 nical writings showing that it was the custom to send for a rabbi in sick- 
 ness, and that sometimes as many as four visited the sick at one time. 
 Polycarp {ad Phil. 6) mentions visitation of the sick as a duty of 
 the elders Jirto-KeTrro/uci/ot TravTas atr^Ei/cis, see Acts xx. 35. On the treat- 
 ment of the sick and the use of the physician cf. Sir. xxxviii. 1-15 esp. 
 v. 9 ev a.ppw(TTrjfw,TL (rov...tv^ai K.vpL<o (cat auTOS tacrerat (re. 
 
 irpoo-evlao-euo-av «ir' airov.] ' Let them pray (stretching their hands) over 
 him.' Origen (Horn, in Lev. ii. 4) compaiing the ways of propitiation 
 under the old and new covenants, quotes this verse as follows si quis 
 autem infirmatur, vocet jyi'eshyteros ecelesiae, et imponant ei Tnanus, 
 ungentes eum in nomine Domini. Et oratio fidei salvahit infirmum, et, 
 si in peccaiis Juerit, remitteniur ei. I do not think this implies any 
 denial of the beneficial effect of oil in bodily sickness ((\s Dr. Plummer 
 seems to hold in his note on this passage) : it is merely that Origen 
 does not care to dwell upon it, as it is unconnected with his particular 
 subject. For the ace. cf. /xri KXaUre ctt' e/it Luke xxiii. 28, ovo/xa^etv 
 cTTi Tovi ixpvTa's TO, TrveviJi,aTa to ovo/j-a tov K.vpiov Acts xix. 13. It often 
 alternates with the dat. as in Zech. xii. 10 Koxj/ovrai, irr airov, d)s tV 
 dyaTnjTu, and o-TrXayxvi^oiiai ctt' airov Matt. xv. 32, Mark viii. 2, ix. 22, 
 but €ir' airrj Luke vii. 13 ; so tticttevw with ace. Acts ix. 42, but with 
 dat. Eom. iv. 3, 1 Tim. i. 16 : cf. Winer p. 508, 510. 
 
 aX«Ci)ravT£s eXaCij).] Anointing the sick was customary, see D. of B. 
 under ' Medicine ' and also vol. iii. p. 395, and for instances Isa. i. 6, 
 Luke x. 34. Herod in his last illness was recommended a bath of oil 
 by his physicians (Jos. B.J. i. 33. 5). The medicinal properties of oil 
 are al-so praised by Philo (Somn. M. i. 666), Pliny (N.H. xxiii. 34-50), 
 and Galen [Med. Temp. bk. ii.). The latter calls it apunov lafiaToiv 
 ■TrdvTuiv Tois iirjpajjLfj,evoK Koi av)Qji.u)Be(ri (Tutfi.a.criv. Here the anointing is 
 accompanied by a miraculous healing in answer to prayer, as we 
 are told of the Twelve (Mark vi. 13) rjX.u<fiOV iXaita ttoXXovs appuxr- 
 Tovi Kol l6epa.Tre.vov. Nothing is specified as to the use of oil in 
 the promise recorded by the same Evangelist (xvi. 18) etti appiaarovi 
 ^Etpas eTTiOi^crovo-iv koI /caXSs e^ov(rLv, or in Acts xxviii. 8, where St. Paul 
 is said to have healed the father of Publius by prayer and the laying 
 on of hands. In the church of Corinth (1 Cor. xii. 9) gifts of healing 
 (^aptcr/naTa lafidriov) are mentioned along with the other manifestations 
 of the Spirit, but again nothing is said as to their mode of working. 
 So too Irenaeus (ii. 32. 4) asserts that miraculous powers might still 
 be witnessed in his day, aAXot tous Ka/Avoiras 8ta r^s tZv )(eip<av eTriOecrewi 
 lUvTat, but is silent as to the use of oil : Augustine in his long list of 
 contemporary miracles (Civ. D. xxii. 8) only once mentions the use of 
 oil. On the other hand Tertullian (ad Scap. 4) says Septimius Severus 
 was cured with oil by the Christian Proculus ; and in the Gospel of 
 Nicodemus (c. 19) Seth, having asked for oil from the tree of life to heal 
 his father Adam, is told that this is impossible, but that hereafter the 
 
V U NOTES 159 
 
 Christ would come koL dXeii/'ei omtov ™ toiouto) iXai'ta Koi a.va(TTiqcrera.i. . . 
 KoX TOTE diro Trdorjjs votrov 'uxOrjcrerai. Irenaous (i. 21. 5, cf. August. 
 Haeres. 16, Epiphan. Haeres. xxx. 2) says that the Gnostic sect of the 
 Heracleonites anointed the dying with oil and water to protect them 
 from hostile spirits in the other world. Chrysostom, Horn. 3 in Malt. 
 (Migne Patrol. Gr. vol. 57, col. 384), magnifying the sanctity of Church 
 vessels generally, says, those know how far our lamps surpass all others 
 ocroi.jU.6Ta. Trto'rews koX euKatpajs eXato) ■j^wa.fi.fvoi voarj/iaTa ikvcrav, from 
 which it is inferred that the oil for anointing the sick was taken from 
 the lamps used in church, as is still the custom in the Greek Church, cf . 
 Neale's Eastern Church, Introd. pp. 966, 1037, Diet, of Chr. Ant. under 
 'Oil' p. 1453 foil. Oassianus speaking of Abbot Paul says {CoU. vii. 26) 
 such virtue proceeded from him, that cum da oleo quod corpore con- 
 tigisset unguerentur infinni, confestim cunctis valetudinihus curarentur. 
 This may be compared with Ohrys. Ilom. in Mart. {Patr. vol. 50. col. 
 664), where he recommends, as a remedy against drunkenness, the 
 anointing of the body with oil taken from the martyrs' tombs. So the 
 Nestorians mix oil, water and the relics of some saint or, if these are 
 not to be procured, dust from the scene of a martyrdom, and anoint 
 the sick with it (Neale, I.e. p. 1036 and cf. Greg. T. Mir. Mart. i. 2). 
 On the Oil of the Cross see Diet. Chr. Ant. I.e. 
 
 From these facts it may be probably inferred that, the anointing 
 with simple oil having ceased to be effective in healing the sick, some 
 endeavoured to add fresh virtue to the oil either by special consecra- 
 tion or by combining it with the relics of saints, while others, like the 
 followers of Heracleon and the Church of Rome in later times, sup- 
 posed it to retain a purely spiritual efficacy, thus changing a hypo- 
 thetical appendage to the injunction (kSv d/xaprias ^ imroiiqKuii) into the 
 essence of the injunction itself. There is, I believe, no recorded 
 instance during the first eight centuries of the anointing of the sick 
 being deferred, as having only a spiritual efficacy, to the point of 
 death, except among the Heracleonites, whose conception of the use 
 of the anointing, as described by Epiphanius I.e., is almost in verbal 
 agreement with the language of a monastic rule for Extreme Unction 
 contained in Martene {De Antiquis Eeclesias Ritibus, vol. 5 p. 241) 
 ut more militis uncti praeparatus ad certamen aereas possit superare 
 
 Many stories are told of cures wrought by the Unction for the Sick 
 in D. of Christian Ant. pp. 1455 and 2004. In the Greek Church the 
 oil, called aiyk'Kia.i-ov, is usually consecrated by seven priests. In the 
 West we find the oil consecrated by laymen and even by women as late 
 as the 6th century. In the 8th century Boniface ordered all pres- 
 byters to obtain the oil of the sick from the bishop. It is curious that 
 in the early church it was not necessary for the anointing to be 
 done by a priest : it was frequently performed by the sick man 
 or by his friends.^ It is not till a.d. 852 that the function of 
 anointing is confined to the priest. The original intention for the 
 
 ^ Caesarius of Aries (502 a.d.) during an epidemic recommends a person to anoint 
 both himself and family with blessed oil {Scrm, 89. 5). 
 
160 THE EPISTLE OE ST. JAMES 
 
 healiag of the body was forgotten and ' the rite came to be regarded 
 as part of a Christian's immediate preparation for death. Hence in 
 the 12th century it acquired the name of unclio extrema. ... In the 13th 
 century it was placed by schoolmen among the seven rites to which 
 they then limited the application of the term sacrament.' D. of G. A, 
 
 "rhe effect of this sacrament is thus defined by the Council of Trent 
 {sessio decima quarto). After declaring (cap. 1) that it was ordained 
 by Christ (MarJi vi. 13) and promulgated in this verse by St James, 
 the decree continues (cap. 2) res et effectus hujus sacramenti illis 
 verbis explicatv/r : Et oratio fidei salvahit inji/rmwrn et alleviabit eum 
 Dominus ; et si in 2}eccatis sit, dimittentur ei. Res etenim haec est gratia 
 S2yvritus sancti, cujus Unclio delieta, si quae sint adhuc expianda, ac 
 jjeccati reliquias ahstergit et aegroti animam, alleviat et conJvrmat...et 
 sanitatem corporis interdum, ubi saluti animae expiedierit, consequitur. 
 The dogma is clenched by tUe following anathemas: Can. I. Si quis 
 dixerit extremam Unctionem non esse vere et propi'ie Sacramentv/m a 
 Ghristo Dotnivo nostro instiiutwm et a beato Jacobo Apostolo promul- 
 gatum, sed ritum tanlum acceptum a patribus aut Jigmentum hwmanum ; 
 anathema sit. Can. II. Si quis dixerit sacram injvrinorum Unctionem 
 non conferre gratiani nee remittere peocata nee alleviare infirmos ; sedja/m 
 cessasse, quasi olim fuerit gratia curationum ; anatJiema sit. Similarly 
 in Canons III. and IV. those are anathematized who think that the 
 Iloman rite is opposed to the teaching of St. James and may be safely 
 neglected by Christians, as well as those who think that the Elders 
 mentioned by St. James are other than episcopally ordained priests. 
 The Iloman Catechism adds that it is only to be administered to those 
 who are dangerously ill, that the oil is to be applied to those parts of 
 the body in quibus potissimum, sentiendi vis eminet, eyes, ears, nose, 
 mouth, hands, feet, renes etiam veluti voluptatis et libidinis sedes. Pastors 
 must instruct their people that by this sacrament venial sins are 
 remitted, the soul is freed from the weaknesses contracted by sin, and 
 filled with courage, hope, and joy. If bodily health does not now 
 follow it, this is to be ascribed to the want of faith of those who 
 administer or receive the sacrament. In the form of Visitation for 
 the Sick, in the English Prayei'-book of 1549, anointing was allowed if 
 the sick person desired it : ' then shall the priest anoint him on the 
 forehead or breast only, making the sign of the Cross and saying thus ' 
 (a prayer for the inward anointing of the soul and for a restoration 
 of bodily health). 
 
 As regards the Greek Church Dr. King says {Rites and Ceremonies 
 of the Greek Ghwrch in Russia, 1772, p. 305) 'though the Greek Church 
 reckons it (the anointing of the sick) in the number of her mysteries, 
 yet it is certain there is nothing throughout the whole oflice which 
 implies that it should be administered only to persons periculose aegro- 
 tantibus et mortis perieulo imminente, as is prescribed in the Roman 
 Church. On the conti'ary it may ... be used in any illness as a pious 
 and charitable work, but not of necessity ; and thence I presume the 
 doctors of this church maintain that this mystery is not obligatory or 
 necessary to all persons.' 
 
V 14, 15 NOTES 161 
 
 It is curious that there is no note on this verse in Theophylact, 
 Euth. Zig., or Cramer's Catena. Oecumenius on aXeiif/avrei iXai<a 
 refers simply to the miracles in the Gospels without alluding to any 
 sacramental use of oil in his own day : tovto koL tov Kvpiov ert tois 
 av$p<i)Trois <Twa,va<TTp(.<^oixivov oi d7rooToA.oi hroiovv aXucjiOVTes tovs dcrOc- 
 voSvTas iXaito Koi Iwixevoi,. Bade in like manner speaks only of the use 
 of oil for healing bodily disease : koo et apostolos feoisse in Evangelio 
 legvmus, et nuna JEcclesiae consvetudo tenet ut infirmi oleo oonsecrato 
 ungantur a presbyteris et oratione comitante sanentw. Nee solum pres- 
 byteris, sed, ut Innocentius papa scribit, etiam omnibus Ghristianis uti 
 licet eodem oleo in sua aut suoruin necessitate ungendo, quod tamen oleum, 
 non nisi ab episcopis licet confici. Nam quod ait, ' Oleo in nomine 
 Domini,' significat oleum Gonsecratwm in nomine Domini : vel certe quia 
 etiam, cum ungvnt infirmum, nomen Domini super eum invocare debent. 
 Luther's opponent, Cardinal Cajetan, in his comment on this verse 
 denies that it has any reference to the Sacrament of Extreme Unction : 
 Textus non dicit ' Infirmatwr quis ad mortem V sed absolute ^ Infirmatur 
 quis 1 ' et effectum dicit infirmis alleviationem, et de remissione pecca- 
 torum non nisi conditionaliter loquitur. . . . Praeter hoc quod Jacobus ad 
 unum aegrum multos presbyteros twm orantes turn ungentes mandat 
 voca/ri, quod ab extrema unctione alienum est. 
 
 Iv ra ovdjJiaTi ToB EvpCov.] In v. 10 we had the same phrase used of 
 the prophets only with the omission of the article before K. It is 
 probable however that the words t. K., which are bracketed by WH., 
 are merely an explanatory gloss, as they are not found in B and are 
 variously given in the other MSS. In that case to ovo/x,a will be used 
 here as in 3 John 7 (where see Westcott), Acts v. 41 (where aiToS or 
 some other specifying genitive is added in the inferior MSS.), Lev. 
 xxiv. 11, cf. above ii. 7, and the similar use of rj 68os in Acts ix. 2, 
 xix. 9, &c.^ All cures were wrought in the name of Jesus Christ ; cf . 
 Mark xvi. 17 ev r<3 ovojjm/ti fi,ov...e7n appuxTTOvi ^eipa.'S en-iOyjaovuiv, 
 Luke X. 17, John xiv. 13, Acts iii. 6, 16, iv. 10, xvi. 18, xix. 13 (of 
 the exorcists). 
 
 15. ■fj rfx*l '^*is TioTews-] Prayer proceeding from faith, cf. i. 6. 
 
 a-iitra tJiv kohvovto.] ' Shall restore to health him who is ailing,' cf. 
 Mark v. 23 (lay thy hands upon her) oircos a-u>6^ koX ^'qa-erai, ib. vi. 56, 
 iii. 4, viii. 35, &c. : so in classical writers, Lys. p. 107 'AvSoklBt]^ e^ei to, 
 fi^-qwrpa <7Q)o-as rrp/ avrov \pvyriv iripdiv 8ia Ta^Ta a.Tro6av6vTu>v : hence the 
 word aSxTTpov was used of a doctor's fee. This is the only passage in 
 the N.T. in which Kap-vw is found in this sense, though it is common 
 enough in classical writers, who also use the aor. and perf. participles 
 of the dead. I see no ground for the distinction made by some 
 between aa-OevSi and Kap-vm. 
 
 lyepei oirbv o Kilpios.] Cf. Mark i. 31 irpoa-^XOwv yjyapev avT'qv, Matt. 
 ix. 5, Psa. xli. 8-10. Dean Plumptre compares Acts ix. 34 'J. C. 
 maketh thee whole.' The R.C. interpreters understand it of spiritual 
 comfort. 
 
 1 Compare Clem. R. ii. 13 'Iva ri) Svo/m /i-h 0Ka(^<l>wv-<-a', where Lightfoot refets 
 to his note on Igq^t. ^h. 3, also Taylor, Jewish Fathers, p. 81. 
 
 M 
 
162 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 kHv.] Not to be taken in its more usual sense ' even if,' as Alford 
 and Huther. The latter denies that it can ever have the copulative 
 force, but see Mark xvi. 18 Kav davaa-Lfjiov n iriuxriv, Luke xiii. 9 kov fiev 
 iroirjairi Kapirov, Demosth. S'.JJ. 411 ovtos iKTpeireTai /x£ vvv airavTuyv, kclv 
 a.vayKa(T6rj ttov crvvTvxelv, aTreirrjSriCTev evOeoi'S, Xen. Anab. i. 8, 12 KBpos 
 ejSoa otynv to crTpa,T€v/j,a Kara, fiecrov to tS>v 7ro\eiJ,L(ov OTi eKei ySaciXeiis etrj, 
 Kav tout', €tf)Trj, vmui/jbev, TrdvO' rj/juv TreTTOiTjTai, ih. iii. 36, Isaeus p. 66, 4 
 ofioioig iiTrap^et tyjv avTr/v eivai jx/qTipa, Kav iv tuJ TraTp(fu> /jLevrj tis oXkw, kAv 
 iKTTOLrjdrj, and often in the newly discovered Constitution a/ Athens, e.g. 
 § 61 Kav Tiva a,Tro\ii.pOTOvq(TUi(TLV Kpivoviriv iv T(a SiKaaTrjpiio, Kav [A,kv dA.<3 
 TLfiwcnv. 
 
 ajjiaprCas ■p TrsiroinKtis.] We might ask why St. James puts the com- 
 mission of sin hypothetically after he had distinctly said •jroXXa TrTaiofiev 
 ttTravTEs. But the clause is probably to be taken as meaning ' if he has 
 committed sins which have given rise to this sickness,' cf . Matt. ix. 2-5 
 (the healing of the paralytic), John v. 14, ih. ix. 2, 1 Cor. xi. 30, Deut. 
 xxviii. 22, 27, Psa. xxxviii., Job xxxiii. 19 foil. There is a Jewish 
 saying 'No sick man recovers from sickness till his sins have been 
 forgiven ' (Nedarim f. 41a cited by Schneckenburger). Lange com- 
 pares Isa. xxxiii. 24 ' The inhabitant shall not say I am sick : the 
 people that dwell therein shall be forgiven their iniquity.' 
 
 d(|>c6<i<r£Tai avTu.] Impersonal : ' forgiveness shall be extended to him,' 
 cf. Matt. vii. 2 avTi/xeTprjOrja-iTaL avTw, ih. ver. 7 ^oOrjcriTai, xii. 32 os iav 
 tiirg \oyov Kara tov vlov tov av6pw7rov atj^eO-qaeTai aiiTu), XXV. 29, Luke 
 xiv. 14 avTaTToSodi^a-eTai, 'Rom. x. 10 KapSia 7no-T€ijeTai...o-T0/xaTt ofioXo- 
 yiiTai, 1 Pet. iv. 6 ei-i^yyeXia-Ori, Polyc. Fhil. 2 d<t>ieTe Kal dtfaOrjiTeTai, 
 vfuv, Clem. E.I. 13, Euseb. lI.E. ii. 9 KaTO. ttjv oSov Miwa-ev ddyiOfivai 
 avTio VTTO TOV laKUipov. 
 
 16. l|a)i,oXo7eto-ee oSv dW^iXois rds onapTfas.] Instead of ras dynapTtas, 
 read by WH. Ti. Treg. with the best MSS., Alford reads to. -irapairTia- 
 fi.aTa, found in K L Pesh., Theophylact, Oecumenius, and Origen in 
 Froverh. (Mai JVov. Bih. vii. 51) o 'laKco/Jos <l>t](Av, dAArjAots i^ayyeXkcTC 
 TO. ■TrapaTTTuip.aTa v/xHv ottws ladrpre. It may perhaps receive some slight 
 support from the Didaohe 4. 14 €V iKKk-qa-ia i^opioXoyria-fi to. irapairrwiuiTa 
 o-ou Kttt ov ■n-poa-fXivuri iirl irpoa-euxrjv crov kv crvvuh-ri<7e.i Trovrjpa, ih. xiv. 1 
 KaTO. KvpLaKriv...K\da-aT€ apTov Kal evxapia-T-qcraTe Trpo€$op.okoyr]a-diJi,a/OL Ta 
 TrapaTTTco/xaTa i/xSiv ottcos KaOapa rj 6v(ria vp,mv ■§' ttSs Se €)((i)VTr]v d/i0t/3oXiai' 
 /*6Ta. TOV iTaipov avTov p.r] avv^XdiTia vpuv £(us ov SiaXXaySeriv, iva /jirj KOiviaOyj 
 ■^6va-M v/iStv, Clem. Ep. ad Jac. 15 £fo/toXoyou>evoi to. irapaTrroi/iaTa koX 
 TO. i^ ein6v[x.i!av aTdKTWv croipevdsvTa KaKd, dnva tw ofnoXoyrja-ai Sxrinp 
 direp,eo-avT£s Kov(f)i^ea-de riys voa-ov, ■n-poa-U/j.ivoi ttjv €k t^s £irt/A£XEias truT^piov 
 vyUiav. The latter reading seems to agree better with what appears 
 to be the sense of the passage, if we understand it as referring to our 
 Lord's words reported in Matt. v. 23 foil, and vi. 14 : the sins of the 
 sick man will only be forgiven if he forgives others who have injured 
 him, a,nd if he makes amends for any injuries he may himself have 
 committed. St. James expands the precept out of its narrow applica- 
 tion ' let the sick man confess his trespasses to those against whom he 
 has trespassed and let them in turn confess any trespasses which they 
 
V 15, 16 JSrOTES 163 
 
 may have committed against him, and join in prayer for him, in order 
 that he may be healed of his bodily ailment,' into the general rule ' con- 
 fess your trespasses to each other, and pray for each other at all times, 
 that ye may be healed of all your diseases whether of body or soul.' 
 The use of the word ovv implies the close connexion of the present 
 with the preceding clause (' since prayer has such power, pray for each 
 other ; and, that you may be able to do this better, confess your faults 
 to each other '). 
 
 If we read a/xaprtas it is more natural to understand the confession 
 to refer not to trespass towards man, but to sins towards God 
 (though a[MpTavw is also used of the former, as in Matt, xviii. 15, 21). 
 Such confession (e^o/xoXoyr/o-ts)' was made to John the Baptist (Matt. iii. 
 6) and by the penitents at Ephesus to Paul (Acts xix. 18), but for long 
 after the apostolic age it seems to have been unusual, except in the 
 case of converts or penitents who were under ecclesiastical censure. 
 For others the words of Augustine held good (Gonf. x. 3) quid mihi 
 est cum hominibus ut cmdiant oonfessiones meas, quasi ipsi sa/naturi sint 
 omnes languores meos, and the even stronger words of Ohrysostom {Horn. 
 XX. in Gen. p. 175) quoted in Bingham xviii. 3, and in Diet, of Gh. Ant. 
 under Exomologesis. We need not however suppose any reference here 
 to a formal confession of sin, but merely to such mutual confidences 
 as would give a right direction to the prayers offered by one for 
 the other : so Augustine, commenting on this verse {Tract. 58 m Joha/n. 
 quoted by Bingham, I.e.), and Bede quotidiana leviaque pecoata alter- 
 utrvmi coaequalihus confitewmur eorumque quotidiana credamus oratione 
 salvari ; though the latter adds gravioris leprae irrvmunditiam juxta 
 legem sacerdoti pandamus atque ad ejus arbitrium qualiter et quanta 
 tempore jusserit purificare curemus. The Greek commentators have no 
 note here. Origen (Horn. ii. in Ps. xxxvii., Lomm. xii. p. 266) points 
 out the use of such confession and at the same time recommends 
 caution in choosing the person to whom confession should be made. 
 He does not limit the selection to presbyters, though they would 
 naturally be thought of, and are generally specified by later writers on 
 the subject. 
 
 Some of the Romish controversialists, as Bellarmine, cited by Hooker 
 vi. 5, maintain that St. James in this passage alludes to auricular con- 
 fession, but Oajetan again speaks the language of common sense : Tiec 
 hie est sermo de conf'essione sacramentali (ut patet ex eo quod dicit ' con- 
 fitemini invicem' ; sacraonentalis enim confessio nonfit invicem, sed sacer- 
 dotibus tantum), sed de con/essione qua mutuo fatemwr nos peccatores ut 
 oretur pro nobis, et de confessione hinc et inde erratoru/m pro mutua 
 placatione et reconciliatione. The practice of auricular confession was 
 not made generally obligatory even by the Church of Rome till the 
 Lateran Council of 1215 under Innocent III., which ordered that every 
 adult person should confess to the priest at least once in the year. In 
 all other Churches it is still optional. Mutual confession was an early 
 
 1 St. John uses the active of the simple verb in place of the more common i^ofi.- 
 o\oyovfuu, see 1 John i. 9 ihv d/iohoya/iev tAs afiaprias. In the LXX. i^ayopeia is 
 used in the same sense. 
 
 M 2 
 
164 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 custom in monasteries,^ and the Moravian Societies (which Wesley 
 took as the pattern for the Methodist Classes) used to meet two or 
 three times a week ' to confess their faults one to another and to pray 
 for one another that they might be healed.' The word Exomologesis 
 was borrowed by the Latin Christians, cf . TertuU. Orat. 7. For further 
 information see articles on Exomologesis and Penitence in D.G.A. 
 
 Sircos taBriTs.] For the use of laa-Oai in reference to the diseases of the 
 soul of. Heb. xii. 13, 1 Pet. ii. 24, Matt. xiii. 15, Deut. xxx. 3 lao-erat 
 Kvptos ras d^apTtas trou, 2 Chron. xxx. 20, Isa. vi. 10, Ivii. 19, Sir. 
 xxviii. 3, (fee, Herm. Sim. 9. 23, also the remarkable parallel in Arrian 
 Anah. vii. 29 ix,6vq yap e/jioiye Sokci tacris d//,apTtas oynoXoyeiv re afiapravovra 
 Koi SrjXov elvai hr avrZ /AETayiyvwcrKovra. If the word is understood 
 literally of bodily disease, as by De Wette and Huther, the connexion 
 of thought is perhaps closer, keeping to the subject of the miraculous 
 cure, which is spoken of in the preceding verse and seems to be 
 referred to in the words which follow, dwelling on the miraculous 
 power of the prayer of Elijah. 
 
 iroXi Xtryy^x. Setjo-is SiKaCov.] Compare the saying of E.. Jehuda poeniten- 
 tia potest aliguid sed preces possunt omnia, and the promise in Matt. xvii. 
 20, 21, ih. xxi. 21, 22, Mark xi. 22-26, Phil. iv. 13, 1 John v. 14-16, Psa. 
 cxlv. 18, 19, Prov. xv. 29, Sir. xxxii. 7, Clem. R. 21 fMOeTuicrav ri raireivo- 
 <l>po(Tvvr) irapa ®ew urxvei. For SiKaiov cf. v. 6 : he is one who by faith 
 fulfils the vd/xos eXcvOepia?. Bp. "Wordsworth (Stud. Bib. I. 128) and 
 Ronsch (Das Ifeue Test. Tertullians) hold that Tertullian never quotes 
 from St. James ; but is there not a reference to this passage in the 
 De Oratione c. 28 1 We find there 1st an allusion to the prayer of 
 Elijah retro oratio imbriv/m utilia prohibebat, and 2nd to the much- 
 availing ' prayer of righteousness ' : nv/nc vero oratio justitiae omnem 
 iram, Dei avertit, and its employment defunctorum animas de ipso mortis 
 itinere vocare, debiles reformio/re, aegros remediare . . . Eadem diluit 
 delicta, tentationes repellit : cf. above ver. 15 and below ver. 20, also 
 i. 5, 6. 
 
 evepYounevT).] Is this passive or middle 1 Of the former we have 
 examples 1 Esdr. u. 19 ivepyeiTai to, Kara tov vaov 'the works of the 
 temple are being pushed on,' Joseph. Ant. xv. 5^ 3 tov Se Tr6Xep,ov ort 
 Koi OeXei TovTov ivepyeiarOai koX BiKaiov otSev, ScStjA.iokcv auTos 6 ©cos, Arist. 
 Phys. ii. 3 fin. ro. ivepyovvra (irpdrepa) Trpos to. evipyovfieva, Polyb. 
 i. 13. 5 TToXe/ios ivrjpyeiTO, ib. ix. 13. 9 St' Siv evepynjO-qcriTai. ro KpiOiv, 
 Justin Apol. i. 12 TretreitT/jLeOa Jk Sai/idvwv ravra iv€pyii<T$ai, Trypli. 78 
 UTTuiv Tous TO, M.i6pa pA}(TTripia 7rapa8i8dvTas...wo TOv Sia^oXov ivepyrj- 
 Qrjvai etTTeiv, ib. 18 to, e^ avOpuinrmv KoX hai/xoviav ivepyovp.eva €is ■fip.a.'s, 
 hence the term ivepyoviMevoi used of those possessed (cf. Suiceri. p. 
 1115), Clem. Hom. ix. 12 ttoXXoI ovk eiSoTes 'TroOfv ivepyovvrai Tats 
 tSv Saiixoviov KaKaTs v7rovoiaLs...ain'Ti6evTai, Arethas in Apoc. v. 6 
 Ta (ToifiaTa ruiv Ovrj(TK6vT(i)V rpeis 17/Aepas SiaKaprtpuv ry ffivoriKy ^(arj 
 ivepyovfieva (i.e. being animated or energized by the mere life of 
 nature). It is denied however that this use is ever found in the 
 
 1 See examples in Martene Ant. Eccl. Bit. iy. p. 38, Athanas. Vit. Ant. p. 75. 
 
V 16 NOTES 165 
 
 N.T., see Alf. and Lightfoot on Gal. v. 6 iriWis 8i' dyairiys ivep- 
 yovfiiv-q. The latter says 'the Spirit of God or the Spirit of Evil' 
 ivepyel [cf. 1 Cor. xii. 6 BiaipecreK evepyrj/jidTiav eicrl Kal 6 avTos ®eos 
 6 ivepySiv to. irai'Ta iv Tratriv, Gal. ii. 8 6 ivepyi^aa's UiTpio . . , Ivrjp ■ 
 yiycrev koX i[ji,oi, Eph. i. 20 Kara ttjv ivepyeiav rjv ivrjpyrjKtv kv Xpiarto, 
 Phil. ii. 13; and (of Satan) Eph. ii. 2 tov irvtvp.aTO'; tov vvv ivepyovvro's iv 
 Tots 1)1018 rrji aTTiiOeias, Justin M. Apol. i. 5 ol Satjiioves evrjpyrjorav ws aOtov 
 Kol acr^Prj aTroKTuvai (tov ^tnKpa/rrj) koX o/ioitos £<^' rip-Siv to avTO ivepyovaLV, 
 ib. 26 Sio, T^s Tuiv evepyovvTiov Sai/jLovav TeyQi-qi Svvdp.ei's iroiijcas p,ayiK6.i, 
 and a little below MevavSpov ivepyrjOivTa wo tS)v 8at/iovtW, id. IVyph. 
 78 (the Magi were carried away) irpos irao-as Ka/cas irpa^eis ras ei/epyoi;- 
 /;i€i'as ^TTo ToC SaifiovLov], ' the human agent or the human mind ivepyelrai 
 (middle).' It is however not quite correct to say that the human agent 
 evcpyeiTai : the word in the N.T. is always used of some principle or 
 power at work, whether in the soul or elsewhere, e.g. Rom. vii. 5 ore 
 ^fiev ev TTj (yapKi, to, waOt^fia/ra t<ov d/iaprtSv rd Sia tov vop-ov IvqpyaTo 
 kv ToTs /;tcA.£0"tv r)p.S>v, 2 Cor. i. 6 mrip t^s vjiSyv 7rapaKA.-^o-e<os T^s evepyovfievrji; 
 iv mo/jLovfj, ih, iv. 12 6 Odva/ros iv 'fuMv ivepyeiTai, Eph. iii. 20 (to Him that 
 can do exceeding abundantly) Kara Tr/v Svva/xiv t^v iv€pyoviJi,€vrfv iv ij/ttv, 
 Col. i. 29 dytovt^o/iEvos Kara rrjv Ivipyeiav avTov (i.e. Christ) rrjv ivepyom- 
 /tevTji' iv ifioi iv Swd/j-et, 1 Thess. ii. 13 (\oyos ®eov) evepyeTrat iv v/uv roZs 
 TnaTevova-LV, 2 Thess. ii. 7 to ix/vaTrjpiov ^Sr] evcpyeiToi t^s dvo/iias. Again 
 the active is not exclusively confined in the Hellenistic writers to the 
 immediate action of a good or evil spirit, cf. Prov. xxi. 6 o ivepyav 
 6rja-avpL<T/ji.aTa yXuiiTcrrj ij/evSa. [idraia SwoKei ' he that getteth treasures 
 by falsehood,' Matt. xiv. 2 at Swdp-eis ivepyovcriv iv avrm (with which 
 compare ivepyovfievriv used in Eph. iii. 20, Col. i. 29), Wisd. xv. 11 
 ^yvoijo'e TOV iii/!rviv(TavTa. avTia if/vx^p' ivepyorvtrav, Prov. xxxi. 12 ij yuv^ 
 evepyci Tu dvSpi £is dyaSd irdvTa tov piov, cf. Jos. B, J. iv. 6 rd 
 BoyOivTa Ta^Lov kol t^s eirivoids iv/jpyovv (' put in practice '). When we 
 compare such instances of the transitive use of the act. as Gal. iii. 5 
 o ivepyZv Swdp,ets iv 17p.1v, Phil, ii. 13 6 evepyfiv £V ip2v to ivepyelv, Eph. 
 i. 20 ^v (evepyetav) ivrjpyrjcrev iv Xpio-T<3, and the use of the passive noun 
 evepyrj/jLa, we are tempted to regard as passive the forms which are 
 usually assumed to be middle, and so to get the force here of prayer 
 actiMted or inspired by the Spirit, as in Rom. viii. 26 (so Bull 'fervore 
 atqioe impetu quodam divino acta et incitata,' Benson ' inspired,' Mack- 
 night ' inwrought prayer,' Bassett, * when energized by the Spirit of 
 God '). In like manner Chrysostom on Rom. vii. 5 ovk chtcv, d evijpyei to. 
 fieXr], dW a ivripyelTO iv toIs peXeo-tv, SeiKVv? iTepwOev ovcrav Trj'S irovjjptas tijv 
 dpY'^v, OTTO tSv ivepyovvTtav XoyuT[i.S>v, ovk diro Tciiv evepyov/xcvwv p,eXSv. Cf . 
 Bull Examen Censurae (vol. v. p. 22 foil.) ' ivcpywOaifere semper id signi- 
 4cat quod Latine dioimus agi, agitari, exerceri, effici' : he supports this by 
 TertulHan's renderings of Rom. vii. 5 and Gal. v. 6, and by Chrys. on 
 2 Cor. i. 6 17 croyTTjpia v/jimv Tore evepyeirai p.atpvio's, tovt iiXTi StiKVvrai, 
 av^erai, eiriTctvcTat, otov virop.ov'ip/ f.-)(ri...ovK £wr€v, t^s ivfpyovarj'S, dXXd t^s 
 £V£pyoup.£V57S, SeiKvvi oti 17 X'^P''^ iroXXd eUrecjjepev ivepyovcra iv avTois. On 
 the whole I am not satisfied that any undoubted instance of the middle 
 can be adduced either from profane or sacred writers. If however we 
 
166 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 are to regard this as a true middle, it would seem that the dis- 
 tinction between it and the active here is analogous to that between 
 TiOevai, and Tidea-dai vo/xov. God acting by his own sovereign will ivepyu, 
 the principle of good which he engrafts into our nature evepyeirat. 
 
 I turn now to the explanations offered by previous editors. The 
 old Greek commentators give it a passive sense, Oecumenius and 
 Theophylact interpreting it much as Matthaei's scholiast a-vvepyoviJi,ev7j 
 vTTo T-^s ToB Seo/u,evov yi/uJ/iijs Koi Trpa^Ews ' assisted by (actualized by) 
 the intention and the action of the sick man,' and not far otherwise 
 Euthymius and Cramer's Catena ' strengthened and heartened by the 
 penitence and obedience of the sick,' which they illustrate by the 
 case of Samuel forbidden to pray for Saul, of Jeremiah forbidden to 
 pray for the Jews. They also give a second interpretation, according 
 to which the just man's prayer is energized by his own life of active 
 godliness (rrjv Berj(riv evepyov kol t,<i>crav tois t/oottois twv ivToXZv \l/v)(ovfji,evr]V 
 . . .la-)(ypav koi Travra Svva/Jiivrp/ 6 St/catos ^)(€i rrjV heqa-iv evepyovfiivrjv rats 
 evToAats) : cf . Theodoret's note on the next verse ravra tov Oeiov irvev- 
 /juxToi ivepyovvTos etprjKev 6 7rpo<^^T?ys in the same Catena. Michaelis 
 takes it in the way suggested above preces agitante Spiritu effusae. De 
 Wette, Hofmann, Huther, Alford take it 'the prayer of a righteous 
 man avails much in its working,' but this gives a very poor force to a 
 word which ought from its position to be emphatic. Erdmann trans- 
 lates ' viel vermag das Gebet des Gerechten indem es sich wirksam 
 erweist,' which appears to me either tautological or unmeaning : prayer 
 is no prayer at all, if it is not real. Bp. Wordsworth seems to strain 
 the force of the preposition (which cannot be other in the verb than in 
 adj. ei/Epyos, from which it is derived) when he translates ' working 
 inwardly,' ' inwardly energizing in devotion and love, so as to pro- 
 duce external effects in obedience.' Most commentators take it with 
 Luther ' wenn es ernstlich ist ' (so Dean Scott ' when urgent,' he 
 compares Col. iv. 1 2 •jravTore dywi'i^d/tei/os wep vp.wv h> rats wpoo-ewvais) ; 
 though some ignore the participial force and make it simply equivalent 
 to ivipyt)<i (Heb. iv. 12, Philem. 6) or eKrei/^s (Luke xxii. 44, Acts xii. 
 5), as Schneckenburger, Kern, Bouman, Wiesinger. I would not deny 
 that ive.pyovp.kvi] may be used in the sense of evepy^s oScra, but no 
 precise parallel is cited. Pallad. Laus. 1083 B and Eustath. on Odyss. 
 S. p. 197, 50 are cited for the phrase Trpoa-evxri eVepy^s. Lange tries to 
 combine the form of the passive and middle, ' die mit der voUen Hinge- 
 bung an den gbttlichen Impuls zugleich gesetzt voile Spannung des 
 betenden Geistes.' 
 
 17. dvSpun-os ^v 6|ioioira9<|s ■f\f.lv.'] The classical word ofi. is used by 
 Paul of himself and Barnabas to the people of Lystra, by the Fathers 
 of Christ (e.g. Euseb. ff.E. i. 2, cf. Heb. iv. 15), in 4 Mace. xii. 13 to 
 show the atrocity of persecution ovk ■^Sea-Orj's avOpw-Tro^ tav tovs o/j.oioTraOei's 
 Koi €K tSv avTtov ycyovoras cttoixciW y\o)TTOTop,^<rai. It was necessary for 
 the writer to insist on the resemblance between us and Elijah because 
 of the exaggerated ideas entertained of the latter at that time (see 
 Sir. xlviii. 1-12) : 'Such potency of prayer is not out of our reach, for 
 Elijah possessed it, though he gave evidence of weakness similar to 
 
V 16-17 NOTES 167 
 
 ours.' Compare Peter's words to Cornelius, Acts x. 26, and Anton, 
 vi. 19 iJ,7j eiTi auT(3 (Tot SvcTKaTairovrjTOv tovto avOpwirta aSvvaTOV inroXafjiPdveLV 
 oAA £1 Tt avBpb>TTW %vva,TOV Kol oiKctov TOVTO Kol CTsavTW ifjiiKTOv vofiL^e with 
 Gataker's n., also Calvin's n. here, ideo ininus profioimus ex sanctorum 
 exemplo quia ipsos Jingimus semideos vel heroas quibus peculiare fuit cum 
 Deo commercium, : ita ex eo quod auditi sunt nihil fiduoiae concipimus. 
 For the use of the copulative conjunction (^v...Kai) instead of the parti- 
 ciple (mv) see Winer 542-544 and above iii. 5 /^iKpov /Ae'Xos eo-rt koL k.t.X. 
 iepoa-eu\'^ irpoo-ijillaTo.] For examples of similar reduplication see Luke 
 xxii. 15 hriBvixia eireSv/Aijo-a, John iii. 29 xapa ■)(a.(.pe.L, Acts iv. 17 diretXiJ 
 direiX.r]<T<i>iJi,e6a, ib. v. 28 ■jrapayyeXio, TrapriyyeiXa/jiev, ih. xxiii. 14 avaOifiaTi 
 avide/JLaTia-aiJiiv lavTovi, 2 Pet. iii. 3 ty i/j.TraiyfioV'rj efiiroLKTai, Deut. vii. 26 
 ■irpocro-)(Bi(Tp.aTi, irpoa-oxOi-eh koi jSSeXvyfiaTL /3SeXv$ri, Jos. xxiv. 10 evXoytais 
 £vXoyi7cr£v, Isa. xxx. 19 KXav6fJL<a eKXavcrev, Judith vi. 4 aTrbiXeicf. aTroXovvrai, 
 Vorst p. 626, Winer p. 584, Lobeck Paral 523 foil., where analogous 
 instances are cited from classical writers, in some of which the dative 
 is added for precision, as in Dem. 1002. 12 ya/xu ytyafirjKun qui rite con- 
 fecit nupiias, but in others has an intensive force, as Plato iSymp. 195 
 <f>evyciv <j>vyy, compare such phrases as /caKos /caKus, and in Lat. occidione 
 occidere, curricula cwrrere. I cannot understand what should lead De 
 Wette, Hofmann, Huther, Erdmann to deny this intensive force which 
 belongs to reduplication in all languages. The last translates ' in einem 
 Gebet betete er,' and says by this is expressed ' nicht der Charakter der 
 Ernstlichkeit und Kraftigkeit, sondern die That des Gebets,' and so, I 
 suppose, Alford ' lie prayed vnth prayer (made it a special matter of 
 prayer, not prayed ea/rnestly. This adoption of the Hebrew idiom 
 merely brings out more forcibly the idea of the verb),' though his 
 meaning is far from clear. A similar intensive phrase is formed by 
 the use of the participle, as in 1 Sam. xxvi. 25 iroi&v iroi^o-eis, Swd/tei/os 
 Svvi^crrj, Ps. cxviii. 18 TraiSevwv ciratSeuo-e, Jer. iii. 22 iTna-Tpa,<j>rJT£ hrufTpi- 
 KJiovTK, Lam. i. 2 KXaiovcra €KXava-ev. Here the strengthened phrase 
 illustrates what the writer intended by the word hnpyovp,ivq. 
 
