King James Bible: New Testament and Books of Wisdom with bookmark, flexible thermal vinyl binding - King James translation (1611) into Russian. Exposing the Fraud in the King James Version What Makes the King James Version Different

I personally use several translations of the Bible in my study and preaching—including the King James Version. The Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew and partly in Aramaic. The New Testament was originally written in Koine Greek. All of the original manuscripts have been lost, but thousands of very early copies still exist. All of them are of great interest to scholars creating modern translations. If the Scriptures were preserved in their original languages, it is unlikely that most people would be able to read them. To date, the entire Bible has been translated into 235 languages, the New Testament into 290, and portions of the Bible into more than 1,232 different languages.

While all original Scriptures were inspired by God, none of their copies, translations, or versions were or are. This is true of all English versions, even the beloved King James Version.

King James Version

The King James version was created by 48 Anglican and Puritan scholars who completed it by 1611 CE. King James I authorized it for public and private reading. It was basically a revision of the 1602 C.E. Bishops Bible. The King James Version has been revised many times over the centuries, the most famous of which was in 1769 and the most recent in 1980. Very few people would be able to read the first King James Version of the Bible today.

Many of the words contained in the popular King James Version are now archaic and therefore difficult for the modern reader to understand. And also, beginning in 1611, many other ancient Greek manuscripts containing the entire Bible were discovered and used to create new versions of translations.

Although some of the later versions are not completely reliable, I personally believe that a sincere seeker with a pure heart who can read and understand the text correctly will be able to learn God's truth from any version, even the weakest.

EXPOSING A FALSE IN THE KING JAMES TRANSLATION - This is just one of many facts pointing to a serious mistake made in the translation of the text of the New Testament, which, in fact, became the cause of many different false teachings in Christianity and, as a result, directed many generations of believers on the wrong path.

I will briefly, in my own words, share what I heard in the teachings of Michael Rude "The Code of Jonah and the 70 weeks of Daniel." Michael Roode is a well-known scholar, author, and popular TV presenter who lives in Israel but has a ministry in the United States. He has established himself as one of the best experts on the biblical calendar. Not only teachers of many Bible schools in America study with him, but also ministers of the Word from other countries of the world. Many scientists in Israel listen to his opinion, with whom he maintains a close relationship.

So, here is what Michael Rud claims.

***It is noteworthy that the translators of the King James Bible did not capitalize the words Sabbath or Pesach (Passover - Easter in the Russian Bible), although these are proper names and should be capitalized. And only in one place, in the Book of Acts 12:4, the word Passover (Easter) is written, as expected, with a capital letter; however, in this place the Greek word πασχα 3957 "Easter" is translated into English as Easter - in honor of the pagan goddess of reproduction and fertility Ister (Astarte, Ishtar, etc.) It turns out that they write a pagan holiday with a capital letter, and God - with little. Thus, they did NOT consider the Feasts of the Lord worthy to be written with a capital letter.

John 6:3-5 “Jesus went up to the mountain and sat there with his disciples. 4 Passover[!!!], the feast of the Jews, was approaching. 5 When Jesus lifted up his eyes and saw that a multitude of people were coming towards him, he said to Philip, “Where can we buy BREAD[!!!] to feed them?”

This is the story of feeding 5,000 people with five loaves of bread and two fish, which, according to the traditional gospels of Matthew, Luke, and John, took place 18 days before Sukkot, the Feast of Tabernacles [for exact counts of days, see the aforementioned teaching of Michael Roode].

Now let's turn to Scripture and examine the above verse. It is known from the Bible that before Passover, already by 14 Nisan, in accordance with God's Commandments, nothing leavened (yeast) should have been in the houses of Israel, since the Week of Unleavened Bread was coming. During these 7 days, the Torah forbids eating leaven (Exodus 12:15; Exodus 23:15). We also know that three times a year, according to the commandment of Yahweh, all males over 13 years of age had to appear before the Sovereign Lord in Jerusalem, on Mount Moriah, to celebrate His Holidays. And one of these three Feasts is Passover, during which the Passover lamb was sacrificed (Exodus 23:17; Deuteronomy 16:16).

What do we see in John 6:3-5? It says: "EASTER [!!!], the Jewish holiday (i.e. Pesach) was approaching." But at the beginning of chapter 6, verse 1 tells us that “Jesus went to the other side of the Sea of ​​Galilee, [in] [near] Tiberias.” Come on, how is that?! It turns out that Yahushua did NOT go to celebrate Passover in Jerusalem??? And what does he do instead? He feeds 5,000 people with barley leaven at a time when all leaven had to be destroyed!!! But even this is not enough: Yeshua goes... to the synagogue of Capernaum (John 6:59), where a lot of people teach - the same people who, like Yahushua, should have already been in Jerusalem by that time for the celebration of Pesach! On top of that, in the synagogue, He teaches them about the resurrection from the dead, which is a traditional theme of sermons before the onset of Yom Trua (Feast of Trumpets). Then, three days later, He feeds 4,000 more men (except women and children) who also violate the Torah by not coming to the Feast in Jerusalem, and again, He feeds them with YEAM Bread! Blimey! Something is not right here... Further - more: we read that in the same period of time the Pharisees and Sadducees came to Him from Jerusalem to Galilee to express their dissatisfaction with His violation of the traditions of the elders. A natural question arises: didn't these Pharisees and Sadducees also have to be in Jerusalem to celebrate Pesach???

Of course, a person who is ignorant of the Torah, who is not familiar with the instructions of Yahweh about the Feasts of the Lord, far away both in time and according to the traditional church teaching from the everyday life of the Israeli people of God, is not aware of such details, and hardly anyone uninitiated would have seen the discrepancies found here. .

BUT! If Yahushua breaks the Torah, then He CANNOT BE the Messiah of Israel! If He does NOT keep the Commandments of Yahweh, adds or subtracts something from them, then, according to the definition of Yahweh Himself, given in the Torah through Moshe, He is a FALSE prophet, endowed with the occult power to perform signs and wonders to deceive us! Here's what Scripture says about it:

>> Deuteronomy 13:1-5 "If a PROPHET or a dreamer rises up among you and presents you with a SIGN or a WONDER, 2 and it will come to pass[!] that SIGN or WONDER of which he spoke to you, and he will also say: "Let us follow the gods others whom you do not know, and we will serve them, "- 3 then DO NOT HEAR [!] the words of this PROPHET, or this dreamer; !], love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul; 4 Follow the Lord your God and fear Him, OBSERVE His COMMANDMENTS[!] and listen to His voice, and serve Him, and to Him cleave; 5 but the PROPHET of that or that dreamer must be SUPPOSED to DEATH, because he urged you to depart from the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt and delivered you from the house of slavery, desiring to deceive you from the path (Torah) in which he commanded you go, the Lord your God; and [so] DESTROY EVIL[!] from among you."

Friends, God is not joking! So who was Yahushua: the Messiah or a false prophet? Who do we follow and in whom do we believe? The answer is unequivocal: He was the True Son of God, Who came from the Father, Messiah Yahushua! And He did not sin against the Father in anything, being obedient in the Law of Yahweh, and obedient unto death! Why, then, does the passage of John 6:3-5 present Him to us in such a distorted way? To understand this, let's turn to the primary sources - artifacts in Greek. It is important to note that there are over 225,000 translations of the Gospel texts, while there are just over 5,000 Greek fragments themselves. So, in the King James Bible, in the passage we are considering, in verse 4 it says: [!] Passover..." And although most translations from the Greek also repeat this verse, there are others that testify otherwise. One of them is the 27th Nestle-Aland edition of the Greek text, which is recognized as the most accurate of all sources. In ancient Greek manuscript No. 476 it reads as follows:

"Jesus went up the mountain and sat there with his disciples. Jesus, raising his eyes and seeing that a multitude of people were coming to him, said to Philip: where can we buy bread to feed them?"

