James, Volume 48 by Ralph P. Martin;

Author:Ralph P. Martin; [Martin, Ralph P.]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: REL006070 Religion / Biblical Commentary / New Testament
Publisher: HarperCollins Christian Publishing (3 users)

Notes

a. Reading τὸ ὄθελος with the best witnesses. The omission of τό (B C* 102) is supported by Ropes, who regards the text of A as having been brought into conformity with 2:16, which has τὸ ὄθελος: cf. 1 Cor 15:32, where also τό is omitted by D F G. The meaning is unaffected.

b. The punctuation is in dispute. Specifically, we cannot be sure where the objector’s quotation ends. SeeForm/Structure/Setting.

c. This (reading χωρίς) is the text of Nestle-Aland26, supported by A B. There is a weaker yet well-attested alternative in the TR, ἐκ τῶν ἔργων σου; the vg has sine, which has produced the AV/KJV translations “without” in spite of the TR’s ἐκ. Z. C. Hodges, “Light on James Two,” 345, wishes to defend the TR as the majority reading on the ground of its wide distribution and on the principle of lectio difficilior. R. W. Wall, “Interlocutor and James,” has reopened the debate, concluding that while the uncial support favors the critical reading, it does not do so decisively, and the issue of a correct reading must be decided on internal grounds, namely, that in order to account for the severity of the rebuke (in v 20: ὦ ἄνθρωπε κενέ) it is necessary to have the objector say more than the simple statement that there are two competing claims to authentic religion: You have faith, I have deeds (v 18a). For Wall, this is followed by an interlocutor’s second remark which is not tautological, that there are two beginning points of “true religion” (1:27)—faith and deeds—that are “not only mutually exclusive; they have no logical interplay as well.” The upshot of the objector’s position is that “believers” may choose to have either faith or works and still be classed as true to religion. Hence the parallelism ἐκ τῶν ἔργων . . . ἐκ τῶν ἔργων (accepting TR). The interlocutor also is responsible for the affirmation καλῶς ποιεῖς, lit., “You do well,” which he borrows from James’ earlier remark (2:8, καλῶς ποιεῖτε) about obedience to the royal law. He also cites the monotheistic formula as the epitome of his faith, seeking James’ concurrence along with what he regards as the essence of faith. According to this reconstruction, based on the text-critical issue, James’ reply begins in v 20 with a stinging invective. But it is still possible to claim that the flow of the discussion requires the interlocutor’s words to include more than v 18a, but to reject TR’s witness, which is weakly attested, as Ropes, 209, has shown.

Among translators the quotation marks usually close with v 18a, but Williams, The New Testament, offers an interesting exception. In the 1950 edition the quotation ends with v 18a, but this is changed in the 1986 edition to include the whole of the verse in the speaker’s discourse.

Vv 18–19b are a unit arranged in chiastic pattern (Donker, “Der Verfasser . . . sein Gegner,” 236; but overlooked by Burge, “And Threw Them Thus”), and should not be split between separate speakers. This

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.