 Tov (j.*| pp^iai.] The genitive of the infinitive is used to express the 
 purpose of an action in classical writers, as in Thuc. i. 4 to X-qariKov 
 Kadrjpu eK Trjs OaXdorarrji tov ras TrpocroSov^ yu,SXXov Uvai avT<S, but the use 
 is much extended in the Hellenistic Greek. Thus it is found not only 
 after verbs immediately expressive of design, as here and in Isa. v. 6 
 Tats ve<f>eXais evreXoC/xat tov fx-q /Spefat eis avTov ierov, and in the 
 Byzantine writers, as Malalas xiv. 357 ■ffrrjO-aTO -^ Avyova-Ta tov /Sao-tXe'a 
 TOV KwreXOeiv eis toiis dytous tottovs (cf. Thuc. viii. 40 oiyyeXidi' eTre/jiTrov 
 IttI rds vavi tov ^p.TrapaKop.LO'OijvaL) ; but it is used also to denote the 
 consequence of an action, as in Acts iii. 12 ois Treiroir/Koa-L tov inparaTiiv 
 avTov, and even for the simple infinitive, when it stands as subject of 
 the sentence, as in Luke xvii. 1 avevSc/crov ccttiv tov to. a-KavSaXa /jltj 
 iX6tiv, Acts X. 25 iyevcTo tov dareXdeiv tov HeTpov, see Winer, p-. 408 foil. 
 The verb Ppix^i is here used, like vei, without a subject, as in Luke 
 xvii. 29 : we have the personal use in Matt. v. 45 (6 ®ebs) Pp^x^i- «wt 
 Si/catovs KoX ahiKOrvs. 
 
 As regards the facts referred to, we hear nothing of this prayer in 
 
168 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 the O.T. unless the expression 'before whom I stand' (in 1 Kings 
 xvii. 1) may be interpreted to mean 'stand in prayer' as in Jer. xv. 
 1, of. Gen. xviii. 22, xix. 17. The duration of the drought here 
 given is the same as that in Luke iv. 25, which is also found in 
 the Rabbinical tractate Jalkut Simeoni quoted by Schegg after 
 Surenhusius ; but in 1 Kings xviii. 1 it is said ' after many days the 
 word of the Lord came to Elijah in the third year saying...! will 
 send rain upon the earth.' We are not told from what point the 
 third year is dated ; if it is from the commencement of his sojourn 
 with the widow, as is generally supposed ; and if the expression ' end 
 of the days ' in 1 Kings xvii. 7 (' it came to pass at the end of the days 
 that the brook dried up ') is to be understood, as in other places, of a 
 year or more (see Keil in loo. and on xviii. 1, who compares Lev. xxv. 
 29, 1 Sam. xxvii. 7, Jud. xvii. 10) ; then the cessation of the drought 
 would take place in the fourth year from its commencement, and 
 Jewish tradition would naturally fix on the middle of the fourth year, 
 as giving the half of the symbolical number, which is so prominent in 
 the prophecies of Daniel and in Apoc. xi. 3-9 (where it is said that the 
 two witnesses ' have power to shut the heaven tva /t^ verbs Pp^xQ during 
 the days of their prophecy,' i.e. 1260 days = 3| years). Others suppose 
 the calculation to include the dry season preceding the first failure of 
 the regular periodical rains. It is simply a question as to the origin 
 of a Jewish tradition which undoubtedly existed at the time of the 
 Christian era, and which was probably excogitated by the early 
 rabbinical interpreters." In the fourth book of Esdras (vii. 39) Elijah 
 is cited as an example of intercession pro his qui pluviam acceperwnt et 
 pro mortuo ut viveret. 
 
 kirX Tfjs 77)9.] Merely filling up the idea of lySpe^ei/ as in Gen. vii. 12 
 iyev€To 6 verbs ivl rijs yrji, 1 Kings xvii. 7, see above v. 5. 
 
 18. irctXiv irpoo-iivlaTo.] As shown by his attitude (1 Kings xvui. 42), 
 for which cf. Neh. viii. 6. 
 
 6 ovpavbs itrhv ^ScoKcv.] The phrase v. SiS. is used of God 1 Kings 
 xviii. 1, 1 Sam. xii. 17, Acts xiv. 17 ovpavoOev vetovis SiSov's. Josephus 
 [Ant. xiv. 2. 1) tells a similar anecdote of Onias (b.c. 64) StKotos avTjp 
 KoX Oeo(j)L\r]S OS avop-Ppias ttote ovtnjs rjviaro ra ®€w...Kal 6 ®e6s va-ev, and 
 Epiphanius (p. 1046) of James himself, irore dySpoxtas ycvo/ienys eTr^pe 
 Tas x^V"-'' ^'5 ovpavov koI 7rpoarT]v^aro Kol €v6vs 6 ovpavbs 28o)k£V verov, 
 Clem. Al. {Strom, vi. 3, p. 753 P.) cites the legendary story of Aeacus 
 (Paus. ii. 28, p. 179) to the same effect, as being derived from the 
 narrative of the miraculous rain sent in answer to Samuel's prayer 
 (1 Sam. xii. 17). Compare also the story of the Legio Fulminatrix 
 given by Euseb. II. E. v. 5. 
 
 ipXAoTTTio-sv.] The aor. is here transitive, as in Gen. i. 1 1 y8Xacm;o-dTa) 
 ^ yrj Pofrdvqv, Sir. xxiv. 17 eyoj <us a/iireXos i^Xdarrrjo-a xap'v, more 
 usually intr., as Matt. xiii. 26, Heb. ix. 4. In later Greek the present 
 also is sometimes found in a transitive sense, see Lobeck on Aj. 1. 869. 
 
 19. (&v Tis Iv ipjiiv ir\ttvT)8f.] Returns to the subject of ver. 16. For 
 eV vfuv see above v. 13. 'There seems no reason to give, as Alf., to 
 TrXavriOfi here the passive force which it bears in Apoc. xviii. 23 iv rrj 
 
V 17-20 NOTES 169 
 
 <^ap/;iaK€i^ (Tou £7rXav^6ijcrav Travra to edvrj. The passive aor. is used 
 with a middle force in classical writers, as in the LXX. Deut. xxii. 
 1, Ps. cxix. 176, Ezek. xxxiv. 4, and probably in Luke xxi. 8 and 
 2 Pet. ii. 15 KaraXuTrovre's evOeZav oSov eTrXavqOria-av. It makes no 
 difference as to the admonition given, whether the wanderer goes 
 astray of his own will, or is led astray by others. See above i. 16 and 
 TrXdvr] bSov just below. 
 
 dirJi TTjs d\Ti9eCtts.] See above i. 18, John viii. 32, 1 John i. 6, iii. 18, 
 19, 3 John 4 (I have no greater joy than to hear that my children) Iv 
 aXrjdfia TrepiTraTOvcriv, Wisd. v. 6 kTrXa,vrj0iqfi,a/ airo o8oC AXij^etas, Psa, Cxix. 
 30 oSov akf^Oua.'s igperKra.jxyjv. 
 
 lirurTp44r{| Tis.] Found with the same force Mai. ii. 6 jroXXovs iirea-Tpe- 
 i/fEv oLTTo dSiKtas, Luke i. 16, 17, Acts xxvi. 18, Psa. Ixxix. 3, Lam. v. 21, 
 Polyc. ad Phil. 6 oi Trpecr/Swcpot (.v(nrka,yyyoi...lTTUTTpitl>oVTK to. airoTTf.- 
 TrXavqp,eva, Apost. Const, ii. 6 tovs ■imrX.avrj/Ji.ivov's eiridTpi^ere, Plut. Mor. 
 21 (Menander) eirecrrpei/'e koX ireptecnrao-e ■n-pos to koXov i^ynas. In Matt, 
 xiii. 15 and elsewhere it is used intransitively, much as the passive in 
 1 Pet. ii. 25 i/re yap <os Trpoftara TrXavw/ievoi, dXX eTretrrpac^TjTe vvv E'tti tov 
 iroi/jifva Koi iiricrKOTrov rStv tjni)(Zv v/jiSiv. The following tis shows that 
 this duty was not confined to the elders. As it belongs to the brethren 
 in common to pray for each other and hear each other's confessions, so 
 here they are in common exhorted to bring back wanderers to the faith. 
 
 20. -yiveoo-KeTe.] So WH. with Cod. B. The majority of the best 
 MSS. have yivaa-KeTUi, keeping the regular construction. The use of 
 the plural after rts iv vfuv may be paralleled by p,ij Sfirc after tis it vp-Siv 
 above (ii. 16). Qn the other hand it is possible that an original yivoxr- 
 K€TU) may have been altered to suit dSeXc^oi p,ov. Reading yivoicrKCTe, I 
 should be inclined to treat it as an indicative (as in Matt. xxiv. 32, 
 John XV. 18), calling attention to the well known fact (like tare in i. 
 19) that conversion involves salvation, rather than introducing it as 
 something of which they had to be informed. Or, if we follow the 
 other interpretation, and consider that we have here an appeal to 
 enlightened self-interest, it may perhaps be thought more worthy of 
 St. James to mention this as a fact in which all are interested, than to 
 insist on it as a motive for the individual who takes in hand to convert 
 his brother. 
 
 6 eiri(rTp^i|(os o|iopT<»\dv.] Why is this repeated 1 Some say in order 
 to emphasize the fact, but a more obvious reason would be that it is in 
 order to avoid ambiguity, especially if yivoxTKere is read. Without these 
 words the subject of croicret would naturally be understood to be ' one 
 of you.' 
 
 Ik irXdvTis oSov oirov.] Comparing Wisd. xii. 24 tZv irXai/Tjs 68wv p-aKpo- 
 repov iTrXavqOrjo-av longius aberrabcmt quam, erroris viae ferehcmt (' even 
 further than error itself ') we might be disposed to make ■Kkhnyi depend 
 on oSov, translating ' his erring path ' ; but the usual order of words, 
 when the metaphorical 68os is joined with a gen. of quality, is to put 
 oSds first, as in Psa. cxix. 29, 30 oSov dStKtas &jr6crTrj(rov dw' e/toC.oSov 
 aXTjOeiai rjpeTLa-dp.rjv, Prov. iv. 24 o8. €lprjvq<s, ib. viii. 20 o8. 8iKatocrwi7s, 
 ib. V. 6 g8, {ft)^s, ib. xii. 19, xv. 25, xvii. 24, Job xxiv. 13, Isa. xxvi. 7, 
 
170 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 lix. 8. It seems better therefore to translate ' from the error of his 
 way.' In classical prose the article would have been used both before 
 7rXavi;s and oSoC. The second article is omitted according to Hellenistic 
 usage because the noun is defined by the genitive of the personal 
 pronoun which follows it (cf. {j/vxrjv avrov just below, KapBiav avTov, 
 yXwcra-av avrov above i. 26 and Winer, p. 155 foil.), and the first article 
 is omitted by the ' law of correlation ' to suit the anarthrous oSov, as in 
 Matt. xix. 28 im Bpovov ^6^-q's avrov, of. Winer, p. 175 and A. Buttmann, 
 p. 104. We find the same opposition of irXavr] to aX-qOua in 1 John 
 iv. 6 e/c TOVTOV yivdxTKO/Jiev to irveS/ta t^s aXrjOeMs Kal to Trveufx.a T^s 
 
 a-ixra <|/iixV ai'ToB.] If this is the correct reading, the second ainov 
 m&j either be understood of the subject of the verb (= Lat. suus, cf. 
 Winer, p. 188 foil , A. Buttmann, p. 97 foil., Meisterhans Gr. Att. Insch. 
 p. 122), or, more probably, it repeats the preceding avrov, in which 
 case it may have been intentionally inserted to mark that this clause 
 refers to the sinner exclusively, allowing a wider scope to the next 
 clause ; but in B. avTov comes after Oavarov ^ instead of after xj/vyfr/v, 
 suggesting that it may have arisen from a dittography. The future 
 (TUMTu is easier to understand if tj/vx^v refers to the subject of the 
 verb. ' He who converts a sinner will be himself saved ' reads natural- 
 ly enough, the one action not being either identical or contemporaneous 
 with the other ; or again ' He who converts a sinner has thereby saved 
 a soul ' ; but there is something of incongruity in the words ' He who 
 turns a sinner from the error of his way will save that sinner's soul 
 from death, and will cover a multitude of sins.' The object of the writer 
 is to stimulate and encourage the work of conversion to the utmost, but 
 by the use of the future instead of the present ^ or past he puts off the 
 issue of the work to an indefinite distance of time. [Bengel explains 
 it olim constabit, it will be seen on the day of judgment that he 
 has saved a soul from death.] Otherwise salvation is regarded and 
 spoken of by the writers of the N.T. sometimes as a fact of the present, 
 sometimes of the future. See n. on next clause. For cr. ij/. cf. i. 21, 
 and for the absence of the article the last note and 1 Pet. iii. 3 6(f>6a\- 
 fji.01 Kvptou cTTi SiKatous Kal S)Ta avrov cts Birjaiv avrSv, particularly with 
 the word tj/vxy, Heb. x. 39 el's mpiirovrjo'iv i/fu^s, 1 Pet. i. 9 Kop.iZ,6fi,€vo% 
 TO TeA.os T^s TTttrTews, o'uyrrjplav ij/vx<t>v, 2 Pet. ii. 8 \fn>)(rjv SiKaiW dvo/xois 
 epyots iPacrdvi^ev. The saving of the soul is attributed to the human 
 instrument in Rom. xi. 14, 1 Cor. vii. 16, 1 Tim. iv. 16, &c. 
 
 «K BavoTOD.] See above i. 15. 
 
 KaXiJi|/ci irXfjSos a|iapTiMv.] A proverbial expression, which occurs also 
 in 1 Pet. iv. 8 ayairrj KaXxnmi TrX'^flos a.p.apTiwv, and which Eesch 
 regards as one of the unwritten words of Christ, quoting Clem. Al. 
 Paed. iii. 12. p. 306, where it is introduced by (^tjo-i, which he 
 
 ^ So Corbay MS. aalvat animam dc morte stia. The Vulgate has animam ejus, 
 but Bode notes quidam codices Iiabent 'salvabit animam stiam '...el re vera qui errantem. 
 corrigit sibimM ipsi per hoc vitae caclestis gaudia ampliora conquirit. 
 
 '' The Pesh. has the present 'covers the multitude of his sins,' so too Corb. and 
 Orig. Horn, in Lev, quoted below. 
 
V 20 NOTES 171 
 
 understands of Christ ; but as the immediately preceding references 
 in Clement are to the O.T. it is more natural to supply ®£os or 
 ^7 ypa-^-q- It is however ascribed to Christ in Didascalia ii. 3 kiyu 
 Kvptos aydirrj KaXuVret k.t.X. The original is found in Prov. x. 12 (Heb. 
 not LXX.) ' hate stirreth up strife, but love covereth all transgres- 
 sions,' cf. Psa. Ixxxv. 2 a(j}'!jKas tcis dvojutas Tiii Xaol croi;, iKaXvij/as irao-as 
 Tois d/AapTtas avrSiv, ib. xxxi. 1, 2, Nehem. iv. 5 /jltj KaXvtj/rj'S iirl avo/xiav, 
 Bp. ad Diogn. c. 9 rt yap dXXo ras d/xaprtas ■^/u.oiv rjSvvtiOrj KoXvij/ai -ij 
 fKeCvov [XpicTTov) StKaiocrvvT] ;^ There can be no doubt about the meaning 
 of the verse in Proverbs, ' love refuses to see faults ' : are we to attach the 
 same meanilig to it in St. Peter, where it follows a warning to ' be sober 
 and watch unto prayer "i .' Above all things being fervent in your love 
 amongst yourselves, ybr (on) love covereth a multitude of sins.' Love 
 is recommended because it covers (hides) sin. This seems to imply 
 more than the mere shutting the eye of man to sin : it implies that 
 sin, including the sin of him who loves, at least as much as that 
 of him who is loved,^ is thus cancelled, blotted out even in the 
 sight of God, cf. Luke vii. 47 d<^e<ovTai at d//.apTtai avrrj's ai iroXXai, 
 OTi ■^yaTrrjcriv iroXi;, and above ii. 13 KaTaKav^arai eXeos KptVews. In 
 other Hebrew writings we find love narrowed to iXerjfjLocrvvrj (' pity ' 
 rather than ' almsgiving '), yet with the same promise attached to 
 it. Sir. iii. 28 IXeij/iocruvi; e^tXdtrcTai d/iaprias, Dan. iv. 24 rds d/wipTtas 
 crov iv iX.erj/j.ocnovai'S XvTpoKrai koI Tas dSuctas Iv olKTipfj.ol's TrevrJTWV, Tobit 
 iv. 10 ikeriixocrvviq e/c Oava/rov pverai k<u ovk iS. eicreX^ei]/ cts toctkoto's, Su)pov 
 yap dya^oi' kcrriv iXeriiiocrvvrj, ib. xii. 9 IXeqp.oo'vvrj Ik Oavarov pverai kol 
 awT^ WTTOKaOaipei iracrav ajU-apTLav, ol ttoiovvtes i\eqp,o(Tvvriv ^(opTaaBrja-ovTai 
 tfmi's. Or love is narrowed to the keeping of the fifth commandment, 
 as in Sir. iii. 3 6 ti/xSv Trarepa i^iXdcreTai afxapria^, ib. v. 14 iX.er]p,ocrvvrj 
 irarpos ovk liriK-qcyOrja'erai koX dvTt djuapriSv wpocavotKoSo/xry^ijcreTat crot ' pity 
 for a father shall not be forgotten, it shall be imputed to thee for good 
 against thy sins.' Similarly Clem. E.. ii. 16 KaXov iXerip-ocrvvri is p.era.voia. 
 d/tapTtas' Kpei(Tcro>v vrjcrreia irpocrev^rjs, iXer/fiocrvvri Se d/ii^OTepo)!/, then he 
 quotes the verse from St. Peter, and continues iXerniocrvvrj yap Kovc^icr/ta 
 afjiapriai yiverai, which leaves no doubt as to the way in which he under- 
 stood it.^ Dr. Lightf oot in his note says ' in James v. 20 the expression seems 
 still to be used of the sins of others, but in the sense of burying them 
 from the sight of God, wiping them out by the repentance of the sinner.' 
 He cites Tertull. Scorp. 6 as understanding the words to mean ' atones 
 for a multitude of one's own sins,' and so Clem. Al. Quis div. sal. § 38, 
 p. 956 ear ravTqv {rT]V dyojTrrjv) i/jL^dhrjTai tis rrj ^fruxflt Swaroi, kov iv apuxp- 
 TTjiuKTiv -Tj yiyewrjiiivos Kav ttoXXo. ruiv KiKtaXv/xeviav etpyac/icvos, avf'^cras 
 T^v dydinjv kol ixerdvouxv KaOapav XaySw, avajxa^iaafrOai to. i'TTTauriJi.iva, 
 ib. Strom, i. p. 423 ; in Strom, ii. p. 463 dyaTn; is understood' of God's 
 forgiving love. There is a remarkable passage of Origen (Horn, in Lev. 
 
 1 For KaKvTtTii compare a saying attributed to Socrates in Stob. Flor. xxxvii. 27 
 71 liiv iaB'^fs t^jv appvBfiiay, rj 8e eivaia t)\v afiapriav irspiaTeWei. 
 
 2 [Compare the words of Portia ' it is twice blest, it blesseth him that gives and 
 him that takes.' A.] 
 
 ^ Compare Taylor, Jewish FatMrs, p. 27. 
 
172 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES 
 
 ii. § 4) referred to in the same note, in which the different remissiones 
 peccatorum in the Gospel are enumerated : (1) baptism, (2) martyrdom, 
 (3) almsgiving (which he supports by Luke xi. 41), (4) forgiveness of 
 others (supported by Matt. vi. 14), (5) converting a sinner, ita enim 
 dicit scriptura divina, quia qui converti fecerit peccatorem ah err ore viae 
 suae salvat animam ^ a morte et cooperit multitudinem peccatorum,^ (6) 
 love (supported by Luke vii. 47 and 1 Pet. iv. 8) ; and much in the same 
 way Oassian {Coll. xx. 8) enumerating the various ways in which sin 
 may be blotted out, besides simple penitence, mentions the conversion 
 of others by our exhortations. Other passages in which almsgiving is 
 referred to as efficacious for the saving of the soul are Didach6 iv. 6 
 €0.1' ^XV^ ^'■^ ™'' X^'P'^'' ^°^ Boxrei's ^ XirpuxTiv afiapTiSyv o"ov, Constit. 
 Apost. vii. 12 8ds, Iva ipydcrrj ets XvTp<iycri,v afj-apTLwy <tov iXcrjp.ocrvvaL's 
 yap Koi 7ri<TTC<nv awoKaOaipovTai a/xapTiai, SO Barn. xix. 10. Luke xvi. 9 
 is naturally understood in the same sense. 
 
 It appears to me that these passages leave little doubt as to the 
 ordinary way of thinking among Jewish writers on this subject, 
 both before and after the Christian era ; and if we further consider 
 the use of the future tense (o-wcret, Kakvij/ei) touched on in the 
 previous note, and the fact that, if the saving of the soul and 
 the hiding of sins have reference to the sinner, they do not essen- 
 tially differ from what is already involved in the protasis, which 
 states the conversion of the sinner from the error of his way, 
 it might seem that we ought to interpret the verse as Origen 
 does in the passage just quoted. So Euth. Zig. and Cramer's 
 Catena (in loc.) towvtov to iv T<a 'lepe/ii^ eiprjiJLevov, ' Kal iav efayayjjs 
 Tt/xiov aTTO ava^iov ws (TTO/jax fiov ecrrar' idv (j>r]cnv, ets tS>v a,iroXXviJ,iviov 
 8ia Trjv KOLKiav cvreXoii/ croiOfj Sto. tuiv <tSiv XdyoDV, evTi/AOS ecriy Sio. tovto 
 ■trap ifioi. We may also compare Dan. xii. 3 ' they that be wise 
 shall shine as the brightness of the firmament, and they that 
 turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever,' 1 Tim. 
 iv. 1 6 €7r£p^£ (r£ai/T<3 Kal rrj SiSacTKaXia- tovto yap ttoiSiv Ka\ (reavrov 
 aruxTti'S Kal Toil's a.KOvovTa.'s aov, 1 Cor. iii. 14, 15, Pirke Aboth v. 
 26, 27 ' whosoever makes the many righteous, sin prevails not 
 over him, and whosoever makes the many to sin, they grant him 
 not the faculty to repent,' Clem. Al. Str. vii. p. 52 o yvwo-rtKos, iSi'ai/ 
 awT'qpiav ■^yov/ici'os ttjv tS>v TreXas (0<^eXetav, dya\fj.a e/juj/v^pv cikotcos av 
 ToC K-vpiov kiyoLTO, Const. Ap. ii. 18 roi? wv(uSets koI Tra.peifj.ivov's 
 €Tn(7Tpi^€, vTro(TTrjpit,t, TrapaKoXei, 6epd.Trtve, e7rio"Ta//,€vos r/XlKOV /jllcOov €YeiS 
 TavTa iiriTeXSiv, uxnrep ovv Kal klvSvvov lav d/icXiJcnjs tovtidv. For a discus- 
 sion as to how far this is in accordance with the general teaching of 
 the N.T., see comment below. St. Paul's words in 1 Cor. ix. 16 may 
 perhaps be compared, ' woe is me if I preach not the Gospel,' and the 
 punishment of 'the wicked and slothful servant,' Matt. xxv. 26. It 
 
 1 So Cod. Sangerm. ; libri editi add ejus. 
 •This is repeated further on with allusion to the Levitical oifering of doves : Si 
 meditando sicut colmiiba...ah errors suo converteris peccatorem et abjecta neqtiitia ad 
 simpUcitatam eum columbae revocaveris...duos puUos cohtmbarum Domino obtulisti. 
 
 ' Dr. Abbott suggests 8i>i eis as in the following quotation from Const. Apost. 
 
V 20 NOTES 173 
 
 may on the other hand be urged that it is at any rate a lower motive 
 than that proposed in Matt, xviii. 15 iav aixapT'^o-r) 6 a8eX<f)6s a-ov, mraye 
 IXeyfov avTov fiera^v (Tov koI avTOv fiovoV idv croD aKOvcry, iKipSyjcra's tov 
 a8e\(f>6v a-ov, and that such phrases as ttXtjOo? ajxapriuiv and crwcret ipv)(r)v 
 eK Oavdrov naturally remind us of the preceding aixapriako^, and of the 
 a/MpTM which brings forth death in i. 15, but are unsuitable if used 
 of one whom St. James would be likely to commission to call others 
 to repentance ; of. Luke xxii. 32 crv ttote cirto-Tpei/fas (rr-qpurov roiis dSeX- 
 <^otJs crov, Psa. 1. 16, li. 13, Matt. xv. 14: on the other hand the 
 psalmist who had ' preached righteousness in the great congregation ' 
 speaks of his iniquities as more numerous than the hairs of his head 
 (Psa. xl. 9, 12). We need not however press the force of a proverbial 
 phrase, nor indeed would there be any objection to make ttXij^os cover 
 the sins of both parties, as Bede does : qui peccatorem ah errore convertit, 
 et ejus peccata per ha/nc conversionem ab aspectu judicis abscondit, et 
 sua quoque in quibuscunque offendit errata ab intuitu ejus qui omnia 
 videt proximum curando contegit ; similarjy Bengel and Schnecken- 
 burger.i Of. Clem. Eom. ii. 19 (I exhort you to give heed to the 
 things that are written) tva koI iavrovs (ruxrrjTC koI tov avayivixXTKovra iv 
 ifuv ft-urOov yap airS i/iSs to /ueravo^crat ef oXijs KapSt'as, a'biTTjpia.v eauTots 
 Koi ^torjv StSovTtts, ib. 17 (if we are commanded to convert even the 
 heathen, how unpardonable would it be to allow the ruin of a soul 
 which has once known the true God !) a-vWd^oyiJLev ovv caurois Koi 
 Tovs dcrOivovvTai avdyeiv im to dyadov, oircos (ro)6u>fJiev aTravTes' Kat 
 iTritrTp€\j/ii)p.ev aXX.yj\ovi Koi vovOen^o'iiyiJ.f.v, ib. 15 (he that obeys) Kat 
 iavTov (Tuxru koi ijxi tov crvfj-PovXevcravTa.- p-Ladbs yap ovk eo-Tiv fJUKpos 
 TrA.avu/u.ei'Jjv t^v)Q]V koX dTroXKvfii.€vr]v aTrocTTpiij/ai eis to (r<j)6^vai,' In 
 that case we might suppose the phrase o-wcrei tpvxrjv ek OavaTov to be 
 parenthetical and refer to the converted person, the future being 
 attracted from the main verb. 
 
 ^ Hammond, Hofmann aud Schegg following Erasmus and the R. C. commentators 
 generally understand the sins covered to be those of the preacher of righteousness ; 
 most modern commentators take them to be the sins of the person converted. 
 Calvin's note deserves to be quoted : Cibum dare esurienti el sitienti potum, mdemus 
 qvMnti Christus aestimet : atqui multo pretiosior est UK animae solus quam corporis 
 vita. Gwvendwm, ergo ne nostra ignavia pereant redemptae a Christo animae, quarum 
 salutem quodam modo in manu nostra ponit Deus. Non quod salutem conferamus 
 ipsi ; sed quod Deus ministerio nostro liberat ac servat, quod alioqui mdebatur exitio 
 propinquum . . . Alludit potius ad dictum Salomonis quam pro testimonio citat 
 Qui oderunt, libidine sese mutuo infamandi ardent : qui amant, Ubenter inter 
 se condonant multa : caritas ergo peccata sepelit apud homines. Jacobus hie altius 
 quiddam docet, nempe quod deUantur coram Deo, ac si diceret, Salomon huhc caritatis 
 fructUfm praedicat, quod tegat peccata : atqui nulla melior legendi ratio, quam ubi in 
 totum coram Deo abolentur. 
 
COMMENT 
 
 I. 1 — 15. Paraphrase. 
 
 Rejoice when you meet with trials (temptations) of whatever kind, 
 knowing that these are designed to prove yoicr faith and fix in yoio 
 the habit of patient endurance, with a view to your attainment of 
 the perfect Christian character. To make the right Mse of trial there 
 is need of wisdom, which must te sought ly prayer from Him who 
 gives freely without uplraiding for past neglect or ingratitude. 
 [But prayer, to be effectual, must be the utterance of a fixed purpose 
 which is in no danger of being diverted by changing moods or cir- 
 cumstances. No answer will be given to the prayer of the double- 
 minded and unstable. The true attitude of the Christian is exulta- 
 tion in the glorious truth which has been revealed to him. If poor, he 
 should exult in the new dignity thereby imparted to human nature ; if 
 rich, in the fact that he has been taught the emptiness of earthly wealth 
 and station and has learnt to aim at heavenly riches ; since the rich 
 man of this world is doomed to pass away like the flower of the jield?\ 
 Remember however that it is not trial in itself, but the patient en- 
 durance of trial to which the blessing is promised. He whose faith 
 has been thus approved shall receive the crown of life promised to all 
 that love Cod. Let no one say when he is tempted (tried), that God is 
 the author of his temptation, for God, as he is incapable of being 
 tempted, so He tempts none. Each man is tempted by his own lust (im- 
 pulse), by which he is carried away from right and allured to wrong : 
 lust, when it has conceived, becomes the parent of sin ; sin when 
 matured brings forth death. 
 
 Trial, Temptation — Treipaa-iio^, ■Treipd^ea-Oai. 
 
 We have here the first attempt at an analysis of Temptation from 
 the Christian point of view. It may be compared with that given by 
 Bishop Butler in his Analogy. Speaking of what constitutes our trial 
 both with regard to the present and to a future world, the latter says 
 
176 COMMENT 
 
 (Part T. ch. 4) : 'It must be somewhat either in our external circum- 
 stances or in our nature. For on the one hand persons may be betrayed 
 into wrong behaviour upon surprise, or overcome upon any other 
 very singular and extraordinary external occasions, who would other- 
 wise have preserved their character of prudence and of virtue : in which 
 cases every one, in speaking of the wrong behaviour of these persons, 
 would impute it to such external circumstances. And on the other 
 hand men who have contracted habits of vice and folly of any kind, or 
 have some particular passions in excess, will seek opportunities, and, as 
 it were, go out of their way to gratify themselves in these respects at 
 the expense of their wisdom and their virtue ; led to it, as every one 
 would say, not by external temptations, but by such habits and 
 passions. . . . However, as, when we say, men are misled by external 
 circumstances of temptation, it cannot but be understood, that there is 
 somewhat within themselves to render those circumstances temptations, 
 or to render them susceptible of impressions from them ; so, when we 
 say, they are misled by passions, it is always supposed that there are 
 occasions, circumstances, and objects exciting these passions, and afford- 
 ing means for gratifying them. And therefore temptations from within 
 and from without coincide and mutually imply each other.' 
 
 Again, speaking of moral improvement by discipline, he says (ch. 5) : 
 ' Mankind and perhaps all finite creatures from the very constitution 
 of their nature, before habits of virtue, are deficient and in danger of 
 deviating from what is right, and therefore stand in need of virtuous 
 habits for a security against this danger. For, together with the 
 general principle of moral understanding, we have in our inward frame 
 various affections towards particular external objects. These affections 
 are naturally, and of right, subject to the government of the moral 
 principle as to the occasions on which they may be gratified, as to the 
 times, degrees, and manner, in which the objects of them may be pur- 
 sued ; but then the principle of virtue can neither excite them nor 
 prevent their being excited. On the contrary, they are naturally felt 
 when the objects of them are present to the mind, not only before all 
 consideration whether they can be obtained by lawful means, but after 
 it is found they cannot. For the natural objects of affection continue 
 so ; the necessaries, conveniences, and pleasures of life remain naturally 
 desirable, though they cannot be obtained innocently, nay, though they 
 cannot possibly be obtained at all. And when the objects of any 
 affection whatever cannot be obtained without unlawful means, but 
 may be obtained by them ; such affection, — though its being excited, 
 and its continuing some time in the mind, be as innocent as it is 
 natural and necessary, — yet cannot but be conceived to have a tendency 
 to incline persons to venture upon such unlawful means ; and therefore 
 must be conceived as putting them in some danger of it. . . . This 
 tendency in some one particular propension may be increased by the 
 greater frequency of occasions naturally exciting it, than of occasions 
 exciting others. The least voluntary indulgence in forbidden circum- 
 stances, though but in thought, will increase this wrong tendency, and 
 may increase it further till, pecuUar conjunctures perhaps conspiring, 
 
I 1-15 iretpair/tos — Treipd^ecrOai, 177 
 
 it becomes effect, and danger of deviating from right ends in actual 
 deviation from it ; a danger necessarily arising from the very nature 
 of propension, and which therefore could not have been prevented, 
 though it might have been escaped or got innocently through. ... It 
 is impossible to say how much even the first full overt act of irregu- 
 larity might disorder the inward constitution, unsettle the adjustments 
 and alter the proportions which formed it, and in which the upright- 
 ness of its make consisted ; but repetition of irregularities would pro- 
 duce habits. And thus the constitution would be spoiled, and creatures 
 made upright become corrupt and depraved in their settled character, 
 proportionably to their repeated irregularities in occasional acts. But 
 on the contrary these creatures might have improved and raised them- 
 selves to an higher and more secure state of virtue by the contrary 
 behaviour ; by steadily following the moral principle supposed to be 
 one part of their nature, and thus withstanding that unavoidable 
 danger of defection, which necessarily arose from propension, the other 
 part of it. For, by thus preserving their integrity for some time, their 
 danger would lessen ; since propensions by being inured to submit 
 would do it more easily and of course : and their security against this 
 lessening danger would increase ; since the moral principle would gain 
 additional strength by exercise : both which things are implied in the 
 notion of virtuous habits. Thus then vicious indulgence is not only 
 criminal in itself, but also depraves the inward constitution and 
 character. And virtuous self-government is not only right in itself 
 but also improves the inward constitution and character : and may 
 improve it to such a degree that, though we should suppose it impos- 
 sible for particular affections to be absolutely coincident with the 
 moral principle, and consequently should allow that such creatures, as 
 have been above supposed, would for ever remain defectible, yet their 
 danger of actually deviating from right may be almost infinitely 
 lessened, and they fully fortified against what remains of it.' 
 
 Butler then proceeds to argue that ' this world is peculiarly fit to be 
 a state of discipline to such as will set themselves to mend and improve. 
 For the various temptations with which we are surrounded, — our ex- 
 perience of the deceits of wickedness, having been in many instances 
 led wrong ourselves, the great viciousness of the world, the infinite 
 disorders consequent upon it, our being made acquainted with pain and 
 sorrow either from our own feeling of it or from the sight of it in 
 others, — these things, though some of them may indeed produce wrong 
 effects upon our minds, yet when duly reflected upon, have, all of them, 
 a direct tendency to bring us to a settled moderation and reasonable- 
 ness of temper, the contrary both to thoughtless levity, and also to 
 that unrestrained self-will and violent bent to follow present inclina- 
 tion, which may be observed in undisciplined minds. . . . Allurements to 
 what is wrong, difficulties in the discharge of our duty, our not being 
 able to act an uniform right part without some thought and care, and the 
 opportunities which we have, or imagine we have, of avoiding what we 
 dislike or obtaining what we desire by unlawful means, when we 
 either cannot do-it at all, or at least not so easily, by lawful ones,— 
 
 N 
 
1 78 COMMENT 
 
 these things, i.e. the snares and temptations of vice, are what render 
 the present world peculiarly fit to be a state of discipline to those who 
 will preserve their integrity ; because they render being upon our 
 guard, resolution, and the denial of our passions, necessary in order to 
 that end. And the exercise of such particular recollection, intention 
 of mind, and self-government, in the practice of virtue, has from the 
 make of our nature a peculiar tendency to form habits of virtue, as 
 implying not only a real, but also a more continued, and a more intense 
 exercise of the virtuous principle, or a more constant and strongef 
 effort of virtue exerted into act. Thus suppose a person to know him- 
 self to be in particular danger for some time of doing anything wrong, 
 which yet he fully resolves not to do ; continued recollection and 
 keeping upon his guard, in order to make good his resolution, is a con- 
 tinued exerting of that act of virtue in a high degree, which need have 
 been, and perhaps would have been, only instantaneous and weak, had 
 the temptation been so.' 
 
 Butler's distinction between the two factors in temptation, the inner 
 nature and the external circumstances, will help us to understand the 
 contrast apparent in the text between the trial [Treipacrfj.os) in which 
 the Christian is to rejoice, and the temptation (Trapa^tcrdai) which must 
 not be ascribed to God, since from Him only good proceeds. The 
 latter is the inner temptation, the former the outer trial, and not even 
 that in its full extent. External circumstances may try us either by 
 suggestions of pain, of which the great example is our Lord's agony in 
 the garden, or by suggestions of pleasure, exemplified in our Lord's 
 temptation in the wilderness, i.e. either by intimidating or by alluring. 
 It is the former, the trial by pain, which St. James has in his mind in 
 the 2nd verse, and by which those to whom he writes were assailed. 
 They were mainly poor and were suffering persecution and oppression 
 from the rich, as we gather from ii. 6, v. 7 foil. They were tempted 
 to murmur against God and to speak evil of men. St James (below 
 V. 7-11) urges upon them the duty of patience, by showing how neces- 
 sary it is in common life, by appealing to the example of the prophets, 
 and pointing to the near approach of the judgment day, in which 
 murmuring and impatience would be punished and the blessedness of 
 patient suffering be revealed. Here he bids them rejoice in these trying 
 circumstances, because, if patiently endured, they would confirm their 
 faith and fit them to receive the reward of eternal life promised to all 
 that love God. It is the same motive which is appealed to in the 
 Sermon on the Mount (Matt. v. 4, 10-12) and in 1 Pet. i. 6 foil. 
 Another reason for rejoicing in affliction is given in Heb. xii. 6 : it is 
 a mark of God's love towards those whom he chastises. In Acts v. 41 
 we read that the Apostles, when scourged, rejoiced that they were 
 counted worthy to suffer shame for the name of Christ. St. Peter 
 speaks of the partaking of Christ's suffejings as a ground for rejoicing 
 (1 Pet. iv. 13). St. Paul rejoiced in the thought that he was allowed 
 to supplement the afflictions of Christ for the sake of the Church 
 (Col. i. 24). 
 
 The stnges of Christian growth according to St. James are as follows: 
 
I 1—15 7reipa(r//,ds— TEipafetr^ai 179 
 
 Trial tests faith ; the testing of faith produces endurance ; endur- 
 ance, if it is continued till it attains its end, builds tip the perfectly 
 matured Christian character, thoroughly furnished to all good works. 
 For an example of this testing of the faith, patiently endured to the 
 end, we may take the Syro-Phoenician woman. It is manifest what 
 strength of endurance, what unshaken trust in God, she must have 
 gained through that one victory. The converse is equally true. 
 Where there has been little trial, there has been little to test and 
 exercise faith, little experience of ourselves, little to instil the habit of 
 submission and resignation, little to lead us away from earth and up 
 to heaven. The old Greek proverb, ira^^juara fiaO-qfiara, is adopted by 
 the writer of the epistle to the Hebrews, and applied where, without 
 his sanction we might have hardly ventured to apply it, in the words 
 (catTTEp oiv vios e/iaOev a<ji Ssv eiraOev Ttjv viraKO-qv. 
 