What is missing? In the original text of the 4th verse: "The PASCH, the holiday of the Jews, was approaching" - NO !!! Absolutely not! Therefore, these words were added by someone. What was the purpose of inserting such a provocative reference to Easter into the original text of the Gospels? Nothing else comes to mind, as soon as - with the aim of perverting the Truth by distorting the chronology of events and false evidence of the Messiah. And this is a daring crime against the King and His people, because, by doing so, they presented the world with a completely different messiah, who did NOT observe the Feasts of Yahweh and violated the Law!

As I said at the beginning, this is just one of the many tricks ... There are many more of them, and they literally stand on end! There is a definite purpose in all of this, which was to adjust the term of Yahushua's ministry to 3.5 years by adding separate phrases to the original text. Another Passover was added to the New Testament. In fact, Yahushua's ministry on Earth lasted exactly 490 days, which is exactly 70 weeks. Why did they need these 3.5 years? To establish another vicar between God and people - another "messiah" sitting on a throne in the Vatican.

Emperor Constantine got rid of everything Jewish, including the Jewish Messiah Himself, by teaching God's people to interpret the Jewish Scriptures through pagan eyes. He flooded Christianity with all sorts of pagan traditions. And later, anyone who refused to obey them was executed.

But now the days of the restoration of the Truth and the True Gospel have come, for the great deception of Satan is that we all blindly followed this FALSE messiah for 17 centuries. However, Yahweh always had a remnant of those who did not bow to the Baals and tremblingly kept the Truth. And now we, the generation of the last time, have been given the baton of protecting and conveying the purity of the Gospel, and the mission of helping those who are looking for that very narrow path leading to Salvation. The only pity is that so far only a few are looking for this path.

Commentaries (introduction) to the entire book of "James"

Comments on Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION TO JAMES

The Epistle of James only after a stubborn struggle was included in the New Testament. But even after he was ranked among the Holy Scriptures, he was looked at with suspicion and restraint. As early as the sixteenth century, Martin Luther would have gladly excluded it from the New Testament.

DOUBT OF THE CHURCH FATHERS

In the writings of the Fathers of the Church, the Epistle of James occurs only at the beginning of the fourth century. The first collection of New Testament books was the Muratorian canon, dating from about the year 170, and the Epistle of James was not included in it. The teacher of the Church Tertullian, who wrote in the middle of the third century, very often quotes the Scriptures, including 7258 times - the New Testament, but not a single time the Epistle of James. The Epistle of James is mentioned for the first time in a Latin manuscript: which is called the Codex Corbeiensis and dates from about 350; it was attributed to James, son of Zebedee, and was included not among the generally recognized books of the New Testament, but in the collection of theological treatises written by the fathers of the early Christian Church. Thus, the Epistle of James was accepted, however, with certain reservations. The first quotation from the Epistle of James was quoted verbatim by Illarius of Poitiers in a treatise entitled On the Trinity, written about 357.

But if the Epistle of James became known so late in the Church, and its acceptance was associated with reservations, how then was it included in the New Testament? Of great importance in this belongs to Jerome, one of the outstanding teachers of the Church (330-419), who without the slightest hesitation included the Epistle of James in the revised translation of the Bible, which he edited, called the Vulgate. But he had some doubts. In his book Concerning Famous Men, Jerome wrote: "James, who is called the brother of the Lord, wrote only one epistle, one of the seven epistles of the council, which some people say was written by someone else and attributed to James." Jerome fully accepted this epistle as an integral part of Holy Scripture, but he understood that there were certain doubts as to who was its author. All doubts were finally dispelled when Augustine fully recognized the Epistle of James, not in the least doubting that this James was the brother of our Lord.

The Epistle of James was recognized rather late in the Church: for a long time it stood under a question mark, but its inclusion by Jerome in the Vulgate and its recognition by Augustine secured its full recognition, after some struggle.

SYRIAN CHURCH

It can be assumed that the Syrian church should have been one of the first to accept the Epistle of James, if it really was written in Palestine and really came out from the pen of our Lord's brother, but the same doubts and hesitations existed in the Syrian church. The official Syriac translation of the New Testament, which the Syriac Church adheres to, is called Peshito and occupies the same place in the Syrian Church as it occupies in the Roman Catholic Church Vulgate. This translation was made in the year 412 by Rabulla, Bishop of Edessa, and at the same time the Epistle of James was first translated into Syriac; before that time there was no translation of it in the Syriac language, and until 451 this epistle is never mentioned in Syriac theological literature. But since that time it has been widely accepted, and yet as early as 545 Paul of Nisibis disputed its right to be included in the New Testament. It was only in the middle of the eighth century that the authority of John of Damascus promoted the recognition of the Epistle of James in the Syrian church with the same force with which the authority of Augustine influenced the whole church.

GREK-SPEAKING CHURCH

Although the Epistle of James appeared in the Greek-speaking church earlier than in other churches, but in it, over time, it took a certain place.

It is first mentioned by Origen, head of the Alexandrian school. Somewhere in the middle of the third century, he wrote: "Faith, if it is called faith, but does not have works, is dead in itself, as we read in the epistle, which is now called James." In other theological treatises, it is true, he quotes this quotation already quite sure that it belongs to James and makes it clear that he believes that James was the brother of our Lord; although there remains a hint of doubt.

The great theologian and Bishop of Caesarea of ​​Palestine, Eusebius, traces and analyzes the various books of the New Testament and books related to the New Testament written up to the middle of the fourth century. He classifies the Epistle of James as "controversial" and writes about it thus: his". And here again slips doubt.

The turning point in the Greek-speaking Church was 267, when Bishop Athanasius of Alexandria wrote his famous Paschal Epistle in Egypt. It was supposed to give people guidance on which books to consider as Holy Scripture and which not, because they began to read too many books, or at least too many books began to be counted as Holy Scripture. In this Epistle of Bishop Athanasius, the Epistle of James was included in the canon without any additional comments, and since then it has taken a firm place in the canon.

Thus, the meaning and importance of the Epistle of James itself was never questioned in the early Church, yet it became known rather late and its right to take its place among the books of the New Testament was disputed for some time.

The epistle of James still holds a special position in the Roman Catholic Church. In 1546, the Council of Trent finally, once and for all, established the composition of the Roman Catholic Bible. A list of books was drawn up to which nothing could be added. Nothing could be removed from this list either. The books of the Bible were to be submitted only in a presentation called the Vulgate. All books were divided into two groups: protocanonical, that is, undeniable from the very beginning, and deuterocanonical, that is, those that only gradually made their way into the New Testament. Although the Roman Catholic Church never questioned James, it was nevertheless included in the second group.

Luther and James

Today it can also be said that many do not consider the book of James to be the most important in the New Testament. Few would put it on a par with the Gospels of John and Luke or the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians. Many still treat him with restraint today. Why? This, of course, has nothing to do with the doubts expressed about the Epistle of James in the early Christian Church, because many in the modern Church have no idea at all about the history of the New Testament at that distant time. The reason is this: the Roman Catholic Church determined its attitude towards the Epistle of James by the edict of the Council of Trent, but in the Protestant Church doubts about its history persisted and, in fact, even increased, because Martin Luther opposed it and even would have preferred to remove it altogether. from the New Testament. With his edition of the German New Testament, Luther included a table of contents in which all the books were numbered. At the end of this list was given, separately from the others, a small group of books without numbers. This group included the Epistles of James and Jude, the Epistle to the Hebrews and Revelation. Luther regarded these books as secondary.

Luther attacked the book of James especially sharply, and the unfavorable opinion of a great man can ruin a book forever. Luther's famous judgment on the epistle is found in the last paragraph of his Preface to the New Testament:

"Thus the Gospels and 1 John, Paul's letters, especially the Romans, Galatians and Corinthians, and 1 Peter are the books that show you Christ. They teach you everything you need to know for your salvation, even if you would never see or hear of any other book, or even hear any other teaching. Compared to them, the Epistle of James is an epistle full of straws, because there is nothing ecclesiastical in it. But more about this in other prefaces.

