Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical
It is only logical. Galatians was written around 55-60 AD. James was written around 50 AD. Galatians mentions Judaizers coming from James circa 55-60 AD. Therefore, James, written in 50 AD most likely contains a Judaistic influence.
Yes, James witnessed the resurrected Christ. But he did not receive the gospel that was given to Paul. Paul says in Galatians 1:11-12 that he did not receive the Gospel from man but from God, Paul received a new gospel. The others, including James, did not. Paul received a special commission and calling from God to take his gospel to the Gentiles. James did not.
That is why the book of James and Paul's writings have a distinctly different flavor. That's why almost half of the books of the NT are Paul's and not James's. This is testament to the fact that Paul's books were more widely read and accepted in the early church, than Jame's.
If we look into the history of the new testament Canon, we can find that James was one of the disputed books. That is, there were a number of believers who did not think it should be part of the Canon.
|
So then the timeline is the proof.
Here are the relevant passages from Galatians:
Gal 1:18Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas, and tarried with him fifteen days. 19But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord’s brother. 20Now touching the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not. 21Then I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia. 22And I was still unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea which were in Christ: 23but they only heard say, He that once persecuted us now preacheth the faith of which he once made havoc; 24and they glorified God in me.
Gal 2:9and when they perceived the grace that was given unto me, James and Cephas and John, they who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship, that we should go unto the Gentiles, and they unto the circumcision; 10only they would that we should remember the poor; which very thing I was also zealous to do.
11But when Cephas came to Antioch, I resisted him to the face, because he stood condemned. 12For before that certain came from James, he ate with the Gentiles; but when they came, he drew back and separated himself, fearing them that were of the circumcision. 13And the rest of the Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that even Barnabas was carried away with their dissimulation.
The first passage says that Paul was a relative unknown at that time, certainly this was long before he wrote the epistle to Galatians, so we can eliminate that. But the second passage refers to a time 14 years later.
To be fair to James this passage is a specific rebuke to Peter and Barnabas, and is less clear about the influence of James. Still, I am willing to say that "coming from James" is enough to say that he was a Judaizer at this point.
What was the rebuke? The rebuke was that Peter's dissimulation was evidence of showing partiality. Peter and Paul's visits to Jerusalem were to prove that the gospel was open to both Jews and Gentiles. That was decided. To then show partiality between Jews and Gentiles was hypocrisy.
This very same rebuke shows up in the book of James where James says that "do not have the faith of the Lord Jesus with respect of persons" (i.e. those who came from James) and that "showing partiality" is evil.
Therefore the logical person would agree that both Peter and James had received the rebuke given to Peter, embraced it, and put it into each of their epistles (Peter's epistle commends Paul's epistles). It is also very reasonable that Paul would want James to write the epistle first, since if he were to write Galatians first it could cause a schism in the church. It is also very reasonable that after James writes his epistle Paul writes Galatians to demonstrate a oneness among the ministers of Christ.