 But is not St. James' exhortation to rejoice in temptation 
 opposed to the petition 'Lead us not into temptation,' where the 
 same word ireipao-p.o's is used in the same signification of external 
 temptation ? In the Lord's Prayer however there is no reason 
 to limit its application to pain-temptation any more than in 1 Tim. 
 vi. 9 (they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare). In 
 the next place one who is conscious of his own weakness may 
 without inconsistency pray that he may be kept out of tempta- 
 tion, and yet, when he is brought into it through no fault of his 
 own but by God's providential ordering, he may feel such trust in 
 Divine support as to rejoice in an opportunity of proving his faithful- 
 ness. St. James speaks to those who are in the midst of trial, and in 
 danger of losing heart in consequence : it was evidently not God's will 
 that they should be kept out of temptation, but that they should turn 
 it to good account ; and this is what St. James encourages them to do. 
 Another way of explaining the difficulty is by a comparison of the 
 words in Matt. xxvi. 41 Trpo(rev)(t<r6€ tva /ti) eio-eX^ijte eh Treipaafiov. The 
 disciples to whom Jesus addressed these words were already in a situa- 
 tion of extreme trial, and he does not propose to remove them from it : 
 they are all to be sifted. Still they are to pray that they may not 
 enter into temptation, i.e. that they may be so supported by Divine 
 grace as to go through trial without its being able to tempt them. I 
 do not think however that there is any need to limit in this way the 
 meaning of the petition in the Lord's Prayer. 
 
 Allowing that St. James is here thinking mainly of trial arising 
 out of affliction, how far may we generalize his ' divers temptations ' 1 
 Beside pain, sorrow, fear, it will certainly embrace all sorts of per- 
 plexities, difficulties, disappointments, anxieties, anything which 
 troubles or annoys us. We are naturally inclined to wish them out 
 of the way, to think of them simply as interfering with the comfort 
 and happiness which we esteem our right. The true way is to regard 
 them as part of our schooling for heaven, helping to form the cross 
 which has to be borne by every Christian. We should strengthen 
 ourselves to bear them by looking away from the pain to the 
 good involved in it, if rightly borne. But may we also rejoice in 
 
 N 2 
 
180 COMMENT 
 
 such tests of faith as are not naturally grievous, in wealth, powfer, 
 beauty, popularity, prosperity of every kind ? Or, yet further, in the 
 external temptations of the world, the flesh and the devil 1 Might 
 Joseph rejoice in the temptation which came to him in Potiphar's 
 house, as well as in that which came when his brothers sold him to the 
 Midianitesi The conquest of pleasure-temptation is not less useful 
 as experience ; it is not less strengthening to the character than the 
 conquest over pain : to have gone through such temptation unscathed 
 may be the ground of deepest thankfulness afterwards ; but the spiri- 
 tual joy in resisting temptation of which St. James speaks is not com- 
 patible with any lower feeling of pleasure. To have suddenly come 
 into possession of a great fortune is a cause of rejoicing to the natural 
 man : one who has a right sense of the responsibilities and the snares 
 of wealth may shrink from it as a burden, or enter upon it with much 
 anxiety and self-suspicion ; but we can hardly conceive of such an in- 
 version of the ordinary view as to allow of a -man's rejoicing in wealth 
 as a trial. St. James just below speaks of the poor as rejoicing in his 
 dignity, but the rich in his humiliation as a Christian — both equally 
 difficult and the latter especially painful to the natural man. One- 
 simus and Philemon may both rejoice in the new relation of brother- 
 hood, which replaces that of slavery and lordship : to the one it may 
 bear the aspect of a levelling up, to the other of a levelling down ; but 
 in reality what both rejoice in is the falling into the background of 
 the old transitory distinction in comparison with their common fellow- 
 ship in the eternal glory. 
 
 The call to rejoice is of course not exclusively made to those who 
 are tried. There is a natural joy which is not condemned, but which 
 needs to be associated with the thought of God to guard it from 
 becoming a snare to us (ch. v. 13). ' Rejoice in the Lord always ' is a 
 universal precept for all Christians, but one that has to be insisted 
 upon especially in the case of those whose circumstances naturally 
 tempt them to sorrow. It is a bracing appeal to them (like St. Paul's 
 in Eph. vi. 10 foil.) to muster up all their courage, and to look their 
 difficulties in the face, seeing in them a Divine discipline, which they 
 are to accept as sent by Him who knows what is best for them and will 
 not suffer them to be tempted above that they are able. On the other 
 hand there is a false joy springing from a confidence in ourselves and 
 in our circumstances, which shows that we aim at the friendship of the 
 world, and which necessarily separates us from God (ch, iv. 4, 16). This 
 false joy must be exchanged for the sorrow of repentance before the 
 true joy can enter our hearts (iv. 9, 10). 
 
 In ver. 12 St. James guards against a possible misunderstanding of 
 the encouragement given in ver. 2. Trial can only be a subject of 
 rejoicing when it is patiently endured. He who gives way to the 
 temptation involved in trial is in no way benefited, but the reverse, 
 unless, as in the case of St. Peter, his discovery of his own weakness 
 leads him to a deeper repentance. 
 
 A still more serious error is met in ver. 13. Man throws the blame 
 of his wrong-doing on God, who made him what he is, and placed him 
 
I 1-15 iretpao-/u,ds — trapdt^ta-Oai 181 
 
 in circumstances which it was impossible to contend against. St. 
 James meets this in two ways : (1) by showing that it involves a sup- 
 position which contradicts what we know of God, (2) by explaining 
 more fully the nature of internal temptation. (1) (a) God is untempt- 
 able ; (h) He tempts none. But how are these statements to be recon- 
 ciled with other passages of Scripture, in which God is said both to be 
 tempted and to tempt "! Such are Ex. xvii. 2 ' why do ye tempt {Trapd- 
 ^ere) the Lord t ' ver 7 ' he called the name of the place Massah (jreipacr- 
 lj,6v) because they tempted the Lord, saying, Is the Lord among us or 
 noti' Numbers xiv. 22, Deut. vi. 16 'ye shall not tempt the Lord,' 
 Ps. Ixxviii. 18, 41, xcv. 9, Isa. vii. 12, Matt. iv. 7, where our Lord 
 meets the temptation to cast himself down from the temple by referring 
 to the command in Deut. vi. 16, Acts v. 9 (of Ananias and Sapphira) 
 ' how is it that ye have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the 
 Lord ? ' 1 Cor. x. 9 ' neither let us tempt Christ as some of them also 
 tempted and were destroyed of serpents ' (referring to Numb. xxi. 5 
 ' the people spake against God and against Moses, "Wherefore have ye 
 brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness ? '), cf . Judith viii. 
 12 (of the rash oath of Ozias to surrender Bethulia if help iid not come 
 within five days) ' who are ye that have tempted God ? . . .ye cannot 
 find out the depth of the heart of man, then how can ye search out 
 God or comprehend his purpose 1 . . . He hath power to defend us when 
 he will. Do not bind the counsels of the Lord our God.' So self- 
 sought martyrdom and the proposal to test the power of prayer by 
 comparing the results in a praying and in a non-praying hospital may 
 in different ways be regarded as tempting God. The distinction is 
 plain between the temptation to sin of which St. James speaks and 
 such cases as these, in which men are said to tempt God, when they 
 make experiments with Him, or take liberties with Him, try how far 
 they may go, so to speak, instead of humbly submitting to what they 
 feel to be His revealed will or His providential ordering ; when in the 
 words of Stier they ' anticipate by the word of their own self-will the 
 word of God upon which they should wait.' Man can be tempted 
 because of tlie propensity to evil in his own nature ; God cannot be 
 tempted because He is absolute goodness. 
 
 But (5) we also read of God tempting man, as where he tested 
 Abraham's obedience by demanding the sacrifice of his son (Gen. xxii. 
 1), or the Israelites by the forty years' wandering 'to humble thee, 
 and to prove thee (Treipdcrrj), to know what was in thine heart,' Deut. 
 viii. 2, or Hezekiah by the Babylonian embassy 2 Chron. xxxii. 31, 
 Judith viii. 25-27. But here again the design of temptation is quite 
 different from that spoken of in the text; it is not temptation. with 
 the view of drawing man into sin, but trial with the view of dis- 
 covering his motives and principles and of gradually buUding up the 
 perfect Christian character, as stated in the second verse. 
 
 What then is the real history of the temptation which allures 
 us to sin? It has its root in man himself, in his appetites, desires 
 and iinpulses of every sort, suggesting the thought of pleasure to 
 be obtained (or pain avoided) by the commission of a wrong act. 
 
182 COMMENT 
 
 A.t first the impulse is a blind instinctive movement, involuntary 
 md therefore innocent, but if unchecked it discovers a definite 
 aim, which it seeks to attain by uniting itself with thought and 
 will. Sin originates when we choose to dwell upon the thought 
 of the pleasure suggested, though knowing, or strongly suspectiog, 
 that it cannot be lawfully obtained. The desire becomes stronger 
 by indulgence, the thought of sin ceases to shock as it becomes more 
 familiar, until at last that which had been long rehearsed in the 
 imagination is enacted in real life. In most cases the commission of 
 the outward act is followed by something of shame or remorse, which 
 may lead to genuine repentance, but if the sting of conscience is dis- 
 regarded, the first wrong action is naturally followed by others, which 
 give rise to a sinful habit, and at length conscience is silenced, the will 
 is permanently enslaved, the moral nature is to all appearance dead ; 
 and so the soul departs to the other world to receive the reward of the 
 things done in the body. The genesis of temptation is admirably 
 illustrated in the story of Macbeth. In the second scene we have the 
 picture of an innocent and laudable ambition. The interview with the 
 witches shows this ambition perilously sensitive to outward solicitation, 
 and already open to the suggestion of unlawful means for the attain- 
 ment of the coveted object, a suggestion seconded by his wife's direct 
 instigation, and supported by external circumstances, the nomination 
 of Malcolm as heir to the throne and the visit of Duncan. We have 
 then after many misgivings the final resolve and the execution of the 
 murder : the consequent change from the noble Macbeth, whose nature 
 is full of the milk of human kindness and of whom it is said ' what 
 thou wouldst highly that wouldst thou holily,' to the bloodthir.sty 
 tyrant of the later scenes. It is to be noticed that in Macbeth we are 
 always conscious of a background of hellish instigation. This does not 
 appear in the first chapter of St. James, but is recognized afterwards 
 in iii. 6 where the tongue is said to be set on fire of hell, iii. 15 where 
 false wisdom is described as devilish, iv. 7 where we are bidden to 
 submit ourselves to God and resist the devil, ' the tempter ' as he is 
 called by St. Paul, who makes use of our natural impulses to bring us 
 to ruin. 
 
 Here however a further difficulty arises, for the action of Satan is 
 sometimes said to be permitted by God, as in the temptation of Job ; 
 at other times an action is attributed indifierently to Satan and to 
 God, as in the numbering of the people by David, which is said to be 
 instigated by God in 2 Sam. xxiv. 1, by Satan in 1 Chron. xxi. 1 ; and 
 yet again God seems to be represented as the author of immoral or 
 irreligious conduct in man, as in Ex. ix. 16 'the Lord hardened the 
 heart of Pharaoh.' With regard to the first case the answer is simple: 
 Satan tempts with the design of inducing Job to give up his righteous- 
 ness and his trust in God : God permits the temptation, because he 
 knows the end will be to prove Job's faith and confirm his righteous- 
 ness. It is fundamentally the case of those to whom St. James writes. 
 They are in trouble ; Satan is allowed to suggest that this trouble is a 
 sign that God neglects them ; yet they are to rejoice in this trouble 
 
I 1—15 TTUpao'ii.o's — Tretpa^ecrpat 183 
 
 with its attendant temptation, because in this way their faith 
 will be strengthened, and they will learn endurance. In such a 
 case as this it might be said, either that Satan tempted them by 
 Divine appointment, or that God tempted them through Satanic 
 agency. The difference of expression in 2 Sam. xxiv. 1 and 1 Chron. 
 xxi. 1 is due to the idiosyncrasy of the writers, the later writer shrink- 
 ing from the bold anthropomorphism of the earlier. There is more 
 difficulty in the passage in which God is said to have hardened 
 Pharaoh's heart, especially if we read it with St. Paul's commentary 
 (Rom. ix. 17-24) 'whom he will, he bath mercy on, and whom he will, 
 he hardeneth,' and his silencing of the objector by what looks like an 
 appeal to unlimited power ' Shall the thing formed say to him that 
 formed it Why hast thou made me thus V It is no doubt in reference 
 to such a passage that we read that the epistles of St. Paul contained 
 'things hard to be understood which they that are unlearned and un- 
 stable wrest to their own destruction.' Perhaps it is most easily ex- 
 plained by regarding it as an abbreviated way of saying that Pharaoh's 
 hardness was the natural conse^juence of the Divine law which has 
 ordained that prolonged resistance to conscience should result in the 
 searing of the heai't, and that this hardness was also part of the 
 providential plan by which Israel was brought out of Egypt and the 
 power, of God manifested. It is not meant that Pharaoh was under 
 any compulsion to sin, or that God tempted him to sin. Lastly the 
 argument of St. Paul is more justly regarded as an appeal to man's 
 ignorance than as an assertion of the doctrine that might makes right. 
 Throughout the Bible God's claim to man's obedience is founded on 
 His righteousness. The faith of Abraham rests on this foundation. 
 ' Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right ? ' In the mind of St. 
 Paul as well as of Moses, no miracle, no sign of power could justify 
 the Israelite or the Christian in accepting a doctrine different from 
 that which he had received from Him whose name is Holy. 
 
 Setting aside however the precise language of Scripture, does not 
 experience show cases in which it might be said that man is tempted 
 of God ? Take the child of criminal or vicious parents. He inherits 
 a special predisposition to evil, and he is placed in circumstances which 
 encourage and call out that tendency. Here we have to consider (1) the 
 teaching of our Lord with regard to the many stripes and few stripes. 
 Guilt is very different according to the different degrees of light 
 accorded. But (2) every one has received some measure of light from 
 above, teaching him that there is a right and a wrong, and further 
 light and strength are given in proportion as the existing light is used. 
 The publicans, and sinners were nearer to Christ than the Scribes and 
 Pharisees. 
 
184 
 
 COMMENT 
 
 Pre- Moral Stages 
 
 The following scheme may serve to illustrate the teaching of St. 
 James on this subject. 
 
 Stages of Temptation. 
 
 1 . Internal nature with its impulses {iiriOvuLaL) which 
 often require some external stimulus (ireipacr/xds) 
 to rouse them, otherwise remaining dormant. 
 
 2. Excitement of particular impulse through external 
 stimulus of present or prospective pleasure or 
 pain. 
 
 3. The impulse thus roused is brought under the 
 purview of reason and conscience, and, if un- 
 sanctioned by them, constitutes full temptation 
 
 4. The two ways. Action of will under temptation : 
 (a) passively yielding (b) actively resistiag un- 
 
 under Satanic in- der Divine influence, 
 
 fluence. 
 
 5. (a) The understanding (6) 
 cooperates with the 
 impulse, suggest- 
 ing modes of grati- 
 fying it, and pic- 
 turing the pleasure 
 of gratification 
 (crvAAaySoBcra). 
 
 6. (a) The will identifies (6) 
 Moral Stages (j itself with the im- 
 pulse and resolves 
 on the steps re- 
 quired to attain 
 desired object (tik- 
 rei a/jLapTiav). 
 
 (a) Sinful act. (6) 
 
 (a) Habit of vice form- (6) 
 
 ed by repetition 
 
 of vicious action 
 
 (a/xapTia awoTfkecr- 
 
 6ei(ra). 
 
 (a) Final result, death (b) Final result, crown of 
 
 (airoKVa Oavarov). life (SoKt/iios yei/d/xcvos 
 
 X^/u.i/'CTat Tov (TTt<l>avov 
 
 The will summons 
 up the other powers 
 of the mind and 
 above all seeks aid 
 from God to enable 
 it to resist tempta- 
 tion {yTTOfiovri). 
 
 The will identifies it- 
 self with conscience 
 and refuses all parley 
 with temptation. 
 
 Virtuous act. 
 Habit of virtue form- 
 ed by repetition of 
 virtuous acts (^ wo- 
 juov^ epyovTeXetovep^ei). 
 
GOD THE AUTHOR OF ALL GOOD 185 
 
 I. 16 — 18. Paraphrase. 
 
 Beware of wrong thoughts as to the character and work of God. 
 All good from the lowest to the highest comes from above, descending 
 from the Source of all lights, with whom (unliJce the luminaries of 
 this lower world) there can he neither change from within nor over- 
 shadowing from without. God of His own good pleasure implanted 
 in our hearts the germ of His own nature hy the preaching of the 
 Gospel, in order that we might he the first-fruits of His new creation. 
 
 God the Author of all Good. 
 
 To dissipate entirely the idea that temptation comes from God, and 
 that man is therefore not responsible for his sin, St. James here gives 
 the positive side of that characteristic which he had shadowed out on 
 its negative side in ver. 13. God is not merely Himself free from all 
 touch of evil, and therefore incapable of injuring others, He is absolute 
 Goodness, always communicating good to others, and Himself the 
 hidden spring of all good done by others. Nor is it only moral good 
 that comes from Him, though that may be His most perfect gift ; but 
 all light, all truth, beauty and happiness, all that at first made the 
 world appear good in the eyes of its Creator, is still His work. His gift. 
 It is vain to look for good from any other quarter, from the lusts of 
 the flesh, or the smiles of the world. Man, however, by his own sin 
 raises up a cloud which hides from him the face of God ; and thus he 
 comes to picture to himself a God who is no longer loving, but stern, 
 vindictive, jealous of human happiness. Such an imagination is a 
 delusion of the devil. Even this material sun does not cease to shine 
 behind the cloud which hides it from human view ; and God's 
 love, more unchanging than the brightness of the sun, knows no 
 eclipse. In all worlds He is eternally the same, the giver of all good, 
 who cannot do otherwise than will what is best for every one of His 
 creatures. His purpose for us Christians is that we should be the 
 first-fruits, the sample and earnest, of His new creation. Through us 
 He reveals to the world what He would have all men to be. And the 
 means by whict He renews in us the divine image, which is the true 
 nature of man, is the declaration of His love, made first through the 
 Son, and then further explained and enforced by those whom the Son 
 has sent to sow the good seed of the kingdom. The teachin'g of Christ 
 rightly received into the heart constitutes the germ of a new divine 
 life, "by which it is the will of God that humanity as a whole should 
 in the end be permeated and transfused. ^ 
 
 It shows how liable men are to be deluded by phrases, that Luther, 
 with this passage before him, could imagine the teaching of St. James 
 to be opposed to that of St. Paul. ' By grace are ye saved through 
 faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God ' is not a stronger 
 
 See Jukes, Bestitution of All Things, pp. 30-^45. 
 
186 COMMENT 
 
 expression of the doctrine of free justification than the words before 
 us, ' of his own will begat he us with the wor^ of truth.' 
 
 Regeneration. 
 
 It is worth while to compare the different terms used in the Bible 
 to express the change wrought in man's nature by the Divine influence. 
 
 (1) It is described as a new birth. This is expressed in the text by 
 the verb aTroKviui. St. Peter in his First Epistle (i. 23) employs the 
 verb avayevvdia ' being born again not of corruptible seed, but of incor- 
 ruptible, through the living and abiding word of God,' cf. ib. ii. 2. 
 St. John has either ytvi/aw dvwOev or the simple yevi/dw, as in i. 12, 13, 
 ' A.S many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons 
 of God, even to them that believe on his name : which were born, not 
 of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of 
 God,' ib. iii. 3 ' except a man be born from above, he cannot see the 
 kingdom of God,' this new birth being further explained by the words 
 in verses 5, 6, ' except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he 
 cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the 
 flesh is flesh ; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit ' ; simi- 
 larly 1 ep. iii. 9 ' every one who is born of God committeth not sin ; 
 for his seed remaineth in him, and he cannot sin, because he is born 
 of God ' ; ib. v. 4 ' whatsoever is born of God (ttSlv to yeyevvrjfjievov ck 
 Tov ©eoO) overcometh the world ; and this is the victory that over- 
 cometh the world, even our faith,' cf. also ii. 29, iv. 7, v. 1, 18. St. 
 Paul uses the word iraXiyyevecria, in Tit. iii. 5 ' according to his mercy 
 he saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy 
 Ghost,' and addresses the Galatians as ' my little children of whom I 
 travail in birth until Christ be formed in you' (Gal. iv. 19). 
 
 (2) Nearly related to this is the description of the change as that 
 of adoption (vio^ccrta) or sonship, for which see Rom. viii. 14 — 17, ' As 
 many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. For 
 ye did not receive a spirit of bondage again to fear, but ye received 
 II spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father . . . The Spirit 
 itself witnesseth with our spirit, that we are the children of God,' 
 cf. Gal. iv. 5, 6, Epb. i. 5. 
 
 (3) Or again, that which speaks of a new heart, a new man, a new 
 creation, a new nature, cf. Ezek. xi. 19 'I will put a new spirit 
 within you ; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh, and will 
 give them a heart of flesh.' III. xxxvi. 25-27, Jer. xxxi. 33, Ps. Ii. 10, 
 2 Cor. V. 17 'If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature {Kawri 
 KTto-ts) ; old thiugs have passed away ; behold all things are become new,' 
 Eph. iv. 22 ' that ye put off the old man which is being destroyed in 
 accordance with the lusts of deceit, and be renewed in the spirit of 
 your mind ; and that ye put on the new man which after God is 
 created in righteousness and holiness of truth,' 2 Pet. i. 4 ' in order 
 that through the promises ye may become partakers of the divine 
 nature,' Gal. vi. 15, Eph. ii. 15, Col. iii. 9, 10. 
 
 (4) This new nature is further described as a resurrection from 
 
I 16-18 REGENEEATION 187 
 
 death, and -combined with the thought of our being joined with Christ 
 in His crucifixion and resurrection. Thus we read (1 Job. iii. 14) 'we 
 know that we have passed from death to life, because we love the 
 brethren,' Eph. ii. 4-6 ' God, for his great love wherewith he loved 
 us, even when we were dead in sins, quickened us together with Christ, 
 and raised us up together and made us sit together in heavenly 
 places in Christ Jesus,' Col. ii. 12, 13, iii. 1, Rom. vi. 3-11. 
 
 (5) At other times it is described as a change from darkness to 
 light, as in Eph. v. 8 ' ye were once darkness, but now are ye light in 
 the Lord,' Col. i. 13, 1 Pet. ii. 9, 1 Job. ii. 8-11. 
 
 (6) Or from slavery to freedom, as in Rom. vi. 22 ' but now being 
 made free from sin and become servants to God, ye have your fruit 
 unto holiness, and the end everlasting life,' Rom. viii. 2 ' the law or the 
 Spirit of life in Christ Jesus made me free from the law of sin and 
 death,' Job. viii. 32, James i. 25. 
 
 (7) Or it is described more simply a.i conversion or turning, see 
 Matt, xviii. 3 ' except ye be converted (ectv fjurj a-TpacfirJTe) and become 
 as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven,' 
 Jas. V. 19. 
 
 (8) The most common, however, as well as the most complete 
 description of this change is the receiving of the Holy Spirit, through 
 whom Christ dwells in us and we in Him, see Eom. viii. already 
 quoted, Gal. v. 16 — 26, Eph. iii. 14 foil., James iv. 5, John xiv. — xvi. 
 
 The idea of regeneration was connected by the Jews with their rite of 
 circumcision and also with the admission of proselytes by the 
 ceremony of baptism.^ It was therefore only natural that when 
 baptism became the sacrament of admission into the Church of Christ 
 it should be regarded as possessing a regenerative power. St. Peter, 
 comparing it with the preservation of Noah in the ark, says ' the 
 like figure whereunto, even baptism, doth now save us ' (1 ep. iii. 21). 
 St. Paul speaks of our being saved by the washing of regeneration 
 and renewing of the Holy Ghost (Tit. iii. 5), and says that ' as many 
 as were baptized into Christ did put on Christ' (Gal. iii. 27) ; that 'ye 
 were buried with Christ in baptism, wherein also ye were raised with 
 him through faith in the power of God who raised him from the 
 dead' (Col. ii. 12). So St. John I.e. 'except a man be born of water 
 and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.' The love 
 of system led later Church writers to limit the use of the term Re- 
 generation to the special grace conveyed in Baptism, carefully dis- 
 tinguishing it from JustifioatioD, Conversion, Sanctificatiou, and so on.^ 
 In our Baptismal Service water is said to be sanctified to the mistical 
 washing away of sin, and the baptized child is said to be regenerate 
 
 ' See "Wetst. on 2 Cor. v. 17, Diet, of Christ. Ant. under 'Baptism,' p. 170, 
 Schoettgen, ITor. Sebr. I. p. 70i, Lightfoot, If. Heb. on Matt, iii., John iii., 
 Meusohen, N. T. ex Talm. illustratum, p. 286. 
 
 ^ See, for an excellent summary of tlie teaching of the Church of England on this 
 subject, a little tract by Canon Meyrick entitled Baptism, Regeneration, Conversion, 
 published by the S.P.C.K. 
 
188 COMMENT 
 
 and grafted into the body of Christ's Church. J. B. Mozley in his 
 treatise on Baptismal Regeneration argues that since regeneration, 
 strictly taken, implies Christian perfection, the assertion here made 
 must be understood hypothetically, as expressing a charitable hope 
 that the person is on the way to perfection. The more common 
 explanation is that all baptized persons are by the fact of their 
 baptism placed in a new state of spiritual capacity. It is important 
 to notice here two things : (1) that the same distinction is made 
 between outward and inward baptism as between outward and inward 
 circumcision. Of the latter St. Paul says, borrowing the figure used 
 in the book of Deuteronomy (xxx. 6), ' he is not a Jew which is one 
 outwardly ; neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh ; 
 but he is a Jew which is one inwardly and circumcision is that of the 
 heart, in the spirit and not in the letter ' ; and so St. Peter after 
 saying that ' baptism saves us,' adds the caution ' not the putting 
 away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience 
 (o-ui/etSiJcrecos ayaO^s iTrepuyTrjfjta) towards God ' ; and St. John, who 
 reports the words ' except a man be born of water and the Spirit, 
 he cannot enter into the kingdom of God,' gives a test by which 
 we may ascertain who is thus born, in the words ' every one that 
 doeth righteousness is born of him ' (1 ep. ii. 29), ' whatsoever is born 
 of God doth not commit sin ' {ib. iii. 9), ' whatsoever is born of God 
 overcometh the world ; and this is the victory that overcometh the 
 world, even our faith ' (ib. v. 4). That baptism was not always a rege- 
 neration in this high sense is shown by such instances as that of Simon 
 Magus, who, after he had been baptized by Philip, and received the gifts 
 of the Spirit by the laying on of the hands of Peter, was declared by 
 the latter to ' have neither part nor lot in the matter, but to be still in 
 the gall of bitterness and the bond of iniquity.' (2) We have to remem- 
 ber that the Apostles wrote at a time when adult baptism was the rule, 
 and infant baptism the exception. Baptism was then, as it is" now in 
 heathen or Mahometan countries, the confession of the faith of Christ 
 crucified, when it entailed shame, persecution, even death. It was of 
 such confession Christ himself said ' whosoever shall confess me before 
 men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven ' 
 (Matt. X. 32) ; and St. Paul, ' with the heart man believeth unto 
 righteousness ; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation ' 
 (Kom. X. 10) ; with which we may compare the words recorded in 
 Mark xvi. 16 'he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.' Faith 
 and repentance (or conversion) were the necessary preliminaries to 
 baptism ; but baptism, being the outward sign and seal of the inward 
 change, being also the confession of Christ before men, and being 
 accompanied by further gifts of the Spirit, became the summary ex- 
 pression for the new birth which preceded it. It is evident that in 
 these respects infant baptism now is something very different from 
 adult baptism then. Yet these differences do not derogate from the 
 uses of Infant Baptism. "We rightly regard the offering of the child 
 to God by the parents in baptism as the first step in the Christian life, 
 the acknowledgment on their part of their duty towards the child as a 
 
I. 16-18 REGENERATION 189 
 
 creature born not for time, but for eternity ; and the authoritative 
 declaration on the part of God of His saving will in regard to each 
 child thus brought to Him. In bringing our infants to the font we 
 only carry out the principle laid down by St. Paul (1 Cor. vii. 14)) in 
 respect to the children of Christian parents, and obey the word of 
 Christ Himself ' Suffer little children to come unto me.' If all goes on 
 as it should do, we may hope and believe that the child will lead the 
 rest of his life according to that beginning ; that there will be a steady 
 onward growth, as in the case of Timothy, without any deliberate 
 falling away, such as to require that entire change of heart and life 
 which we generally understand by the term ' conversion.' In this, 
 which ought surely to be the normal case in a Christian country, the 
 child is brought up to believe that he has not to win God's favour by 
 any special merit of his own, but that he is already redeemed, already 
 grafted into the true Vine, a participator in the gifts of the Spirit, 
 and an heir to all the promised blessings of the Gospel, unless by his 
 own neglect he refuses to avail himself of these privileges. And in 
 such a life as this it does not seem possible to fix on any other moment 
 as the moment of regeneration, except that in which the parents 
 proclaimed their intention to bring up their infant as a member of 
 Christ and a child of God. 
 
 It is interesting to observe the acknowledgment of the necessity of 
 a conversion or new birth even among heathen writers. Some found 
 this in the initiation of the mysteries, others in the teaching of 
 philosophy.^ 
 
 The Woed of Truth. 
 
 As there are some who attribute a magical virtue to the material 
 rite of baptism, so there are others who attribute a magical virtue to 
 sermons. They support their view by citing such texts as the fol- 
 lowing : ' Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. 
 How shall they hear without a preacher?' (Rom. x. 14, 17); 'God 
 hath manifested his word through preaching ' (Tit. i. 3). But we 
 have only to compare the state of things in the early Church with the 
 state of things which now prevails, in order to see how entirely inap- 
 propriate such language, literally understood, is to our own time. 
 When St. Paul thus spoke, it is almost certain that there was no 
 
 ' Compare for the conversion of the soul {\(ivxvs irepiayayjj) effected by philosophy, 
 Plato's account of the Cave-dwellers in Jlep. vii. 514-522, and the Stoic passages 
 quoted by Zeller (vol. iv.' p. 255) on the instantaneous change from a state of 
 folly and misery to one of wisdom and happiness, also Seneca, ep. 6, § 1 intellego 
 non emendari me twnium, sed transfigurari...hoc ipswm argumentum est in melius 
 translati animi, quod vitia sua, quae adhuc ignordbat, videt ; for the mysteries com- 
 pare the words used by the initiated i(j>vyov kilk6v, eiipov &fi.eivov in Dem. De Corona, 
 313, also Apul. Metam. xi. 21 Nam et inferum claustra et salutis tutelam in deae 
 manu posita, ipsamque traditionem ad instar voluntariae mortis et precariae salutis 
 celebrari, quippe cttm . . . in ipso finitae lucis limine constitutes . . . numen deae 
 soleat elicere et sua providentia quodam modo renatos ad rtovae reponere rursus salutis 
 curricula ; and Tertull. Praescript. c. 40 Diabolus ipsas quoque res sacramentorum 
 divinorum in idolorum mysteriis aemulatur. 
 
190 COMMENT 
 
 written Gospel. It was an oral revelation, passed from mouth to 
 mouth. The words of eternal life spoken by Christ were reported by 
 those who heard him, and these words were spirit and life to all who 
 received them. But even then it made no difference whether they 
 were addressed to many at once in the temple, as by Peter, or to one in 
 a chariot, as by Philip. Nor did it make any difference, when James 
 set the example of preaching by letter, where he could not preach in 
 person, and was followed by Paul and the other Apostles. Preaching 
 is only one out of many Christianizing influences now at work in 
 England. Some go so far as to question whether it would not be for 
 the advantage of all, preachers and hearers alike, if we would give 
 heed to St. James' advice (furj ttoXXoI StSda-KaXoi yivicrOe) and put a stop 
 to four-fifths of the preaching which now goes on. Still there is 
 room for sermons in the adaptation of the Gospel to the varying needs 
 of successive generations, and different classes of men, as well as to 
 the idiosyncrasies of different individuals. And there is need of 
 course for personal influence, especially with the less educated. Next 
 to the influence of believing parents, and in some cases superior to 
 it, is the influence of a schoolmaster like Arnold, of a preacher like 
 Maurice or Keble, in convincing a man of the reality of Christianity. 
 
 I. 19—27. Paraphrase. 
 
 Since yoib know that it is God ivho of His own good pleasure has 
 infused a new life into us by means of the preaching of the Word, 
 listen with eagerness to the Word which comes from Him, remember- 
 ing that it is not something to talk about or to fight about, but to re- 
 ceive into our heart and to manifest in our actions. Human ^^o-ssion 
 and bitterness are not pleasing to God or productive of the righteous- 
 ness which God requires, and which He alone can give. Therefore 
 begin by putting away all that unkindness which is so ready to over- 
 flow the lips and defile the man ; and then open your hearts to 
 receive in meekness the Word sown, which is able to save the soul. 
 Do not however deceive yourselves with the idea that it is enough to be 
 hearers of the Woo'd without carrying it out in action. Such a 
 hearer is like a man who, looking at his face in a mirror, gives one 
 glance, and is gone, and at once forgets what he was like. If we wish 
 to make a right use of the heavenly mirror, the Word which shows us 
 what we are and what we should be, we must not be satisfied with a 
 hasty glance, tve must give our minds to it ; wc must embrace it as the 
 law of our lives and never lose sight of it. Only tMis will God's bless- 
 ing attend our actions. If any one regards himself as a religious 
 man, while he knows not hoiv to bridle his tongue, such a man deceives 
 himself and his religion is of no avail Such was the religion of the 
 
I 19-27 HEARING THE WORD 191 
 
 Pharisees, who devoured widowi houses while for a pretence making 
 long prayers. The religious service ivMch God approves, consists in 
 kindness to all who need our kindness, and in rising superior to 
 worldly motives and solicitations. 
 
 Hearings the Word. 
 
 The parallel passage in St. Peler shows that the immediate reference 
 here is to the good seed of the Word sown by the preaching of the 
 Apostles. But the rule laid down by St. James need not be confined 
 to this, It is a direction as to the way in which all good thoughts, all 
 higher aspirations, all that raises and purifies our ideal, should be 
 received in the mind. As Sb. Paul says (Phil. iv. 8), 'whatsoever 
 things are true, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things 
 are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, these things we are to 
 think upon,' whether we read them in books, or see them in the lives 
 and actions of other men, or have them suggested to us by the 
 teachings of art or nature, or by the voice of conscience, or whatever 
 else may seem to come through the more immediate inspiration of 
 God. In respect to all of these the lesson is the same : ' take heed 
 how ye hear.' Let your hearts and minds be receptive of these higher 
 influences. Hearken for the still small voice, ponder its accents, 
 submit yourselves humbly and lovingly to its guidance. Keep a firm 
 hand on vanity, pride and passion, lest they get the dominion over 
 you, and drive away the Spirit or drown His voice within you. To the 
 same effect are the words of the Psalmist, ' Commune with your own 
 heart upon your bed, and be still,' ' I will hearken what God, the 
 Lord, will say concerning me,' ' Rest in the Lord and wait patiently 
 for Him ' ; and the words of the youthful Samuel, ' Speak, Lord, for thy 
 servant heareth.' In like manner Wordsworth speaks of the 
 influences of nature. 
 
 But pure contemplation is not enovigh. Man is made for action, as 
 well as for thought and feeling ; and if the latter have no influence on 
 his action, they become merely a refined self-indulgence, and tend to 
 dull the moral sense, and harden the heart, until moral renewal 
 becomes all but impossible, because we have destroyed the natural 
 connexion between the emotional stimulus and the response in act. 
 In the well-known words of Bp. Butler : ' Going over the theory of 
 virtue in one's thoughts, talking well, and drawing fine pictures of it ; 
 this is so far from necessarily or certainly conducing to form habits of 
 virtue in him who thus employs himself, that it may even harden 
 the mind in a contrary course and render it gradually more insensible, 
 that is, form a habit of insensibility to all moral considerations. For, 
 from our very faculty of habit, passive impressions by being repeated 
 grow weaker.' Few things are more fatal to moral and spiritual 
 growth than the satisfaction derived from a merely aesthetic or 
 sentimental religion. 
 
 But, it may be urged, is not a, contemplative life a legitimate 
 
192 COMMENT 
 
 vocation 1 Are not some men called to be artists, poets, philosophers, 
 students or teachers, as other men are called to be men of business 
 and action 1 la not action itself crippled and wasted from want of 
 knowledge ? Is it not one of the most deplorable features of modern 
 life, that there is so much re&tless activity with so little thought as to 
 the end to be pursued, and the means to be employed for arriving at 
 the end ; so much talk and profession, and so little feeling ; so much 
 fuss, and so little real enjoyment? 
 
 We may allow all this, and yet hold with Bp. Butler and St. James, 
 that it is a disastrous thing for a man to rest satisfied with his own 
 ' passive impressions.' If a poet like Wordsworth devotes himself 
 steadily to the task of raising the standard of thought and feeling 
 among his countrymen, or a jurisprudent, such as Bentham, lives 
 laborious days in order to reform men's ideas of what law should be, 
 and so ultimately to bring about that vast improvement in the statute 
 law of England which has been witnessed in this century, no one 
 could deny that these were in the highest sense men of action. It is 
 true there have been artists and philosophers who were less consciously 
 practical, ' who sang but as the linnets sing,' who wrote or composed 
 in obedience to the inner impulse without any definite idea of 
 benefiting others ; whose work nevertheless has been rich in practical 
 results of the greatest importance. Here too, for the work to produce 
 such results,. there must have been a high degree of mental activity, 
 and a conscientious effort to render faithfully the impression or the 
 thought by which the writer or artist was possessed. To borrow St. 
 James' figure, no great work of art was ever produced by a mere hasty 
 glance at the mirror of the Divine Word. But St. James is of course 
 speaking primarily of moral and spiritual truth. He does not deny 
 that one who preaches or theorizes on these subjects without prac- 
 tising his own precepts may put forward thoughts which may be good 
 and useful for other men ; nor that he may even be a medium, like 
 Balaam, for divine inspiration, though he should be found in the end 
 fighting, like Balaam, for the enemies of God : but what he says is 
 that, to the theorizer himself, moral theory without practice is of no 
 avail, but rather a dangerous snare as fostering the habit of self- 
 deception. 
 
 Slow to Speak. 
 
 But is it not the duty of a Christian to let his light shine? to 
 preach ^the Gospel to every creature ? Does not the Psalmist say 
 (ixxii. 74), ' my mouth shall speak of thy righteousness all the day,' and 
 St. James himself (v. 20) give a special encouragement to one who 
 ' converts a sinner from the error of his way ' ? On the other hand, in 
 ch. iii., he warns his readers against being too ready to take upon 
 themselves the office of teacher, and urges on them the necessity of 
 controlling the tongue. Doubtless we are to understand him in the 
 text as deprecating rash and hasty speech on religious subjects, in 
 accordance with the teaching of the wise man, ' God is in heaven and thou 
 on earth; therefore let thy words be few' (Eocl. v. 1, 2). A grave 
 
I 19-27 SLOW TO SPEAK 193 
 
 reverence, modesty and humility, careful previous confiideration of the 
 subject on which he has to speak, these seem to be the qualities St. 
 James requires in a teacher, in contrast with the flippant familiarity, 
 the readiness to pour out prayers or exhortations on the shortest 
 notice, which are often found so attractive. ' Slow to speak ' seems 
 also to imply a long period of testing and preparation for the work of 
 the ministry, in contrast with the plan ascribed to the Salvationists, of 
 taking one who has only just abandoned a life of sin himself, and 
 setting him up to be an evangelist to others. The words ' slow to 
 speak' are applied by Stier to conversation on religious topics as well as 
 to actual preaching. ' How many Christians,' he says, ' hold that God's 
 word is a matter about which people must talk together — God's word 
 which should always speak directly to the heart !... Guard against the 
 so much loved pious conversations, which are often so unprofitable, 
 often no more than mere idle babbling. Do not tcdh away from your 
 hearts the power and blessing of saving truth.' Allowing this to be 
 the general rule, we must not forget that the demoniac was bidden to 
 tell how great things God had done for him ; and that however 
 unwilling a man may be to set himself up as censor morum or an 
 instructor of others, it is every one's duty to make confession of his 
 own belief and principles when occasion calls for it. 
 
 Should we limit the injunction to the sphere of religion, or give it a 
 general application, equivalent to Carlyle's ' Silence is golden ' % Let us 
 consider the case of one who was certainly rap^is XaXeTv, the Apostle 
 Peter. His promptness of speech is shown on many occasions, as 
 when he said ' Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, Lord,' ' Let 
 us make three tabernacles,' ' Thou art the Christ, the son of the living 
 God,' ' This be far from thee. Lord, this shall not be unto thee,' ' Thou 
 shalt never wash my feet,' ' Not my feet only but my hands and my 
 head.' Here we have the immediate, spontaneous, expression of the 
 feelings of the heart, sometimes right, sometimes wrong, but always 
 attractive and interesting. It is this simplicity and openness which 
 draws us so much to the Apostle and makes us place such confidence 
 in his sincerity. So in general, expansiveness and freedom of utter- 
 ance is both a loveable and useful quality. We do not wish the 
 natural flow to be checked by the constant question ' Is what I am 
 about to say wise ? Is it prudent ] How will it affect people's 
 estimate of me ? ' On the other hand what can be more wearisome 
 than a flow of words where there is little of feeling or thought? 
 words which are mere words, or words prompted simply by vanity, or 
 which betray a shallow or coarse or malicious nature ? That a talker 
 of this kind should be induced to check the current of his words by 
 asking ' Is this true ? Is it likely to pain or injure any one ? Can it do 
 good to any one 1 ' is surely much to be desired. But even in the case 
 of natural kindly utterance, some sort of control is desirable. The 
 im pulse to hear should balance the impulse to speak. There should 
 be the thought that others too may wish to express, themselves, and 
 that the thoughts and experiences of others may be not less interesting 
 and useful than our own to the company at large. There should be 
 
 
 
194 COMMENT 
 
 the instinctive shrinking from any approach to falsehood, as well as 
 from anything which could give pain or do mischief. There is nothing 
 unnatural or artificial in such control as this, nothing to excite a 
 suspicion of Jesuitism. 
 