Luther developed his assessment in the "Preface to the Epistles of James and Jude", as he promised, He begins: "I highly value the Epistle of James and find it useful, although it was not accepted at first. interpretations of human doctrines. As for my own opinion, regardless of anyone's prejudices, I do not consider it to have come from the pen of an apostle." And that's how he justifies his refusal.

First, in contrast to Paul and the rest of the Bible, the Epistle ascribes a redemptive quality to human deeds and accomplishments, incorrectly citing Abraham, who allegedly atoned for his sins by his deeds. This alone proves that the epistle could not have come from the pen of the apostle.

Secondly, there is not a single instruction or reminder for Christians to remember the suffering, the Resurrection, or the Spirit of Christ. It mentions Christ only twice.

Then Luther sets out his principles for evaluating any book in general: “The true measure for evaluating any book is to establish whether it emphasizes the prominent position that Christ occupies in the history of mankind or not ... That which does not preach Christ is not from apostles, even if it was preached by Peter or Paul. Conversely, everything that Christ preaches is apostolic, even if it is done by Judas, Annas, Pilate, or Herod."

And the Epistle of James does not withstand such a test. And so Luther continues: “The Epistle of James pushes you only towards the law and accomplishments. It mixes one with the other so much that, I suppose, one virtuous and pious person collected several sayings of the disciples of the apostles and wrote them down, and maybe someone wrote the epistle anything else by recording someone's sermon He calls the law the law of freedom (James 1:25; 2:12), while Paul calls it the law of bondage, wrath, death and sin (Gal. 3:23ff; Rom. 4:15; 7:10ff)".

Thus, Luther draws his conclusion: "James wants to warn those who rely on faith and do not proceed to actions and accomplishments, but he has neither inspiration, nor thoughts, nor eloquence appropriate for such a task. He commits violence against the Holy Scriptures and He thus contradicts Paul and all Holy Scripture, he tries to achieve by law what the apostles are trying to achieve by preaching love to people, and therefore I refuse to recognize his place among the authors of the authentic canon of my Bible, but I will not insist if anyone put it there, or raise it even higher, because there are many beautiful places in the message. In the eyes of the world, one person does not count; how can this lonely author be counted against the backdrop of Paul and the rest of the Bible?

Luther does not spare the Epistle of James. But, having studied this book, we may conclude that this time he allowed personal prejudices to violate common sense.

That's how complicated the story of the book of James was. Let us now consider the related issues of authorship and dating.

THE PERSON OF JACOB

The author of this epistle, in fact, does not tell us anything about himself. He calls himself simply: "James, the servant of God and the Lord Jesus Christ" (James 1:1). Who is he then? There are five people with this name in the New Testament.

1. Jacob is the father of one of the twelve, named Judas, but not Iscariot (Luke 6:16). It is only given to refer to someone else and cannot have anything to do with the message.

2. Jacob, son of Alphaeus, one of the twelve (Mark 10:3; Matt. 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13). Mapping Mat. 9.9 and Mar. 2.14 shows that Matthew and Levi are the same person. Levi was also the son of Alpheus and therefore the brother of Jacob. But nothing more is known about Jacob, the son of Alpheus, and therefore he, too, could not have had anything to do with the epistle.

3. Jacob, nicknamed "the lesser", mentioned in Mar. 15.40; (cf. Matt. 27:56 and John 19:25). Again, nothing more is known about him, and he, therefore, could not have had anything to do with the message.

4. James - brother of John and son of Zebedee, one of the twelve (Mark 10:2; Matt. 3:17; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). In the Gospels, James is never mentioned on his own, without his brother John. (Mat. 4:21; 17:1; Mark 1:19-29; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3; 14:33; Luke 5:10; 8:51; 9:28-54 ). He was the first of twelve martyrs; Herod Agrippa beheaded him in 44, he was associated with the message. In the Latin Codex Corbeiensis, written in the fourth century, a note was made at the end of the epistle, quite definitely attributing the authorship to James, son of Zebedee. But this authorship was taken seriously only in the Spanish church, where until the seventeenth century he was considered the author of this epistle. This is due to the fact that John of Compostela, the father of the Spanish church, was identified with James, the son of Zebedee, and therefore it is quite natural that the Spanish church was predisposed to consider its head and founder the author of the New Testament epistle. But Jacob's martyrdom came too soon for him to write this epistle, and, moreover, only the Codex Corbeiensis links him to the epistle.

5. Finally, James, who is called the brother of Jesus. Although his name was first associated with a message only by Origen in the first half of the third century, traditionally this message was attributed to him. As already mentioned, in 1546 the Council of Trent ruled that the Epistle of James was canonical and written by an apostle.

Consider all that is said about this Jacob. We learn from the New Testament that he was one of Jesus' brothers. (Mark 6:3; Matt. 13:55). Later we will discuss more in what sense the word brother should be understood. During the preaching period of Jesus, His family could neither understand nor sympathize with Him and wished to suspend His activity (Matthew 12:46-50; Mark 3:21:31-35; John 7:3-9). John says bluntly: "For even His brothers did not believe in Him." (John 7:5). Thus, during the period of Jesus' earthly preaching, James was one of His opponents.

In the book of the Acts of the Holy Apostles, a sudden and inexplicable change is noted. Already from the first lines of the book, the author tells that the mother of Jesus and His brothers were among a small group of Christians ( Acts. 1.14). And from this place it becomes clear that James became the head of the Jerusalem church, although there is no explanation anywhere how this happened. So Peter sent the news of his deliverance to James (Acts 12:17). James presided over the council of the Jerusalem church, which approved the access of Gentiles to the Christian Church (Acts 15). And Paul, who first came to Jerusalem, met with James and Peter; and again he discussed the scope of his activities with Peter, James and John, revered as pillars of the Church (Gal. 1:19; 2:9). To James, Paul brought during his last visit to Jerusalem, which led to his imprisonment, the donations collected among the pagan churches (Acts 21:18-25). This last episode is very important, because in it we see that James sympathized with the Jews who kept the Jewish law, and, moreover, forcefully insisted that they not offend their beliefs and even persuaded Paul to demonstrate his loyalty to the law, prompting him to accept on the expenses of some Jews who had taken the Nazarite vow.

Thus, it is clear that James was the head of the Jerusalem church. This has been greatly developed in tradition and tradition. Egesipus, one of the earliest historians of the Church, reports that James was the first bishop of the Jerusalem church. Clement of Alexandria goes further and says that James was chosen to this office by Peter and John. Jerome writes in the book "On famous men": "After the passion of the Lord, James was immediately consecrated by the apostles to the rank of bishop of Jerusalem. He ruled the Jerusalem church for thirty years, that is, until the seventh year of the reign of Emperor Nero." Last step In the creation of this legend, the "Clementine Confessions" appeared, in which it is said that Jesus Himself consecrated James to the rank of bishop of Jerusalem. Clement of Alexandria conveys a strange tradition: "The Lord entrusted the message (knowledge) after the Resurrection to James the Just, John and Peter; they passed it on to other apostles, and the apostles to seventy." There is no point in tracing the further development of this legend, but it is based on the fact that James was the undisputed head of the Jerusalem church.

JACOB AND JESUS

AT 1 Cor. fifteen a list of the appearances of Jesus after the Resurrection is given in the following words: "Then he appeared to Jacob" ( 1 Cor. 15, 7). And, besides, we find a strange mention of the name of Jacob in the Gospel of the Jews, one of the first gospels, which was not placed in the New Testament, but which, judging by the surviving fragments, could be of great interest. Here is a passage from Jerome that has come down to us: “And now the Lord, having given the shroud to the servant of the high priest, went in to Jacob and appeared to him (because Jacob swore that he would not eat bread from the moment he tasted the cup of the Lord until until he sees Him risen again from those who sleep). And further: “Bring you,” says the Lord, “a table and bread,” and immediately added: “He took bread and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to James the Just and said: “My brother, eat your bread, for the Son The human has risen from those that sleep."

