The Literature and History of New Testament Times

mes 2:14-26. In that passage, some of the same terms appear as are prominent in connection with the great Judaistic controversy in which Paul was engaged fr

roversy arose, (2) during that controversy or while it was still fre

ames. It can treat the epistle as authentic. It has furthermore the advantage of explaining the coincidences between James 2:14-26 and Rom., ch. 4. For if the epistle was w

does not really contradict them, but is in perfect harmony with them. He has therefore gone out of his way in order to introduce a formal contradiction of the great apostle to the Gentiles although there is no real contradiction of meaning at all! What could he possi

g of Paul, why did James not say so? Why did he not distinguish Paul clearly from his misinterpreters? Instead he has indulged uselessly in a formal contradiction of Paul, and has in refutation

upon which Gentiles were to be received into the Church. In A. D. 62 this question had recently been the subject of bitter controversy. At that time n

tten either before the Judaistic controve

e first head of the Jerusalem church. This is of itself sufficient to refute the late dating. For the procedure of the supposed falsifier is quite incomprehensible. He has chosen James as the a

contradiction of Paul as appears in James 2:24? In a writer of A. D. 150 we should have had formal agreement with Paul and material disagreement; in the Epistle of James we have formal disagree

Abraham offered the most obvious example in all the Scriptures. It is possible, too, that the faith and works of Abraham had in pre-Christian Jewish circles already been the subject of controversy. Furthermore,

t the time of the Apostolic Council. In the second chapter of the epistle, James has used the same terms that became prominent in that controversy, but