 But if we have no difficulty in finding cases in which we should all 
 echo the admonition of St. James ; if we should allow that for the 
 Jews of his time, as for certain races in our own time, the rule ' slow 
 to speak ' might be of very general application ; do we not also find 
 cases, especially in England, where a stimulus is needed in the opposite 
 direction? Is there not sometimes a stolid absence of interest both in 
 persons and things, which does away with the chief motive for conver- 
 sation t or a sluggishness of thought and speech, which amounts almost 
 to dumbness ? or a timidity and self-distrust, which make it a painful 
 effort to open oneself to others? In such cases surely the injunction 
 should be : Try to break through the isolation in which you have placed 
 yourself : learn to interest yourself more in others : remember that 
 you too in you'r own small circle are intended not only to do the will 
 of God, but to be an oracle of God, reflecting back that aspect of the 
 Divine Glory, to manifest which is the reason of your creation. 
 Certainly neither Moses nor Jeremiah were commended for their slow- 
 ness of speech. In vain the former pleaded ' I am not eloquent, but 
 am slow of speech and of a slow tongue.' ' The anger of the Lord,' 
 we are told, ' was kindled against him ' for his unwillingness to carry 
 the Divine message to his countrymen. 
 
 Slow to Wrath. 
 
 This is not to be understood as enjoining on Christians the habit of 
 Stoic apathy, any more than ' slow to speak ' is to be understood as 
 enjoining a Trappist silence. Bp. Butler in his sermons on Resent- 
 ment has well shown both the use and the abuse of the irascible ele- 
 ment in man. One chief means of raising a degraded moral tone is 
 the sight of the indignation produced in persons of a more generous 
 nature by a mean or unkind action. We have many examples of such 
 indignation in the Bible, notably in the language of John the Baptist 
 and of our Lord. What the text means is ' do not give way to the 
 first impulse to anger. Think how often you have had to repent of 
 what you have done or said under the influence of passion : how often 
 you have found that you had misapprehended the facts, or misinter- 
 preted the motives of the supposed offender. Even when there can be 
 no reasonable doubt on these points, in any case do not let yourself be 
 carried away by blind passion ; ask yourself how much of your anger 
 arises from the fact that wrong is done, and how much from the fact 
 that it is done to you, and try to eliminate the latter element ; take 
 into account the extenuating circumstances, hereditary predisposition, 
 defective education or whatever it may be. Consider also your own 
 liability to go wrong ; and above all consider the royal law, Thou shalt 
 love thy neighbour as thyself. , Put yourself into his place, and act 
 
I 19-27 SLOW TO WRATH 195 
 
 towards him as you would wish that another should act towards you 
 under like circumstances : that is, act for what you believe to be the 
 ofiender's best interests, and in such a way as to arouse his own better 
 feelings.' This warning of St. James against over-hastiness in wrath 
 may be compared with St. Paul's warning against too great persistency 
 in wrath, ' Be ye angry and sin not, let not the sun go down upon 
 your wrath.' 
 
 The context however shows that St. James is not thinking so much 
 of the passion of anger in general, as of its indulgence under particular 
 circumstances. He is speaking of the way in which men should re- 
 ceive the Word. ' They should be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow 
 to wrath, seeing that the wrath of man does not work the righteous- 
 ness of God ; therefore they are to receive with meekness the word of 
 salvation.' On a first reading we might be inclined to ask. Who ever 
 supposed that man's wrath could work God's righteousness? Why 
 should St. James have given iitterance to a truism like this ? But the 
 history of religion proves that there is no more common delusion than 
 this — that the best evidence a man can give of his own orthodoxy is 
 his bitterness towards the heterodoxy of others. The monarch's 
 private vices were atoned for by unsparing persecution of his heretical 
 subjects ; to join a crusade against the infidel was regarded as a pass- 
 port to heaven ; to burn a Protestant was an Act of Faith. The 
 odium theologiowm has passed into a proverb. Nor is it difl&cult to 
 understand why this should be so. Religion, with its vastly extended 
 horizon and its infinite possibilities as to the future, stimulates in a 
 very high degree the faculties of hope and fear, and in the more anxious 
 and less trustful natures tends to arouse an eager longing for some 
 positive assurance of personal safety. Such an assurance may be 
 either objective or subjective ; it may be derived either from the au- 
 thority of the Church without, or the supposed voice of the Spirit 
 within, testifying that we are children of God. The former assurance 
 may be found in the dogmatic coupling together of Conversion and 
 Pinal Perseverance as different aspects of the same fact, or in the 
 Viaticum and Extreme Unction of the Church of Rome. The latter 
 assurance may be sought from the presence of what is regarded as an 
 overpowering religious emotion. In the last resort, the former also is 
 subjective, in as much as it depends on the degree of confidence placed 
 in the ecclesiastical authority to which a man has submitted himself : 
 and the fact that this confidence is liable to be shaken by the discovery 
 that others do not acknowledge the same authority, is one main cause 
 of the hatred of heresy, as tending to undermine a man's own faith 
 and destroy his own security. Then this very hatred, — itself, as we 
 have seen, the offspring of doubt and fear, — becomes identified in our 
 thoughts with righteous indignation against sin ; and the more 
 fiercely it rages, the stronger is the conviction in the mind of the 
 persecutor, that he is the Jehu appointed to carry out the Divine 
 vengeance against the sinner, and that Paradise is secure to the 
 champion of the truth. Something of the same kind may be observed 
 wherever party spirit (the ipiOia of the third chapter) runs high ; 
 
 o 2 
 
196 COMMENT 
 
 it is so easy, so comforting to be a good hater, to take for granted 
 that one's own side has a monopoly of intellect and virtue, to 
 accept the party watch-word and join in shouting the party war- 
 cry ; so arduous and so humbling to divest oneself of prejudice, to 
 seek the truth for its own sake, to acknowledge the evil in ourselves, 
 and see the good in those who differ from us. 
 
 Modes of Self-Deception. 
 
 St. James notices in this chapter four ways in which men may 
 delude themselves as regards their religious state in God's sight, and 
 preach peace to themselves when there is no peace. The first is by 
 their fluency in speaking on religious subjects, the second by their 
 religious zeal, the third by their pleasure in hearing sermons or 
 reading religious books, the fourth (see verses 26 and 27) by the 
 punctiliousness of their religious services. Not that any one of these 
 is in itself wrong ; they may be all good and right as means of grace ; 
 but they are easily capable of becoming a source of self-delusion, 
 because it is so easy to confound the means with the end. Thus 
 under the old dispensation Isaiah (i^i 10 — 20) was commissioned to 
 declare the utter worthlessness of sacrifices and incense, of sabbaths 
 and holidays, of solemn meetings and many prayers, unless they were 
 accompanied by a moral change, unless the worshippers ceased to do 
 evil, and learnt to do well, — a change exemplified in Isaiah, as in 
 St. James, by kindness shown to the orphan and the widow. In 
 like manner Micah (vi. 6 foil.) contrasts the externalities of a 
 sacrificial worship with that which the Lord requires, justice, mercy, 
 humility. The same contrast is found in the New Testament, as 
 in John iv. 20 — 24, where Christ himself corrects the Samaritan 
 woman's ideas of the special sanctity attaching to one place above 
 another, in the words ' God is a Spirit, and they that worship 
 him must worship him in spirit and in truth ' ; and again in Matt. vii. 
 21 — 23, where He declares that, to many who have prayed and 
 prophesied and wrought miracles in His name, it shall hereafter be 
 said ' I never knew you ; depart from me, ye that work iniquity.' 
 In his next chapter St. James specifies a fifth mode of self-deception, 
 arising from confidence in the orthodoxy of our creed : ' thou believest 
 that there is one God ; thou doest well : the devils also believe, and 
 tremble.' To all these various semblances of religion — not necessarily 
 hypocritical semblances, for it is not a seeming to others, but a seeming 
 to self, which is condemned in the ei tis Sokei Oprja-Ko? €tvai of the 26th 
 verse-— he opposes the reality, oi yap So/cciv apio-ros dAA' etvai deAu. 
 
 II. 1 — 13. Paraphrase. 
 
 An example of the worldly spirit may be seen in yotir assemblies 
 when a poor man entering is shown to the worst place, and a rich 
 man to the best. How is this regard for worldly distinctions con- 
 
II 1-13 RESPECT OF PEESONS 197 
 
 sistent with your belief in Christ, the only glory of believers ? Does 
 it not show that you are divided in heart, and allow yourselves to be 
 influenced by lower considerations ? In reality the poor have more 
 title to our respect than the rich, since it is among the poor we find 
 those who are rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom of heaven, 
 while the rich, as a class, maltreat the brethren and blaspheme the 
 name of Christ. If it is from obedience to the royal law of love that 
 we show courtesy to the rich, it is well ; but if we do this only from 
 respect of persons, it is a breach of law and defiance of the lawgiver 
 no less than adultery or murder. Remember that both words and 
 actions will be tried by the law of liberty, which regards the motive as 
 well as the deed. If we do not show mercy to others, we shall not 
 receive mercy ourselves. It is mercy only which triumphs over judg- 
 ment. (See notes on vv. 8 and 12 especially.) 
 
 Eespect of Persons. 
 
 ft is to be feared that, if St. James were to visit our English 
 churches, he would not find much improvement on the state of things 
 existing in the congregations of which he speaks. While there is 
 perhaps no objection either to the appropriation of sittings, in so far 
 as it assures to regular attendants the right to sit in their accustomed 
 place, or to the exactment of a fixed payment from the well-to-do 
 members of the congregation for the use of their seats ; it is surely 
 most contrary to the spirit of the Gospel that all the best seats should 
 be monopolized by the highest bidders. The poor are at any rate not 
 to be at a disadvantage in the House of God. The free and open seats 
 should at least be as good as the paying seats, and it should not be in 
 the power of a seat-holder to prevent any unoccupied sitting from 
 being used. 
 
 But the principle here inculcated goes much further than the particular 
 example given. If it is wrong to thrust the poor into bad places in 
 church, it is also wrong to treat them with disrespect in our ordinary 
 intercourse. St. James had before spoken of the change brought 
 about by Christianity in the feelings of the rich and poor themselves : the 
 rich brother was to exult in his humiliation, i.e. in the feeling of 
 common brotherhood which unites all Christians to Christ, and in the 
 special obligation, which lies upon one who is specially favoured, to use 
 his talents and his means for the common good ; the poor brother was 
 to exult in his admission to the full rights and privileges of a member 
 of Christ and a child of God. Here he is speaking of the duty of 
 Christians generally towards these two extremes. Apparently he 
 allows of no difference in our behaviour towards them. Our behaviour 
 towards both should be governed by the simple rule laid down by St. 
 Peter, ' honour all men.' This does not mean that we are to show 
 
198 COMMENT 
 
 less courtesy than we have hitherto done towards the rich, provided 
 this courtesy proceeds from the right motive ; but it means that our 
 courtesy towards the poor should, if anything, be greater than- our 
 courtesy towards the rich, partly because they have greater claims 
 upon us — the claims of the widow and orphan were noticed in the 
 previous verse — and partly because it may be more difficult for those 
 who have been long down-trodden to rise to their full dignity as 
 Christians, unless aided by our brotherly sympathy. 
 
 There are several questions which suggest themselves here. Does 
 St. James mean that all persons are to be treated exactly in the same 
 way, irrespective of rank, age, sex, colour, creed, nationality, or the 
 special relations by which men are connected one with another ] Are 
 all these differences considered to belong not to the man himself, but 
 to the part he plays on the transitory stage of this mortal life ? Is 
 it wrong to be influenced by such qualities as beauty, amiability, 
 cleverness, external refinement and good manners? Should our 
 behaviour towards one another be determined only by superiority 
 of moral excellence, as constituting the true essence of the man ? 
 
 This last distinction must of course in any case put a limit on the 
 injunction to 'honour all men.' We are to honour man as man, but 
 not as coward or liar. It is the godlike, not the bestial or the 
 devilish, in man which deserves our honour. Yet seeing that these 
 elements are bound up in one individual, we must take care that the 
 stern repression which may be the treatment required for the worse 
 elements, does not entirely extinguish or conceal the reverence which 
 should be forthcoming for any manifestation of the higher nature in 
 the man. The reason given in the text for honouring the poor rather 
 than the rich, is that the latter are blasphemers and persecutors, the 
 former the inheritors of the kingdom of heaven. Nor again can we 
 suppose that St. James would disagree with St. Peter's injunction to 
 pay honour to the wife as to the weaker vessel, or that he would fail 
 to recognise the relative duties of parent and child, master and 
 servant, &c. Special honour is due to the king and the magistrate in 
 consideration of the office which they hold. While we give the first 
 place to moral goodness in whatever circumstances it may be found, it 
 is only natural and right to acknowledge with thankfulness God's 
 good gifts of mind or body, provided we are not led by them to con- 
 done or to think lightly of the moral defects by which they may be 
 accompanied. We cannot love all alike, nor can we honour all alike, 
 yet still honour and love are due to all who share the image of God 
 (iii. 9). 
 
 We come now to the actual case of respect of persons condemned 
 by St. James. Is it right to pay respect to wealth qua wealth 1 It 
 may be right to respect it, in so far as it is the sign and result of 
 honest skill and industry, or if it is used as a stewardship for the 
 good of others ; but where it has been accumulated by withholding 
 his fair wages from the workman, and where it is used simply for the 
 purpose of selfish luxury, St. James has no measure in his indignant 
 denunciations (v. 1 — 6). On the whole we may say that, while he 
 
II 1-13 RESPECT OF PERSONS 199 
 
 does not altogether deny to the rich a place in the Church, yet he 
 agrees with his Master and with St. Paul in regarding the pursuit of 
 money and the possession of wealth as greatly increasing the difficulty 
 of entering the kingdom of heaven (ii. 6, 7, iv. 13—16). On the 
 other hand a special blessing attaches to the poor. 
 
 The question here arises whether, if wealth is thus detrimental and 
 poverty favourable to our highest interests, we should not take steps 
 to diminish the one and increase the other. The writer of our Epistle 
 had himself witnessed the experiment of socialism tried at Jerusalem in 
 the first Pentecostal enthusiasm of the Church. The frequent sub- 
 scriptions in aid of the Church at Jerusalem, to which St. Paul refers, 
 have been regarded as an indication that the experiment proved a 
 failure from an economical point of view. At all events it does not 
 appear to have been continued for any length of time. Subsequently 
 this view of the comparative advantages of poverty and wealth had 
 great influence on the development of the Mediaeval Church : privatus 
 ilUs censics erat brevis, commune m.agnwm ; but this did not extend to 
 the secular order of things. Perhaps it may have been reserved to 
 our age, by legislative enactment, as well as by moral and religions 
 suasion, at any rate to limit the two extremes. We cannot doubt 
 that St. James would have approved of what has already been done 
 by the state in England to ameliorate the condition of the poorer 
 part of the community by means of factory bills, free education, free 
 libraries, extended franchise, &c., nor that he would have sympathized 
 with the efforts which are now being made to give the workman a 
 larger share of the profits of labour, and ensure to honest industry a 
 comfortable old age. And as regards the other extreme, it seems 
 natural to assume that he would have approved of a more careful 
 circumscription of the supposed rights of property and also of any 
 measures, consistent with justice, which would tend to check the 
 concentration of wealth in the hands of a few, such as a graduated 
 scale in the income-tax and the death duties. Outside of the action 
 of the State there will still remain plenty of scope for the influence 
 of the Church in drawing classes together, making them realize more 
 the tie of brotherhood, discountenancing wasteful self-indulgence, not 
 less in the smoking and betting and drinking of the poor than in the 
 luxurious living of the rich, compelling all to recognize their responsi- 
 bility to God for the use of the talents He has entrusted to them, 
 fostering such a tone of public feeling as would make it a disgrace for 
 men to spend their money or energy merely on their own pleasures 
 or interests, and would encourage them to vie with one another in the 
 promotion of art and science and literature, in making the world 
 happier and better and more beautiful than they found it, in a word, 
 in the advancement of God's kingdom upon earth. 
 
 One word as to the kind of honour which St. James would have us 
 pay to the poor. It is not of course that we are to flatter them, now 
 that they have become the depositaries of power, with a view of 
 gaining popularity and power ourselves. This would indeed be to 
 act from those ' sinister motives ' (8iaX.oyicr/i5v Trovrjpwv) which 
 
200 COMMENT 
 
 St. James ascribes to the flatterers of the rich in his day. Might 
 does not make right now, any more than it did under Roman 
 imperialism or mediaeval feudalism. The true way of honouring 
 the masses, if we like to use that term, is first by taking for 
 granted that they, like the classes above them, are largely made 
 up of reasonable beings, who desire to learn the honest opinions of all 
 who have taken the trouble to form opinions for themselves ; secondly, 
 by ourselves doing our best to understand their position, listening 
 with respect to their opinions, and freely pointing out where we believe 
 them to be mistaken ; thirdly, by seeking to make them sharers in all 
 the civilizing influences of our time, and as far as possible to raise 
 them to the level of the more favoured classes ; in other words, by 
 extending as widely as possible the refinement and culture, the self- 
 respect and self-control, implied in the old name of ' gentleman.' We 
 may hope that in these and other ways much of the bitterness of 
 poverty may be done away with, and that the upward path to compe- 
 tence may be opened to all who are capable of making use of it ; but 
 until human nature is entirely regenerated, the ascent of some from 
 the lowest class is likely to be balanced by the descent of others from 
 the upper classes. Nor is this in itself to be regretted, poverty and 
 want being the reformatories provided by nature for the idle and 
 vicious. In time past, it is true, these reformatories have too often 
 acted as incitements to crime rather than to virtue, because the 
 sufferers were left to suffer alone, without guidance for the present or 
 hope for the future. The thought and effort which are now being 
 applied to schemes for the improvement of the condition of the 
 ' submerged tenth ' will, we may believe, tend to bring out the good, 
 and neutralize the evil of poverty, while at the same time providing a 
 safe channel for the exercise of Christian charity. 
 
 It is however important to remember that the Jewish law, forbidding 
 respect of persons, was directed not less against the partiality which 
 favours the poor, than against that which favours the rich. The 
 caution against the former, which we find in Lev. xix. 15, ' thou shalt 
 not respect the person of the poor,' is certainly as much needed now as 
 it ever was. 
 
 Solidarity of Duty and the Law of Liberty. 
 
 ' He who keeps the law as a whole and fails in one point only is 
 guilty of all.' Such a principle would evidently cause great injustice, 
 if applied in the administration of human law. A child who steals a 
 carrot is not thereby guilty of forgery and murder. If the divine law 
 consisted of rules relating to outward action only, as human law does, 
 the same would be true of it also ; but the perfect law of God, as St. 
 James tells us in i. 25 and ii. 12, is a law of liberty. It is fulfilled 
 only when we freely choose what God commands, when His will 
 becomes our will, when we love Him because He loved us ; when we 
 love our neighbours as ourselves, because they are children of the 
 same Father, redeemed by the same Saviour, partakers of the same 
 
II 1-13 SOLIDARITY OF DUTY 
 
 Spirit with ourselves. If then we systematically neglect any one 
 commandment of God, say, the duty of honouring our parents, it will 
 not atone for this, though we should be most scrupulous in all other 
 respects ; the one wilful neglect proves that we were not actuated by 
 a right motive in our obedience to the other commandments : it shows 
 that we were not led by the Spirit of God. 
 
 In the 3rd chapter we read ' in many things we all offend ' the word 
 (irrato/tev) being the same as that used here, where it is said, that ' he 
 who offends in one point is guilty of all.' How then 'are any to be 
 saved? This is explained in v. 13 'mercy triumpheth over judgment,' 
 which follows closely on the words ' So speak and so act, as being 
 about to be tried by the law of liberty.' The law of liberty is at once 
 more exacting and more merciful than the law of bondage. It is the 
 former, because it is not satisfied with the outward act : it is the 
 latter, because, where there is real love of good, and real desire and 
 effort to do right, God accepts the will for the deed. To bear in mind 
 therefore that we shall be judged by the law of liberty tends to 
 produce in us a deeper conviction of sin, at the same time that it frees 
 us from anxiety, because we believe that God Himself desires that we 
 may be perfect as He is perfect, and that He will accomplish this 
 perfection in us by the presence of His Holy Spirit in our hearts, if 
 we are willing to receive it. 
 
 II. 14 — 26. Paraphrase. 
 
 We have seen that hearing is useless without doing, that the doing 
 which is confined to external forms of worship is equally useless, since 
 the only service which pleases God is that of 'practical kindness and 
 unselfishness. We have seen further that our faith is of no value if 
 it does not keep us from respect of persons and if it does not mani- 
 fest itself in love. This may be summed up by saying that faith 
 without works, pt'ofession without practice, is worthless, as worthless 
 as a mere verbal philanthropy. Even if such a faith were real, it 
 could not prove its existence ; and the uselessness of a bare faith is 
 shown by the fact that even the devils possess such faith. The 
 typical examples of faith given in the Old Testament prove that the 
 faith which Justifies must be an active principle. The function of 
 faith is to inspire action, and it is itself perfected by action. An 
 inactive faith is the mere corpse of religion. [See especially notes 
 on vv. 14, 23, 26.] 
 
 Faith. 
 
 St. James has already told us that trials are sent to test and confirm 
 our faith (i. 3), that without faith prayer is of no avail (i. 6, cf. v. 
 15, 16), that Christianity consists in faith in the Lord Jesus Christ 
 
202 COMMENT 
 
 (ii. 1), that those who are rich in faith are heirs of the promised 
 kingdom (ii, 5). By this faith he means trust in the loving wUl of 
 God revealed to us in Christ, and the reception of His word into our 
 souls, as seed into a good soil (i. 17, 18, 21). If we retain our trust 
 in God's all-wise, just and loving Providence, in spite of the trials 
 which He permits, the habit of endurance is strengthened, in us, and 
 thus we grow up to the full stature of Christian manhood (i. 4). The 
 opposite to faith is worldliness : our faith is shown to be tainted with 
 worldliness if we favour the rich above the poor (i. 27, ii. 2 — 4). In 
 the verses which we have now to deal with, faith appears in a different 
 light. It is no longer the essence of Christianity, but a mere dead 
 semblance, or empty profession of faith. For the employment of the 
 same word ttuttk to denote the two kinds of faith, we may compare the 
 different meanings of Tretpacr/Aos and ireipd^ecrOaL in i. 2, and 13, the 
 former used of a tempting for good, the latter of a tempting for evil ; 
 the use of a-oipia to express both a heavenly and an earthly wisdom 
 in iii. 15, 17, 1 Cor. i. 17-ii. 16, and so of iravovpyta in Sir. xxi. 12 ; also 
 the use of cpts in Hesiod (Op. 11 — 30) for the emulation which is good, 
 and the quarrelsomeness which is hurtful. This use of the same name 
 for different things is natural enough in the rough and ready speech 
 of men little accustomed to metaphysical analysis or subtle refinements 
 of language, and would be intentionally adopted by those who had to 
 address such hearers. The change of meaning is however prepared for 
 here by the use of the word Xeyy in ver. 1 4 : not faith in itself, but the 
 profession of faith is declared to be of no avail. The thought of faith 
 is apparently suggested by the statement in ver. 13 that 'love (com- 
 passion) is the only thing which can triumph over judgment,' judgment 
 being without mercy to, him who has shown no mercy. To this an objec- 
 tion is supposed to be made by the worldly-minded Christian of ver. 1 : 
 ' Will not faith also triumph against judgment ? What is the good of 
 being an orthodox believer, if I am no better off than a Samaritan 
 or a Gentile or an unbelieving Jew?' St. James replies by the 
 parable of the talking philanthropist. Just as a profession of philan- 
 thropy unaccompanied by kind actions is of no good to the needy, so a 
 profession of faith unaccompanied by righteous actions is of no good to 
 ourselves ; both are alike a mere hypocrisy in the sight of God. Such 
 profession is indeed the dead carcase of genuine religion. But in the 
 midst of this diatribe against a dead faith, St. James gives some further 
 particulars of a true faith, such as Abraham's (ver. 22) : ' faith 
 cooperated with his works and by works was faith made perfect ' ; 
 words which are in close agreement with St. Paul's teaching as to 
 ' faith which worketh by love,' and the ' fruits of the Spirit.' 
 
 If St. James were not so fully justified by the subsequent history of 
 the Church, we might be inclined to wonder at the scathing words in 
 which he expresses his contempt for those who place their confidence 
 in the orthodoxy of their creed. But it may be questioned whether 
 any form of fetishism has been quite so mischievous, so destructive to 
 all kindly feeling as well as to moral and spiritual and intellectual 
 progress, as the fetish of orthodoxy, i.e. the idea that the assent to a 
 
II 14-26 FAITH 203 
 
 given form of words is both necessary to, and suiBcient for salvation, 
 and that heterodoxy is the worst of sins. 
 
 We are not to suppose however that St. James would in these words 
 discourage the wish to arrive at a clear intellectual view in religion. 
 The ' word which is able to save the soul ' is itself addressed in the 
 first instance to the understanding, though it must penetrate the whole 
 nature before its work can be accomplished. It no less belongs to 
 man, as a rational being, to think clearly, than it belongs to him, as a 
 moral being, to act rightly. ' I will pray with the spirit ' says St. Paul, 
 ' but I will pray with the understanding also ' : and St. Peter, or whoever 
 is the author of the second Epistle which goes under his name, warns 
 us of the danger arising from the misunderstanding of the written 
 word, where he speaks of the hard things contained in St. Paul's 
 epistles, ' which they that are unlearned and ignorant wrest, as they do 
 also the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.' To grasp fully 
 the meaning of each separate statement, as intended by the writer and 
 understood by the original readers, will often tax our powers to 
 the utmost ; and we have besides to consider how far each separate 
 statement is to be qualified or limited or balanced by other statements, 
 whether in the same book or in the other Scriptures ; and again how 
 far changed circumstances, changed modes of thought and expression, 
 necessitate a change in the form of the doctrine taught ; — before we can 
 be sure of what is the actual teaching of the Spirit to the Church in 
 our own day. It is from neglecting these things, from the misunder- 
 standing of forms of speech, or from fixing the mind exclusively on 
 one side of Christian teaching, that erroneous views as to the Sacra- 
 ments and as to Predestination have become so widely prevalent. It 
 was therefore only natural and right that the Catholic Church should 
 seek to guard against the misinterpretation of revealed truth, first, by 
 drawing up short summaries of the essentials of belief for the use of all 
 her members, and secondly by careful exposition of the teaching of the 
 Bible on particular doctrines, made by the most learned of her sons. St. 
 James is not of course to be regarded as objecting to such formularies 
 or treatises. It is not the creed he finds fault with, but the belief 
 that a man is saved by the correctness of his creed. 
 
 Every extreme in religion is sure to give rise to the opposite 
 extreme. If therefore one party exaggerate the importance of a correct 
 statement of Christian truth, and make this correctness consist in a 
 repetition of phrases devised by the Fathers of the fourth or of some 
 later century, rather than in the actual teaching of Christ and his 
 Apostles ; if they restrict the freedom of thought by unwarrantable 
 assertions that the Church has already arrived at absolute truth, and 
 that the duty of reason is not to question, but simply to bow down in 
 adoration of a mystery ; it was to be expected that another party 
 would spring up, who would not only deny that the Church had any 
 right to put out an authoritative statement of doctrine, but would also 
 deny the possibility of arriving at any conclusion whatever in matters 
 of theology, and even that there was any connexion between doctrine 
 and conduct. Such persons might be disposed to claim the authority 
 
204 COMMENT 
 
 of St. James on their side, when he speaks of the profession of a right 
 faith being consistent with devilish wickedness. Nor can we evade 
 this by assuming that the profession is merely verbal. In the 
 supposed case there is real belief, a belief, be it observed, which has a 
 real efiect on the believer ; but the efiect is not that which St. James' 
 opponents claimed for their orthodox faith ; not an assurance of salva- 
 tion, but the extremity of terror. There can, however, be no doubt of 
 what St. James himself really held in regard to the connexion between 
 thought and action. He spoke in i. 19 of the seminal power of the 
 divine Word received into the mind : he is equally explicit below as to 
 the evil influence of words uttered at the instigation of a wisdom which 
 is earthly, sensual and devilish (iii. 6, 15). But, as is explained in the 
 Parable of the Sower, there are many things which may hinder the 
 word, or the thought, or the doctrine, from producing its natural 
 effect. It may lie altogether on the outside of the mind ; it may 
 make a mere momentary impression ; it may form strange combina- 
 tions with the already existing growths ; as, for instance, the thought 
 of One All-powerful and All-holy, meeting with a will which is 
 obstinately set on evil, is naturally productive of terror. It is only 
 where it finds a good soil, clear of weeds, that the full virtue of the 
 Word is manifested. We need not however assume that the Word is 
 necessarily wasted, where its effect is not immediately perceptible. The 
 use of short formularies, texts or hymns committed to memory, is to 
 store up for the future truths to which the heart may be inaccessible 
 at the moment. 
 
 I have in the introduction (pp. Ixxxvii. foil.) touched on the relation 
 which St. Paul's teaching on the subject of faith bears to that of St. 
 James. We saw there that there was substantial agreement between 
 them, notwithstanding the verbal contradictions which may be found 
 in their Epistles. Both agree that ' in many things we offend all,' 
 that man is saved not by his own merits, but by the goodness and mercy 
 of God. What differences there are, may be explained partly by the 
 difference of the errors which they controvert. St. Paul is arguing 
 against a dependence on the scrupulous performance of the Jewish 
 law (what he calls the epya vo/j-ov), and against the denial of salva- 
 tion to the Gentiles unless they conformed in all points to that 
 law. St. James is arguing against a dependence upon Jewish 
 orthodoxy, irrespective of moral conduct (what St. Paul might call 
 ipya mo-TEODs or ' faith working by love '). But partly the difference is 
 due to the difference in the character and development of the two men. 
 To the one, whose spiritual experience had been broken by a violent 
 shock, and whose special oflGlce it was to open the kingdom of heaven 
 to the Gentiles, the Gospel is the antithesis of the Law ; to the other, 
 who had been brought up with Jesus, who had known His disciples from 
 the first, and whose special office it was to make the final offer of 
 salvation to his own countrymen, the Gospel was the consummation of 
 the Law. Again, the one with his deeply speculative nature loves to fix his 
 gaze on the Divine factor in man's salvation, the other with his strong 
 practical bent directs his attention mainly to the human factor ; 
 
in 1-12 USE AND ABUSE OF SPEECH 205 
 
 though each fully allows and even asserts the doctrine complementary 
 to that which may be called peculiarly his own. 
 
 III. 1 — 12. Paraphrase. 
 
 Bo not he eager to assume the responsibilities of teachers. Hard as 
 it is for man to avoid stumbling in action, it is harder still to avoid 
 it in speech ; so that to guide the tongue aright may he regarded as 
 a test of Christian maturity. As the movements of the horse or the 
 ship are controlled by the little hit in the mouth or rudder in the stern, 
 so the whole activity of man is directed by the use made of the tongue. 
 Like the spark which sets the forest on fire, the tongue, hy some little 
 insignificant word, can boast of setting on fire the wheel of mortality, 
 the whole round of this mortal life. In the microcosm of man's 
 nature the tongue represents the unrighteoiis world, and is used hy 
 Satan as his organ. Man has learnt to tame the most savage and 
 venomous of animals, but the tongue is untameable and never at rest, 
 and its venom is the deadliest of all. It is as impossible to combine 
 acceptable worship of God with imprecations on man, God's image, as 
 it is impossible for afov/ntain to send forth sweet and hitter water at 
 the same orifice, or a tree of one species to bear fruit of another 
 species. (See especially notes on verses 8, 10.) 
 
 Use and Abuse op Speech. 
 
 The teacher here referred to is of course, in the first instance, the 
 teacher in the congregation. It is the same warning as we read in i. 
 19 ; the same also as is given by St. Paul in 1 Cor. xiv. 26 — 40. From 
 the latter passage we learn that the Christian assemblies were often 
 scenes of great confusion, in which a number of persons, women as 
 well as men, were trying to make themselves heard at the same time, 
 one with a psalm, one with a revelation, one with a teaching, and so 
 on. St. Paul insists that those who prophesy, or speak with unknown 
 tongues, should speak by two or at the most by three (with which we 
 may compare the /*^ irokXoi, of St. James), and that hy cowrse, so that all 
 things may be done decently and in order. It does not seem that there 
 was any distinct order of teachers : each member of the congregation 
 was at liberty to speak as he was moved by the Holy Spirit, in accordance 
 with the prophecy of Joel, quoted by St. Peter on the day of Pente- 
 cost. But even the exercise of the gifts of the Spirit was to be kept 
 under control ; the spirits of the prophets were subject to the prophets : 
 there was to be nothing orgiastic in the Christian service. If there 
 was anything of mere animal excitement, of pushing, or display, or 
 want of consideration for others, this was a sign that the speaker 
 was not exclusively influenced by the Spirit of God (vv. 14, 15). The 
 
206 COMMENT 
 
 dangers arising from the over-freedom of the youthful Church have long 
 ago been effectually guarded against in the Church of England by the 
 denial of the right of speech to any but the clergy. But it may perhaps 
 be questioned whether St. James would have consented to purchase 
 immunity from the disorder of which he complains, by investing one 
 of the teachers, not selected for that particular post, ns being specially 
 qualified for it, either by the congregation, or by the Apostles, or by 
 the Church at large, but merely nominated by some wealthy person, 
 perhaps one who was an entire stranger to the congregation, and who 
 had never given proof of his qualifications to exercise such an important 
 trust, — whether, I say, St. James would have approved of investing a 
 teacher, so chosen, with exclusive authority over the ritual and the 
 teaching of the congregation, and would further have thought it 
 expedient to enable him, however incompetent or unsuited for that 
 particular post, to disregard the wishes and feelings alike of his 
 ecclesiastical superiors and of the people committed to his charge, by 
 ensuring to him a practically irremovable tenure. And yet, after all, 
 our present system does not make St. James' caution inapplicable. 
 We may silence the laity, and still leave too many teachers ; since it 
 does not follow that, because a man is ordained and has the charge of 
 a parish, he must therefore be able to preach. A man may be an 
 excellent parish priest without having the qualifications of a prophet 
 and teacher. 
 
 We must not, however, suppose that the caution is limited to 
 preaching. It applies to all who set themselves up as instructors of 
 others, whether as schoolmasters, lecturers, politicians, journalists, 
 critics, writers of whatsoever kind, who make themselves responsible, 
 not only for their own actions, but for the seed they sow in the minds 
 of others. As there never was a time when people pressed more 
 eagerly into these professions, so there never was a time when it 
 behoved each man niore seriously to ask himself, what kind of vocation 
 he has for the work which he proposes to undertake, and whether he 
 has conscientiously endeavoured to prepare himself for it. As regards 
 education, perhaps the time has now come when it may be possible to 
 require a certificate, both of adequate knowledge and of ability to 
 teach, from others besides the teachers in our elementary schools. 
 
 On a. first reading, there is to a western mind something odd and 
 exaggerated in St. James' remarks as to the Tongue. The tongue is 
 of course merely the innocent instrument employed by the free will of 
 man. The rhetorical figure by which it stands for the abuse of the 
 faculty of speech, and of which examples have been given in the note, 
 need not however imply a want of earnestness in the speaker, any 
 more than Cranmer's apostrophe to ' this unworthy hand.' In some 
 cases there can be no doubt that temptation comes from ' the pleasures 
 encamped in our members ' (below iv. 1). There would be nothing 
 inappropriate, for instance, in ascribing to the palate the evils which 
 arise from gluttony. But there is no physical pleasure in the actual 
 movement of the tongue, and but little in hearing ourselves talk. 
 The pleasures and temptations connected with the use of the tongue 
 
Ill 13-18 TTSE AND ABUSE OF SPEECH 207 
 
 as an organ of speech, are entirely psychological ; but they constitute 
 an easily recognized department of man's activity, which St. James 
 tickets by this name ; and besides, like the pleasures of the palate, 
 they seem to have a separate life of their own, independent of our 
 will, so that we often find it the hardest thing in the world to hold 
 our tongue (ver. 8). The next point which we might be disposed to 
 question is the statement that one who controls the tongue is a 
 perfect man ; that, as the movement of the horse is governed by the bit, 
 so the activity of man is governed by his use of the tongue. Perhaps 
 we may find this easier to understand if we go back to the analysis of 
 temptation given in i. 14. Man's own lust is the cause of sin. The 
 angry or impure or impious thought goes on to express itself, first in 
 words, and then in action. Under the Old Dispensation it was wrong 
 action, which was forbidden by the Ten Commandments. St. James, 
 like his Master, bids us stop the evil current at an earlier point. Not 
 only he that kills is in danger of the judgment, but he that says ' Eaca ' 
 or ' Thou fool.' Evil is to be met and conquered in its initial stage of 
 thought, before the bitter or malicious feeling has had time to vent 
 itself in words. It may be objected that there are cases in which 
 some such vent is needed for the raging passion within, which only 
 becomes more dangerous by the endeavour to stifle it, just as grief 
 when it is unable to find relief in tears. Allowing this to be the case, 
 it need not, in the first place, diminish the value of the general rule 
 that we should accustom ourselves to check the evil impulse in the 
 bud ; and, secondly, we have to remember that, in St. James' view, 
 prayer is the natural vent for all the agitations of a Christian (below 
 V. 15). Perhaps however we may conclude from the language used 
 here and above (i. 19) that St. James was addressing people more 
 prone than the English to give expression to their feelings in words, 
 people of more fiery and less phlegmatic tempers. 
 
 We are not of course to suppose that St James denies or ignores the 
 right uses of the tongue. The very importance he attaches to hearing 
 proves the value he puts on the right kind of speaking, and the 
 description he gives just below of the qualifications of the truly wise 
 teacher is worthy to be compared with St. Paul's panegyric on 
 Charity. 
 
 III. 13—18. Paraphrase. 
 
 If a man claims to he wise, let him prove his wisdom hy his con- 
 duct. True wisdom shows itself in modesty, recognizing the immen- 
 sity of the universe and the narrow limits of man's capacity, and 
 lowing in reverence to God who made both man and the universe. 
 The mixing up of personal feelings, envy, jealousy, ambition and 
 party spirit, with the attempt to teach others, proves the absence of 
 true wisdom. Such a teacher sets up self above truth : his wisdom 
 ceases to be a gift from God : it is charged with other elements derived 
 
208 COMMENT 
 
 from, the flesh, the world and the devil. It is materialistic, irreligi- 
 ous, hating God and goodness, and is attended hy unrest, disquietude 
 and every hind of evil. On the other hand the wisdom which comes 
 from God is first of all pure : it has gained the victory over all 
 the lower impulses of our nature : it is at peace with itself, with 
 God and with man : it is gentle, reasonable, compassionate, single- 
 minded, free from dissimulation, abounding in good fruits. It is hy 
 the peaceful activity of such lovers of peace that the seed, which will 
 spring up into a harvest of righteousness, is sown in the hearts of 
 men. 
 
 Wisdom. 
 
 St. James, following the books of Job and of Proverbs and the 
 sapiential books of the Apocrypha, has already spoken of wisdom as 
 the gift of God, whicli we are to seek by earnest prayer, and whicb 
 will enable the Christian to understand the purpose of the trials to 
 which he is exposed, and to make the right use of them (i. 3). In the 
 0. T. the word has a very wide sense, including both science 
 and literature (1 Kings iv. 29-34, Prov. i. 6), but laying most stress 
 on practical wisdom, of which the foundation is said to be the fear of 
 the Lord. Here it is introduced as a sequel to the instructions to 
 teachers, especially religious teachers, and is defined by the moral 
 qualifications which go to the making of a good teacher or student. 
 Freedom from personal objects, single-minded devotion to the pursuit 
 of truth, simplicity, modesty — these qualities are essential to students 
 in whatever department of thought. Gentleness and sympathy, 
 appreciation for the work of others — ^these qualities are essential to a 
 persuasive teacher. So much we shall all admit ; but it may be asked, 
 Is wisdom to St. James nothing more than this % If we test his 
 description of wisdom by applying it to the case of men who are 
 universally esteemed wise, a Thucydides, a Plato, a Shakespeare^; or to 
 an Athanasius, or a Pascal, or a Bishop Butler ; even to St. Paul or 
 St. John, do we find that it supplies us with anything like an 
 exhaustive analysis of what we know as wisdom in them ? It 
 evidently takes no account of the original powers of the mind, or of 
 the strictly intellectual training needed for the full development of those 
 powers. It is as suited to the ordinary Sunday School teacher as to the 
 highest genius. So far, we may regard this exhortation of St. James 
 as illustrating the Christian freedom from exclusiveness. The 
 Gospel addresses itself to the Publican as well as to the Pharisee, to 
 ' this people that knoweth not the law ' as well as to the doctor and 
 the scribe. Every one has some mental powers : wisdom consists in 
 the right use of those powers, be they small or great. But there is 
 no reason to suppose that St. James intended to give a complete 
 exposition of his ideas on wisdom in this passage. He is simply 
 dealing with the evils incident to the reUgious teaching of the time. 
 There were in the Christian assemblies, as we learn from the Pastoral 
 
Ill 13-18 WISDOM 209 
 
 Epistles and elsewhere, the counterparts of the Jewish rabbis, men 
 fluent and positive and argumentative, who arrogated to themselves 
 the name of wise. St. James says nothing as to the extent of their 
 learning or knowledge ; he is content to point out those particular 
 characteristics of heavenly wisdom in which they were manifestly 
 deficient. We cannot argue from this that he would have disapproved 
 of elaborate disquisitions on theological questions such as we read in 
 the Epistle to the Hebrews, or that he would have condemned the 
 pursuit of learning or science for its own sake ; but for the present his 
 mind is fixed on practical issues. 
 