There are some difficulties to note in this passage. One gets the impression that it has such a meaning: Jesus, rising from the dead and coming out of the tomb, gave the shroud that He wore in death to the servant of the high priest and went to His brother James. It also seems that the passage implies that James was present at the Last Supper. But despite the obscure and incomprehensible places in the passage, one thing is clear: something in the behavior of Jesus in the last days and hours so captured the heart of Jacob that he vowed not to eat until Jesus rose again, and therefore Jesus came to him and gave him the necessary assurance. It is clear that Jacob met the resurrected Christ, but we will never know what happened at that moment. But we know that after this, James, who had previously been hostile and unfriendly towards Jesus, became His slave in life and martyr in death.

JACOB - A MARTHER FOR CHRIST

Early Christian tradition and tradition is consistent in that Jacob died a martyr. Descriptions of the circumstances of his death vary, but the assertion that he died a martyr remains unchanged. Josephus has a very short message ("Antiquities of the Jews" 20.9.1):

“And therefore Ananias, being such a man, and believing that he had a good opportunity, because Festus was dead, and Albinus had not yet arrived, appointed a court session and placed before him the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ - named James - and some others charged with breaking the law and handed them over to be stoned."

Ananias was the Jewish high priest, Festus and Albinus were the procurators of Palestine, who occupied the same position as Pontius Pilate had formerly. The important thing about this message is that Ananias took advantage of the state of the so-called interregnum, the time between the death of one procurator and the arrival of his successor, to remove James and other leaders of the Christian Church. This is quite consistent with our information about the character of Ananias. It can also be concluded from this that Jacob was killed in 62.

A much more detailed message is given in the history of Egesippus. This story itself is lost, but the message about the death of Jacob was completely preserved by Eusebius ("History of the Church" 2.23). This is a rather long message, but it is of such great interest that it needs to be reproduced here in its entirety.

"The leadership of the Church passed to the brother of the Lord James, together with the apostles, whom everyone from the time of the Lord to our days called the Just, because many were called Jacob. And he was holy from his mother's womb; he did not drink wine and strong drinks and did not eat meat; the razor never touched his head; he was not anointed with oil (for anointing) and did not take a bath. He alone could enter the Holy, because he wore not woolen, but linen clothes. And only he alone entered the Temple and he could be seen there prostrate on his knees, praying for forgiveness to people, so that his knees were callused, like a camel's, due to constant worship in prayers to God and begging for forgiveness for people. For his unusual virtue, he was called the Just, or Obias, which in Greek means Stronghold of the People and Righteousness, as the prophets testify about him.

And so some of the seven sects already mentioned in the Memoirs said to him: "Where is the way to Jesus?" and he answered that Jesus is the Savior - and many believed that Jesus is the Christ. Well, the sects mentioned above did not believe in the Resurrection, nor in the One Who will reward everyone according to his deeds; but those who believed in it believed because of Jacob. And because many of the rulers also believed, confusion arose among the Jews, the scribes, and the Pharisees, because, they said, there was a danger that all people would wait for Jesus Christ. And therefore, meeting with Jacob, they said to him: “We implore you, curb the people, because they go astray and follow Jesus, revering Him as Christ. We implore you to convince all those who will come on the day of Passover regarding Jesus because we all heed your word, because we and all the people testify to you that you are just and do not look at faces. and therefore speak your word from the roof of the Temple, so that you can be clearly seen, and your words can be heard by all the people: at the Passover all the tribes, and the pagans too, have gathered.

And so the aforementioned scribes and Pharisees put Jacob on the roof of the Temple and called to him: "O you, the Just, to whom we must all listen - for the people are going astray - tell us, where is the path of Jesus?" And he, Jacob, answered with a loud voice: "Why do you ask me about the Son of Man? He Himself sits in heaven at the right hand of the Almighty (Great Power) and will come on a cloud of heaven." And when many were converted and praised the testimony of Jacob and said, "Hosanna to the Son of David," the same scribes and Pharisees said among themselves: "We made a mistake in allowing such a testimony about Jesus, but let's go and throw him (Jacob) down, so that out of fear they did not believe him." And they cried out, "Oh, oh, even the Just One has gone astray," and they fulfilled Isaiah's words: "Let's put the Just One out, because he causes us trouble; and therefore they will eat the fruits of their deeds."

And they went up and threw the Just One down, and they said to each other: "Let's stone James the Just", and they began to stone him, because the fall did not kill him, and he turned and knelt down, saying: "I beg You, Lord, God the Father, forgive them, because they do not know what they are doing." And when they stoned him like that, one of the priests, the son of Rechabit, about whom it is said in the prophet Jeremiah, cried out: "Stop! What are you doing? The Just prays for you." And one of them, a fuller, took a stick with which he beat the cloth, and lowered it on the head of the Just, and he died a martyr's death. And they buried him right there near the Temple. He gave a just witness to both Jews and Greeks that Jesus is the Christ. And immediately after that, Vespasian laid siege to them."

The last words indicate that Egesippus had a different date for Jacob's death. Josephus dates it to 62, but if it happened just before the siege of Jerusalem by Vespasian, then it happened in 66. It is possible that much of the history of Egesippus belongs to the realm of tradition, but from it we learn two things. First, it also testifies that Jacob died a martyr's death. And, secondly, that even after James became a Christian, he remained absolutely faithful to the orthodox Jewish law, so much so that the Jews considered him theirs. This is quite consistent with what we have already noted about James' attitude towards Paul when the latter came to Jerusalem with donations for the Jerusalem church. (Acts 21:18-25).

BROTHER OF OUR LORD

Let us try to solve one more problem in connection with the personality of Jacob. AT (Gal. 1:19) Paul speaks of him as the brother of the Lord. AT Mat. 13:55 and Mar 6:3 his name is given among the names of the brothers of Jesus, and in Acts 1:14 it is said, without giving names, that the brothers of Jesus were among the followers of the early Church. The problem is to find out the meaning of the word brother, because it is given a lot great importance Roman Catholic Church and Catholic groups in national Christian churches. Already in the time of Jerome, there were continuous disputes and discussions in the Church on this issue. There are three theories regarding the relationship these "brethren" had with Jesus; and we will consider them all separately.

JEROME'S THEORY

Jerome developed the theory that Jesus' "brothers" were actually his cousins. The Roman Catholic Church is firmly convinced of this, for which this provision is one of important elements creeds. This theory was put forward by Jerome in 383, and we can do no better than to give one after another his complicated arguments.

1. James, the brother of our Lord, is mentioned as an apostle. Paul writes, "I saw none of the other apostles but James the brother of the Lord." (Gal. 1:19).

2. Jerome states that the word apostle can only be applied to one of the twelve. In that case, we must look for Jacob among them. He cannot be identified with James, brother of John and son of Zebedee, who, in addition to everything, had already died a martyr's death at the time of writing. Gal. 1.19, as is clearly stated in Acts. 12.2. And therefore he should be identified only with another Jacob of the twelve - Jacob, the son of Alpheus.

3. Jerome proceeds to establish the identity of other data. AT Mar. 6.3 we read: "Is not He the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, Josiah ...?", and in Mar. 15.40 we see at the crucifixion Mary, the mother of James the lesser and Josiah. Since James the lesser is the brother of Josiah and the son of Mary, he must be the same person as Jacob in Mar. 6.3 who was the brother of our Lord. And therefore, according to the theory of Jerome, Jacob, the brother of the Lord, Jacob, the son of Alpheus and Jacob the lesser, are one and the same person, characterized in different ways. 4. The next and last premise of his argument, Jerome bases on the list of women who were present at the crucifixion of Christ. Let's give this list as it is given by three authors.

AT Mar. 15.40 we read: "Mary Magdalene, Mary mother of James and Josiah, and Salome."

AT Mat. 27.56 we read: "Mary Magdalene, Mary, the mother of James and Josiah, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee."

AT John. 19.25 we read: "His mother and sister of His mother Mary Kleopova and Mary Magdalene."

