• Biblica
  • Filología Neotestamentaria
  • Resources
  • BSW Community
RSS

Share Biblica

  • Instructions for Contributors
  • Subscribe to Biblica or Send books for review
  • Index by Authors
  • Index by Biblical Books
  • FAQ
  • Font Instructions
  • Vol 91 (2010)
  • Vol 90 (2009)
  • Vol 89 (2008)
  • Vol 88 (2007)
  • Vol 87 (2006)
  • Vol 86 (2005)
  • Vol 85 (2004)
  • Vol 84 (2003)
  • Vol 83 (2002)
  • Vol 82 (2001)
  • Vol 81 (2000)
  • Vol 80 (1999)
  • Vol 79 (1998)
Home  >  Biblica  >  Vol 88 (2007)  > 

    Huub van de Sandt, «James 4,1-4 in the Light of the Jewish Two Ways Tradition 3,1-6», Vol. 88 (2007) 38-63

    The author of the Letter of James accuses his readers (Jas 4,1-4) of being responsible for war, murder and adultery. How are we to explain this charge? This paper shows that the material in Jas 1,13-21; 2,8-11 and 4,1-4 is closely akin to the teknon section in Did 3,1-6. The teknon section belonged to the Jewish Two Ways tradition which, for the most part, is covered by the first six chapters of the Didache. Interestingly, Did 3,1-6 exhibits close affinity with the ethical principles of a particular stream of Rabbinic tradition found in early Derekh Erets treatises. James 4,1-4 should be considered a further development of the warnings in Did 3,1-6.

    TAGS
    • Jewish Two Ways
    • ethical principles
    • Page 38/63
    • 38
    • 39
    • 40
    • 41
    • 42
    • 43
    • 44
    • 45
    • 46
    • 47
    • ›
    James 4,1-4 in the Light of the Jewish Two Ways Tradition 3,1-6 The close resemblances between the different versions of the Two Ways (including Did 1–6, Barn 18–20 and the Doctrina Aposto- lorum) (1) are generally explained in modern research by their — direct or indirect — dependence upon an earlier Jewish Two Ways document which is no longer known to us. The late David Flusser and I recently attempted to reconstruct this original teaching. Because this source was in Greek, the document may also be called the Greek Two Ways (2). For our purpose, it is important to establish that this (hypothetical) version generally reflects the precise wording of the Two Ways in the Didache, except for the Christianised sections, 1,3b–2,1 and 6,2-3 (3). In this paper, therefore, the Christian Didache will be followed excluding those parts and details differing from the hypothesized Greek Two Ways. In the first century of our era, the doctrine of the Two Ways was employed within Christian circles in pre-baptismal instruction (4). This is explicitly stated in Did 7,1 in a verse that follows right after the rendering of the Two Ways section: “Concerning baptism, baptize as follows: after having previously said these things (tau'ta pavnta (1) There are also later recensions of the Two Ways tradition which include church orders, letters, and monastic writings. These recensions are represented by the Apostolic Church Order, the Epitome of the Canons of the Holy Apostles, the Life of Shenoute, the Ps. Athanasian Syntagma Doctrinae, and the Fides CCCXVIII Patrum. (2) For the above information and a reconstruction of the Greek Two Ways (GTW), see H. VAN DE SANDT – D. FLUSSER, The Didache. Its Jewish Sources and its Place in Early Judaism and Christianity (CRI III/5; Assen – Minneapolis 2002) 112-139. (3) In the Letter of Barnabas and the Doctrina Apostolorum there are no passages that parallel the materials in Did 1,3a–2,1 and Did 6,2-3. For further details on the establishment of an earlier form of the Two Ways and its versions in early Christian literature, see VAN DE SANDT – FLUSSER, The Didache, 55-80; 238- 270. (4) By this I do not mean, however, that the use of the Two Ways teaching was solely restricted to catechetical instruction prior to baptism. That it was used otherwise as well is shown by its insertion into the Letter of Barnabas, which was written to baptized Christians.

Back to top

  • About us
  • Contacts
  • Privacy Policy
  • RSS

Copyright © 2010 Weboost srl (unless specified).