 IV. 1 — 17. Paraphrase. 
 
 The real source of our quarrelsomeness is the greediness with which 
 each one grasps at pleasure for himself. We are envious, if we see 
 others succeed where we have failed ; and we are conscious that our 
 whole life is a failure, as it always must he, when men either omit to 
 pray, or pray only for worldly objects whereby to gratify their selfish 
 impulses. But those who seek the world's favour can never obtain the 
 favour of God. The two are absolutely incompatible. As the Scrip- 
 ture says, ' the Spirit ivhich He has planted in us jealously longs for 
 our love.' It is owing to this jealous affection that He resists the 
 proud and gives grace to the humble. If we submissively accept His 
 chastisement and return to Him, He will return to us, and the tempter, 
 who offers the world to each of us, as he did to Christ, will flee from 
 us also, when he finds we are determined to resist him. This we must 
 do by renouncing all wicked actions and checking all evil thoughts, by 
 learning to take a serioibs view of life, giving up our thoughtless 
 mirth, practising self-denial and repentance, mourning over sin and 
 humbling ourselves before God. If we thus turn from the world to 
 God, He will raise us up and grant us a share in His kingdom. 
 
 Bo not think lightly of ill-natii,red gossip. To speak against a 
 brother or to condemn a brother is really to speak against and con- 
 demn the law of God, who has bidden us to love one another, and has 
 given a special warning against this sin in the ivords, ' Judge not, 
 that ye be not judged.' Shall we venture to set up our opinion against 
 God's law, and claim to do that which has been distinctly forbidden 
 by the sole Lawgiver and Judge ? Our duty is Ttot to criticize, but 
 to obey. 
 
 A further characteristic of the spirit of worldliness is exhibited in 
 our confident forming of plans for the future, without any thought 
 of the precarious nature of earthly enjoyment, and of our dependence 
 
210 COMMENT 
 
 on God for the life of each successive day . All schemes foo' theftdure 
 should he accompanied by the proviso ' if God will! 
 
 Do you say that yov, know all this already ' Bemeiiiber then that 
 it is the knowledge of good, combined with the choice of evil, which 
 constittotes sin. 
 
 The World. 
 
 The term koo-/*,os is borrowed from the Greek philosophers who used it 
 to express, first, the divine order apparent in the universe, and then the 
 actual universe and especially the heavenly bodies. In the pantheistic 
 system of the Stoics the Kocr/ios itself was deified. By the writers of 
 the N.. T. it is generally used iu a dyslogistic sense. Thus St. James 
 (i. 27) bids his readers 'keep themselves unspotted from the world.' 
 In ii. 5 he speaks of those who were ' poor in the view of the world ' 
 as being ' rich in faith.' In iii. 6 he speaks of the tongue as the 
 organ of the unrighteous world in our body. Here he says ' the 
 friendship of the world is enmity with God.' St. John (1 Ep. ii. 
 15-17) analyses the influence of the world into the 'lust of the tiesh, 
 the lust of the eyes and the pride of life.' He tells us further (iii. 1) 
 that the world knew not God and therefore knows not the sons of 
 God ; (iii. 13) that the world hateth you ; (iv. 5) that false prophets 
 are of the world and the world hears them ; (v. 4) ' whatever is 
 begotten of God overcometh the world : and this is the victory which 
 overcometh the world, even our faith ' ; (v. 19) ' the whole world lieth 
 in wickedness' (or 'in the evil one'); (iii. 17) ' the world's good ' is 
 used in the same sense as ' the unrighteous Mammon.' So in his 
 Gospel we read (xiv. 17) that 'the world cannot receive the Comforter' ; 
 (xiv. 30) ' the prince of this world cometh and hath nothing in me ' ; 
 (xv. 19) ' If ye were of the world the world would love its own, but I 
 chose you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.' So 
 St. Paul ' the world through its wisdom knew not God ' (1 Cor. i. 21) ; 
 ' God chose the base things of the world ' (1 Cor. i. 27) ; and St. Peter 
 ' that ye may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped 
 the corruption which is in the world through lust ' (2 Pet. i. 4). It is 
 evident that in these passages the world is used not for the external 
 universe, but for the world of men, that same world of which we are 
 told that God so loved it, that he sent his Son that the world through 
 him might be saved (Job. iii. 16, 17) ; and yet St. James says that one 
 who loves the world thereby becomes an enemy of God. How are we 
 to explain this? What is the I exact nature of that world which is so 
 dear to God, and so dangerous to man 1 
 
 In the simplest sense of the word, the world is each man's natural 
 environment, that into which he enters at birth, and from which he 
 departs in death. It is the immediate present, the seen and temporal, 
 of which our senses bear witness, in contrast to the unseen and eternal ; 
 as St. John says ' the world passeth away and the lusts thereof, but he 
 that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.' It supplies the objects of 
 all our appetites, the stimulus to our activities, the occasions of our 
 
IV 1-17 THE WORLD 211 
 
 passions, the subject-matter of our thoughts. This environment is 
 partly inanimate, so far as our senses, thoughts, and appetites are con- 
 cerned, but far more largely human, in all that has to do with feelings, 
 passions, desires. It is the appointed training-place of the immortal 
 soul. But just as the inanimate world, which was intended to reveal the 
 glory of the eternal Godhead, was itself deified through the folly of man ; 
 so the world of humanity, which was intended to be a further revelation 
 of the inner character of God, engrosses our attention until we no 
 longer hear the voice of God speaking in conscience, but take the 
 custom of the world for our law, submit ourselves to its judgment, 
 strive for its prizes, seek its approval, — in a word, worship the world as 
 our God. In speaking of the world we must remember that it is not 
 one, but multiform. Each man's world differs from that of every 
 other man, depending partly on his surroundings and partly on the 
 working of his own mind. The same surroundings may be to one man 
 it channel of divine influence, to another the very embodiment of the 
 worldly spirit. "Where the mind of one sees or creates good in all 
 around him, the mind of another may be conscious only of evil ; and 
 thus the same set of people may constitute a church to the one, a 
 world to the other. In like manner there will be a broad distinction 
 between man's world and woman's world, the world of youth and the 
 world of age, the world of poverty and the world of wealth. Fashion, 
 politics, religion, — the criminal, the school-boy, the working-man, — all 
 have their separate worlds ; there is the world of the nun in her 
 convent, of the hermit in his cell. Incalculable mischief has been 
 caused by the imagination that the worldly spirit could be avoided by 
 keeping out of some particular society which men chose to identify 
 with the world. The world is in the heart of man. There may be 
 endless differences in point of refinement between the various forms 
 of the world ; but in so far as they all tend to separate us from God 
 and lower our standard of duty, the influence of all is alike baneful. 
 He who makes it his chief aim to gain the favour of his world thereby 
 becomes an enemy of God. And yet all the while each separate soul, 
 included in the aggregate of worlds, is itself the object of God's love, 
 though the worldly influence, which in the Bible often goes by the 
 name of the world, is so hateful to God that, as we have seen, no man 
 can love it without becoming His enemy. 
 
 St. James in the text tells us that the cause of quarrelling is our 
 eagerness to get the world's good things, which are palpably limited 
 in quantity, and often derive their chief value in our eyes from their 
 difficulty of attainment. The fact of this limitation inevitably leaves 
 many disappointed of their desire. But even the successful are not 
 satisfied. No sooner is the coveted object attained, than the process 
 of disillusion commences. There is a moment's delight at the victory 
 over our rivals, and again the cloud of disappointment settles over us. 
 We feel that, once more, happiness has eluded our grasp, and we are 
 filled with envy and jealousy of those whom we fancy to be in any 
 respect more fortunate than ourselves, till in the end we find our 
 nearest approach to happiness in striving to prevent or destroy the 
 
 p 2 
 
212 COMMENT 
 
 happiness of others. How is this to be remedied? The Stoics 
 answered : ' By ceasing to desire.' The Christian answer is : ' By desiring 
 to be and to do what God wills, and by desiring others' good rather 
 than our own.' 
 
 The Divine Jealousy. 
 
 We are familiar with the Greek idea of Nemesis. Excessive 
 prosperity on the part of man even apart from evil-doing, as in the 
 well-known story of the Ring of Polycrates, portended utter ruin, 
 because it provoked the divine jealousy of human happiness. We are 
 familiar also with the ascription of jealousy to the God of the Jews, 
 visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third 
 and fourth generation. This seems to us to belong to the same stage 
 of thought as the lex talionis ' an eye for an eye and a tooth for a 
 tooth,' or as the expulsion of Adam out of Eden for fear that he might 
 put forth his hand and eat of the tree of life ; or again as the dispersion 
 of mankind over the face of the earth, for fear that they might make 
 themselves too strong by building the tower of Babel. Such concep- 
 tions seem to us natural to the anthropomorphism of a rude people and 
 period, when even Moses could urge as a reason for sparing the 
 Israelites the fear that the Egytians might say, 'because the Lord 
 was not able to bring them into the land which he promised them, he 
 hath brought them out to slay them in the wilderness.' But under 
 the New Dispensation we are perhaps surprised that it should still be 
 possible to make use of a figure which seems derogatory to the Divine 
 Perfection. We think jealousy a defect in human love ; how much more 
 in Divine ! The phrase itself is no doubt due to the writer's Hebraic 
 tone of thought and speech ; but it is at the same time a most forcible 
 expression of a most important truth : and the addition ' He giveth 
 more grace ' removes from it all that is unamiable in the idea of jea- 
 lousy. It is really a parable in which the soul is represented as 
 standing between rival wooers, God and the world. The strongest 
 human passion is boldly taken to represent the Divine longing for the 
 entire possession of the human heart, i.e. for the expulsion of every 
 thought and feeling which interferes with the recovery of the Divine 
 image in man and the attainment of the perfect ideal of humanity. 
 We blame human jealousy, because it is so largely made up of a selfish 
 desire for our own pleasure and honour ; so liable to turn into hatred 
 of the object of our passion. The Divine jealousy, as depicted in the 
 N.T., desires nothing but the best good of the beloved object, and hates 
 nothing but that which would injure and degrade it. How is this 
 jealousy concerned in ' resisting the proud, and giving grace to the 
 humble ' ? Pride here consists in man's claim to be independent of 
 God, to do what he likes and gratify all his natural impulses irre- 
 spective of God's will. It is the choice of the temporal in preference 
 to the eternal, of the world in preference to God. This pride is re- 
 sisted, as was shown in the previous Comment, by the continual failure 
 to obtain the happiness sought for. The Divine jealousy having 
 
IV 1-17 THE DIVINE JEALOUSY 213 
 
 ordained that the world shall never give satisfaction, he who seeks 
 his happiness there cannot but feel himself continually thwarted in his 
 ambitions, until at last he conceives himself to be the victim of some 
 jealous and hostile power seated upon the throne of the universe. Yet 
 ' He giveth more grace.' Underneath the dark suspicion which 
 blots out heaven from our eyes we are dimly conscious of an 
 appeal to feelings long lost sight of and all but extinct within us. 
 In the Prodigal's heart there begins to arise a loathing, not only for 
 the husks with which he has striven to satisfy the cravings of the 
 immortal soul, but also a loathing for his own folly and sin, a longing 
 for the home which he- has forsaken, joined with the sense of his 
 own unworthiness, which makes him fear lest he should have lost it 
 for ever. To one thus humbled grace is given in full measure : 
 the soul, which could never satisfy its thirst from earthly cisterns, 
 finds never-failing supplies of happiness in that inner union with God 
 which is typified by the well of water springing up unto everlasting 
 life. 
 
 Accompaniments of Repentance. 
 
 Does St. James mean that God's grace and favour are to be won by 
 fasting and self-discipline 1 Not so ; God's loving favour is ours to 
 receive, the moment we believe in it. He means ' be willing to give 
 up what has till now seemed to be the chief interest of your life : give 
 up the pursuit of honours and pleasures : no longer indulge in dreams 
 of conquering your rivals and taking vengeance on your enemies : 
 welcome what may seem the gloom of renunciation : examine yourself 
 to see where you have gone wrong in the past : and set to work to 
 atone, so far as may be, for any wrongs you have done to others. 
 Listen for the voice of God in conscience, and do your duty, as in His 
 sight and relying on His strength, with all the more energy in pro- 
 portion to its irksomeness and difficulty.' The natural accompaniments 
 of such feelings and resolutions amongst the Jews were weeping and 
 fasting, the rending of clothes and the casting of dust on the head. 
 If these things help the inward change, good : if they are its natural 
 accompaniments, good also : but, if they are used as substitutes for 
 the inner change, or as an anodyne to quiet the conscience and pave 
 the way for the resumption of the former life, then they are nothing 
 better than the vain religion {Oprja-Keia /uaTaios) already condemned by 
 St. James. 
 
 Judging. 
 
 Are we then never to find fault with others t It may be an essen- 
 tial part of our duty, as in the case of a magistrate, appointed for the 
 very purpose of deciding whether the accused is guilty or not guilty ; 
 of a parent, who has to train up his children to distinguish between 
 right and wrong ; and so in every case where instruction or criticism 
 is required. What St. James means is that we are not to indulge in 
 the habit of fault-finding from the mere love of it, where duty does 
 
214 COMMENT 
 
 not call us to it, for the sake of showing oS our acuteness and pulling 
 down others by way of exalting ourselves. Even where it is our duty 
 to judge, it should bo done under a sense of responsibility, with the 
 consciousness of our own liability to go wrong and a genuine desire for 
 the improvement, not the humiliation, of the person blamed ; and 
 further our judgment should be determined by the objective standard 
 of right, not by our private tastes or likings ; otherwise we set up our- 
 selves above the law and the lawgiver. There is no fault which brings 
 about its own punishment more certainly than the love of fault-finding. 
 While we become quick to see the mote in a brother's eye, the beam is 
 still growing in our own. The habit of negative criticism is destruc- 
 tive to the creative faculty and to much besides. All human action is 
 more or less blundering ; if we choose to concentrate our attention on 
 the blunders, and shut our eyes to the honest aim and the real good 
 effected in spite of the blunders, we lose the stimulus of admiration 
 and emulation ; thus deadening within us all that makes life worth 
 living, if it be true, as the poet teaches, that ' we live by admiration, 
 hope, and love.' 
 
 Making Plans. 
 
 Are we then to live at hap-hazard 1 not to use our best endeavours 
 to foresee the future and shape our actions in accordance with proba- 
 bilities ? This would be to give up one main use of reason. When our 
 Lord said 'take no thought (E.V. 'be not anxious') for the morrow, 
 for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself ' (Matt. vi. 
 34), he did not mean to forbid serious consideration of the course to 
 be adopted under given circumstances. He did not mean that it 
 was wrong to make engagements beforehand and to take steps to 
 keep our engagements ; that it was wrong for a man to deliberate 
 carefully before choosing a profession or accepting a post which 
 might be offered him ; or again, that it was wrong for a states- 
 man to consider carefully what measures he should bring forward 
 in Parliament. His meaning was that we should not worry our- 
 selves with the anticipation of evil : we should make all due pre- 
 paration for it, and then await it calmly in reliance upon God. 
 As Christ forbade undue anxiety, so St. James here forbids undue 
 confidence. We should bear in mind that we cannot foresee the issues 
 of things ; so that what we think desirable now, may turn out here- 
 after to have been undesirable ; aud again that the best-laid plans 
 are liable to fail ; so that, however good the object, still it may be 
 unattainable by us ; that we should therefore not stake our life, as it 
 were, on a single throw of the dice, but join with all our plans for the 
 future the reservation ' if God will,' and the aspiration ' Thy will be 
 done.' Some people, perhaps thinking of Christ's promise of divine assist- 
 ance to those who should be brought before synagogues and magistrates 
 for his sake(Matt. x. 18), seem to have an idea that forethought and plan- 
 ning are in themselves opposed to faith, and that, in religious matters 
 especially, there is something approaching to impiety in making pre- 
 parations for the future. It is enough to say in answer to this, that 
 
IV 1-17 MAKING PLANS 215 
 
 while we are no doubt justified in believing that Christ's grace will 
 be sufficient for us in whatever diiEculties, still it is our duty to use all 
 our powers, especially our nobler powers, in God's service ; that the 
 powers of imagination, hope, and reason, were given to us especially as 
 guides to action ; and that no great and permanent work has ever been 
 effected in which these powers were not fully exercised. 
 
 It is probably this passage which has given rise to the common use 
 of the letters D.V., as to which see the note. It is a comparatively 
 trivial example of what may be called the objectification of ideas, 
 which in greater matters has been productive of so much evil in regard 
 to religion. To have acquired the habit of submission and resignation 
 to the Divine Will is all-important for man : but the use of the symbol 
 is a matter of indifference. Where it is used in one place and omitted 
 in another, it would rather seem to imply that, when omitted in writing, 
 it was not present in the mind. 
 
 V. 1 — 11. Paraphrase. 
 
 Another form of worldliness is the love of wealth, whether stored 
 hy the miser, or squandered by the voluptuary. The decay which 
 threatens unused wealth is itself symbolical of the destruction 
 awaiting its selfish possessor. The cry of the labou/i'er, from whom 
 his just wages are withheld, is not unheard in heaven. As for 
 the voluptuary who, in this final crisis of his country's for- 
 tunes, thinks of nothing but personal gratification, he can only be 
 compared to a sheep fattened for slaughter. By the help of an unjust 
 law he may get rid of the imresisting righteous, whose life is a con- 
 tinual witness against him ; but let him remember that the Lord is 
 coming to judgment. Let the brethren, on their side, wait patiently 
 and strengthen their hearts to endiire for the short period which has 
 still to elapse before the coming of the Lord. Let them take a lesson 
 from the husbandmen who patiently wait for the rains to mature the 
 fndts of the earth, and from the prophets of old who spoke and suffered 
 in the name of the Lord. The story of Job is a striking example of 
 the blessing which awaits patient endurance. It shows us that, how- 
 ever severe may be the trial to which the believer is exposed, God's 
 mercy and lovingkindness will be made manifest in the end. The 
 brethren, however, must remember that the Lord comes not only to take 
 vengeance on His enemies but to judge His people ; and must beware 
 of a mu,rmuring, unforgiving spirit. 
 
216 COMMENT 
 
 Sternness of St. James. 
 
 What are we to say to the stern denunciation of this passage ? Is 
 it not inconsistent with the warning against judging and evil-speaking, 
 given in iv. Ill At any rate it is not inconsistent with the denun- 
 ciation of the Pharisees by John the Baptist and by our Lord. What 
 would be presumption in an ordinary Christian may be part of the 
 commission of a prophet. It was not presumption in Jonah to declare 
 the approaching downfall of Nineveh : the presumption came in, where 
 he expostulated with God for refusing to make good his threats, when 
 they had produced the desired effect. The prophetic announcement of 
 impending evil is not inconsistent with the tenderest sympathy, as is 
 shown by our Lord's lamentation over Jerusalem. Here we can see 
 ample reason for the strongest warning. The rich represented the 
 pride of the world. Their success, their triumphant career of selfish 
 oppression, while it left little hope of the possibility of their own 
 repentance, caused despair in the hearts of the brethren whom they 
 oppressed. It was the truest kindness on the part of the prophet to set 
 before both the fact of imminent judgment revealed to him by the Spirit. 
 To the rich it was the final invitation, the hand- writing on the wall, 
 which, if instantly accepted, might still enable them to seek a share in 
 the humiliation of a Christian (i. 10) ; to the poor it was the encpur- 
 agement needed to prevent their falling away. Nor is this prophetic 
 office yet extinct in the Church of Christ. Wherever sin is rampant, 
 wherever oppression and cruelty prevail, where the denunciation of the 
 evil-doer is a dangerous and unpopular service, there the heart of the 
 prophet will still burn within him, till at the last he speaks with his 
 tongue. 
 
 V. 12—20. Paraphrase. 
 
 Bo not mahe use of oaths of any Jcind, lest you fall into con- 
 demnation. Let all your feelings, whether of joy or sorrow, he 
 controllid and sanctified ly laying them- lefore God. In case of 
 sickness send to the elders, and let them pray and anoint the sick 
 person, and the Lord will answer the prayer of faith, and, if his 
 sickness is the conseqztence of past sin, it shall he forgiven. Confess 
 yoUr offences therefore to one another, and pray for one another, that 
 you may be healed. The story of Elijah on Mt. Carmel shows how 
 great is the power of a good man's 'prayer prompted hy the Spirit of 
 God. If a hrother falls into sin, you know that he who hrings him 
 hack into the right way will he the means both of saving a soul and 
 of hiding a multitude of sins. 
 
V 12-20 SWEARING 217 
 
 Swearing. 
 
 From the form of the prohibition, we might suppose that St. James 
 took the same view of the subject as St. Augustine, quoted in the 
 note, and forbade swearing, not so much because it was wrong in 
 itself, as because it was likely to lead to wrong, and therefore to con- 
 demnation. He could not have said of murder 'Do not kill lest you 
 fall under condemnation.' At any rate by giving his warning in this 
 form he made it easier for the Jews to accept it. Whatever their 
 practice was, they would certainly allow that there was much careless 
 and irreverent swearing, and that this could not but be displeasing to 
 God. St. James is, however, quoting Christ's own words, and it is 
 therefore probable that he means 'Whatever form of oath you 
 use, it will come under the prohibition of Christ.' Are we to 
 understand from this that every kind of swearing is absolutely for- 
 bidden, that the Quakers, for instance, were right in refusing to take 
 an oath in a court of justice 1 This is not what we should gather 
 from the conduct of St. Paul and of Christ Himself. The former calls 
 God to witness that he is speaking the truth in more than one passage 
 (2 Cor. i. 23, xi. 31, Gal. i. 20, etc.), and our Lord took the oath proposed 
 to Him in the words of the High Priest ' I adjure thee by the living 
 God.' So the angel in the Apocalypse is represented as swearing ' by 
 Him that liveth for ever and ever.' The same rule of interpretation 
 must be applied here as in the case of the other precepts of the Sermon 
 on the Mount. They supply an ideal standard, a goal to be aimed at, 
 but not a code of law to be immediately put into execution, regardless 
 of existing circumstances, and of the manner in which their exact 
 observance would affect our carrying out the two great commandments 
 on which hang all the law and the prophets. Take for instance the 
 precept to turn the other cheek : if this is tried by the principle that 
 we should do to. others as we would wish them to do to us, it is evident 
 that the last thing which a sane man could wish for himself or for one 
 whom he loved would be that he should be allowed to strike and 
 insult others with impunity. We have to disregard the letter, in 
 order to keep the spirit of the precept ; which is that a Christian 
 should never act from mere vindictiveness. The law of love requires 
 us to act for the best interest of the offender, i.e. to act in such a way 
 as to induce him to avoid such faults in future. It is only where there 
 is sufficient generosity of character to make a man ashamed of striking 
 one who offers no resistance, that non-resistance becomes the fitting 
 course for a Christian, the right way of obeying the law ' Thou shalt love 
 thy neighbour as thyself.' Yet in proportion as a society becomes Chris- 
 tianized, it becomes more and more possible to practise non-resistance 
 without transgressing the higher law of love, which bids us always act 
 for the best interest of our neighbour. So with swearing : the right 
 state in a Christian community is that all should feel so strongly the 
 obligation of truth, that there should be no occasion for further sanc- 
 tion beyond the simple 'yes' and ' no.' Wherever there is need of 
 more 'it comes of evil.' But often the standard of truthfulness is so 
 
218 COMMENT 
 
 low, that it is necessary to appeal to the All-seeing Witness in order to 
 make the affirmant realize what is his duty in respect of the 
 truth. And thus swearing becomes allowable, just as war is allowable 
 in the present imperfect state of things ; yet the aim of the Christian 
 should be, as far as possible, to limit the use both of oaths and of war, 
 so as ultimately to get rid of them altogether. See an excellent 
 article, in the Cont. Rev. vol. 49, pp. 1 — 17, by the late Archbishop 
 Magee, on the substitution of a declaration for an oath in admitting 
 members of Parliament. Unhappily in this, as in some other matters, 
 the professed advocates of religion have often taken a lower view than 
 its professed opponents. The earnestness of St. James in this pro- 
 hibition is probably to be explained by the constant breach of the 
 third commandment caused by the Jewish habit of swearing. 
 
 Healing of the Sick by Anointing with Oil and by Peaybr. 
 
 There can be little doubt that St. James is here describing a miracu- 
 lous cure following the prayer of faith. To encourage the elders to 
 obey his injunctions, he first insists on the power of prayer, when 
 inspired by the Divine Spirit, and then refers to an example of this 
 power in the person of Elijah, a man, as he reminds them, of like 
 weakness with ourselves. A difficulty arises here : if every sick 
 person could be miraculously healed, how is it that St. Paul did not 
 miraculously heal Timothy and others (1 Tim. v. 23, 2 Tim. iv. 20) 1 
 Why was not his own thorn in the flesh removed 1 We hear occasion- 
 ally of miraculous cures, but they are plainly exceptional. May not the 
 explanation lie in the word evcpyov/ieVi? (ver. 17)? When a miracle 
 was to be wrought the power of the Spirit made itself felt in the prayer 
 which preceded. Elijah himself could not work a miracle at wiU. He 
 too must wait, like Samson, till the Spirit of the Lord came upon him. 
 One reason why the elders, rather than others, were to be called in, 
 may have been that they were better able to judge what was the will 
 of the Spirit. Prom v. 16, however, it would appear that the office of 
 prayer and anointing and receiving confessions was not confined to 
 them. It has been already pointed out (pp. cxxi, cxxii) that the 
 assumption here made by St. James, that the anointing of the sick 
 would be attended by a miraculous cure, if performed in the spirit of 
 prayer, is a mark of the very early date of the Epistle. 
 
 Are we to consider that the scope of this injuncbion, which is 
 evidently temporary in form, is limited to the age in which it was 
 written, or is it in any way applicable to our own time ? The 
 prayers of the Congregation are still requested for the sick in the 
 public services of the Church of England ; and to offer such prayers 
 is a natural, we might say, an inevitable outcome of Christian 
 friendship. There are some who disbelieve in anything beyond a 
 subjective answer to prayer. Yet even they must allow that a 
 subjective action on the imagination may produce an objective 
 change in the bodily condition, as has been attested in many cases 
 of faith-healing, both among Protestants and Roman Catholics. But 
 
V 12-20 HEALING OF THE SICK 219 
 
 the teaching of St. James and of the writers of the N.T. in general 
 goes much further than this. Men are to cast every care upon God, 
 knowing that He careth for us. If there is a drought, men pray for 
 rain ; if there is a bodily infirmity, they pray for its removal ; if there 
 is danger or difficulty impending, the example of Christ Himself shows 
 that we are not wrong in asking that ' this cup may be taken away,' 
 provided we add ' nevertheless, not my will, but Thine be done.' In 
 these latter cases, however, we are told that prayer is absurd, or even 
 impious, because it brings us into collision with the laws of nature : 
 and certainly, when we are convinced that a certain sequence regularly 
 follows a certain antecedent by natural law, or, as Christians would 
 say, by God's ordinance, — in such a case it would be not only folly, 
 but the extreme of presumption to ask that God's ordinance might be 
 set aside for our convenience. The husbandman does not pray that 
 the grain which he has sown one day may spring up into the golden 
 crop of corn on the next day, or that it may come to maturity unaided 
 by rain or sunshine. These things he knows to be impossibilities, and 
 he does not ask for them, because he cannot deliberately desire them. 
 But where a change for the better is not, so far as he knows, an im- 
 possibility, there he cannot help strongly wishing for the change ; and 
 in the mind of a Christian every wish becomes a prayer, because it is 
 joined with the aspiration ' Thy will be done.' If meteorological 
 science is ever so far advanced that the meteorologist can predict the 
 weather with the same certainty as the astronomer predicts an eclipse, 
 prayer for fine weather would become impossible ; but wherever desire 
 is possible, there prayer is possible and right. We do not even pray for 
 the recovery of the sick, when the symptoms make it clear that God's 
 will is otherwise : our prayer is then for a peaceful and painless departure. 
 
 As the request for the prayers of the Church, so the service for the 
 Visitation of the Sick is founded upon this passage. The parish priest, 
 being notified of the sickness, attends by the bedside, joins in prayer 
 for the sick person, reminds him of his duty to make confession both 
 of his sin to God and of his shortcomings towards other men, assures 
 him of the Divine forgiveness promised to all repenting sinners, 
 administers to him the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ the 
 ever-present Saviour, in whom he realizes his communion with all saints, 
 not only those still on earth, but those who have crossed the dark 
 river before him, and whom he hopes soon to rejoin on the other side. 
 
 The Church of Eome claims to keep closer to St. James' injunction 
 by its use of Extreme Unction for the remission of sins and the spiritual 
 comfort of the dying. It is one of the curious phenomena of our time 
 that English Churchmen have been found to regret that our Bishops 
 persist in withholding from the clergy the power to administer this 
 sacrament of comfort ^ ; as to which it has been shown in the Notes 
 
 1 See J. H. Blimt's Theological Dictionary, p. 772, ' It may be iDelieved, in accord- 
 ance with the whole stream of Christian belief until recent times, that the spiritual 
 blessing declared to attend the unction of the sick is still given by God : . . . but 
 as modern English bishops do not bless oil for the purpose, this means of grace is at 
 present withheld from their flocks,' 
 
220 COMMENT 
 
 that, as far as we can judge, it was never contemplated by St. 
 James, and that there is no evidence of its use during the first 
 eight centuries by any except an obscure sect of Gnostics. There 
 are others who, while allowing that the belief in spiritual benefit to 
 be derived from Extreme Unction is a mere unauthorized fancy, are 
 still inclined to wink at it, as a means of tranquillizing the mind and 
 preserving it from terrors as unreal and as superstitious as the remedy. 
 If a false theology has fastened on the mind the belief that God's mercy 
 is limited to this life, and that after death He has no further compassion 
 for the sinner who has not repented and believed while on earth, but 
 is henceforth only the Judge and the Avenger, is it not allowable to 
 drive out one error by another ? The question is far-reaching, but no 
 lover of truth can hesitate. Even at the last hour let the true Gospel 
 sound in the ears of the dying penitent, still' more of the dying saint, 
 who is terrified by suspicions that he has not the right faith or the 
 true conversion. He who has once grasped the idea that Christ is 
 the propitiation for the sins of the whole world ; that God's mercies 
 are everlasting over all His creatures ; that He will do for each after 
 death exactly what perfect love and perfect wisdom dictate ; that 
 Eternal Justice and Eternal Holiness, no less than Eternal Love, are 
 our guarantee against an eternity of evil, will have no need and no 
 wish for a material anointing. 
 
 OoNPEssioN OP Sin. 
 
 The connexion between suifering and sin was universally believed in, 
 and even exaggerated, when St. James wrote ; as is evident from our 
 Lord's words about the Galileans, whose blood Pilate mingled with the 
 sacrifices, and also from the question of the disciples about the man 
 who was born blind. St. Paul asserts that many were punished with 
 sickness and even with death for irreverence in receiving the Eucharist. 
 The Jewish proverb quoted in my note to the effect that ' a man could 
 not recover from sickness till his sins were forgiven ' is quite in 
 accordance with our Lord's procedure in healing the sick of the palsy, 
 where the words ' Son, thy sins are forgiven thee ' preceded the 
 command ' Rise up and walk ' ; and both enable us to understand why 
 confession and forgiveness are introduced here in the instructions 
 given for the healing of the sick. 
 
 There seems, however, to be a certain want of consecutiveness 
 in the language of St. James. We should have expected the con- 
 fession of sins to be mentioned before the forgiveness of sins, and 
 even before the prayer for healing, since healing, as we have seen, 
 was regarded as implying forgiveness ; whereas it is brought in 
 afterwards as a second thought, though connected with what pre- 
 cedes by the inferential particle ovv. The emphatic dA.A.7}A.ois and 
 a.\\.T^\<i)v of V. 16 are decisive against the Romish limitation of 
 confession to the priest. Either the Elders mentioned in v. 14 
 have no special position distinguishing them from the other members 
 of the Church, or, more probably, we are to suppose that the duty 
 
V 12-20 CONFESSION OF SIN 221 
 
 of visiting the sick is not confined to them, but falls on the brethren 
 generally. Are we to understand that no one may hear the con- 
 fession of others unless he at the same time confesses bis sins to 
 them t This would seem the most natural meaning of the Greek ; 
 but it evidently could not be always carried out. Children ought to 
 confess their faults to father or mother, but it would in most cases be 
 far from expedient that the former should in their turn hear the 
 confessions of the latter. On the other hand we can easily conceive 
 cases in which mutual confession is most natural and desirable, since 
 one party is seldom so entirely in the right, as to leave all the regrets 
 and apologies to the other party. If however we are to think of 
 confession here in connexion with healing, it must be the confession of 
 sin against God which is intended : how would this suit the idea of 
 mutual confession? We can understand that confession is made easier 
 to the sinner, if another is ready to join in the expression of sorrow 
 and repentance. We can understand too that an unsympathizing 
 Pharisaic tone is likely to repel any confidences on the part of a 
 penitent. But the idea of mutual confession does not seem altogether 
 appropriate in the case of the sick man, and yet, if the word laOrjre is 
 taken literally, we seem to be tied down to this case. If on the other 
 hand we give it a metaphorical meaning, we may suppose that the 
 precept is of general application, and that St. James is recommending 
 the habit of mutual confession between friends. It cannot, I think, 
 be doubted that in many respects such mutual confidences might be 
 productive of great good. How much easier it would be to put up 
 with hastiness or coldness on the part of a friend, if we knew that he 
 was himself conscious of his faults and ttying to amend them ! What 
 a relief it would be to one of a sensitive self-conscious nature to lay his 
 anxieties before another of whose wisdom and sympathy he felt 
 assured ! Might it not tend to increase the feeling of Christian 
 fellowship, if those who were exposed to the same difficulties, anxious 
 to conquer the same weaknesses and to practise the same virtues, 
 could break through their isolation and confirm themselves in their 
 good resolutions by the knowledge that they were shared by others ? 
 Might it not help to diminish the miseries of life, and to change the 
 course of thoughts which may be tending towards insanity or suicide, 
 if there were more of outspoken sympathy in the world, if people were 
 sure that they might trust their secret feelings to others without fear 
 of being despised or laughed at or shrunk from ? The Church of 
 England has wisely refused to follow Rome in requiring regular 
 confession to the priest ; yet, where the parish priest is what he 
 should be, wise with the heavenly wisdom described by St. James, 
 none should be better fitted than he by position, training, and ex- 
 perience, to receive such confidences and give the needed comfort and 
 counsel.^ 
 
 On the whole of this section of the Epistle it may be worth while 
 to quote Dr. Arnold's remarks ^ : — 
 
 See Eomilies, p. 479, Oxf. ed. ^ Fragmeint on the Chiirch, p. 44 foil. 
 
222 COMMENT 
 
 'The object of the passage is to encourage the exercise of those 
 mutual spiritual aids rendered by Christians to each other, which is 
 one of the great objects and privileges of the institution of the 
 Church. The body was to sympathize with its several members. If 
 a man was in trouble, he was to pray ; if in joy, to sing hymns : in 
 neither case is the Apostle speaking of private prayer or private 
 singing ; but of those of the Christian congregation ^ : there every 
 individual Christian could find the best relief for his sorrows, and the 
 liveliest sympathy in his joy. St. Paul's command "Rejoice with 
 them that do rejoice and weep with them that weep," applies to this 
 same sympathy, which the prayers and hymns of the church services 
 were a constant means of expressing. But if a man were sick and 
 could not go to the congregation, still he was not to lose the benefit of 
 his Christian communion with them ; he might then ask them to 
 come to him ; and as the whole congregation could not thus be 
 summoned, the elders were to go as its representatives, and their 
 prayers were to take the place of the prayers of the whole church. 
 Care, however, is taken to show that the virtue of their prayers arises 
 not from their being priests, but from their being Christians, and 
 standing in the place of the whole church. For these words im- 
 mediately follow : " confess therefore to one another your sins, and 
 pray for one another, that ye may be healed ; there is much virtue in 
 a just man's prayer, when it is offered earnestly." Now, this most 
 divine system of a living Church, in which all were to aid each other, 
 in which each man might open his heart to his neighbour and receive 
 the help of his prayers, and in which each man's earnest prayer, 
 offered in Christ's name, had so high a promise of blessing annexed to 
 it, has been almost ^ destroyed by that notion of a priesthood, which 
 claiming that men should confess their sins to the clergy, not as to 
 their brethren, but as to God's vicegerents, and confining the pi'omised 
 blessing to the prayers of the clergy as priests, not as Christians, nor 
 as the representives of the whole church, has changed the sympathy 
 of a Christian society into the dominion of a priesthood and the 
 mingled carelessness and superstition of a laity. 
 
 ' St. John's language agrees with that of St. James : " If any man 
 see his brother sinning a sin which is not unto death, he shall pray, 
 and Christ shall give him life, for those who are not sinning nnto 
 death. There is a sin unto death ; — it is not for that that I am 
 bidding him to pray." Here the very same blessing which St. James 
 speaks of as following the elders' prayers is said by St. John to follow 
 the prayer of any Christian, a clear proof that the elders were sent 
 for as representatives of the Church, and not as if their prayers 
 possessed a peculiar virtue, because they stood as priests between God 
 and the people.' 
 
 ' I cannot agree witli Arnold in confining the exhortation to congregational 
 singing or prayer. 
 ' Wrongly printed 'most' in the original. Lond. 1845. 
 
Y 12-20 CONVERTING THE SINNER 223 
 
 Converting the Sinner. 
 
 Is this a new case, or another aspect of the case of the sick man 1 
 If the latter, it seems to imply strange sloth and lukewarmness on the 
 part of the Elders, that they should stand in need of exhortation to the 
 performance of a duty, which would not have seemed to be particularly 
 arduous or irksome. The previous verses insist on their power to heal 
 the disease and procure forgiveness by their prayers : v. 20 speaks of 
 the reward. If, as seems more likely, it is a new case, St. James may 
 have added it as an afterthought on finding that his warnings had 
 been chiefly against over-activity, too much vehemence, too much 
 eagerness to teach. In ver. 14 he had begun to speak of our duty 
 towards the sick in body ; in ver. 16 he had extended this into a general 
 precept as to mutual help in spiritual matters ; in ver. 19 he turns to the 
 case of the backsliders. Even here nothing is said as to the duty of 
 the Church to go out into all the world and preach the Gospel to every 
 creature ; nothing is said as to making proselytes from the Gentiles or 
 even from the unbelieving Jews. It is the exhortation of the Bishop, 
 whose aim is the reformation and improvement of the Church, not of 
 the Apostle, whose aim is the extension of the Church by the diffusion 
 of the faith. 
 