Let's analyze this list now. Each of them mentions the name of Mary Magdalene. One can quite definitely identify Salome and the mother of the sons of Zebedee. But the problem is to say how many women are on John's list. Should the list be read like this:

1. His mother

2. His mother's sister

3. Maria Kleopova

4. Mary Magdalene

or like this:

1. His mother

2. His mother's sister, Maria Kleopova

3. Mary Magdalene

Jerome insists that the second option is correct and that His Mother's sister and Maria Kleopova are one and the same person. In that case, she must also be Mary, who in another list is the mother of James and Josiah. This James, who is her son, is known as James the lesser, and as James the son of Alpheus, and as James the Apostle, known as the brother of the Lord, which means that James is the son of Mary's sister (His mother), and, therefore, a cousin Jesus.

This is Jerome's argument. There are at least four objections to it.

1. James is repeatedly called the brother of Jesus, or listed among his brothers. In each case, the word adelphos- the usual designation of a brother. It, however, can characterize a person belonging to a common brotherhood. According to this principle, Christians call each other brothers. It can also be used to express affection or love - you can call the brother of a person very close spiritually. But when this word is used to designate relatives, it is doubtful that it meant cousin relationship. If James was a cousin of Jesus, it is unlikely, perhaps even impossible, that he would be named adelphos Jesus.

2. Jerome was greatly mistaken in asserting that the title of apostle could only be applied to one of the twelve. Paul was an apostle (Rom. 1:1; 1 Cor. 1:1; 2 Cor. 1:1; Gal. 9:1)- Barnabas was apostle (Acts 14:14; I Cor. 9:6). strength was apostle (Acts 15:22). Andronicus and Junius were apostles(Rom. 16:7). It is impossible to limit the use of the word apostle only twelve, and therefore, as soon as there is no need to look for Jacob, the brother of the Lord, among the twelve, then the whole system of Jerome's arguments collapses.

3. The literal meaning of the words in John. 19.25 indicates that four women are mentioned here, and not three, for if Mary, the wife of Cleopov, was the sister of Mary, the Mother of Jesus, then this would mean that there were two sisters named Mary in the same family, which is unlikely.

4. It should be remembered that this theory appeared in the Church only in 383, when it was developed by Jerome, and it is quite obvious that it was developed for only one purpose - to substantiate the theory of the purity of the Virgin Mary.

EPIPHANIUS THEORY

The second of the major theories regarding the relationship of Jesus and His "brothers" is based on the fact that these "brothers" were in fact His half-brothers, Joseph's sons from his first marriage. This theory is called Epiphanius, after Epiphanius, who strongly insisted on it around 357; but he did not create it - it existed long before that and, one might say, received the widest distribution in the early Church. The essence of this theory is set forth already in an apocryphal book called the book of James or the Protoevangelium, dating back to the middle of the second century. This book is about a devoted couple named Joachim and Anna. They had one big grief - they had no children. To their great joy, when they were already in old age, they had a child, and in this, moreover, in all likelihood, they also saw immaculate conception. The child, a girl, was named Mary as the future mother of Jesus; Joachim and Anna consecrated their child to the Lord, and when the girl was three years old, they took her to the Temple and left her in the care of the priests. Mary grew up at the Temple and when she was twelve years old, the priests decided to marry her off. They summoned all the widowers, telling them to take their staffs with them. The carpenter Joseph came along with everyone. The high priest collected all the staves, and the last he took Joseph. Nothing happened to all the staffs, but a dove flew up from Joseph's staff and landed on his head. Thus it was revealed that Joseph was to take Mary as his wife. Joseph was very reluctant at first. “I have sons,” he said, “I am an old man, and she is a girl: how could I not become a laughing stock in the eyes of the children of Israel” (“Protoevangelium” 9.1). But then he took it, obeying the will of God, and in due time Jesus was born. The Protoevangelium is, of course, based on legends, but it shows that in the middle of the second century there was a widespread theory that would later be named Epifanieva. But there is no direct evidence to support this theory, and only circumstantial evidence is given to support it.

1. They ask: Would Jesus have left the care of his mother to John if she had other sons besides him? (John 19:26-27). In response to this, we can say that, as far as we know, the family of Jesus did not sympathize with Him at all, and one could hardly entrust any of the family to care for them.

2. It is claimed that Jesus' "brothers" treated Him like older brothers treat a younger one: they doubted His sanity and wanted to take Him home (Mark 3:21:31-35); they treated him quite hostilely (John 7:1-5). One could also argue that they viewed the actions of Jesus, regardless of His age, as a hindrance to the family.

3. It is argued that Joseph must have been older than Mary because he completely disappears from the gospel and must have died before Jesus began preaching and public ministry. The mother of Jesus was present at the wedding feast at Cana of Galilee, and Joseph is not mentioned at all (John 2:1). Jesus is sometimes called the son of Mary, and this suggests that Joseph had already died by that time and Mary was a widow. (Mark 6:3; but compare Matt. 13:55). Further, Jesus remained in Nazareth for a long time until He was thirty years old. (Luke 3:23), which can be easily explained if we assume that Joseph died and the care of the house and family fell on Jesus. But the mere fact that Joseph was older than Mary does not prove that he had no children by her, and the fact that Jesus remained in Nazareth as a village carpenter to provide for his family would be a more natural indication that He was the eldest, not the youngest son. Epiphanius's theory is based on the same points on which Jerome's theory is based. Its purpose is to substantiate the theory of the absolute purity of Mary. But for the latter there is no evidence at all.

ELVIDIEV'S THEORY

The third theory is called the Elvidian theory. In accordance with it, the brothers and sisters of Jesus were fully His brothers and sisters, that is, His half-brothers and sisters. All that is known about Elvidia is that he wrote a treatise in support of it, against which Jerome sharply opposed. What can be said in favor of this theory?

1. A person who reads the New Testament without certain theological premises and assumptions perceives the expression "brothers and sisters of Jesus" used in the Gospel as evidence of direct kinship.

2. The account of the birth of Jesus in Matthew and Luke suggests that Mary had other children. Matthew writes: "Rising from sleep, Joseph did as the Angel of the Lord commanded him, and took his wife, and did not know her, how at last she gave birth to her firstborn Son" (Mat. 1:24-25). From this it can be clearly inferred that after the birth of Jesus, Joseph entered into a normal marital relationship with Mary. Tertullian, in fact, uses this little passage to prove that both the virginity and the marital state of Mary were sanctified in Christ by the fact that she was first a virgin, and then a wife in the full sense of the word. Speaking about the birth of Jesus, Luke says: "And she gave birth to her firstborn Son" (Luke 2:7). Calling Jesus the firstborn, Luke clearly indicates that later there were more children.

3. As we have said, the fact that Jesus remained in Nazareth as a village carpenter until he was thirty years of age is at least an indication that he was the eldest son and was to take over the care of the family after Joseph's death.

We believe and believe that the brothers and sisters of Jesus were truly His brothers and sisters and do not insist that celibacy is superior to marriage-sanctified love. Any other theory is based on the glorification of asceticism and the desire to see Mary as an eternal virgin.

And therefore we proceed from the fact that James, who is called the brother of the Lord, was in the fullest sense the brother of Jesus.

JACOB AS THE AUTHOR OF THE EPISTLE

Can we then say that this James was the author of the present epistle? Let's see what evidence supports this view.

1. If James had written an epistle, it would be quite natural, could only be of a general nature, which it is. James was not, like Paul, the traveler known in many church communities. James was the leader of the Judaic branch of Christianity, and one might well expect that if he were the author of the epistle, it would be similar to an appeal to Jewish Christians.

