386 Introduction

Now, Charles, who may justly be claimed as our leading authority on all that concerns the Pseudepigrapha, has shown conclusively in his edition of the Testaments (1908) that this work was written originally in Hebrew in 109-106 B.c.; the Jewish additions he regards as belonging to the years 70-40 B.c., and in its Greek form it appeared “at the latest’’ in 50 Α.Ρ.; the thirty Christian interpola- tions (approximately) belong probably to different dates, but scarcely any of these come into consideration in the present connection (see pp. L.-Ixv.); instances of St. fames probably utilising the Testaments are given on p. xc. Or, to mention another instance, the similarities between St. James and the Epistle to the Corinthians of Clement of Rome are likewise pointed to as a proof of the early date of St. James, because Clement (end of first century and beginning of second century) was influenced by it; but the most striking part of this similarity is the way in which each deals with the subject of faith and works. This subject was, however, one of the funda- mental causes of difference between Jews and Christians at all times (indeed, the minds of thinking Jews were exercised by it before the Christian era), and it is dealt with in a number of other works of various dates—Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, Testa- ment of Abraham, Apoc. of Baruch, 2 (4) Esdras, Book of Enoch, and often in the later Jewish literature ;—therefore it is difficult to see why St. fames necessarily influenced Clement on a subject which was so much in evidence in a large variety of writings ; and the statement of Mayor, that ‘‘the fact that Clement balances the teaching of St. Paul by that of St. James is sufficient proof of the authority he ascribes to the latter’’ (p. lii.), seems a little too strong, especially as St. James is not mentioned by name in Clement. Similari- ties are also found between St. Fames and pseudo-Clement, the Didache, the Epistle of Barnabas, the Epistles of Ignatius, Hermas, Justin Martyr, the Epistle to Diognetus, Irenzeus, Theophilus, Ter- tullian, Clement of Alexandria, and the Clementine Homilies; all these authorities, ranging from the first century to the former half of the third, are often pointed to as showing their recognition of our Epistle, because they show the marks of its influence upon them. The possibility of such indebtedness is not denied, but in the majority of cases it cannot be said that the similarities prove it; nor do they necessarily prove the canonicity, and still less the authorship of our Epistle, especially as not in one single instance is the Epistle mentioned by name in the authorities mentioned above. The earliest writer, as far as is known, who refers to the Epistle definitely as Scripture, and as having been written by St. James, is Origen