 In my note I have pointed out that the words of ver. 20, ' he who 
 recalls an erring brother saves (or 'will save ') his soul from death and 
 will be the means of blotting out many sins ' are capable of two 
 interpretations, according to the reference we give to ' his.' I have 
 mentioned some difficulties which lie in the way of our taking ' his ' to 
 refer to the sinner, and have shown that it was not uncommon with 
 Jewish writers to hold forth the prospect of salvation and forgive- 
 ness of sins, as an inducement to certain kinds of right conduct, 
 such as alms-giving. I postponed to the present occasion the 
 consideration of the question whether it was possible that St. James 
 should have adopted a similar mode of speaking. We cannot, of 
 course, imagine that he would ever have dreamt of a man's being 
 able to atone for his own sins by his assiduity in calling others to 
 repentance. Such a notion is forbidden, not less by our Lord's words 
 recorded, in Matt. vii. 20-22 ' Many will say to me in that day. Lord, 
 have we not prophesied in thy name ? . . . then will I profess unto 
 them, I never knew you ; depart from me, ye that work iniquity,' and 
 by the words of St. Paul in 1 Cor. xiii. 1-3, ' Though I speak with the 
 tongues of men and angels . . . though I have the gift of prophecy . . . 
 though I have all faith . . . though I give my body to be burnt, and 
 have not charity, it profiteth me nothing,' and in ch. ix. 26, 27 ' I keep 
 under my body and bring it into subjection, lest having preached to 
 others, I myself should be a castaway,' — than by the words of 
 St. James himself, ' Be not many masters, knowing that we shall 
 receive the greater condemnation,' and by his constant depreciation of 
 mere speaking, unaccompanied by deeds and practice. St. James has 
 told us already how the soul is saved (i. 21-25) : not by preaching to 
 
224 COMMENT 
 
 others, but by receiving in meekness the ingrafted word, and continu- 
 ing in the perfect law of liberty. What in fact could be more 
 contemptible in itself and more fatal to any good influence, than for a 
 man to urge upon others a course which he has determined not to 
 follow himself, and expect to be rewarded for thevr faith and works, 
 when he has no faith or works of his own ? The passages from the 
 N.T. quoted in the notes do not contemplate the possibility of a 
 preacher of righteousness, who has still to be saved from his sins. It 
 is only in the Apocrypha that we find such unchristian sentiments 
 as ' Almsgiving saves from death and purges away all sin ' (Tobit xii. 9). 
 The other quotations are simply encouragements to sincere but 
 sluggish workers, to throw more energy into their work. It is 
 allowable to say ' you have done much evil in the past, try and make 
 up for it by the good you do in the future,' or ' remember that you are 
 appointed by God to be a teacher or an elder : it is not enough for you 
 to keep yourself unspotted in the world : you must bring your influence 
 to bear on others, or you will be found wanting at last ' : but it is not 
 in accordance with Christian truth to say ' If you make a convert, 
 your own sins will be forgiven.' It appears therefore that we must 
 fall back on the other interpretation understanding ' his ' of the 
 sinner. The chief difficulty in this interpretation is that the apodosis 
 seems to add so little to the protasis. ' Conversion ' to us already 
 implies ' saving the soul ' ; but this need not have been so to the first 
 readers of the Epistle. To them the words may have meant ' However 
 many sins the wanderer has been guilty of, still, if he turns, he will be 
 saved from the death he has deserved, and all his sins will be forgiven.' 
 We can imagine that such a promise might have been a great en- 
 couragement to those who were dispirited at the state of the back- 
 sliders in the church to which they belonged, and doubted whether it 
 was possible to renew them again unto repentance. 
 
INDEX OF GKEEK WORDS 
 
 (a) words not used by any writer previous to St. James. 
 (6) not used in this sense before St. James. 
 
 (c) not used by any other N. T. writer. 
 
 (d) not used in the Septuagiut (including Apocrypha), 
 (c) post-Aristotelian. 
 
 (Add.) see Addenda after Preface. 
 
 A^padfj, : ii. 21 Aj3. 6 Trarrjp tj/j.Siv ovk i^ tpyuiv iSiKaiiadr], ii. 23 Aj8. 
 
 ayaOoi : i. 1 7 iracra Socis ayaOrj, iii. 17 KapTrSiv ayadStv. 
 
 ayaTrdu) : i. 12 tov crT€cj>avov r^s ^cd^s bv iirrjyyelKaTO rots dyaTrcuortv 
 
 avTOV, ii. 5 KXrjpovop.ov'S T^'S ySacriXeia? 17s lirqyyiCXaTO tois dyaTroicrtv 
 
 airov, ii. 8 dyaTrqo'WS tov irXrjcriov crov <us aeavTov. 
 ayoTnjTo? : i. 16, i. 19, ii. 5 aSeXfjioi fiov ayaTrr/TOi. 
 dyyeXos '■ ii- 25 'PaayS v7ro8e^a;u.evij Toiis dy-yeXous. 
 ayvL^io : iv. 8 dyviVare KapSia^ Siij/v)(ot. 
 dyvos : iii. 1 7 17 8c dvu>6ev (ro(f>ia irpSiTov pXv ayvq icrriv. 
 c. dye : iv. 1 3 dye vvv ot Xeyovres, v. 1 , dye vvv ot rrKovtrioi KXavcraTe. 
 dSeX^i; : ii. 15. 
 dSeX^os : i. 9 6 dSeX^os o TOTreivos, ii. 15 eav dSeX^os ij dSeX^^ yu/ivot 
 
 mrapyuxTW, iv. 116 KaraXaXoiv dScX^oC r; Kpiva>v rbv dSeX^dv : vocative 
 
 dSeX^ot iv. 11, V. 7, 9, 10, dSeX^oi j«,oi; i. 2, ii. 1, 14, iii. 1, 10, 12, 
 
 V. 12, 19, dS. /Jiov dyaTTTjToi, i. 16, 19, ii. 5. 
 b.c.e. aSiaKpiTOS : iii. 17 17 Se dvo>6ev aot^iia dSiaKjoiTOS. 
 aSiKia : iii. 6 rj yXaxra-a Trvp, 6 Ko<r/ios t^s dStKias. 
 atTett) : i. 5 aireiTia irapa tov StSoi/TOS ®coi), i. 6 aireiTco 8e Iv irorTei jxrjBiv 
 
 SiaKpLvop-evos, iv. 2 ouk ej^erc Sto. to fxr] aiTtlcrdaL, iv. 3 atTetre Kai ov 
 
 Xa/i)8dv€Te, StOTt Ka/cSs atTCicr^e. 
 e. dxaTacTTacrta : iii. 16 ottoij ^5^°^ ""'' ipiOla, Jkei dKaTatrrao-ta. 
 C. dicaTdo-TaTOS : i. 8 avr]p 8iij/v)(0i aKaTaaTaTOS, iii. 8 ttjv yXSi<Tirav...dKaTd.- 
 
 (TTaTOV KaKOV. 
 
 c.e. aKaToa^eTOi : iii. 8 read for dKaTao-Taros in some MSS. 
 aKovo) : i. 19 Tttx^s e'S to dKovcrat, ii. 5 dKOvcraTC dScX^ot, v. 11 t^v 
 VTrop.ov7jv 'II0/3 rjKovcraTe. 
 
 Q 
 
226 INDEX OF GEEEK WORDS 
 
 d. aKpooLTrj^ : i. 22 ylvea-Oe TroirjTol \6yov, koX firj fiovov aKpoarai, i. 23 ciTis 
 
 aKpoaTTji X.6yov icrriv, i. 25 aKpoarrjs cTrtXiycr/tov^s. 
 dXa^ovia (aXa^oViia) : iv. 16 Kavy^acrO^ ev rats aXatfiviaii vfia>v. 
 aXeL<l><o : V. 14 dXeti^aj'Tes avTOV eXato) ev rio 6v6jx.a.Ti. 
 &Krj6ii.a.: i. 18 Xoyia dXiy^eias, iii. \^ fi.y) KaraKavxaa-Oe Koi {j/evSecrOe Kara 
 
 Trji SXrjOiias, v. 19 edv Tis TrXavrjBy diro T^s dA,7j6£tas. 
 aXXa : i. 25 ouK aKpoarrj^ aXXa iroi-qTri^, i. 26 /t^ ^aXtvaytoySv -yXSo-trav 
 
 dX\a airaT&v KapScav, ii. 18 aXX epel tls, iii. 15 ovK eorriv avrq i] 
 
 <70<l>ia avwdev aXXa eiriycios, iv. 1 1 ovk €l irotijT-^s vofiov dXXa KpLTrj's. 
 
 See p. cliii. 
 dXA.iyXo)v : iv. 1 1 fi,r] KaraXaXeZre aXX-^Xtav, dSeX^ot, V. 9 /Jiij crTevd^eT€ Kar 
 
 dXXt^Xtov, V. 16 i$ofJioXoye'i(r6€ oXX^Xots ras apMpTLWi Koi ev^eaOe vTrep 
 
 aXXi^Xoiv. 
 aXXos : V. 1 2 /t^Te aXXov nva, opKOV. 
 c. aXvKoi : iii. 12 ovte aXvKov yXvKv iroufjiraL vSwp. 
 a/jLapna : i. 15 17 ein6vp.ia anXXa^ovfra, Ti/cret d/JiapTcav, r) Se apupTia 
 
 diroTeXecrBtlcra airoKVii ddvarov, ii. 9 £t TrpoaioiroXTj/x'TrTeLTt a/jLapriav 
 
 epyd^e(r$e, iv. 17 ciSoTi GUI' KaXov ttohZv koI /t^ irowvvTt dp,a.pTLa avrio 
 
 icTTiv, v. 15 K&v a/jMpTias y ireTroirjKiLs, V. 16 i$o/j,oXoyei(r0£ ras a/iap- 
 
 Ttas (ctl, TO, TrapaTTTut/j.aTa.), V. 20 KaXvij/€i TrXijOoi afx.apTLS>v. 
 dfiapTuiXo'S : iv. 8 KadapLcrare p^eipas dfxapTOiXoi, v. 20 6 iiricTTpeifra'S 
 
 dfJiapTwXbv Ik irXavT^s oSov avTov. 
 c. djudo) : V. 4 Tuiv ipyartav ruiv diA,rj(TdvT(i>v ras )(<ipai vfaZv. 
 dfLLavTO^ : i. 27 6p7j(rKeia Ka6apa Koi d/jiiavTO^. 
 OL/iTTcXos : iii. 1 2- p^ij Bvyarai ap.ireXo's (rvKa (iroiTjcrai) ; 
 dv : iii. 4 oirov av, iv. 4 os dv (edv), v. 7 ecus av Xd/Srj verov. See icdv, and 
 
 p. clxxzi. 
 dvdiTTU) : iii. 5 iSov ■^Xikov irvp rjXiKtjv i'Xijv dvairrei. 
 
 e. dva(TTpo<^ri : iii. 13 8etfdru> ck rljs koX^s dva<TTpo<j>rj's Ta epya airoC. 
 dvaTeXXo) : i. 1 1 dvireiXev yap 6 ^Xios. 
 
 dva<l>ip(D : ii. 21 dveviyKa? 'IcraaK iirl to OvcnatTTrjpiov. 
 
 a. dv^io'i : ii. 13 17 yap Kpicris dveXcos T(3 p,ri iroiTjcravTi IXeos. 
 
 a. dvep,i^ofJuiL : i. 6 lot/ce KXvSoivi OaXdcra-rji dvip,it,op,ivm Koi piiriZp- 
 
 p,ivia. 
 dve/xos ' iii. 4 to. irXoTa vwo crKXrjplav d\'ep,iov iXavvopiva. 
 dvT^p : i. 8 dvrjp Slxj/vxo's, i. 12 p.aKdpios dvrjp os VTrop.ivei TreipacrfjLov, i. 20 
 
 dpyrj yap dvSpos SiKaiocrwTjv ®£oC ovk ipyd^erai, i. 23 eoiKtv dv8pl 
 
 KaravoovvTi to TrpocruiTrov, ii. 2 dv^p ;)(pu(ro8aKTuXios, iii. 2 et Tis ev 
 
 Xoyo) ov TTTaiei oStos tcXcios dvrjp. 
 dvBL(TT7}p,i : iv. 7 dvTio-TTjre tu StajSoXo), Kar c^evf crai. 
 dv^os : i. 10 0)5 dv6o^ )(6pT0V TraptXivcrtTai, i. 11 to dvOo'S efeTreo-ev. 
 dvOpwirivo'S '■ iii. 7 Trdcra <^vo-is ScSd/AacTai t^ tjyvcrei T~g dvOpioirivrj. 
 avdpiairos : i. 7 dv6. exeivos, i. 19 ttSs dv6., ii. 20 £ dvOpwire K€ve, ii. 24 
 
 StKaioCrai dvO., iii. 8 oiSeis dv^pwTrwv, iii. 9 KarapiofieOa t. dv6pii>wovs, 
 
 V. 17 'HXtas dvOpwTTO's rjv. 
 dvTi : iv. 15 dvTi Tov Xeyeiv i/xas. See p. clxxii. 
 ovTiTao-o'o) : iv. 6 o ®eos vireprj<j)dvoK avTirda-creTai, v. 6 (0 StVaios) ou/c 
 
 dvTiTdo'aeTai ii/xiv. 
 e. dvuffoKptTos : iii. 17 17 8e dv(a$ev a'otj>ia. dvuiroKpiTO'S. 
 
INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 227 
 
 aviaOev : i. 17 ttSv Scupij/ia reXaov avtoBiv icrnv Kara^aLvov, iii. 15 ovk ecrTiv 
 
 avrr) r) <ro<j>ia avtodev Karep^ofjievri, iii. 17 ^ avw^cv cro<j}ia. 
 dirap^C^ : i. 18 eh to elvai ■^/uSs a.Trap^rjv Tiva tSv avTOV KTicr/AaTO)!/. 
 airas : iii; 2 TToWa •yap irTaiofi.ev aTravres. 
 diraTam : i. 26 dtiraTUV Kap&iav iavrov, 
 a. aTTCtpacTTOs : i. 13 6 yap ® eos diretpacTTOs iariv KaKuiv. 
 d7rep;(op,at : i. 24 KaTevorjonv iavTov koX o.Tr€\iQ\.v$ev. 
 c. dirXfis : i. 5 toB SiSdvros ©£0i) ■jrS.o'iv a-irkZs. 
 dird : i. 13 dTTO ®€0v ireipdfop.at, i. 17 KarajSoivov diro To5 iraTpds, i. 27 
 
 ao-7ri\oy eaTiroi/ Trjpeiv dTO tov Koa-fiov, iv. 7 tpev^erai dffi vfiZv, V. 4 6 
 
 /xio-^os 6 a<j)va'T€priiJ,€voi ^a.(j>' v/jlwv, v. 19 edi' tis ■7rXavrj6'iJ wtto t^s 
 
 dA.*;^eias. See p. clxii. 
 c.e. d?roKDea) : i. 15 -^ §€ d/xapria diroreXeo-Oeiaa a/TTOKvei Odvarov, i. 18 ^ovXtj- 
 
 fltis aTTCKiJiyo-ev i7p.as Xdym dXrjOeiag. 
 dirdXAv/tt : i. 11 ij evirpiTreia rov irpoo'iHtTrov avrov dTrtaXero, iv. 12 eis ctrnv 
 
 vofioOeTTji 6 Svvdfievoi crScrat /cat d'jroXEtrai. 
 OS. dTro(rKLa(T/j.a : i. 1 7 Trap' o) ovk let TrapaXXay^ ij rpoTr^s dffooTKtacrp.a. 
 dxoo-Tepeo) : read in some MSS. for d^uo-Tepe'o) v. 4. 
 d7roTeA.eo) : i. 15 ^ 8e dfnapria dTroTcXecr^eTtra diroKuei Odvarov. 
 dirOTidrjixi : i. 21 dTroOefievoL Trdaav pvirapiav. 
 dpyos : ii. 20 ^ mo-Tts x^'P's ™i' epyiov dpyrj icrnv (al. v€Kpd). 
 dpyvpoi : V. 3 apyvpoi KartWai. 
 
 dcrOei/iu) : v 14 dcrdevei Tts iv vfiiv ; irpoaKaXca-dcrOu) Toiis irpecr^SvTepous. 
 e. dcrinXos : i. 27 dcnriXov iavrov Trjpeiv diro rov Koafwv. 
 dniid^u) : ii. 6 ■^Tifidaare tov tttw^^ov. 
 dr/iis : iv. 14 dr/^ts icrre ^ irpos oXiyov ^aivop,ivr). 
 avpiov : iv. 13 o-i^ynepov ^ avpiov iropeucrd/AcSa, iv. 14 omvcs oi/c iTTurracrde 
 
 TO T^s aiJptoi'. 
 airds : (oblique case = L. is) i. 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 18, 23, 25, ii. 5, 14, 16, 21, 
 
 22, 23, iii. 3, 9, 13, iv. 11, 17, v. 3, 7, 14, 15, 18, 19, 20. Eor 
 
 position of gen. see pp. clx, 60, Add. 
 
 (nominative = L. ipse) i. 13, ii. 6, 7. 
 
 (6 avT6s = 'L. idem) iii. 10, 11. See pp. clxii, clxviii. 
 auToC : not recognized by the latest editors, see iavrov. 
 C. av)(i(0 : iii. 5 ^ ■yXSo'tra /jieydXa av)(ei {al. f]i.eyaXau)(et). 
 d<j)avi^a) : iv. 14 dr/MLs itrre ■^ irpos oXlyov <j>aLvofi,iv7j, eiretra Kai d<^avt- 
 
 ^ofi-evrj- 
 d<j)irjfjii : V. 15 Kav d/uapTi'as rj ireTrotrjKOJS, d^e^ijO'CTat avrS. 
 c.e. d^vcmplui : V. 4 o fJuaOog 6 dcjivtrTepriiJiivos Kpd^ei. See ajroo'Tepeo). 
 
 B 
 
 PdXXm : iii. 3 tZv Linrwv toiis x'^^'-^"^^ ^'^ Ta a-TofjLara pdXXop,ev. 
 ^aa-iXtia : ii. 5 KXT/povd/no-us t^s ^SacriXeias ■^s cirij-yyeiXaTO tois dyairSo-tv 
 
 auTdv. 
 ySacrtXtKos : ii. 8 vojJbov TeXeiTC ^acnXiKov. 
 
 ^Xaa-Tavm : V. 18 -^ y5 ipXdxrrqa-fv tov Kapirbv avrrj'S. See p. civ. 
 PXcw(l)r]fi.€m : ii. 7 ovk avToi pXaa-(fyrjfjLOva-i.v to KaXov dvo/*a to exiKXiy^v 
 
 idtvudi ; 
 
 Q 2 
 
228 INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 
 
 /SXeVo) : ii. 22 /SXeVcis oti r/ TTto-Tis a-vv^pyei ro'n ipyoK avTov. 
 c. ^o-q : V. 4 ai /3oat tS>v OipuxavToiv. ... , „ c 
 
 l3ovXoiJiai:i. 18 l3ovX7]9ch aireKvria-ey rjixa^ Xoycp aKr)6iia<;, iii. i ^mov ^ 
 6p/j,ij ToB Ei^wovTos /SovXerat, iv. 4 os ih.v ^ovXrjerj <^iXos £ivat tov 
 K6(riJ,ov. , , , 
 
 /SpaSv's : i. 19 eo-To) ttSs 3.v0pai7roi ^paSiii tis to XaX^trai, /3pa8us eis opyiji'. 
 /Spexo) : V. 17 'HXias Trpoo-TjiJfaTO toB /a^ Ppi^a-h koI ovk efipe^iv. ^ ^ ^ 
 c.d. jSpvo} : iii. 11 /*ijti rj mjy^ Ik rrji av-njs OTrij^ jSpvu to yXvKV Kai to 
 
 TTLKpOV ; 
 
 yip : i. 6, 7, 11, 13, 20, 24,^ii. 2,J0, 11, 13, 26, iii. 2, 7, 16, iv. 14. 
 
 e. yiivva : iii. 6 ^Xoyt^o/Acvr; vtto t^s yefl'vrjs. 
 
 c. yeXms : iv. 9 6 yikwi vp.S>v ets TrevOoi ix,era(7rpa<j>y}TU>. ^ ^ ^ 
 
 ■yeveo-is : i. 23 to Trpoo-coToi' T^s ycvcVems avTOV, iii. 6 c^Xoyit""'^'' ™'' '^POX"'' 
 T^s yEveo-e(i)s. 
 
 yeupyos : V. 7 o yecopyos f.Khe)(erai tov rifuov Kapirov ■nj's yi?s. ^ ^ ^ 
 
 y^ : V. 7 TOV Kapirov r^s y^s, v. 12 /*^ op-vvere Tr/v yrjv, v. 5 eTpui^^aaTE l^i 
 T^s y^s, V. 17 oiK l/Spcfev etti t^s y^s, v. 18 rj yrj i^XaaTTjcrev tov 
 Kapirov. ^ 
 
 yivo/xai: i. 12 So'ki/aos yc-vo>£vos, i. 22 yivEO-^E voayral, i. 25 ovk aKpoarys 
 yEvd/iEvos, ii. 4 iyeveaOe Kpnai, ii. lOyEyovEVTravTwv efoxos, ii. 11 yey- 
 ovas 7rapa/3aT?;s, iii. 1 A*^ ttoXXoi SiSao-KaXoi yiv^ade, iii. 9 tovs Ka^' 
 o[x.oiai<nv ®e.ov yEyovoTas, iii. 10 ov XP'^ TaCTa owTws yivetrOac, v. 2 Ta 
 ip,aTia crrfToPpioTa yiyovev. ^ 
 
 yivuxTKio : i. 3 yivwo-KovTES oTt TO BoKip.iov vp.u>v rri<s 7rto-T£<DS KaTEpya^ETttt 
 mop-ov-qv, ii. 20 ^eXeis Se yvSvai oTt 17 TrtWis x"P'« '^^"''' W'^" "PT^ 
 EO-Ttv ; V. 20 yivMO-KETE (al. yivMO-KETw) OTI o iTncTTpeij/ai ap,apT<oXov 
 
 O-MO-El lj/V)(jv. _ ^ 
 
 yXvKvs : iii. 11 ^i^Tt ij irryy^ /JpijEt to yX-UKii kol to iriKpov ; iii. 12 oiiTE oXukov 
 
 yXtiKU 'I^oirja^a^ vSuip. 
 yX&a-a-a : i. 26 p,^ x"^""*7'^y"'' y'^<iJ<^<^<="') "i- ^ '7 yXuo-o-tt p,iKp6v /ae'Xos 
 
 EO-Ttv Kat p,EyaXa avxEi, iii. 6 Kat ■^ yXSo-<7a irBp, 6 Koo-p.os t59 aotKtas 
 
 ^ yXSo-o-a Kadia-TaTUL ev tois jueXeo-iv, iii. 8 t^v yXSo-o-av ouSeis 8ap,ao-ai 
 
 SuvaTat. 
 ypai^Tj : ii. 8 KaTo, Trjv ypa^ijv, ii. 23 Kal iirXriputOrj rj ypa(f>rj ■q Xiyovira, iv. 5 
 
 17 ypa(j>r] Xiyei. 
 yvp.v6i : ii. 15 eoiv Se ixSeX^os rj aSeXfjir] y vpvot un-apxoo-iv. 
 
 Saipdviov : ii. 19 koi to 8ai/tdvia irto-TEvovo-iv Kai ^pi(T(ToviTiv. 
 
 a. 8aip.ovi<i)Brji : iii. 15 a'otftLa Saip.ovi<i)Sr]s. 
 
 Sap,d^<o : iii. 7 Tracra cj>v(rii Biripiiav 8ap.a^£Tai Kal 8E8ap.ao-Tat t^ (j>v(Ta TJj 
 
 avOpioirivy, iii. 8 t^v yXoio-o-av ouSeis Sa/xdo-ai 8i;vaTat. 
 SaTravao) : iv. 3 kokus aiTcTtr^E, iva €V TaTs i78ovais ip,Sv SaTrav^oTjre. 
 
INDEX OF GEEEK WOEDS 229 
 
 Se with the correlative /ieV omitted, i. 10, 13, ii. 2, 11; preceded by 
 more than one word, li. 14, v. 12 ; omitted with eirciTa, iii. 17, iv . 
 14 ; 8e Koi ii. 2, 25. Occurs on the whole thirty-one times. 
 
 oeijo-ts : V. 1 6 iroKv l(T)(ya Seijo-ts SiKaiou evepyovfjiivr]. 
 
 OEtKVU|U,i : ii. 18 Self ov jitot t^i/ iria-Tiv a-ov y^wpli tSv ipyiov Kayto <joi hu^ia sk 
 Ttov €py<av fjiov, iii. 13 Su^d/ro) ck tijs KaX'^s dvao'Tpo^^s to. epya avTov, 
 
 d. oeXea^Q) ; i. 14 utto t)}s iStas iTnOvp.La^ cfcXKo/ievos koi SEXeafo/LiEvos. 
 Si)(Ofj,ai : i. 21 ev irpavnjn Be^acrOe rbv €fJL<f>vTOV Xoyov. 
 
 Sia : ii. 12 Sto. v6fji.ov eXevOepCa^, iv. 2 8ia to ;«,^ aiTtto-^at i/^as. See pp. 
 clxxii, clxxiii. 
 
 e. StajSoXos : iv. 7 di'Tto-TTjTe t(3 SiajSoXu, km ^ev^erai. 
 
 h. SiaKpivm : i. 6 alreiTw iv irlaTii, /jL-r/Sev SiaK/Divo/tcvos" 6 yap StaKptvo/;i£vos 
 
 coiKci/ kXvSiovi, ii. 4 ou SieKpidr/Te iv eavToi^ ; 
 oiaA.oy«r/Aos : ii. 4 iyiveo'Oi Kpiral StaXoyitr/^Sv TrovrjpSiV. 
 e. oiacnropa, : i. 1 Tais SaJSexa c^vXais rais €v t^ SiacnropS,. 
 otodcTKaXos : iii. 1 /fij iroWot StSdcricaXot yivecrde. 
 8tSo)/it : i. 5 Tov StSoVTOs ®iov iraa-iv d7rA.(os, *6. So^ijcrcTat ai™, ii. 1 6 iav 
 
 /Jiri SSiT€ avTois to, iirir-qSeia, iv. 6 SiSwcriv X°-P"' (^**)j V. 18 6 ovpavos 
 
 verov iSioKCV. 
 OiKaioi : V. 6 i<f)Ovev(raT£ tov SiKaiov, v. 1 6 iroXv Icr^'uei Seijcrts SiKaiov ivep- 
 
 yovp.£vq. 
 SiKaioa-vvT] : i. 20 opy^ dvSpos SiKaiotrvvrp/ ®eov ovk cpyd^erai, ii. 1 8 lkoyi<rO-q 
 
 aiiTw £ts hiKCLWcrvvrfv, iii. 18 Kapirbs 8e T^S SiKaioa-vvYii iv ftpT^vy (nreip- 
 
 ETttt TOis irotoi)(rtv elprjvTjv. 
 StKaioio : ii. 21 'AyS. ovk i^ epyaiv iSiKaiuiOrj ; ii. 24 i^ ipyuiv SiKaiovrai oivBpo)- 
 
 TTO'S, Kol OVK EK TTiOTEcos fiovov, il. 25 Paa^ OVK i^ cpycov iSiKauaOrj ; 
 Std : i. 21 Sto airoOefjLevoi TrScrav pvirapiav, iv. 6 Sio A.eyei, 
 StoTt : iv. 3 atrtiTE icat oi Xa/xySdycre, Stort KaKuis aireio'Oe. 
 a. Siij/v)(0i: i. 8 dv^p 8iil/v)(0i dKaTdtrraros, iv. 8 dyvtcraTe KapStas SliJ/vxoi. 
 SoKem : i. 26 ei tis Sokei GprjiXKO's etvai, iv. 5 ^ SokeTte OTt /cevGs 17 ypa^rf 
 
 Aeyet ; 
 e. hoKLfUov : i. 3 TO Soki/j-iov vfilov t^s TrwrTews KaTepyoL^erai vnrofJLovyfv. 
 hoKip.O's : i. 12 SoKi/ioi yepo/xevos Xij/xi/^eTai toi' <rTe<^avov t^s ^(o^s. 
 Sofa : ii. 1 ToD Ti.vpiov 17/tSv 'Iijo-oC Xpio-ToC t^s 8o^s. 
 Socrts : i. 1 7 TrSo-a Socris ayaOrj Koi ■Trav SwprjjjM reXeiov avoidev ia-Tiv. 
 SoSXos': i. 1 'laKWySos ©eoC Kai K.vpiov 'Iri<7ov XpicTov SoCXos. 
 Svva/juxL: i. 21 tov ep.ijyvTov Xoyov, tov Swd[ji,evov o'Sia'aL Tas ij/v^^as vp-Stv, ii. 14 
 /t-^ SwaTat 17 TrtWts (rSo-at auTov ; iii. 8 T-qv yXwcrcrav ouSels SapAorai 
 
 SvvaTai, iii. 1 2 /x^ SwaTat ctuk^ eXatds Trolrjo-ai, ; iv. 2 ov SvvacrOe eiri- 
 TU^^etr, iv. 12 6 Suyd/ievos o'So'at Kai diroXeo'at. 
 SuvaTos : iii. 2 teXeios dvtjp, SwaTos ;)(aXtvay(i)yi7crai Kat oXov to cruifm.. 
 SioSiKa : i. 1 IdK0);8os Tats SwSE/ca ^uXais. 
 d. SwpTjfJia : i. l7 Trai/ Swprifia TeXeiov avwOiv scrTtv. 
 
 E 
 
 15 ihv 
 
 Idv : ii. 2 Eav yap ela-eX&g, ii. 14 eay ttlo-tlv Xiyr) Tts ex^'V, ii 
 oSeXi^os ^ dSEX^^ yvfivol wapxtoo-ir, ii. 17 17 iricrTKs, iav fir] i_ 
 vcKpd itTTiv, iv. 15 Eav 6 Ku'pios 6eXria-ri, v. 19 Eav tis irXavr/^^ : used 
 
230 INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 
 
 with relative instead of av, iv. 4 os eav ^ovXrjOrj cfiikoi thai. See 
 
 Koiv, also pp. clxxix, clxxxix. 
 iavTov : i. 22 TrapaXoyilofievoi eavrovs, i. 24 KaTevorja-ev eavTov, i. 27 
 
 aa-inXov iavrov TrjpeLv, ii. 4 ov SuKpWrjTC Iv iavroii, ii. 17 Ka6 JauTijv. 
 
 See p. clxviii. 
 efyitfo : iv. 8 iyyia-aTe t<3 0E(3, xai iyyia-ei v/uv, v. 8 fj Trapova-la tov Kvpiov 
 
 rjyyiKev, 
 iycipia : v. 15 eyepei avrbv 6 K.vpto's. 
 iy<i> : (,ji.ov) i. 2, 16, 19, ii. 1, 3, 5, 14, 18, iii. 1, 10, 12, v. 10, 12 ; (fioi) ii. 
 
 18; (^/ias) i. 18 ; {^[juav) ii. 1, 21, iii. 6; {^fjuv) iii. 3, iv. 5, v. 17. 
 
 See Kayo). 
 el : i. 5, 23, 26, ii. 8, 9, 11, iii. 2, 14, iv. 11. See p. clxxix. 
 eiSov : see opdio. 
 
 dp.C: (e!) iv. 11, 12 ; {ia-Tlv) i. 13, 17, 23, 27, ii. 17, 19, 20, 26, iii. 5, 15, 
 . 17, iv. 4, 12, 16, 17, V. 11 ; (io-re') iv. 14 ; (eVrat) i. 25, v. 3 ; (^v) i. 24, 
 
 V. 17 ; (?te) i. 4 ; (?o-t<o) i. 19, (^rm) v. 12 ; (^) v. 15 ; (cTvac) i. 18, 
 
 26, iv. 4 ; {ovra) iii. 4. See p. clvi. 
 etirov : ii. 3 lav thrrjTe avrio %v Ka.6ov, ii. 11 o yap ei7ro)V...£Mre Kai k.t.X., 
 
 ii. 16 etin] Si Tts 'Yirayere ev eip'^vg. 
 elprjvr} : ii. 16 mrayere Iv elpr/vg, iii. 18 KapTrqs 8e t^s SiKaLOcrvvrj's kv elpT^vy 
 
 a"!reip€TaL tols iroiovdiv elprjvriv. 
 elp-qviKos : iii. 1 7 ij a.v<o6€V ao^ia elpT^viKi^. 
 CIS : i. 18, 19, 25, ii. 2, 6, 23, iii. 3, iv. 9, 13, v. 3, 4. See pp. clxxii, 
 
 clxxxvii. 
 CIS : ii. 10 TTTatcnj Se iv ivi, see ji(ic?., ii. 19 «Ts eo-Tii/ 6 ®eos, iv. 12 els ecttiv 
 
 vo/io^erijs, iv. 13 maDTOV Jva. 
 f.lcrip)(opja.i : ii. 2 eav eicreXOyj eis o-waya>y^v, v. 4 eis to, Sira Kvpiov SajSaud 
 
 eia-sX-^XvOav, cf. pp. clvi, clxxxv. 
 e tra : i. 15 etTa ij eTridv/iia tiktcv dp.apTtav. 
 Ik : ii. 16, 18, 21, 22, 24, 25, iii. 10, 11, 13, iv. 1, v. 20. See p. 
 
 clxxiii. 
 efcacTTOs : i. 14 l/cao-TOS Se ireipa^crat vtto t^s iSt'as kTriJ9viJ.ia%. 
 iKpdXXu) : ii. 25 rois dyyeXovi erepa 68(3 iKpaXov(ra. i 
 iKSIp^ojuai ; V. 7 6 ycwpyos e/cSej^cTat tov rt/xtov Kapirov. 
 Ikei: ii. 3 o-vi o-r^^t eKtt, iii. 16 e/cet d/caTao-Tacria, iv. 13 Troiijtro/nev ekci 
 
 EViauTov eva. 
 EKEtvos : i. 7 o avOptiiTTOi EKEivos, Iv. 15 iroirjaoft.ev tovto f] ekeIvo. 
 iKKXijcria : v. 14 tovs wpccr/SvTepous t^s ekkXi^o-kis. 
 eKXeyij) : ii. 5 oi;^ 6 ®e6s e^eXe^aro roris tttco^ovs ; 
 iKiriiTTU) : i. 11 kui to dvSos awToB i^eirecrev. 
 iXaia : iii. 12 /i.^ SwaTat o-uk'5 IXatas irot^o-ai ; 
 eXoiov : v. 1 4 aXeitj/avTe's avTOV iXaiio. 
 
 iXavvu) : iii. 4 Ta wXota vtto (TKXrjpSiv aviixtov iXawofieva. 
 iXd^uTTO'S '. iii. 4 Ta wA,oia /AETayETOi i;ro eXa^^iVTOi; injSaXiou. 
 IXcy^o) : ii. 9 eXEy^o/itEvot iiiro tov voftov cus irapaPdraL. 
 eXeos : ii- 13 17 xpto-ts oiveXeos t<3 p,i) iroi'^o-avTt IXeos* KaTaKau^^aTat eXeos 
 
 Kpicreoss, iii. 17 jUccTij eXe'ovs. See p. cliv. 
 IXevBtpia. : i. 25 v6fi.ov teXeiov tov t^s iXevOepiai, ii. 12 u)s 8ta vo/xou eXev- 
 
 Bepiat jueXXovTES KpivecrOai, 
 
INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 231 
 
 eX/co) : ii. 6 eX,K0vcrLV v/xoi'; th Kpirripia. 
 
 e/jtiropevofjiai : iv. 13 Koi e/i7ro(0£vcrd/u.e6a koI Ke.p^(rQfii,iv. 
 
 C. ep.ifivTO'S ; i. 21 Sefacr^e tov ifi(f>VTOV \6yov. 
 
 iv : i. 1, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 21, 23, 25, 27, ii. 1, 2, 4, 5, 10, 16, iii. 2, 6, 9, 
 
 13, 14, 18, iv. 1, 3, 5, 16, V. 3, 5, 10, 13, 14, 19. See pp. clxxiii 
 
 foil., clxxxviii. 
 c.d. evaXios : iii. 7 Tratra c^wis ipireTZv tc koi evaXiW. 
 evepyto) : v. 16 8er;tris StKatov ivepyov/jiivr]. 
 ivt : i. 1 7 Trap' ft) ovK evi irapoXXay^ rj TpoTnji aTTOtrKtatr/xa. 
 iviavTos : iv, 13 troiiqcTOixev iKei iviavTov iva, v. 17 ovk e/ipe^ev iviavrov^ 
 
 Tpeis. 
 evo)(Os : ii. 10 yiyovev iravToyv tvo)(os. 
 
 ivTevBev : iv. 1 ttoOcv iroXe/iot ; ovk IvrevOev, ck tS>v rjSovlav i/tSv ; 
 e. ivtliTnov : iv. 10 raTreiviaOrjTi ivwlriov tov K.vpiov. 
 £^ : see Ik. 
 
 If : V. 17 OVK e^pe^cv ivtavTov^ rpeis (cat /A^vas If. 
 c. If eX/cft) : i. 1 4 VTTO Tiys iSuxs ciri^u^tas i^eXKO/J.evo's. 
 Iflp^o/xai : iii. 10 Ik tov a^ToS crTo/j.aTO's Iflpp^cTat eiXoyta /cai Kardpa. 
 e. If o/AoXoyeo/uai : v. 1 6 If o/toXoyeio-^e aXX^Xois to. Trapaimo/iaTa. 
 C. loiKa : i. 6 o yap SiaKpivo/A.evo'i eoiKev kXvSidvl SaXatrtrTjs, i. 23 ovtos coikev 
 
 dvSpi KttTavooSvTi TO irp6(T<07rov avTOV. 
 iTrayylXXft) : i. 12 rov crTi<f>avov ov i7rrjyyeiX.aro tois dyoirwo'iv aiToi/, ii. 5 
 
 T^s /SacriXetas ■^S lirqyyeiXaTO. 
 eirtiTa : iii. 17 17 Seavco^Ei/ crocfiia irpSiTOV jji,€v...eir€iTa..., iv. 14 d.T/iis lo'TC ij 
 
 irpos oXtyov t^ivop-evt], eireiTa koI d^avifo/teviy. 
 lirep^O|Uai : v. 1 liri Tais TaXaariopLaL'S vfiLoiv rat<; iirep^^o/jievaK. 
 hri : with ace. ii. 3 lirL^XeijrrjTe iirl tov <j>opovvTa, ii. 7 to ovo/Jta to iiriKXr)- 
 
 6h/ i<j>' vixS.'s, ii. 21 dvevlyxas tov viov IttI to Ovaiao'T-qpiov, V. 14 
 
 nrpoo'evido-Btoa-av eir avTov ; vith gen. v. 5, 17 lirt tiJs y^s ; with dat. 
 
 V. 1 oXoXi5^ovT€s lirt Tats TaXaiTruipiaK, V. 7 fiaKpoOvfiSyv iir avrio. 
 
 See p. clxxii foil. 
 iTrtySXcTTO) : ii. 3 lav iiri^Xiij/rjTe iirl tov <j>opovVTa. ttjv lo-^'^Ta T'^v Xa/i7rpav. 
 imyao's : iii. 15 auTij 17 crocj^la iiriyeiog. 
 iTTieiKTQs : iii. 17 ^ SI avwOev (ro^ia iirieiKrj'S. 
 eiriBvixiia : iv. 2 iTridv/J-eiTe koL ovk e)(eTe. 
 iinOvfiia : i. 14, 15 ?Kao-Tos ireipd^eTai wo t^s tSi'as firiBvfi.ias' eiTa fj 
 
 iTTiOvfjiia (TvXXa,j3ov(ra tlktu dfjuiprlav. 
 lirtKoXlo) : ii. 7 to xaXov ovojxa to IttikXt/^ev I^ vfx.a.'Si 
 i-iriXavOdvu) : i. 24 evOiui'S iireXdOfTO ottoios »jv. 
 c. f.TnXr)(Tp.ovri : i. 25 aKpoaTrj^ emXrja'fJi.ovrjis. 
 hrnroOiia : iv. 5 Trpos tfiOovov iiniroOet to TrveS/xa. 
 e!nuKeirTop,aL : i. 27 liruTK€Tm(T6ai, optftavovs /cat XVP"-^- 
 im(rTafJiai : iv. 14 ou/c eiritTTaaBf. to t^s avpiov. 
 c. iina'TT^fitov : iii. 13 Tts (Tocjibi /cat lin(TTriii.u>v iv vpZv ; 
 iiri(TTpi<^ta : V. 19 lav Tts TrXa.vrj$y, koX iiniTTpi<prj tls avrov, V. 20 liri- 
 
 (TTpiij/a^ a/JLapTiaXov. 
 c. iTTiTijSetos : ii. 16 Ta liriTJjSna toC o-co/xaTOs- 
 iTrtTuyvdvo) : iv. 2 ^ijXoSte, xai ov Swao'^e l7riT«;(etv, of. .4d(i. A teclinical 
 
 term of the Stoic philosophy, see irepmiTrTw. 
 
232 INDEX OF GEEEK WOEDS 
 
 ipyd^ofJLai : i. 20 opyrj SiKaiocrwjjv ovk epyd^erai, ii. 9 el TrpocTuyirokrjix/KTtiTe, 
 
 ap^apTLdv Ipyd^ecrOe. See p. cxciii. 
 ipydrrjs : v. 4 6 /x.urdo's tZv ipyarZv tS>v ap,rjcrdvT<DV ras ^^(opas. 
 epyov : i. 4 ij 8c virop-ovri epyov riXeiov exeru), i. 25 ovk d/cpoaT^s oXXa TrotijT^s 
 
 epyov, ii. 14, 17, 18 TTta-TLV e-xuv, epya tx^"'' "• ^^' ^^ '^ 
 
 TTto-Tis Ywpis Toiv tpytov, ii. 21, 24, 25 e^ epyiov BiKaiova-Oai, ii. 22 ij 
 
 irtCTTts <TVvripy€i Tots epyois /cat ck tcoi' epyiav enKeuauT], ill. lo octgaro) 
 
 ex T^S (caX^s dva(TTpo<j)7Js to. epya. 
 d. ipiOia (epifleta) : iii. 14 ^rjXov iriKpov ex^re koL ipidiav, iii. 16 f^Xos <cat 
 
 eptdta. 
 kpirerov : iii. 7 iratra <j>vcni kpirerusv re Kac ivaXuav. 
 ipSi : ii. 1 8 dXA, epct rts, Sii ir/ffTtv ex^'*" 
 icrdri's : ii 2 ea-Orjn Xap.irpS. )( pmrapa ia-QfjTL, ii. 3 Tov (j>opovvTa TrjV iaBrjja. 
 