2. There is nothing in the epistle that a virtuous Jew would not accept or agree with; some even believe that it is a Jewish ethical treatise that has received a place in the New Testament. It was also pointed out that in the Epistle of James one can find many such phrases that read equally well in the Christian and in the Jewish sense. The words "twelve tribes scattered" (James 1:1) can be attributed not only to the Jews living in the diaspora all over the world, but also to the Christian Church, the new Israel of the Lord. The word "Lord" can equally refer to Jesus and God the Father. James says that God begot us by the word of truth, that we might be some firstfruits of His creatures" (James 1:18) can equally be understood in terms of God's act of creation or in terms of regeneration, God's re-creation of mankind in Jesus Christ. The expressions "perfect law" and "royal law" (James 1:25; 2:8) can be understood equally as the ethical law of the Ten Commandments and as the new law of Christ. The words of the "elders of the Church" - ecclesia (James 5:14) can be understood both as presbyters of the Christian Church and as elders of the Jews, because in the Septuagint (the translation of the Bible made in Alexandria in the third century BC) ecclesia is the title of God's chosen people. AT Jacob. 2.2"your assembly" is spoken of, and the word synagogue, and it can rather be understood as synagogue than how christian church community. Addressing readers as brothers is absolutely Christian in nature, but it is equally inherent in the Jews. The Coming of the Lord and the Picture of the Judge Standing at the Door (James 5:7.9) are equally inherent in the Christian and Jewish way of thinking. The phrase that they condemned, killed the righteous (James 5:6), is often found among the prophets, and the Christian read it as an indication of the Crucifixion of Christ. There is really nothing in this message that an Orthodox Jew could not accept with a pure heart.

It can be argued that all this speaks in favor of Jacob: he was the head, if you can call it that, of Jewish Christianity, he was the head of the Jerusalem church.

At one time the Church must have been very close to Judaism and rather represented a reformed Judaism. This type of Christianity lacked the breadth and universality that the apostle Paul gave it. Paul himself said that he was destined for missionary work among the Gentiles, and Peter, James and John - among the Jews (Gal. 2:9). The Epistle of James may well reflect the views of Christianity in its early form. This can explain the following two points.

First, it explains why James so often expounds and repeats the teaching from the Sermon on the Mount. We can compare Jacob. 2:12 and Matt. 6.14.15; Jacob. 3:11-13 and Matt. 7.16-20; Jacob. 5:12 and Matt. 5:34-37. The ethics of Christianity was of great interest to all Jewish Christians.

Second, it may help to explain the relationship between this epistle and Paul's teaching. At first sight Jacob. 2.14-26 contains a direct attack on the teachings of Paul. "A man is justified by works, and not by faith alone" (James 2:24). This is contrary to Paul's teaching on justification by faith. In fact, James condemns that faith that does not lead to any ethical action. And those who accused Paul of preaching just such a faith did not read his epistles, for they are simply overwhelmed with demands of a purely ethical nature, as can be seen from the example Rome. 12.

James died in 62 and could not see the epistles of Paul, which became the common property of the Church only in the 90s. And therefore the Epistle of James cannot be regarded as an attack on the teachings of Paul, nor as a perversion of them. And this misunderstanding most likely took place in Jerusalem, where Paul's teaching on the primacy of faith and grace and his attacks on the law were viewed with suspicion.

We have already said that the Epistle of James and the message of the council of the Jerusalem church to the churches of the Gentiles bear a strange resemblance to each other in at least two respects. First, both start with the word rejoice (James 1:1; Acts 15:23), in the Greek version - hairin. This is the traditional beginning of the Greek letter, but for the second time in the New Testament it is found only in a letter from the commander Claudius Lysias to the ruler of the province Felix ( Acts. 23:26-30). Secondly, in Acts. 15.17 a phrase is given from the speech of James, which speaks of the nations, between whom my name will be proclaimed. This phrase in the New Testament is repeated only once in Jacob. 2.7 where it is translated as follows: the name you are called. Although these phrases differ from each other in the Russian translation, they are the same in the original Greek. Interestingly, in the message of the council of the Jerusalem church, we find two unusual phrases that are found only in the Epistle of James. It should also not be forgotten that the message of the council of the Jerusalem church in all likelihood was written by James.

This fact confirms the theory that James was written by James, brother of our Lord and head of the Jerusalem church.

But, on the other hand, there are facts that still make us doubt its authorship.

1. It might be supposed that if the author of the epistle had been the brother of the Lord, he would have made some reference to it. But he only calls himself a slave of God and the Lord Jesus Christ (James 1:1). After all, such an indication would not necessarily serve his personal glory, but would give weight and significance to his message. And such weight would be especially valuable outside of Palestine, in countries where hardly anyone knew Jacob. If the writer of the epistle was indeed a brother of the Lord, why did he not mention it directly or indirectly?

2. Since there is no indication in the epistle that its author is the brother of the Lord, one would expect an indication that he is an apostle. The apostle Paul always began his epistles with certain words. And again, the point here is not in personal prestige, but in reference to the authority on which he relies. If James, who wrote the epistle, was really the brother of the Lord and the head of the Jerusalem church, one would expect at the very beginning of the epistle an indication of his apostleship.

3. But the most surprising thing - and this led Martin Luther to challenge the right of the epistle to be included in the New Testament - is the almost complete absence of references to Jesus Christ in it. Throughout the epistle, His name is given only twice, and these references are almost random. (James 1:1; 2:1).

There is not a single mention of the Resurrection of Christ in the message at all. We know well that the young Church grew up on faith in the risen Christ. If this epistle came from the pen of James, then it coincides in time with the book of the Acts of the Holy Apostles, in which the Resurrection of Christ is spoken of at least twenty-five times. It is surprising that a person who wrote at such an important time in the history of the Church should not write about the Resurrection of Christ, because James had good personal reasons to write about the appearance of Jesus, which, apparently, changed his life.

Moreover, the message says nothing about Jesus as the Messiah. If James, the leader of the Jewish church, wrote to Jewish Christians in those very early years, one might expect that his main aim would be to present Jesus as the Messiah, or at least to make his belief in it quite clear; but there is nothing of the kind in the message.

4. It is clear that the author of this epistle was strongly influenced by the Old Testament; it is also quite evident that he was very familiar with the Books of Wisdom. There are twenty-three obvious quotations from the Sermon on the Mount in the message - and this is not surprising. Even before the writing of the first gospel, summaries of the teachings of Jesus must have circulated in lists. Some people argue that the writer of the epistle must have known Paul's letters to the Romans and Galatians in order to write about faith and human endeavours; it is also rightly asserted that a Jew who had never been outside of Palestine and who died in 62 could not have known these epistles. But, as we have already seen, this argument misses the mark, because criticism of the teachings of Paul, if such can be traced in the Epistle of James, could only be undertaken by a person who did not read the original Pauline epistles, but only used an incorrectly stated or perverted teaching of Paul. The next phrase in Jacob. 1.17: "Every good gift and every perfect gift" - is written in hexameter and is quite obviously a quote from some Greek poet; and the phrase in Jacob. 3.6: "circle of life" may be an Orphic phrase from mystery religions. Where could Jacob of Palestine get such quotes from?

Some things are just hard to explain if you consider that the author of the letter was James, the brother of the Lord.

As we can see, the pros and cons of James writing this epistle balance each other out, but we will leave this issue unresolved for the time being and turn to other issues.

DATING OF THE MESSAGE

Turning to the factors that shed light on the time of writing the epistle, we again face the same problem of an unambiguous answer to this question cannot be given. It can be argued that the epistle could have been written very early, but it can also be argued that it was written quite late.

1. It is clear that at the time of the writing of the epistle there was still a very real hope for the soon Second Coming of Jesus Christ. (James 5:7-9). Although the expectation of the Second Coming never left the Christian Church, but as the period of its onset dragged on, this expectation weakened somewhat and lost its sharpness. This speaks in favor of the early writing of the epistle.

2. In the first chapters of the book of the Acts of the Holy Apostles and in the epistles of Paul, the discussion of the Jews against the admission of Gentiles into the Church solely on the basis of the principle of faith was reflected. Everywhere Paul went, the followers of Judaism followed him, and the acceptance of Gentiles into the Church proved to be very difficult. There is, however, no hint of this struggle in the Epistle of James, which is doubly surprising when one remembers that James, the brother of the Lord, played a leading role in resolving this issue in the council of the Jerusalem church, and therefore this epistle should have been written either too early, even before these contradictions arose; or very late, after the last echo of this dispute has died out. The absence in the epistle of references to the contradictions between Jews and Gentiles can be interpreted in different ways.

3. Equally contradictory are the information about the structure of the Church and its norms reflected in the message. Meeting places in the Church are still called sunagogue (James 2:2). This indicates an early date for the writing of the epistle; later the church meeting would certainly be called ecclesia because the Jewish name was soon forgotten. The elders of the Church are mentioned (James 5:14), but neither deacons nor bishops are mentioned. This again points to an early date for the writing of the epistle, and possibly to a Jewish source, because the presbyters-elders were among the Jews, and then among the Christians. Jacob is concerned that many want to be teachers (James 3:1). This may also indicate an early date for the writing of the epistle, when the Church had not yet developed and developed its system of priesthood and had not yet introduced a certain order into church worship. This may also indicate a late date for the writing of the epistle, when numerous teachers appeared who became a real scourge of the Church.

But there are two general facts that seem to indicate that the epistle was written rather late. First, as we have seen, it hardly mentions Jesus at all. The theme of the epistle is, in essence, the shortcomings of the members of the Church and their imperfections, their sins and their errors. This may indicate a rather late date for the writing of the epistle. The sermon in the young Church in the first years of its existence was imbued with the grace and glory of the risen Christ. Later, the sermon turned, as it often does today, into a tirade against the shortcomings of the members of the church community. The second important fact from which it can be deduced that the message was written late is the condemnation of the rich (James 2:1-3; 5:1-6). The flattery and arrogance of the rich seems to have been a real problem for the Church in the era in which this epistle was written, for there were few, if any, of them in the early Church. (1 Cor. 1:26-27). The Epistle of James, apparently, was written at a time when the formerly poor Church was threatened by the reawakening in its members the desire for earthly goods and pleasures.

Preachers and Mentors in the Ancient World

We can make it easier for ourselves to establish the date of the writing of the Epistle of James if we consider it against the backdrop of the world then.

The sermon is always associated with Christianity, but the sermon itself was not an invention of the Christian Church. The tradition of preaching existed in both the Jewish and Greek worlds; and if we compare the Greek and Jewish preaching with the Epistle of James, their great similarity is striking.

Let's look first at the Greek preaching to the Greek preachers. Wandering philosophers (Stoics, Cynics, etc.) were commonplace in the ancient Greek world. Everywhere where people gathered, one could meet them and hear their calls for virtue: at crossroads, in squares, among large crowds at sports games and even at gladiator fights. Sometimes they even addressed the emperor directly, reproached him for luxury and tyranny, and called for virtue and justice. Gone are the days when philosophy was studied exclusively in academies and philosophical schools. Philosophical ethical sermons could be listened to every day in in public places. These sermons had their own characteristics: the order and methods were always the same. They had a great influence on the manner in which Paul preached the gospel, and James followed in the same footsteps. Here are some of the professional methods of these ancient preachers and note their influence on the method of the Epistle of James and the Epistles of Paul to the churches.

Preachers in antiquity sought not so much to learn new truths as to draw people's attention to the shortcomings in their way of life and make them see again the truths known to them, by chance or deliberately forgotten. They sought to call people who were mired in debauchery and who had forgotten their gods to a virtuous life.

1. They often had fictitious conversations with fictitious opponents in the form of so-called "truncated dialogues." James also uses this technique in 2.18 ff and 5.13 ff.

2. They used to move from one part of a sermon to another through questions they asked to introduce new theme. Jacob also uses this method in 2.14 and 4.1.

3. They were very fond of the imperative mood, urging their hearers to do righteousness and renounce error. The Epistle of James has 108 verses, almost 60 are imperatives.

4. They were very fond of asking their listeners rhetorical questions. Jacob also often asks such questions. (2,4.5; 2,14-16; 3,11.12; 4,4) .

5. They often made living appeals directly to some section of the audience. Jacob speaks directly to presumptuous rich men who trade for profit (4,13; 5,6) .

6. They were very fond of figurative expressions to characterize virtues and vices, sins and positive qualities. James also shows lust and sin in action (1,15) ; mercy (2,13) and rust (5,3) .

7. They used images and pictures of everyday life to arouse interest in listeners. Typical for preaching in antiquity were images of a bridle, a ship's rudder, a forest fire, etc. (cf. James 3:3-6). Along with many others, Jacob uses the image of the peasant and his patience very vividly. (5,7) .

8. They often cited famous and famous people and their moral conduct. Jacob gives the example of Abraham (2,21-23) harlot Rahab (2,25), Elijah (5,17) .

9. In order to attract the attention of the listeners, the preachers of antiquity began their sermon with a contradictory statement. James does the same when he invites people to accept life with great joy when they fall into temptations. (1,2) . Preachers of antiquity also often contrasted genuine virtue with ordinary living standards. James, for his part, insists that the happiness of the rich lies in humiliation (1,10) . Preachers of antiquity used the weapon of irony. So does Jacob (2,14-19; 5,1-6).

10. Preachers of antiquity could speak harshly and sternly. James also calls his reader "an unfounded man" and "an unfaithful and enemy of God" (2,20; 4,4) . Preachers of antiquity resorted to verbal scourging - James does the same.

11. Preachers of old had their standard ways of composing sermons.

a) They often ended part of their sermon with a striking contrast. For example, they contrasted the righteous and unrighteous way of life. Jacob also repeats this technique (2,13; 2,26) .

b) They often proved their points by asking the audience direct questions - James does the same (4,4-12) . It is true that we do not find in Jacob the bitterness, empty and crude humor that Greek preachers resorted to, but it is quite clear that he uses all the other methods that itinerant Greek preachers used to win the minds and hearts of listeners.

The ancient Jews also had their own tradition of preaching. Such sermons were usually read during services in synagogues by rabbis. They had much in common with the sermons of wandering Greek philosophers: the same rhetorical questions, the same urgent appeals and imperatives, the same illustrations from everyday life, the same quotations and examples from the life of martyrs for the faith. But the Jewish sermon had one curious feature: it was abrupt and incoherent. The Jewish teachers taught their students never to linger on one subject, but to move quickly from one subject to another in order to keep their listeners interested. And therefore such a sermon was also called haraz, What means stringing beads. Jewish preaching was often a piling up of moral truths and exhortations one on top of the other. The book of James is written that way. It is very difficult to see in it a sequence and a well-thought-out plan. Sections and verses in it follow one after another, not interconnected. Goodspeed writes about this epistle in the following way: “This work has been compared to a chain in which each link is connected with the one preceding it and the one following it. Others have compared its content with a string of beads ... But perhaps the Epistle of James is not so much a chain thoughts or beads, how many a handful of pearls are thrown one at a time in the memory of the listener.

No matter how we view the Epistle of James as a manifestation of the ancient Greek or Jewish worldview - it is a good example of the sermon of that time. And, apparently, here lies the key to unraveling his authorship.

AUTHOR OF JAMES

There are five possibilities to answer this question.

1. Let's start with a theory developed more than half a century ago by Mayer and revived by Easten in "Bible Commentary". In ancient times it was common to publish books under the name of a great man. Jewish literature between the Old and New Testaments is full of such writings attributed to Moses, the twelve patriarchs, Baruch, Enoch, Isaiah, and others. outstanding people to grab readers' attention. This was common practice. The most famous of the apocryphal books is the book of the Wisdom of Solomon, in which the wise men of later times attribute new wisdom to the wisest of kings. We must not forget the following regarding the Epistle of James:

a) There is nothing in it that an Orthodox Jew could not accept if the two references to Jesus in Jas. 1.1 and 2.1, which is not difficult to do.

b) in Greek Jacob sounds like Jacobus, which undoubtedly corresponds to Jacob in the Old Testament.

c) The message is addressed to the twelve scattered tribes. It follows from this theory that the Epistle of James is just a Jewish writing, signed with the name James, and intended for Jews scattered throughout the world to strengthen them in the faith amid the trials they were subjected to in pagan countries.