 TT/v Xa/jLTTpdv. 
 iaditi} : V. 3 6 los <^ayeTat ras crdpKa'S vfiwv. See pp. civ, clxxxiv. 
 eaoTTTpov : i. 23 Karavoolv to 7rp6(T<aTrov iu icroirTpm. 
 c(Tx<iTos : V. 3 i$7i<Tavpi(raTt iv ecrxdran ■^fiipan. 
 cTcpos : ii. 26 iripa 68m €Kj8aXoBo'a. 
 ei^ews : i. 24 eu6ews eireXd^tTo oTTotos ^y. 
 e.v6vp,iio : V. 1 3 evOv/Xii tis ; ipaXkiToi. 
 eiOvvdi : iii. 4 Tj opju^ toC evWvovtos. 
 ciAoycu) : iii. 9 iv avrfj evX.oyov[jt,ev rbv ®e6v. 
 evXoyla : iii. 10 eiXoyca Kal Kardpa. 
 c.d. iVTTudrj^ : iii. 17 ij 8e dvtoBaf crocjiia cvttei^ijs. 
 C. euTTpeTTcta : i. 11 i^ cvTrpcTrcta toO 'jrpoo'toTrov avrov. 
 evxv '• ^' 15 ^ *"X^ ''^^ TTto-Tctos cruxrei rov KafwovTa. 
 ivXop.a.L : V. 16 evxecrOe virep dXXiyXcuv, ottms iadrjn. 
 o.d.e. i(jyi^p,epos '■ ii. 15 t^s i<f>rjij,€pov Tpoff>7J';. 
 ^xOpa : iv. 4 ^ (jjiXia Tov Kocrfiov ex^P" '''°^ ®€o5 OTTtl'. 
 ix^pos '■ iv. 4 ^iXos ToB Koa/jLov, ix^po's rov ©eoC. 
 eX<» : i- 4 ij vTrop,ovrj ipyov riXeiov ix^ria, ii. 1 /n^ ev ■jrpotrmiroXijju.i^tats ^X*''^ 
 
 T^v irt'o-Tiv, ii. 14 wio-Tti' £X^tv, ii. 14, 17, 18 epya ex*'"! i"- -^^ ^'^Xov 
 
 cXeti/, iv. 2 £Trt6up.etT€, xat ouk exETt. See p. cxciii. 
 ?u)S : (prep.) v. 7 ctos t^s 7rapov<rias tov Kuptou ; (cory.) v. 7 paKpoOvpMv 
 
 £U)s Xd/Sjj. See p. clxxiii. 
 
 ^au) : iv. 15 eav 6 Kvpios OeX-^ay, Kal fijo-o/^ev Kal... 
 ^ijXos: iii. 14 tyjXov triKpov, iii. 16 ^^Xos Kat ipiOia. 
 ^f/Xoo) : IV. 2 ^lyXoCre Kat ov SvvacrOc eTTtTVX*'"- 
 Z[a)J/ : i. 12 TOV <TTe<l)avov t^s ^m'^S) iv. 14 Trot'a ^ ^wi] vp,!!)V ; 
 
 H 
 
 ^ : ( = «w) iv. 5 ^ 8oK£tT£ on kcvus. . .; ( = aut) i. 17, ii. 3, 15, iii. 12, iv. 1,13, 
 
 15. 
 ryyioixai : 1. 2 Tracrav xapav ^yTjO-ao-^e, 
 
INDEX OF GEEEK WORDS 233 
 
 ■fjSov^ : iv. 1 tS>v ■^SovSiv tSiv trTpaTevo/Aevcuv iv rois /jiiX-efriv u/xGv, iv. 3 tVa 
 
 iv rats ^Sovots SaTravjJcnjVc. 
 HXt'as : V. 1 7 'HA.tas avOpoiiroi ■^v o/A.oioTradrj's rjfjiiv. 
 wXocos : iii. 5 tjXikov ■n-vp -^Xiktjv vXrjv avdiTTei. 
 rj\io<s : i. 1 1 <xv€T£iA.£V o ^Xtos. 
 ■^/xels ' see eyco. 
 rj/j-epa : V. 3 ev €(r;^aTais ^juepatg, v. 5 a)s ei* ^If^^p^ (r^ay^s. 
 
 ® 
 
 0a\a(r(ra : i. 6 kXijSojvi 6aXao"(njs. 
 
 c. OavaTT/ifiopo'; : iii. 8 (yA.Scro'a) /JLecrTr] lov 6avaTr]tfi6pov. 
 
 ^civaTDs : i. ]5 17 8e afLaprLa avoKvei Odvarov, V. 20 (riacrei i/ru^^r ex ^ai'aTov. 
 
 ^eXo) : ii. 20 OeXcK SeyvGvat; iv. 15 eav o Kvpios OeX-qaig. 
 
 0€os : i. 1 ®£oS Koi K.vpiov I. X. SovXos, i. 5 Trapa tov SiSoj'tos ®coD, i. 13 
 ttTTO 0£o5 ireipa^o/iat, «6. ©. dirctpao-Tos, i. 20 SiKaiocrvvrjv ®£ov, i. 27 
 6prj<TK€ia dfjuavTO'S irapa t« ®e(3. koI Tiarpi, ii. 6 6 ©cos cfeXefaro Toiis 
 irTO);^ous, ii. 19 eis e(rT6i' o 0eds, ii. 23 kwia-Teva-fv 'AySpaa/t ™ ©eoi xai 
 fjiiX.o's ®€ov kKKr)6r), iii. 9 Ka6' ofwiuicriv ®€oC, iy. 4 ^ ^tXto. toS 
 k6<tij,ov iy(6pa To5 ®£oC...<^tXos toC KOtrfnov i)(6po^ tov ©eoC, iv. 6 o 
 ®eos VTreprjifjd.voLi a,VTiTa.<T<T€Tai, iv. 7 viroTd.yrjT€ r(3 ®eu, iv. 8 cyy/craTe 
 ™ ©em. See p. clviii foil. 
 
 Oepitfn '■ V. 4 at jSoal Twv BepKrdvTiov. 
 
 OepfjLaivw : ii. 16 dep/jLaivea-Oe koI ^oprd^ta-Oe. 
 
 Grjpiov : iii. 7 Trao-a tj>v(Ti'S OrfpCiav re kol TrtTetvcoi'. 
 
 6r](Tavpi^u> '. V. 3 i$rj<ravpi(TaT€ Iv ecrp^diTais fip.epa.i';, 
 
 OXiif/K '■ i. 27 6p<jxi,vovs Koi, XVP"'-^ ^ ''V 6X.iij/€i avTwv. 
 
 OprjcTKeia : i. 26 tovtov /taraiog ^ OprjorKUa, i. 27 OprjCTKeia Ka6apd kol d/tiavTOS. 
 
 a. OprjO'KO'S : i. 26 £t rts Sokci 6pt](rKo^ elvai. 
 
 6vpa : V. 9 o KpiTT]^ Trpo tGv 6vpS)V €(TTrjKev. 
 
 e. OvcruuTTripiov : ii. 21 dvcvcyKas 'IcraaK lirX to 6v(Tia<TTripiov. 
 
 'laKUySos : i. 1 'laKOj/Sos ©£0v koX Kvptov Iijo-ov XpwrToB SoCXos. 
 
 Idofiai : V. 1 6 ev^feaOe iirep dXXiyXo)]/, ottcds laO^e. 
 
 tSios : i. 14 iiro rijs iStas iiriOvfiiai efeXKO/icvos. 
 
 iSe (as^. £t 8e) : iii. 3 tSe, rovs i^aXtvoiis €is toi o-Top-ara /SdXXo/x.ci'. .4c?rf. 
 
 tSov : iii. 4 iSow, koI to. TrXoTa /xeTaycrat, iii. 5 tSovi, ijXt/cov irijp r/XiKTjv vX-qv 
 
 dvaTTCi, V. 4 tSoii, 6 p.io'Ooi Kpd^ei, v. 7 tSoii, o yewpyos €K8£;^eTat tov 
 
 KapTTOV, V. 9 (Soil, 6 KpiTqi ia-TiijKa/, v. 11 iSoii, p,aKapL^op,ev Toiis uto- 
 
 /tei'oi'Tas. 
 'I);o-ovs : i. 1 Kvpiov 'Irja-ov XpioroS SoSXos, ii. 1 roC Kvptou ^/^w 'Ii;a-oB 
 
 Xpt(rToS T^s So^s. 
 i/tdiTiov : V. 2 TO, i/tctTia i/uSv o-ijrd^pojTa yeyovcv. 
 tj/a : i. 4 iva ^te reXeiot, iv. 3 tva ei/ Tats ijSovats Sairavi^<TrjT£, v. 9 tva p,rj 
 
 KpLdrjre, v. 12 tj/a p,r] vtto KpUriv weo-ijTe. See pp. clxxviii foil., 
 
 clxsxviii. 
 ids : V. 3 o los avrSiv ets fiaprvpiov vfuv io-rau 
 
234 INDEX OF GEEEK WOEDS 
 
 MTTTos '.^iii. 3 tSoi, tS)V Xirirmv Tois \a\ivovs «ts to. crrojiaTa paWofiev. 
 'Icraa/c : ii. 2 1 aveveyKas 'IcraaK Tov vlov ainov lin to 6vcria(rTrjpiov. 
 la-TrjfiL : ii. 3 a-v a-njdi e/cet, v. 9 l8ov, 6 KpiT-q's irpo tS>v 6vp!ov earijKev. 
 i(r)(y<i> : V. 1 6 ttoXv lar)(yei Serjcri^ SiKaiov ii/epyovf/.evrj. 
 'I(u;8 : V. 11 TrjV VTTO/JLOV^v 'lojyS rjKovcraTe. 
 
 K 
 
 Kaydi : ii. 18 bis. See p. cliv. 
 
 e. KaOapL^u) : iv. 8 KaOapiaaTe. )(£ipa? afjiMpruikoi. 
 
 KaOapo's : i. 27 BpTjCTKeia Kodapa, kcu a/juavTOS. 
 
 Ka^ij/iai : ii. 3 (TV KtxOoy SSe Ka\.u><s. 
 
 Ka6i(rTrjfiL : iii. 6 ovrus rj yXuxTcra KaOiaTaTai iv rots p-i\tariv, iv. 4 l^Bpoi 
 TOV 6(.ov KaOiCTTaTai. 
 
 Kal: (^ also,' never 'even') i. 11 ovt(os /cat 6 ■jtA.ovo'ios fux.pav6i^(reTaL, ii. 2 
 elcriXdrj Sk Koi TrT(0)(os, ii. 11 o yap £t7r(i)v Mij iJMV)(iva~rj^, eiTrev koX 
 M-^ tf>oveva^'i, ii. 17, 26 owrcos Kai 17 Irian.';, ii. 19 Kat ra SaifJLOvia irw- 
 Tevovcnv, ii. 25 op.oiws Si Koi Paa,/3, iii. 2 Swaros p^aXivayajy^crat Kai 
 oAov TO dloixa, iii. 4 tSov koi to. TrXoia, iii. 5 outws /cat 17 ■yXSctra, iii. 
 14 lirctTtt /cat a^avitpiievy), v. 8 fxaLKpoOvix-qaaTt /cat i/iets. Joining 
 cause and effect (with imperative) i. 5 aiTtiTto koX SoOrja-ercu, iv. 7 
 avTiaTrjTe /cat <f)ev^€Tai, iv. 8 iyyia-are /cat iyyicrei, iv. 10 TW7reivw6yjT€ 
 KoX vtj/d>(TeL, V. 15 Trpocr€v^a.(r6ij)(Tav /cat (TuxreL : (with indie.) i. 11 dve- 
 T£tA.£v 6 ^A,tos /cat e^cTrecrcv, v. 17, 18 irpoa^rjv^aTO Kat... Connecting 
 contrasted notions ii. 19 TrtcrTcvovo'tv /cat ^pCcraovaiv, iii. 5 /jLiKpov 
 /ie'Xos ecTTtv Kat /teyaXa ai^et. Connecting six successive clauses in . 
 V. 17, 18, five in v. 14, 15. Used where we might have expected 
 8e in ii. 4, iv. 15. See /cdyai and kov. 
 
 KaKia : i. 21 TrepicrcrtLav Ka/ctas. 
 
 KaKOiraOiu) : v. 1 3 KaKoiraOel ti^ iv vplv ; irpoaevyicrBiii. 
 
 c. KaKOTrdOia : v. 10 VTroSety/tta XayStTC Trjs KaKOTra6la<s tov'; wpoc^^ras. 
 
 KaKos : i. 13 ®£os aTrctpao-Tos eortv KaKuiv, iii. 8 d/carao-Tarov ko-kov. 
 
 Ka/cSs : iv. 3 ov Xafx^avere StoTt /ca/cSs atrttcr^c. 
 
 KaXeoi : ii. 23 <j>i\.os ®eoS iKK-qOrj. 
 
 /caXos : ii- 7 TO /caXov ovofia, iii. 13 eK t^s /caX^s dvatrrpoc^^s, iv. 17 KaXov 
 
 TTOtetV. 
 
 /caXiJTrTOD : V. 20 KaXvij/ei irX^Oo'S ajxapTiSiv. 
 
 KO.Xui's '■ ii. 3 (TV Kadov SSe /caXSs, ii. 8 KaXSs iroictTe, ii. 1 9 KaXus Trotcts. 
 
 Ka/nfiO : V. 15 17 E^X^ (Tuxrei tov Kap-vovTa. 
 
 Kav{ = KOI iav 'and if) : v. 15. See p. cliv. 
 
 /capSta : i. 26 d7ra™i/ /capStW, iii. 14 f^Xov ex^'''^ ^'' ''^ KapSia, iv. 8 dyvt'cr- 
 
 are /capStas, v. 5 i6pi{j/aTe ras /capSias, V. 8 crTT/ptfaTC ras /capSi'as. 
 Kapiros '■ iii. 17 p,€(TTrj KapirSiv ayaBSiv, iii. 18 /cap^os StKatocrwT/s v. 7 
 
 TOV Tip,iov KapTTOv tt}s yi}?, V. 18 ■^ y5 ipXa.(TTri(Tev tov /capirov avTns. 
 KaTct : (c. ace.) ii. 8 /caTct T-ijv ypa</)ijv, ii. 17 /ca6' eavTiJi/, iii. 9 /ca0' 
 
 bp,oio)cnv ®eoC; (c. jere.) iii. 14 \j/€v8€(r6e KaTo. t^s dXjjfittas, v. 9 /jlti 
 
 (TT(vd^eT€ /cttT dXXijXiov. See pp. clxxii, clxxiii. 
 KaTa^aivto : i. 1 7 KaTa/Salvov dTro toO TraTpos tSiv (jximav. 
 KaTaSt/cd^O) : v. 6 KaTcStKao-are, i<j>ovtv(TaTC tov StVatov. 
 
INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 235 
 
 KaTaovva,(TT£vo> : ii. 6 ou^ oi irXovtriot KaTaSwacmvovcriv v[ji,S>v ; 
 
 e. KaTaKav)(doiJ.ai : ii. 13 KaTaKav)(5.TaL lAeos Kptcreiai, iii. 14 ftij KaraKav- 
 
 yacrOe koX ij/evS€<T6e Kara Trji dXij^ei'as. 
 KaTaXaXem : iv. 1 1 [xij KaTaXaA.£tT£ oXX^Xiui/" 6 KaraXaXwv aSeXtfiov KataXaXtl 
 
 VO/JiOV. 
 
 Karavoita : i. 23 dvSpi KaravoovvTi to irpoaiinrov avTov, i. 24 Kartvo-qtrev yap 
 
 lavTov. 
 Karapa : iii. 10 eiXoyta Kal Kardpa. 
 KarapdofJiai. : iii. 9 iv avrfj KaraprnfiiOa tovs dvOpunrov^. 
 KaT€pydt,oiJUiL : i. 3 to Soxifiiov vfiSiv rijs irtVTeajs Karepyd^erai mrofnovrp/. 
 Karep^o/xai : iii. 15 ouk ea-nv avnr] r] croif)ia dvaiOev KaTtpxafnevr]. 
 C.d. Karq<j>eia. : iv. 9 ^ X"!""' *'^ KaTrjtficiav {fi,eracrTpa^r)Tto). 
 c.e. Kartdb) : V. 3 6 dpyvpos KaTtWat. 
 
 c. KaroLKitfn '. iv. 5 TO Trveujua o KaToiKio'ei' (aZ. KaTifKrjatv) iv ^/juv, 
 e, Kavcriav : i. 1 1 dvireiXev yap 6 ■SjXio'S criiv tw Kavcriavi. 
 Kav)^dofji,ai, : i. 9 Kav^dcrOia 6 dSeXc^os o raireivos ev tu iji/'et avToC, iv. 1 6 
 
 Kav)(aa-de iv Tais dXa^oviats v/juov. 
 e. Kav)()]<ns '• iv. 1 6 irSo'a Kav)(q(ri<i TOtavx-q trovrjpd. 
 KEvos : ii. 20 S avOpaiiri k€vL 
 
 c. Kevuii : iv. 5 rj SoKEtTC oti Kcvois 17 ypaf^r) Xiyei ; 
 
 d. KepSaivm : iv. 13 Kal iix,Tropea(T6iJ,i6a, Kal KepSi^cro/JLev. See p. clv. 
 KXaio) : iv. 9 TaXaarmp-qaaTe Kal irevOrja'aTe Kal KXavaare, v. 1 KXavaare 
 
 oXoXv^ovTcs. 
 KXTjpovofioi : ii. 5 KXrjpov6iJ,ovi riji /SatrtXeias. 
 kXwSwv : i. 6 ioiKiv kXvSo>vi OaXdo'crrj'S dvefJiLt,oiJ,€V(a. 
 h. Koa/JiO's : i. 27 do-TrtXov eauTov Trjpeiv diro rov K6<Tp,ov, ii. 5 tous tttioxovs t<3 
 
 KOiTfim, iii. 6 ij •yXGo"<ra irvp, o Koa"jU,os t^s dSiKiias, iv. 4 17 (juXia rov koit- 
 
 [JI.OV iX^P"- '''^^ ®eov i<TTiv OS iav ^ovXrjOrj ^tXos eivai toB Koa-jjiov e^^pos 
 
 ToS ®£oi) Ka6i<rTaTai. 
 Kpdiia : V. 4 o futrdos 6 dfjiVcrTtprnxtvo^ a,(j> v/j,Siv Kpd^ei. 
 Kp(/xa (so Ti. WH., Kplfia Tr. and others) : iii. 1 ctSores OTt jxiltpv Kpi/xa 
 
 Xri/ntj/ofjieOa. 
 Kpivia: ii. 12 8ia vo/xov iXevOeptai fji,eXXovT£S KpCv^frOai, iv. 11 o Kpiviov 
 
 dSeXcftov Kpivei vo/jlov, el Si vofiov Kpiveii k.t.X., iv. 12 crv tis ei o Kpivtav 
 
 Tov erepov ; v. 9 p,rj aTCvd^ere iva /a^ KpiO^re. 
 KpicTK : ii. 1 3 ■^ yap Kp«ns dveXeos tu /x^ ■?rot)jo-avTt eXeos' KaraKau^j^aTat 
 
 eXeos KpLcreo)^, V. 12 ti/a /i^ iiro Kpiariv ttott^te. 
 Kpirripiov : ii. 6 eX/coiKTiv wjnas ets Kpunqpia. 
 Kpirri^ : ii. 4 Kpiral SiaXoyur/iMV irovr/pSiv, iv. 1 1 oi/c et ttoit^t^s vopLOv dXXa 
 
 KpiTTji, iv. 12 eis ecTti' voix,o6err)% Kal KpiT-q^, v. 9 6 xptr^s irpo tw 
 
 dvpSsv ecTTYjKev. 
 
 e. KTiapia : i. 18 dwap^ijv rtva tSv auToC KTuyfjLaTMV. 
 
 Kvpios : i. 1 Knptot) °I»;croC XptcrToC SoBXos, i. 7 Xrifuf/erai ri Trapa tov 
 Vivpwv, ii. 1 T^v iriarTiv tov ILvpiov ■^p.iov Irjo-ov Xpurrov, iii. 9 tov 
 TUvpiov Kal Haripa, iv. 10 TaireivMrjTe iviainov tov K.vpiov, iv. 15 idv 
 6 Kupios OiXriairi, V. 4 ets to. Sra Kvpt'ou %aj3adi6, v. 7, 8 17 irapova-ia 
 TOV Kvpt'ov, V. 1 £1/ T(3 6v6p,aTi Kvptov, V. 1 1 TO TeXos Kvpiov ctSere, 
 OTt 7roXvaTrXay)(y6s icrnv 6 JCvpios, v. 14 iv tu ovofw/ti (tov 
 Kupiou?), v. 15 eyepet airov 6 Kvpios. See pp. clviii, clxi. 
 
236 INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 
 
 X.a\i(o : i. 19 /SpaBv's eis to X.aXfj<Tai, ii. 12 ouTtos Xakiire, v. 10 eAaXiycrav 
 
 tV TO) 6v6fi.aTL K.vpiov. 
 A.a/ij8av(i) : i. 7 /t-^ oUir6u> on krittAfieTat Tt, i. 12 kyfjuj/erai tov iniifiavov, iii. 
 
 1 /yteifov KpifjM ky)iJi,\p6fii.c6a, iv. 3 atreiTe Kal ov Xafi^dveTe, v. 7 /xaKpo- 
 
 Ov/ji&v ltt)s A.aj82;, v. 10 {nroSeLypi.a X.a.j3eT£ Tous irpo^ras. See p. 
 
 cxciii. 
 Xa/JLTrpoi : ii. 2 cv eo-fl^Ti A.a/x7rpoi, ii. 3 tov <f>opovvTa ttjv icrOrJTa t^v 
 
 A-ajUTrpav. 
 Xeyco : i. 13 fi-qSelg Xeyiru} ort, ii. 14 ear ttUttiv Xeyy tis ex^iv, ii. 23, iv. 5, 
 
 6 ij ypo"^^ Aeyei, iv. 13 aye vui/ ot A.eyoi'Tes, iv. 15 diTi toS A,eyetv 
 
 vp.a.'S. 
 XeiTTW : i. 4 ev fi,T]Sevl Xetiroyiievot, i. 5 et tis vp,Gv \e«reTai <TO(j)Ca<s, ii. 15 
 
 Xuir6p.£Voi T^s icjrrjfiepov Tpoc^^s. 
 \oyi^o/*at : ii. 23 iXoyio-Orj avTto eis SiKaiouvvrjv. 
 Xoyos : i. 18 aireKvrifriv rifjias Xoyta aXrjOilai, i. 21 toi' efitfivTov Xoyov, l. 22 
 
 TToii^Tai Xdyov, i. 23 aKpoarrji Xoyov, iii. 2 e6 tis ev Xoym ov Trraiet. 
 
 See pp. clix, clxv. 
 
 M 
 
 juaKapt^o) : V. 1 1 iSoii, fLaKapL^op,ev tovs virop.uvavTa's. 
 
 p.a.Ko.pio's '■ i. 12 jxaKapioi avrjp os VTroiievu Treipacr/idv, i. 25 ovtos /laKapios 
 
 iv rfj Trotijtrei avroC ecTTai. 
 e. fia,Kpo6vp,i.ui : V. 7 p.aKpoOv/i.'^a'aTe, e(os t^s Trapovcrtas ToCKup«)i;...6 yeuip- 
 
 yos exSe^^eTai p,a.Kpo6vp.S>v, v. 8 /xaKpodvp-i^craTe koX i/teis. 
 p.aKpo6vp,ia : V. 10 vTr6hayjt,a A.aj8eTC T^s p-aKpoOv/jiLas TOVs irpo<^^Tas. 
 c, p,apaivii} : i. 11 o 7rA.oi5o-ios ev Tais iropet'ats auToC papavdi^crcTai. 
 pupTVpiov : V. 3 6 tos aiTW eis p,aprvpwv vp,iv ecTTat. 
 juaTaios : i. 26 toijtov juctTatos 17 OprjaKeia. 
 pid^rj : iv. 1 TTodev iroXep.oL koI p,d)(aL ev VjUiv ; 
 /jLaxpixai : iv. 2 p.d)(ecr6e Koi ■TroXep.cLTe. 
 
 0. p,eyaXav)(€iiy (p,eyaXa av)(€ui) : iii. 5 ij yXwo'cra, p,eydX.a ai^ei. 
 pLEi^wv : iii. 1 /uei^ov Kpip,a, iv. 6 p,ei^ova StSojtrtv X'^P"'- 
 p.eXXui : ii. 12 Sia v6p,ov iXevOepla's jueWoVTes KpLvecrOai. 
 p,iXoi : iii. 5 ij yX5cro-a p,iKpov p-eXos, iii. 6 6 koo-jUos t^s dSiKi'as ^ yXwo-(ra 
 
 KaOiaraTai iv tois /AeXecriv, iv. 1 Tfii/ ^Sovolv Toiv (rrpartvo/jievuiv 
 
 iv Tois p.iXea'iv vp,uiv. 
 p,ev : iii. 17 TrpSirov p.iv dyvq. 
 p,€VT0i : ii. 8 ei p,6VToi v6p,ov TeXeiTe. 
 
 /AetTTOs : iii. 8 p,e(TTfi lov 6avaTrj(l>6pov, iii. 17 pLea-ri) iXiovs. 
 C. pLerayuy : iii. 3 to o'uip.a avTwv perdyop-ev, iii. 4 Tot TrXoIa p,erdyerai, virb 
 
 iXa)(i(rTov TnjSaXi'ou. 
 p,iTa<7Tpe(j><o (al. jueTaTpCTO)) : iv. 9 6 yeXus v/aSv cis irei'^os /jteTao-Tpa^iJrm. 
 p,^ : (m*/i imperative force) i. 7, 16, 22, ii. 1, 11, iii. 1, 14, iv. 11, v. 9, 
 
 12. 
 
 (M)i</j interrogative force) ii. 14, iii. 12, cf. /iiyTi. 
 
 (wi</j infinitive) iv. 2, 11, v. 17. 
 
INDEX OF GREEK WOEDS 237 
 
 {with subjunctive) ii. 11, 14, 16, 17. 
 
 {with participle) i. 5, 6, 26, ii. 13, iv. 17. 
 See pp. clxxx, clxxxix. 
 lirj^iK : i. 4 ev /^ijScvt kenronevoi, i. 6 /^iijSci/ SlaKptvo/^£^'os, i. 1 3 /iijStts 
 
 7r£ipa^o/*evos XeyeToi. 
 p.r;v : V. 1 7 evtauTous Tpcts Kai fji,rjvai €^. 
 
 fUT^re : V. 12 ju,-^ 6/AvijeT£ jU^Te tov oipavov /iijte aA,A.ov riva opKov, 
 imjrri, : ili. 1 1 p.^Tt ^ irr/y^ ySpuet to yXiiKiJ ; 
 jUiKpos : iii. 5 17 yXGo-o-a //.cKpov /j-ekoi icniv. See eXa^nTTOs. 
 /j.ktOo's : v. 4 o iiktBoi tS>v ipyarSiv Kpa^ei. 
 e. ju,oi;(aXis : iv. 4 /xoi.^aX.iSt's, oiiK oiSare ort k.t.A.. 
 
 IJl.0l)(€VIO : ii. 11 jU-^ jJLOL^€V(Trj'S...tl Si OV fJI,Ol^€V€K- 
 
 /j.oixp'i : iv. 4 in some MSS. 
 
 fisovov : i. 22 yivitr&i [Ji.r) dfcpoarai /xovov, ii. 24 oi/c e/c Trtoretos fiovov. 
 
 N 
 
 vai : V. 1 2 •^Toj Se i/xiov to vol vai. 
 
 veicpos : ii. 17 17 ttiVtis, iav /x^ cp^rj epya, v€Kpd icrriv, ii. 26 to o'u/z.a ;^o)pls 
 nTeu/xaTos veKpdi/ eo-Ttv-.-ij iricTTi'i yiapl^ epyuiv veKpa. Icttlv, also ii. 20 
 read for apy-q in some MSS. 
 
 c. vofLoOlTT)^ : iv. 12 eis eo-Tii' vop.oBeTrj'S. 
 
 vo/tos : i. 25 vop-ov rekeiov tov ttjs iXevOepia^, ii. 8 vo/jlov reXeiTe fiacriKi- 
 Kov, ii. 9 eXeyp^o/ici'ot uto toC vo/jlov, ii. 10 oo"Tis oXoi' tov v6p,ov 
 Tqprjo'rj, ii. 11 yeyovas ■Trapa^d.Trjs vo/jlov, ii. 12 cus Slo, vojjlov iXev6e- 
 pCai /JLeXXovrei KpiveuBai, iv. 11 KaToKaXu vo/jlov kol Kpivei v6/jlov . . .fl 
 Se VO/JLOV Kpiveii ovk tl TroLr/Trji vo/jlov. See pp. clix, clxv. 
 
 vvv : iv. 16 vvv Se Ka.v)(axrOi, iv. 13, v. 1 aye vvv. 
 
 H 
 ^paivm : i. 1 1 6 ^A.tos i^pavev tov xppTov. 
 
 O 
 
 0, 17, TO : see pp. clvi — clxvii. 
 
 oSe : iv. 13 ets T-f/vSe tt/v iroAti/. 
 
 oSos : i. 8 dfCttTao'TaTos ev irao-ais Tais oSois auToB, ii. 25 iripa oS(3 eKySa- 
 
 Xowa, V. 20 e/c Trkdviji oSoB avToC. 
 oTSa : i. 1 9 icTTe d.Se\<j>oi /jlov ayawr/Toi, iii. 1 eiSoTes oTt /jl^l^ov Kpi/jLo. Xtj/jl- 
 
 \j/6/JLt6a, iv. 4 OVK oiSaTe on r/ (fnkia tov k6<t/j,ov ix.^pa tov ©eoC eo-Ttv ; iv. 
 
 17 ii^ori KoSJbv TToiiiv. See, p. clvi. 
 e. olKTip/JLtov : V. 1 1 ■rro\v(nrX.ay)(y6i iffTiv 6 Kuptos Kai olKTip/jLuiv. 
 OLO/JLai : i. 7 /JLTj yap oU(r6u} 6 dv^pwTros eKeivos oTt. 
 oXtyos : iv. 14 dr/tts ■^ irpos dA6yov c^aivo/i.ev'q, iii. 5 read for f/XiKov by 
 
 .some MSS. 
 
238 INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 
 
 oXoKXrjpos '• i. 4 ira ^T£ TeXeioi Koi oXoKXrjpoi. 
 
 C. oXoXv^ta : V. 1 K\av(raT£ oXoXv^ovrei eiri rats raXcuTraptai?. 
 
 oXoi : ii. 10 oXov tov vo/uov, iii. 2, 3, 6 oXov to a-ui/jia. 
 
 Ofivvm : V. 12 Trpo irdvTwv Sc /a'^ o/avucte. 
 
 bp.0i0Tra.6ri<s : v. 17 'HXias avOpwiroi rjv o/jLOioiradrjs rjiuv. 
 
 6/iotti)S : ii- 25 o/xotoos 8e Kat PaajS. 
 
 C. Ofji.oLbMn'S : iii. 9 rows Ka6' ofioiuicrLV ®eov yeyovoras. 
 
 dv£t8i^a) : i. 5 tov ©eoC /i.-^ ovetSt^ovTos. 
 
 ovofiM : ii. 7 TO KaXov ovo/ta to e7riK\?;6cv e<^' iyitas, v. 10 £\a\i;o-av Iv tm 
 
 6v6fj.aTi KvpLov, V. 14 dA.eti/'avTcs cv Tw ovo/xari {tov Kvpiov). 
 oirq : iii. 1 1 ^7 TTjy^' ek t^s avT^s ott^s. 
 OTTOtos : i. 24 eiOeitis iireXadero owoios fjv. 
 
 oTTov : iii. 4 o'irou:7 op/*'^ PovXerai, iii. 16 oirov ^^A.os eicci aKaTao-Tao-ia. 
 oTTcos : V. 1 6 ei!;^€o-5e oirtos la^^Te. 
 opau) : ii. 24 oparc oti ii ipyutv Stxatoirrai, v. 11 ro tcXos KtiptotJ ctoeTe. 
 
 See !!8e, tSoi;, oTSa. 
 opy^ : i. 19 jSpaSiis ets opyijv, i. 20 opy^ yap dvSpos SiKatoo-un;!/ ®£oS ovk 
 
 ipyd^eraL. 
 opKos : V. 12 jLMjTe aiXXov Tiva opKOV {ofivvere). 
 opp/fj : iii. 4 ^ opp.^ tov eidvvovTOs- 
 
 OS : i. 12, 17, ii. 5, iv. 5, v. 10; (os eaV) iv. 4. See p. clxix. 
 oo-Tis : ii. 10 oo-Tis oXov tov vo/jlov Tiyp-^OT;, iv. 14 oltivcs ovk hna-TcurOe to 
 
 Trj's avpLov. 
 orav : i. 2 oTav ■n-eiparrp.ois Trepuiria-qTe. See pp. clxxviii, clxxxviii. 
 oTt : 'that' after yivdia-KOVTK i. 3, oUa-dto i. 7, XeycTw i. 13, iruTTtveis ii. 
 
 19, yvuivai ii. 20, ^Xevei^ ii. 22, opaTe ii. 24, ciSotcs iii. 1, otSaTe iv. 
 
 4, SoKeiTe iv. 5, TO TcXos eiScTC V. 11, yivuuTKere. V. 20 ; 
 ' because ' i. 1 Kav)(axT6to iv Trj TaTreivuicrei, oti irapeXeva-iTaL, i. 1 2 puiKapios 
 
 OS VTTOp.fvei, OTi XT^/ixj/eTai tov a-T£<j)avov, i. 23 p,'^ aKpoaToi, oti aKpoarijS 
 
 eoiKEj/ dvSpt KaTttVOovi/Tt K.T.X., V. 8 o-TrjpL^aTe Tas KapSias, on ^ 
 
 ■Ttapovcria fjyyiKev. See p. clxxviii. 
 oii : V. 12 TO vat vat, Kat to ou ov. See p. clxxix. 
 oiSct's : i. 13 Treipd^et 8e avTOS ovSeva, iii. 8 T'^v yXSo-o'av oiSets Sa/xdarai. 
 
 Svvarai. 
 ovv : iv. 4 OS eav oSv povXrjdfj, iv. 7 woTayijTe ovv T(3 0e<3, iv. 17 etSoTt 
 
 ow, V. 7 /jLaKpoOvfi-qcraTi ovv, v. 16 €fo/toA.oy£To-6£ ow. 
 oupavos : V. 12 yit^ o/*vu6T€ /xiyTe toi/ ovpavov p.^T€ t'^v y^v, V. 18 o ovpavos 
 
 VtTOV toiOKev. 
 ovs : V. 4 €ts TO. ojTtt Kvpioi) ei<TeXriXv6av. 
 ovT€ (for oiSe) : iii. 12 out€ olXvkov yXvKV Troi^cat vStap. 
 ouTos : i. 23, 25, 26, 27, iii. 2, 10, 15, iv. 15. See p. clxviii. 
 ouTcDs : (ouTws Kai after comparison) i. 11, ii. 17, 26, iii. 5 ; ii. 12 owtos 
 
 A.a\eiT£ Kat ovTtos TrotetTC o)S jUcAAovTes K.T.X., iii. 10 ou ■^(prj TauTa 
 
 ouTcus yiveaOai. 
 o^tXo's : ii. 14, ii. 16 Tt (to) o(^eXos; 
 c. oi/?tp,os : V. 7 verov Trpoip.ov Kat oxj/iiJiov. 
 
INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 239 
 
 n 
 
 TrdXiv : v. 1 8 TraXiv irpoo'rjv^aTO. 
 
 Trapd ; G. gen. i. 5 aiTCtro) irapa. tov StSovTos ®eoC, i. 7 XrjftApiTal, ti irapa. toS 
 
 Kijpiov ; C. dat. i. 17 Trap' <h ovk tvi TrapaXXayi], i. 27 6pr)crK€ia KaOapa 
 
 Trapo, TM 0€M. See pp. clxxiii, clxxiv. 
 irapaySctnjs : ii. 9 eA.ey;^o/ievoi <us irapaySaTai, ii. 1 1 ■ycyovas Trapa/Sarr;? 
 
 vo/Aoi;. 
 wapaKVTrTO) : i. 25 6 8e irapaKvij/a'S €is v6iJ,ov. 
 C. TrapaXXay^ : 17 TrapaXXayr) ^ TpoTr^s diroo"Kta(r/ia. 
 irapaXoyi^ofiai : i. 22 irapaXoryLt/ojJ.f.voi kavTOv^. 
 irapajxevu) : i. 25 6 vapaKvij/a's koi Trapajj.uva's. 
 e. Trapa.TrTwfx,a (1) : V. 16 k^op-oXoyiiirOi aXXrjXoL'i ra. TrapairTiofJiaTa (al. tos 
 
 a/iapTias). 
 jrapipxo/JLat, : i. 10 ais av^os xoprov TrapeXevaeTai. 
 TrapoufTia : v. 7 eios T^s ira.pov(rta^ tov Kvpiov, v. 8 ij Trapovcrta tov Kvptov 
 
 ■^yyiKEi'. 
 ttSs : i. 2 Tracrav xapav ^y^cracrflc, 5, 8, 17, 19, 21, ii. 10, iii. 7, 16, iv. 16, 
 
 V. 12 irpo iravTwi' jm,^ 6p,vveT€. See pp. clxvi, clxvii. 
 iraT-fip : i. 17 irarrip tS>v (jjutTwv, i. 27 Tui ®e<3 koL Tlarpi, ii. 21 'AjSpaa/j, 6 
 
 iraTr/p yjixSyv, iii. 9 evXoyovp,tv tov Kvpiov koI Zlarepa. 
 iradm : iii. 3. eis to TreWecrdai avTovs Tjfnv. 
 TT^ipatfn: i. 13 [LrfSels ireipa^o/Jievoi XeycTO) OTt aTro ®eoi) 7rEipa^op.at..,.(o 
 
 ©eos) iretpajet oiSeVa, i. 14 ticao-Tos ireipd^iTai virb Trjs iSt'as iin6v[Ji.id9. 
 e. irapacr/AOS : i. 2 oTav Tretpao-ZAois ■Trepnrearrjre ttoikIXok, i. 12 /iaKciptos 
 
 dv^p OS VTrojJ,£VU TreipaxrfJiov. 
 irevOeio : iv. 9 irtvOrjcraTe Kal KXavcraTe. 
 TTO'^os : iv. 9 o yeXws v/iwi' eis TrevOo's ii,era(TTpa<^rfru>. 
 TrepLiriTrTai : i. 2 oTav 7reipao"/xois TvepnridrjTi irotKiXois, and Add. : cf. Epict. 
 
 JSnch. 2 ope^eoi'S eirayyeXia kiriTvy^ia ov opiyrj, eKKXicreuis eirayyiXia. to 
 
 p,yj TTcpiTrecriiv eKelvto o e/c/cAiveTai. 
 e. ■iripLCT(7€ia : i. 21 Trao'ai' pinrapiav Kal Trepicrcreiav KaKias. 
 ireTCivos : iii. 7 Tracra <^vo-ts drjpioiv T£ Koi irercivusv Sap-d^iTat. 
 'TTYfyy] : iii. 1 1 jti^ri 17 irrjyrj /3pva to yXvKv ; 
 wqSdXiov : iii. 4 ra TrAota p,erdyeraL vtto iXa^iaTOV Tn/jSaXiov. 
 c. irt/cpos : iii. 11 to yXvKv koL to iriKpov, iii. 14 ^^Xov iriKpov. 
 TTLTTTO) : V. 12 Lva p,rj v'TTo Kpitriv iricrrjTi. 
 iriCTTevo) : ii. 19 (tv incrTivwi oti els ko'Th' o©eoS}...Kat Ta 8aip,ovta TTKTTeijov- 
 
 (Tiv, ii. 23 cmcrT«TJO-ev Se 'AjSpaap. T<f ®e<o. 
 TTLo-Tis : i. 3 TO SoKi/JiLOV T^s TTtWceos, i. 6 atTeiTM 8e ev TTKTTet, ii. 1 p.'^ ei* 
 
 ■7rpo(T<OTroX7jp,\j/iaK ^X^'''^ ''"^'' "■'""'■"') ^i' ^ 7rXovo"tot)s €V ttCcttu, ii. 14 Jav 
 
 TruTTiv Xiyrj TLi €)(€iv . . . p,r] BvvaTai yj TriaTii dSMxai avTov ; ii. 17 ^ ttIo'ti'S 
 
 V€Kpd, ii. Is (TV TTLOTTIV e.)(iLi . . .hu^OV T. 1Tl(TTLV ^UtpX^ T. £pyO)V KayO) 
 
 8et^«) Jk tSv ipyiov p-ov t. tticttiv, ii. 20 ir. apyrj, ii. 22 ■^ ir. irvvqpyu 
 T. epyots...eK t. epywv r/ tt. tTtXuwOrj, ii. 24 ouk ek TriWetos povov 
 iSiKauxiOri, ii. 26 ■^ TT. ;;^a)pts ipytov viKpd, V. 15 ij ev)(7j Trji ■KCCTTews. 
 
 TrXavdto : i. 16 p,r] irXavacrOe, V. 19 idv Tts ■TrXavrjOrj aTro r^s oXij^eias. 
 
 irXdvrj : V. 20 o hncTTpopa's dp-apTinXov e/c TrXdviys 68cB auToB. 
 
240 INDEX OF GREEK "WORDS 
 
 TrXrjOoi : V. 20 Ka\v\j/€i, ttX^Bo^ d/j/xpTLZv. 
 
 irXrjpoio '. ii. 23 iirXrjpwBrj fj ypatfi'q. 
 
 ■wX-qcriov \ ii. 8 dyair^creis Tov irXTjcriov (Tov (is creavTov, iv. 12 o Kpiviov tov 
 
 7rX7j(TlOV. 
 
 irXoLov : iii. 4 iSoi koL to. TrXola. 
 
 wAovcrtos : i. 10 {Kav^da-9o>) 6 wXovirtos ev ry raTreivuKrei, i. 11 o TrXovtrios 
 
 iv Tais TTopiiaii iJ,apav6ri<TtTai, ii. 5 e^eXe^aro Tovs TTTOixovs TrXovcriovi 
 
 iv TTicTTei,, ii. 6 ou;^ oi irXovcrioi KaTaSvvaa'Tevov<nv vfiSiv ; v. 1 aye vvv 
 
 ol TrXovcnoi KXavarare. 
 ttXovtos : v. 2 6 irXoCros «/xSv a-ea-rprev. 
 TTvevp.a : ii. 26 to crG/ua ^'^pis iri/eu/xaTos vcKpov, iv. 5 to 7rveS/ta o Karw- 
 
 Kt(r£v er ^/iiv. 
 TToSev : iv. 1 TroOev TroXefioi /cat ttoOcv /Aa;^at ; 
 ?rot£a) : ii. 8 Ka\(os Troiexre, ii. 1 9 xaXfis 7rot£is, ii. 1 2 ovTiai \aXc6T6 Kal ovtus 
 
 TroietT€, ii. 13 ™ /i'^ TTOi'^o-avTt e\eos, iii. 12 p-r] SwaTat otjk^ lAacas 
 
 TTOLTJa-ai. . .yXvKv Troifjaai vStop, iii. 18 tois Troicnxnv elpi^vrjv, iv. 13 ttoi^- 
 
 fTOp,ev €Ket eviauTov, iv. 15 irovrja-opfv tovto rj iKelvo, iv. 17 etSoTt o5v 
 
 KaXov TTOiciv Kai /u.^ ttoioui'TI apapria, iarriv, v. 15 Kav apapnas r) 
 
 -rreTTOi-qKiii'S. See p. cxciii. 
 c. TTOirjo'Li : i. 25 paKapioi iv rfj ■jroiijcret aiToC. 
 TToiriTr]? : i. 22 TroiijTai Xoyov, koX p-r] aKpoaToi povov, i. 23 dicpoaTijs Xoyou 
 
 Kat ov TTOLrjTTJs, i. 25 TTOtTjT^s ipyov, iv. 11 '7ron!]Trj'; v6p,ov. 
 iroiKtAos : i. 2 oTav irctpao'/ioTs TrepnreoT^Te ttoikiXois. 
 iroios : iv. 14 TTota yap ^ ^o)^ vp,u)v ; 
 TToXepim : iv. 2 paxc(r$€ koi TroX^pcLTe. 
 iroXepos : iv. 1 TToOev 7r6Xep,OL Koi pAxo-L ; 
 TToXts : iv. 13 TTOpevdoptOa fh rrivSe rrjv ttoXiv. 
 7roA,ijs : iii. 1 /^^ ttoXXoI SiBdcrKaXoi yivecrde, iii. 2 iroWa irraiopev diravm, 
 
 v. 1 6 7roA.ij io-;(ij£i Sirjcns. 
 a.c. TToXvcrirXayxyoi : v. 11 TroXvcnrXayxvos icrtv 6 Kupios. 
 ■Kovqpo';: ii. 4 Kpnal SiaXoyicrpSiv Trovripuiv, iv. 16 Traora Kaij^o"is Toiaurf/ 
 
 7rovr/pd. 
 7rop£ta : i. 11 £V rats 7ropeiai<s papavOi^creTat. 
 iropevopai : iv. 1 3 TropevcropiBa ets TijvSe T'qv 7rdA.1v. 
 iropvrj : ii. 25 PaayS ^ iropvrj. 
 
 TTous : ii. 3 tSv iroSoiv inserted after ^TroTrdSiov by some MSS. 
 7rp3,yp,a : iii. 16 ttSv <^ai;Xov irpaypa. 
 e. irpavTt]? '■ i. 21 iv TrpavTrjTL Se^acrOe tov \dyov, iii. 13 SetfaTO) Ta Ipya ev 
 
 irpavTrjTi o-oc^i'as. 
 irpi(TpvTepo<s : v. 14 toiis Trpea/SvTepov's t^s iKKX7](Tia%. 
 TTpo : V. 9 Trpo T<ov dvpSiV €(rTr]Kev, v. 1 2 Trpo TravTwv ;a^ 6/ivv£T£. 
 c. irpoip,os (TTpcui/xos) : v. 7 vctov irpoip.ov koi mpip.ov. 
 wpos : (with accusative) iv. 5 m-pos ^Oovov iTrnroBit, iv. 1 4 irpos dXtyov 
 
 tf>aivopivr]. See p. clxxii. 
 7rpoo-£ux^ : V. 17 ■jrpodevxxi TrpocrrjviaTO tov p-rj ^pi^ai. 
 irpotTf.vxpp^i '• V. 13 KaK07ra6£t Tis; ■7rpoo'£uj(£0'^ft), V. 14 irpotrev^dirOwa'av 
 
 iir' avTov, v. 16 Trpoa-cvxe<T6e read by some MSS. for ewxeo'Se, v. 17 
 
 irpocre.vxjj irpocrrjv^aTO, v. 18 TrdXiv TrpooTjv^aTO. 1 
 
 TrpotTKaXiu) : v. 14 irpofTKaXeo'da'Bia Toy's Trpi<TpvTipoy<5. 
 
INDEX OF GEEEK WOEDS 241 
 
 ax. irpoo-MTToXiy/xirTeo) : ii. 9 el Se irpocrcoTToXij/iHrTetTe, a/iapTiav ipyd^eaOe. 
 a. ■jrpocriairoX.rnjaj/ia : ii. 1 [iij iv irpoo-MTroXij/m^tats e)(£Te t7]V mcmv. 
 TTpdcrMTTov : i. 11 ^ eiirpeweta toO irpoa'unrov aiToS, i. 23 to irpocrufirov rijs 
 
 yevOTecos afiTo5. 
 ■jTpo^yffrq'i : V. 10 wo8ety/Aa Xa/Serc Toiis irpoi^^Tas. 
 ■jrpmLfji,oi : see irpoi/u.os. 
 
 TrpoJTov: iii. 17 17 avtoOev crocfyia wploTov fikv d-yvij icmv. 
 irpwToTOKOs : pp. xix, xxi. 
 TTTato) : ii. 10 (oorts) irTaicrg iv ivl, iii. 2 iroXXa TTTaiop.ev a.TravTe<;...eiTi.<;iv 
 
 Xdyo) ov TTTaUi k.t.X.. 
 iTTCo^ds : ii. 2 irrcop^os ev pvirapS, iarO^ri, ii. 3 tw ittw^w eimjre, ii. 5 tovs 
 
 TrTu^oiis T<p Kocr/juo, ii. 6 ■^Ttp.ao'aTe tov imoxdv. 
 TrCp : iii. 5 i^XtKov ■TrCp -rjXiKrpi vKrjv dvairret, iii. 6 ■^ yXScrcra TrSp, v. 3 
 
 (^dyerat rds crapKois is irBp. 
 
 P 
 "Paa'^S : ii. 25 'Pad/3 17 Trdpi/r;. 
 c.(£. parLiia : i. 6 kXvSiovi 6a\a,(T<rq<s pujri^o/j.ivM. 
 a.c. ptnrapia : i. 21 aTToOi/jieuoi. TrScav pvirapiav. 
 pinrapoi : ii. 2 ev pmrapS, iadrJTi. 
 
 %apauiO : V. 4 Sra Kvpiov ^a^adO. 
 
 crdpi : V. 3 6 tos ^dycTtti rds crdpKas v/xSiv. 
 
 creauToi) : ii. 8 dyairijo-cts tov irXijo-tov o-oij ois (reavTov. 
 
 cr^/iepov : iv. 13 o'^/u.epoi' ■^ aipiov. 
 
 c. <r^a) : V. 2 6 irXoSros v//.aiv o-eo-ijTrcv. 
 
 c.e. erijTd)8po)Tos : v. 2 rd ifidria (Tr/ro/SptaTa. 
 
 CKXijpds : iii. 4 utto crK\rjpS)V dvcjuoiv. 
 
 (TOfjiLa: i. 5 £t T6S XciTTETat o-o^ids, iii. 13 cv irpavTip-L aoi^tds, iii. 15 ouk 
 
 ttTTiv avrt) rj (70<^(a dvco^ev KaTep^fop.evr], iii. 17 ij aviaOev coc^id. 
 (T0<j>6i : iii. 13 co^os Kat eirurT^/id)!'. 
 e. o'lraraXdo) : v. 5 iTpv(j>T^(TaTe kol {(TiraraXi^a'aTe. 
 oTretpo) : iii. 18 Kapiro^ Se SiKaioo'vvijs ev tipT^vrj (77r€ipfTai. 
 oTTiXdo) : iii. 6 (17 yXSo'cra) 17 o-'irtXoCo-a oXov to <TmiJ,a. 
 (nrXdyxva : see p. 153. 
 CTTEvd^o) : V. 9 p,^ o'Tevd^£T£ Kar' dXXijXo)!/. 
 (Tri^avos : i. 12 tov o-Te^avov t^s ^(d'^s. 
 tTTrjpitfi) '• V. 8 (Trqpi^art Tds KapSias v/iSrv. 
 <rr6p,a : iii. 3 toiis ^oXtvoiis £ts Td uTOfiLaTa ^dWo/j-ev, iii. 10 ex toC aiToi) 
 
 (rTO/xaTos iiip)(eTai. 
 fTTpwrevu) : iv. 1 t<1v -^SovStv tS>v (TTpaTevo/xevrnv ev TOis p^eKeirar, 
 (TV : ii. 3, 18, 19, iv. 12 o-i! ; ii. 8, 18 o-oi; ; ii. 18 o-oi ; ii. 6, v. 8 v/^ieis ; ii. 6, 
 
 7,iv. 2, 10, 15 i/iSs; i. 3, 5, 21, ii. 2, 6, 16, iii. 14, iv. 1, 3, 7, 9, 14, 
 
 16, V. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 12 ip.S)v ; iii 13, iv. 1, 8, v. 3, 6, 13, 14, 19 uuiv. 
 crvKTJ : iii. 1 2 p.'q Svvarat irvKri eXaids irot'^o-oi ; 
 crvKov : iii. 12 1; a/iir fXo'S <TVKa ; 
 
 R 
 
242 INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 
 
 (Tt/AAa/j.jSavb) : i. 15 ^ iirWviJ.ia o-vAAajSoStra TiKTei. afjiapriav. 
 
 crvv : i. 1 1 6 ^Xios crvv rm Kowcovt. 
 
 (Tvvayiayi^ : ii. 2 elo-eXOTH el% (rvvayuyyrjv vfiZv. 
 
 (Tuvepyim : ii. 22 ^ irto-Tts cruvijpyet tois epyots avroB. 
 
 (Tfjioyri : v. 5 a)s ev rjfLipq. tr<^ay^s. 
 
 (ToU^o) : i. 21 Tov Swa/AEVov (Twcrai ras ij/v)(d9 v/jiSiv, ii. 14 jU'^ Suvarai ■^Trto-Tis 
 (TUMTai avTov ; iv. 12 o 8-i;i/a/i£V09 (rScrat Kal a7roA.e<rai, v. 15 ^ ^^X'^ ''^^ 
 irttTTCois (Tuxrei tov Ka/jivovra, v. 20 o-cocrft ij/v)(rjv ck Oavdrov. 
 
 o-ujua : ii. 16 Ta cTTiT^Seta toC (Tto/iaTos, ii. 26 to crZfjM )(<apli irvevfuiTos 
 vtKpov e<TTiv, iii. 2, 3, 6, oXof to (Tuip,a. 
 
 c. ToXai/TTiapio} : iv. 9 TaXanrcopijcraTE Kai irevOi^a'aTe. 
 
 Takai'TTuipia. : v. 1 oA.oAiJfovT€s e^ri Tais TaXatTruptats v/Jilov. 
 
 Tairavoi : i. 9 Kav^daOw 6 aSeXifMi 6 raireivos h/ t<3 vi^a, iv. 6 TaTretvots 
 
 SlStlKTlJ' ^dpiv. 
 TWTravom : iv. 10 Ta7r£ivo)6i;T£ h/umiov Tom TLvpiov. 
 TaTTiLVuxTK '• i. 10 o St irXovcTtos cv TJJ TaireivcitTet ovtoS. 
 c. Ta^iJS : i. 19 Ta^s eis to aKovo'ai. 
 T€ : iii. 7 Orjpimv t£ xat Trerctvuv, ipirtTuiv t£ xat ivaXianr. 
 TeXeios : 1. 4 epyov reXeiov i)(€TO) "va rjT€ TeA.£ioi, i. 17 ttSv Siiprj/Jia TcXeiov, 
 
 i. 25 vojxov TeX.eLov tov t^s eXeuSeptas, iii. 2 ovtos TcAetos dviyp. 
 Te\«id(o : li. 22 EK Trnv tpyatv fj irtVris iTeKeiioOr/. 
 TeXeo) : ii. 8 v6p.ov TeXetre ^cutiXikov. 
 TeXos : V. 11 TO TeXos Kvpiou etScTe. 
 TijXiKOVTos : iii. 4 Ta irXota TTyXiKaBra WTa. 
 
 TT]pe<j> : i. 27 ao-TrtXov lauToi' Tijpeiv, ii. 10 oo-tis oXov tov v6p.ov njpiyoT/. 
 TiKTio '• i. 15 ^ eTriOvjxia (TvXXa^ovcra tikt€i d/xapTtav. 
 
 Tlf/,lOi : V. 7 TOV Tip,LOV KapTTOV T^s y^s. 
 
 Tts : (sM6s«(Mi«twaZ) et tis i. 5, 23, 26, iii. 2 ; Idv tk ii. 14, 16, v. 19 ; eptiTts 
 &c. ii. 18, V. 13, 14; Ti i. 7 : {adjectival) airapxyv riva i. 18, dXXov 
 Tivd OpKOV V. 12. 
 
 Tts : Ti o^eXos; ii. 14, 16, tis cro(j>6^ ; SetfaTio iii. 13, cru tis ei; iv. 12. 
 See p. clxix. 
 
 TOtoiJTOS : iv. 16 Tracra Kav)(i]crK TOiavrrj. 
 
 Tpeis : V. 17 ei/taiiToiiSTpets. 
 
 b. Tpi<j>u> : V. 5 iOpeipaTe Tots Kap8ia$. 
 
 c. Tpairrj : i. 1 7 TpoTr^s diro<TKt'aap,a. 
 
 Tpo<j>i^ : ii. 15 Xe«ro/*evoi t^s i<^r]fi.ipov Tpo^^s. 
 
 c. rpo;(os : iii. 6 <^Xoyi^ovo-a tov rpoypv t^s ycvco-eios. 
 
 c. Tpv<f>dia : V. 5 eTpu^^erare em t^s y^s. 
 
 ijSoip : iii. 12 ovtc dXvKov yXuxu TTot'^O'ai vSwp. 
 
 u€Tos : V. 7 v€Tov irpolfiov koX oi/rip.ov, v. 18 6 oipavos vetov ISukcv. 
 
 Dios : 11. 21 dvEveyKas Icraax tov viov awoC. 
 
INDEX OF GEEEK WORDS 243 
 
 C. v\-r] : iii. 5 rjKiKOV irvp fjkiK-r)v vXrjV avaimi. 
 
 ijiActs : see <tv. 
 
 vTrdyia : ii. 16 virdyeTt kv eip-qvy. 
 
 v7rdp)(io : ii. 15 eav a8e\<^os y (l8eA,^ij yu/ij/ot VTrdp^^wa-iv. 
 
 inrep : v. 16 ev^euOe inrep dAA^Xon/^ 
 
 vTrepTi)4>avo<; : iv. 6 o Oeos virsp-q^dvovs avTirdtrcrerai. 
 
 vTTo : (mw^A ace.) ii. 3, v. 12 ; {with gen.) i. 14, ii. 9, iii. 4, iii. 6. See pp. 
 
 clxxii, clxxiii. ;.:'£,( 
 
 VTr6Seiyp,a : v. 10 un-dStiy/ia Xd^ere t^s KaKiyiraOiai. 
 ryiro84)(oiJ,ai : ii. 25 viroSe^afievri roiis ayyeAous. 
 inrofievu) : 1. 12 /la/captos dv^p os wo/uei/ei ireipatr/iov, V. 11 fjuiKapL^op,ev Toiis 
 
 UTTO/AEtVaVTaS. 
 
 VTrop.ovri : i. 3 ro SoKi/iiov t^s iri'cTTecos KaTepya^erai mrofwvi^v, i. 4 ^ vTrofwvrj 
 
 epyov TeXeiov exeru), V. 11 t'^v VTroft,ov7]V 'I(i);8 ^Kovtrare. 
 e. vTTOTToSiov : ii. 3 iTro to viroTToStov jltOU. 
 uTTOTacro'O) : iv. 7 worctyT^TC GUI' tc3 ©ecS. 
 ui^os : 1. 9 o TaTTiivos ev tw iJi^et airoB. 
 vij/ou} : iv. 10 (6 Kijptos) vxpiaa-u wynSs. 
 
 $ 
 
 (jidyofiai : see €(T&iu>. 
 
 <j>aiv(i> ■ iv. 14 wrpX's ij Trpo's oKiyov ^aivofLevt]. 
 
 (f)av\oi : iii. 1 6 irSv (ftavXov irpay/jui,. 
 
 fj>evy(o : iv. 7 dvTL(TTryre tZ hia^oXta, koX t^eu^erai a.<j>' v/jlSiv. 
 
 (jiOovio) (?) : iv. 2 <j}dove2T£ koI ^j^XoCre, cf. Add. 
 
 (j>66vos '■ iv. 5 Trpos <j>66vov iirurodci to Trvev/xa. 
 
 c. ^(Xia : iv. 4 ^ <f>L\ia tov Kocrpov. 
 
 <^tXos : ii. 23 </)tXos ©coB cKX'^drj, iv. 4 ^iXos toC k6(tp,ov. 
 
 c. ^Xoyt^o) : iii. 6 ^ yXScrtra <^Xoyi^ot)(ra tov rpoxov -rij's ycvecrceos Kai ^Xoyi- 
 
 ^o/tei/ij iiro T^s yeevvijs. 
 (fiovevio : ii. 11 /a'^ <f>ov€V(Ty]'S...<f>oV€V€K Si, iv. 2 ouk e^CTf ^oveutTe (?), v. 6 
 
 c^ov€U(raTe tov Socaiov. 
 <f)op£(i> : ii. 3 TOV <jiopovvTa t^v eo-^^Ta t^v Xa/Airpav. 
 c. <j)pL(T(r<a : ii. 19 Kat tcI Saip.6via. <j)pi(Tcrov<7iv. 
 (fivXr] : i. 1 Tats SciSeKa c^vXais. 
 <l>v<7K ■ iii- 7 Tracra ^uo-ts Sa/*d^€Tai tij <j>va-u rrj dvOpuiirLvrj. 
 
 <j>5li : i. 1 7 aTTO To9 TTOTpOS TUV ^(OTCOV. 
 
 yaipw : i. 1 'laKto/Sos Ta« SulScKa <J3vXaii ^aipeiv. 
 
 a.c. yaXivayoiyeo) : i. 26 /j,'^ X"^""''y"V'^'' yXfio-o-ov eauroC, iii. 2 SvvaTos X"^'" 
 
 vaywy^cai to <Tu>p.a. 
 vaXivos : iii. 3 tovs x"^'""^* ets to. aTopara j3dX\op,€V. 
 vapa : i. 2 Trao-av ^''P""' ^'rjCfurOi, iv. 9 ^ X°'P" *'* Kwrrjijieiav {p.€Ta- 
 
 (TTpa^rfTia). 
 xapis : iv. 6 (6i«) StSojo'tv \dpw. 
 
 B 2 
 
244 INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 
 
 X«p : iv. 8 KaBapuTwrt ■)(iipa's d/xapT<oXoi. 
 Xqpa : i. 27 hruTKeimtrOai optftavovi koL p^pas. 
 XoiVos : see p. 120. 
 
 Xoprd^m: ii. 16 OepfJiaiveirOe koi xoprd^earOe. 
 XopTos : i. 10 (Bs &v6oi xoprov, i. 11 i^pavev [tov xoprov. 
 c.d. xp'tl '■ iii. 10 ov xpi) ravra ovrto's yivetrOai. 
 
 Xpuj-Tos : i. 1 K.vpiov 'Iijo-oC XptoroS SoSXos, ii. 1 tov Kvpiov ■^fjuov 'I. X.V 
 a.c. )(pv<ToSaKTv\ios : ii. 2 av^p p^puo-oSaicTiJXios. 
 )(PV(t6s : v. 3 6 ^utros i/u-fiv KariWat. 
 X<i>pa : V. 4 Tu>v d/ii/o-avTMV ras X'^P^'S vfjJov. 
 
 \<i)pii '• ii. 18, 20 17 TTicTTK x<^P'S tZv €py<ov, ii. 26 xmpli ■jn'evfJMTOi...)((opli 
 epyav. 
 
 b. ij/dXX(o : V. 1 3 iv6vft.it ti's ; ij/aWeTio. 
 
 tl^evSio: iii. 14 ju^ tj/evSeaOe Kara t^s aXTjOeia^. 
 
 i^u^V • i- 21 TOV Swdfievov crZa'ai Tas tj/vxas vfiwv, v. 20 trwcrec ^u^^v 
 
 ^avaTou. 
 6. i/ru^iKos: iii. 15 croi^ia eirtyeios, ^vxikyj, Scu/iovimStj^. 
 
 n 
 
 (i> : ii. 20 w avdponre Keve. 
 
 mSe : ii. 3 cru KaOov u8e KaXus. See p. clxxx. 
 
 (US : 1. 10 MS avOos x,°P'''°'''> "• 8 dyaTT^o-eis tov irXtfcrCov crov <bs treain-ov, ii. 
 
 9 iX.eyxp/Ji.a'oi m Trapa^drai, ii. 12 outcds ttowite ws /ieXXovTes 
 
 Kpive(r0ai„ V. 3 tpdyerai. cas irBp. 
 tooTTcp : li. 26 &a-irep to a-to/ui, vcKpov, ourcos xai 17 TritTTi^. 
 oio-TC (lo-TC in better MSS.) : i. 19 aioTe, dSeX^ot, eo-roj iras k.t.\. 
 
INDEX OF SUBJECTS 
 
 Abraham, the recognized example of 
 
 Justification by Faith, 95-97, xc foil., 
 
 the Friend of God, 98. 
 Abstract nouns, plural use of, 73, 141, 
 
 clxx. 
 Acta Johannis, Ixii. 
 Acts, resemblances with this Epistle, 
 
 ii-v, Ixxxvii. 
 Adverbs, clxxx. 
 
 Agrapha in this Epistle, xliv, 46, 47. 
 Alliteration, cxcvii. 
 Alphaeus not the same as Clopas, xvi. 
 Animals, Jewish classification of. 111, 
 
 man's dominion over. 111, 112. 
 Aorist, civ, clxxv, 32, Add. 
 Apocalypse, resemblances between it and 
 
 our Epistle, cii. 
 Apocrypha, see ' Quotations. ' 
 Apostle, a term used of others besides 
 
 the Twelve, xiii. 
 Apparatus oritious, ocxxii-ccxxx, 2-27. 
 Apposition, regular and irregular, clxx, 
 
 140. 
 Arnold quoted on Confession, 222. 
 Article, use of, clvii-clxvii, clxxvii, 
 
 clxxxvi, in predication, clxi. 
 omission with epithet, 83, clxv, 
 
 with genitive, clxi-clxvi. 
 Asyndeton, 88, cxcix. 
 Athanasius includes our Epistle in his 
 
 Canon, xlix, and often refers to it by 
 
 name, Ixvi. 
 Athenagoras, Ixii. 
 Attraction of gender, 71, clxviii. 
 of case of relative, 80, clxix. 
 Augustine includes our Epistle in his 
 
 Canon, 4 ; quoted on Swearing, 154. 
 Authenticity, see ' Epistle.' 
 
 Baptism and Regeneration, 187. 
 Barnabas, references to our Epistle in, 
 
 Hii foil. 
 Bibliography, ocxv foil. 
 Blasphemy, 71 foil. 
 
 ' Brother of the Lord, ' pp. v-xxxvi. 
 
 never used for 'cousin' in G.T. or 
 in classical Greek, ix. 
 
 Bruckner, W., his argument as to the 
 date examined, cxxxv foil. 
 
 Bull quoted on ivcpyciadai, 165. 
 
 Butler on Temptation, 174 foil., on Pas- 
 sive Impressions, 191, on Resentment, 
 194 
 
 Canon of the early Church, xlvii foil. 
 
 Cases, use of the, clxx foil. 
 
 Christ, slight references to in our Epistle, 
 
 i, ii, 151. 
 the Coming of, 151, Resurrection of, 
 
 cxxxv. 
 Chrysostom, his references to the Epistle, 
 
 Ixvii. 
 Church organization, 99, 100, 157-163, 
 
 cxxi, cxxviii ; disorders in the, 205. 
 Clement of Alexandria refers to our 
 
 Epistle, Ixii foil. 
 Clement of Rome, his references to our 
 
 Epistle, li, combines the teaching of 
 
 James and Paul, li. 
 Clementine Homilies, references in, Ixv. 
 Clopas, according to Hegesippus, brother 
 
 of Joseph and father of Symeon, the 
 
 second bishop of Jerusalem, xvi foil, 
 by later writers identified with 
 
 Alphaeus, husband of Mary and father 
 
 of James, viii. 
 Codex Amiatinus, ccxxvi, 3-27. 
 Bobiensis, of James, ccxxviii. 
 Fuldensis, ccxxvi, 3-27. 
 Papiriensis, collated, ccxxvii. 
 Commandments, order of the Ten, 87. 
 Confession, auricular, not referred to by 
 
 St. James, 162 foil., mutual, 220. 
 Constitutiones Apostolicae, references in, 
 
 Ixvi. 
 Conversion, recognized by profane 
 
 writers, 189, blessing upon, 223. 
 
246 
 
 INDEX OP SUBJECTS 
 
 Corbey version compared with the Greek, 
 ecvi foil., cexxv, 3-27. 
 
 Date of the Epistle, cxix-cli. 
 
 Davidson Dr. S. , his argument as to the 
 
 date examined, cxxvi foil. 
 Deo volente (D. V.), 215. 
 Didachfe, resemblances between it and 
 
 our Epistle, liii. 
 Didymus commented on our Epistle, 
 
 Ixvii. 
 Dispersion (Diaspora), cx-cxiii, 30. 
 
 Ebionite, our Epistle written by an 
 anonymous, according to Davidson, 
 cxxx. 
 
 supposed leanings of St. Luke's 
 Gospel, cxxxi foil. 
 Ellipsis, clxxxi, of Be after iinna, 122, 
 
 140. 
 Epiphanian theory as to the Brethren of 
 
 the Lord, xviii-xxii, xxix. 
 Epiphanius included our Epistle in the 
 Canon, xlix, on the Perpetual Vir- 
 ginity, xxix. 
 Epistle of St. James, authenticity of, 
 xlvii-lxvii. 
 
 its relation to earlier writings, Ixviii- 
 Ixxxi. 
 
 its relation to the other books of the 
 N.T., Ixxxii-ciii. 
 contents, civ foil., doctrine, cviii. 
 to whom addressed, cx-cxviii. 
 not a translation from an Aramaic 
 original, ccix-ccxiv. 
 [See ' James ' and ' Date. '] 
 Essenes addi-essed by James, according to 
 Briickner, cxl. 
 
 supposed Essene leaning of James, 
 55n., 154. 
 
 Faith, St. James' view of, Ixxxix foil., 
 
 cxlv foil., 201 foil, 
 and Works, a subject of Jewish 
 
 controversy, 89. 
 Fanaticism, 195. 
 Farrar, his argument as to the date 
 
 examined, cxxv. 
 Firstfruits, 185. 
 Future tense, cliv, clxxv. 
 
 Gadara, 'a Syrian Attica,' xli foil., 
 ccix, Add. 
 
 Gender, changed from masc. to neut. in 
 later Greek, cliv. 
 
 Genitive, see ' Case. ' 
 
 God, giver of wisdom, 36, and of all good, 
 52 foil,, 185, tempts none, 47 foil., 181, 
 father of lights, 54 foil.. His will the 
 cause of our salvation, 57 foil.. His 
 righteousness, 61, His service, 71, 
 
 imparts His Spirit, 132 foil., in what 
 sense jealous, 131, 212. 
 Gregory Thaumaturgus refers to our 
 Epistle, ixv. 
 
 Hapax legomena, cxci. 
 
 Hearing and Speaking, 191 foil, 
 and Doing, 191, 204. 
 
 Hebrews, Epistle to, resemblances be- 
 tween it and our Epistle, ci. 
 
 Hegesippus on James, xxxviii. 
 
 Hellenism in Syria, xli, ccix. 
 
 Helvidian theory of the Brethren of the 
 Lord, xxii-xxxvi. 
 
 Hermas, borrowed from our Epistle, 
 Ivii-lxi, exliii foil. 
 
 Hexameter quoted by St. James, 53. 
 
 Hiatus, cliii. 
 
 Hieronymian theory as to the Brethren 
 of the Lord, viii-xviii. 
 
 Hypothetical sentences, see ' Sentence. ' 
 
 Ignatius, references to our Epistle, Ivi 
 
 foil. 
 Imperative, frequent use of, oeiii, see 
 
 ' Moods.' 
 Indicative, see 'Moods.' 
 Iniinitive, clxxxviii, see 'Moods.' 
 Inflexions, less usual, cliv, clxxxv. 
 Interrogative, frequent use of, cciii, 124, 
 
 to express a condition, 117, clxxix. 
 Irenaeus, references to our Epistle, Ixii. 
 Irony, 94, cciv. 
 
 James, as he appears in this Epistle, 
 i,ii. 
 
 as he appears in other parts of the 
 N.T., ii-v. 
 
 in uncanonical writings, xxxvi foil. 
 
 an Apostle, but not one of the 
 Twelve, x-xiv, 29, 
 
 not a disciple till after the Resurrec- 
 tion, xxxvi, xxxvii, xlv, xlvi. 
 
 the son of Joseph and Mary, xix- 
 xxxvi. 
 
 his knowledge of Greek, xli, xlii, 
 Ixxix-lxxxi, cliii-ccxi. 
 
 character, ccii-cciv, asceticism, 
 xxxviii. 
 
 sternness of, 216. 
 
 appearance of our Lord to, xxxvi. 
 
 grammar of, cliii-clxxxiv. 
 
 style of, clxxxv-cciv. 
 
 inexactness in logical opposition, 
 52 on iraaa Z6ais, 71 on airaToJi' KapSlav^ 
 in contrasting heterogeneous genitives, 
 69 on irotTjT^s tpyov, 
 
 resemblances between his speeches 
 and letters in the Acts and oui- Epistle, 
 ii-v. 
 
 [See 'Epistle,' 'Paul.'] 
 
INDEX OF SUBJECTS 
 
 247 
 
 Jealousy ascribed to God by Greeks, 
 
 Jews, Christians, 212. 
 Jerome, on the Brethren of the Lord, 
 
 viii-xviii. 
 on om" Lord's appearance to James, 
 
 xxxvi foil, 
 on the Canonicity of our Epistle, 
 
 xlix. 
 Job, 152, Ixx. 
 John, resemblances between his Gospel 
 
 and Epistles and our Epistle, Ixxxiv- 
 
 Ixxxvii. 
 Josephus, on the death of James, xxxix, 
 
 on the treatment of the rich in the 
 
 siege of Jerusalem, 148. 
 Judging, 213. 
 
 Justification, 95, Ixxxvii foil. 
 Justin Martyr, his reference to our 
 
 Epistle, Ixi. 
 
 Laotantius refers to our Epistle, Ixvi. 
 Law, perfect, 68, of liberty 68, 200, 
 
 cxxxiv. 
 Lightfoot on the Brethren of the Lord, 
 
 viii foil. 
 Luke, resemblances between his Gospel 
 
 and our Epistle, Ixxxiv. 
 
 Man created in the Divine image, 113, 
 
 114. 
 Marcus the Valentinian refers to our 
 
 Epistle, Ixii. 
 Mark, resemblances between his Gospel 
 
 and OUT Epistle, Ixxxiv. 
 Matthew, resemblances between his 
 
 Gospel and our Epistle, xliii foil., 
 
 ixxxii-lxxxiv. 
 Metaphor, use of in our Epistle, cxciv, 
 
 104, see 'Parable.' 
 Middle voice, 128, see 'Verb.' 
 Mill, Dr., on the Brethren of the Lord, 
 
 xxxiii. 
 Monotheism the boast of the Jews, 93, 
 
 cxxxiii. 
 Moods, clxxv, clxxxviii. 
 
 Negatives, clxxix. 
 New Birth, see ' Regeneration. ' 
 Number, plural for singular 90, 91, 
 clzix, singular for plural, 115, 138. 
 
 Oil used in healing the sick, 158 foil. 
 Order of words in sentence, clxxxiii foil., 
 
 clx, 60, 91, Add. 
 Origen, his witness as to the authenticity 
 
 of our Epistle, ixiii foil., cxliv foil., 
 
 on the covering of sin, 171. 
 Orthodoxy no guarantee of Salvation, 
 
 202. 
 Orthography, clii foil. 
 
 Parables, use of, xlii, see ' Metaphor. ' 
 
 Paronomasia a marked feature of St. 
 James' style, oxcv. 
 
 Participle, use of, clxxvi foil. 
 
 Paul and James, their resemblances and 
 differences, Ixxxvii-xcv, cxvii, 35, 204, 
 the former borrowed from the latter, 
 Ixxx viii foil., cxliii, his complex style, 
 cc. 
 
 Pauline trichotomy, 120. 
 
 Pearson on the Brethren of the Lord, 
 xix foil. 
 
 Perfect, prophetic, 143, see ' Tense.' 
 
 Person, use of first, by courtesy, 100. 
 
 Personification of the Tongue, 104 foil., 
 206, 207, of the Law 138, cf. ccii foil., 
 of Scripture, 131. 
 
 Peshitto version compared with Greek, 
 ccxi. 
 
 Peter and James, resemblances between, 
 xcv-ci, the former borrowed from the 
 latter, xcv foil., cxxxv-cxxxix, not 
 'slow to speak,' 193. 
 
 Pfleiderer, his argument as to the date 
 examined, cxlfoll. 
 
 Philo, resemblances between and our 
 Epistle, Ixxvi-lxxix, in the use of 
 words, e.g. jevetrts 109, rpoirli 56 foil. 
 
 Philosophers, Greek, their influence on St. 
 James, xli, Ixxix foil., ccix foil. 
 
 Place from which the Epistle was written, 
 cxviii. 
 
 Plans, making of, 214. 
 
 Plato, resemblances to our Epistle, Ixxix, 
 as to the comparison of God to the sun, 
 55, the royal law, 83, friendship of 
 God, Ixxx, the origin of war, 124. 
 
 Pleonasm, clxxxii. 
 
 Polycarp alludes to our Epistle, Ivii. 
 
 Poor and rich, 197 foil. 
 
 Prayer for external good, 218. 
 
 Preaching, 189. 
 
 Predicate, oblique, clxxxiii foil., see 
 'Article.' 
 
 Preposition, clxxiifoU., elxxxvii. 
 
 Priority of writing, how to be deter- 
 mined, cxliii. 
 
 Priscillian, his quotations from our 
 Epistle, ccxxvi, 3-27. 
 
 Pronoun, olxvii, position of, clx, 60, Add., 
 see 'Pleonasm.' 
 
 Quarrels, cause of, 211. 
 Question, double, 104, see 'Interroga- 
 tive' and 'Pronoun.' 
 Quotations from O.T., Ixviii-lxxiii, 95 
 foil., 135, often inexact, xcvii foil., 
 cxxxix, 68, 131, 170. 
 from Apocrypha, Ixxiii-lxxv. 
 in St. James compared with those in 
 Peter, xcvii foil., cxxxix. 
 
248 
 
 INDEX OF SUBJECTS 
 
 Rahab, why selected as example of faith, 
 
 98. 
 Regeneration, 186 foil. 
 Repentance, externals of, 213. 
 Repetition, see ' Paronomasia.' 
 Resentment, 194 foil. 
 Respect of Persons, 197. 
 Rhetorical figures, cxciii foil. 
 Rhythm, cxoix. 
 Rich addressed in this Epistle were Jews 
 
 or Christians, not heathen, oxiii foil., 
 
 42, 82, 142. 
 Riches, danger of, 199. 
 
 Salome, wife ofZebedee and auntof Jesus, 
 
 XT. 
 
 Salutation, forms of, 30, 31 . 
 
 Self-deception, 196. 
 
 Seneca, see 'Stoics.' 
 
 Sentences, compound, clxxviii, excix. 
 
 Sick, visitation of the, 219. 
 
 Sins which cry to heaven, 146. 
 
 covered by the conversion of the 
 sinner, 168-172, 223. 
 
 Slowness of speech commended, 192. 
 
 Soden von, argument as to date examined, 
 cxxx foil. 
 
 Solidarity of Duty, 200. 
 
 Speculum, ccxxvi, 3-27. 
 
 Speech, use and abuse of, 205. 
 
 Stoics, resemblances between their 
 writings and our Epistle, Ixxx foil., 
 as to the mirror 66, true freedom 68, 
 doing and knowing 69, solidarity of 
 virtues and vices 86, Ixxx, true riches 
 and true royalty Ixxx, friendship of 
 God 98, man's likeness to God and 
 authority over animals 111, Ixxxi, 
 origin of war 124, indwelling Spirit 
 Ixxxi ; terminology borrowed by 
 St. James, see iinrvx^tv in Addenda 
 to p. 128, ■jrcpmiirreiv 32 and Greek 
 Iiidex, (piffis 110. 
 
 Subject, understood, clxxxi, 149. 
 
 of infinitive pleonastically ex- 
 pressed, clxxxi. 
 
 and predicate distinguished by use 
 of the article, clxi. 
 
 Swearing forbidden, 153 foil., 217. 
 
 Symeon, name given to Peter in only one 
 
 passage of the Acts, iii. 
 son of Clopas, cousin of James, xvii. 
 Synagogue of the Jews used by early 
 
 Christians, 76, also a name for Christian ■ 
 
 assemblies, 76. 
 Syntax, clvi foil. , clxxxvi foil. 
 
 Teaching, responsibility of, not to be 
 
 lightly assumed, 205 foil. 
 Temptation, 175-184, comes from sell 
 
 not from God, 181, stages of, 184. 
 Tenses, cliv, clxxv, clxxxvii, 84. 
 Tertullian acquainted with our Epistle, 
 
 Ixiv foil., 163 foil., quoted in reference 
 
 to the Perpetual Virginity, xxvii foil. , 
 
 to covering of sin 170. 
 Testament, Old, see 'Quotations.' 
 
 New, other books of, compared with 
 
 our Epistle, Ixxxii-ciii. 
 Testamenta XII Patriarcharum, re- 
 semblances between and onr Epistle, 
 
 liv foil. 
 Theophilus acquainted with our Epistle, 
 
 Ixii. J f^ 
 
 Tongue, abuses of, 205. "^ 7^ 
 
 Trial, see 'Temptation.' 
 Tubingen School, their theory, axioms 
 
 and method, exlvii foil. 
 
 Unction, Extreme, history of, 158 foil., 
 218 foil. 
 
 Verb, intransitive used as transitive and 
 V.V., clxxv, 116, 168, see 'Moods' 
 and 'Tenses.' 
 
 Voice, clxxiv. 
 
 Vocabulary of St. James, cxc-cxciii, uses 
 the same word in different senses, 202. 
 
 Weiss, ed. of St. James, Add. 
 
 Wisdom, two kinds of, 208. 
 
 Word, the, what St. James meant by it, 
 189, 191, its influence on Conduct, 204. 
 
 Wordsworth, Bp. J., on the original 
 language of the Epistle, ccv foil. 
 
 World and worldliness, 210 foil. 
 
 Wrath of man works not God's righteous- 
 ness, 194 foil. 
 
 ItmTTARD CLAY AND SONS, LIMITED, LONDON AND BUNOAA'