This theory has been further developed. AT Gen. 49 Jacob's address to his sons is given, which is a series of short descriptions and characteristics of each of his sons. Mayer states that he can find parallels in the Epistle of James to the description of each of the patriarchs, and therefore all twelve tribes, given in the address of James. Here are some of the comparisons and parallels:

Asir is a rich man: Jacob. 1.9-11; Gen. 49.20.

Issachar - doing good: Jacob. 1.12; Gen. 49.14.15.

Reuben - begun, the first fruit: Jacob. 1.18; Gen. 49.3.

Simeon symbolizes anger: Jacob. 1.9; Gen. 49.5-7.

Levi - a tribe that has a special relationship with religion: Jacob. 1.26.27.

Naphtali symbolizes peace: Jacob. 3.18; Gen. 49.21.

Gad symbolizes wars and battles: Jacob. 4.1.2; Genesis 49:19.

Dan symbolizes the expectation of salvation: Jacob. 5.7; Gen. 49.18.

Joseph symbolizes prayer: Jacob. 5.1-18; Gen. 49:22-26.

Benjamin symbolizes birth and death: Jacob. 5.20; Gen. 49.27.

This is a very ingenious theory: no one can bring irrefutable evidence in its favor, or refute it; and it certainly explains well the conversion to Jacob. 1.1 to the twelve tribes living in dispersion. This theory allows us to conclude that the moral and ethical aspects of this Jewish treatise, written under the name of James, made such a strong impression on some Christian that he made some corrections and additions to it and published it as a Christian book. This is, of course, an interesting theory, but perhaps its main advantage lies in its wit.

2. Like the Jews, Christians also wrote many books, attributing them to eminent figures of the Christian faith. There are gospels written in the name of Peter, Thomas, and even James; there is a letter signed with the name of Barnabas, there are gospels from Nicodemus and Bartholomew; there are acts of John, Paul, Andrew, Peter, Thomas, Philip and others. Such books are called pseudonymous, that is, written under someone else's name.

It has been suggested that James was written by someone else and attributed to a brother of the Lord. Apparently, this is what Jerome thought when he said that this epistle "was issued by someone in the name of James." But whatever that epistle really was, there was no way it could have been "issued by someone in the name of Jacob," because the person who wrote and attributed such a book to someone would carefully and diligently try to show who was to be considered by its author. If the author wanted to publish the book under a pseudonym, he would make it so that no one would doubt that its author was James, the brother of our Lord, but this is not even mentioned.

3. The English theologian Moffat was inclined to believe that the author of the epistle was neither the brother of the Lord nor any other well-known James, but simply a teacher named James, about whose life we ​​know nothing at all. This, in fact, is not so unbelievable, because even at that time the name Jacob was very widespread. But then it is difficult to understand which book was included in the New Testament, and why it began to be associated with the name of brother Jesus.

4. It is generally accepted, however, that this book was written by James, the brother of the Lord. We have already pointed out a very strange point - that in such a book only twice the name of Jesus is accidentally mentioned and never at all is it said about His Resurrection or that Jesus was the Messiah. But there is another, even more difficult and complex problem. The book is written in Greek, and Ropes believes that Greek must have been the native language of the author of the epistle, and the great classical philologist Major stated: "I am inclined to believe that the Greek of this epistle is closer to the norms of the high classics than to the Greek of other books of the New Testament, with the possible exception of Hebrews." But Jacob's native language was undoubtedly Aramaic, not Greek, and he most certainly could not master classical Greek. The orthodox Jewish upbringing he received must have made him contempt for Greek as a hated pagan language. In this vein, it is almost impossible to imagine that this epistle would come out from the pen of James.

5. Let's remember how much the book of James is like a sermon. It may well be that this sermon was actually delivered by James himself, but was written down and translated by someone else; then it was slightly changed and sent to all churches. This explains both the form of the epistle and the fact of its identification with the name of Jacob. This also explains the absence of numerous references to Jesus, to His Resurrection and Messiahship: after all, James could not touch on all aspects of faith in one sermon; he, in fact, brings to the consciousness of people their moral obligations, and does not teach them theology. It seems to us that this theory explains everything.

One thing is quite clear - we may begin to read this little epistle, realizing that the New Testament contains books of greater importance, but if we study it with perfect reverence, we will close it with a sense of gratitude to God that it has been preserved for our guidance and inspiration.

GREETINGS (James 1:1)

Already at the very beginning of the epistle, James rewards himself with a title in which all his glory and all his honor; he - servant of God and the Lord Jesus Christ. James is the only one of the authors of the New Testament, except for Judas, who calls himself " doulos" without any further explanation or reservation. Paul calls himself "a servant of Jesus Christ, called an apostle" (Rom. 1:1; Phil. 1:1). James does not want to add anything more to the fact that he is a servant of God and the Lord Jesus Christ. This title has four meanings.

1. It suggests absolute obedience. For a slave there is only one law - the word of the master, the slave has no rights; he is the complete property of his master, and he is obliged to show absolute obedience.

2. It suggests absolute obedience. This is how a person calls himself, thinking not about his privileges - but about his obligations, not about his rights - but about his duty. This is how a person who has forgotten himself in the service of God calls himself.

3. It suggests absolute loyalty and devotion. This is how a person who does not have his own interests calls himself, because everything he does, he does for God. He does not count on personal benefits and advantages, he is faithful to Him.

4. But, on the other hand, this proud rank. So called themselves the greatest personalities of the era of the Old Testament. Moses was doulos, a servant of God (1 Kings 8:53; Dan. 9:11; Mal. 4:4), also Joshua and Caleb (Josh. N. 24:29; Num. 14:24); patriarchs - Abraham, Isaac, Jacob (Deut. 9:27), Job. (Job 1:8) and Isaiah (Isaiah 20:3). It is quite obvious that the servants of God, doulos were prophets (Amos 3:7; Zech. 1:6; Jer. 7:25). Calling myself a slave doulos, Jacob considers himself the follower and successor of those who have found freedom, peace and glory in absolute submission to the will of God. A Christian cannot have a higher goal than this - to be a servant of God.

But this greeting has one interesting feature: when greeting his readers, James uses the word hairin, a common greeting in Greek secular letters. Paul, for example, never used this word: he always used a purely Christian greeting, "grace and peace" (Rom. 1:7; I Cor. 1:3; 2 Cor. 1:2; Gal. 1:3; Eph. 1:2; Phil. 1:2; Col. 1:2; I Thess. 1, 1; 2 Thessalonians 1:2; Phm. 3). Further in the New Testament, this secular greeting occurs only twice: in a letter from the Roman officer Claudius Lysias to the governor Felix, written about the safety of Paul's journey (Acts 23:26), and in a letter to all the churches, written after the decision of the Jerusalem council to admit Gentiles into the Church (Acts 15:23). it interesting fact because that meeting was presided over by Jacob (Acts 15:13). It is possible that he used the most common greeting because his message was sent to the general public.

JEWS LIVING IN DISPERSION ALL OVER THE WORLD (James 1:1 (continued))

The message is addressed to twelve tribes scattered in the diaspora. This word is used exclusively in relation to Jews living outside of Palestine. Millions of Jews who for one reason or another lived outside of Palestine constituted the diaspora. This scattering of Jews around the world played an extremely important role in the spread of Christianity, because all over the world at that time there were synagogues where Christian preachers could begin their journey and, in addition, all over the world there were people, men and women, who already knew the Old Testament and seeking to arouse in others an interest in their faith. Let's see how this scattering came about.

The Jews were forcibly driven from their land several times and forced to live in foreign territories. There were three such migrations.

1. The first forcible resettlement of the Jews was carried out by the Assyrians, when they captured the Northern Kingdom with the capital Samaria and took all the people into captivity in Assyria (2 Kings 17:23; 1 Chr. 5:26). These were the ten tribes that never returned. The Jews themselves believed that in the end they would all gather in Jerusalem, but these ten tribes, they believed, would not return until the end of the world. This belief was based on a rather strange interpretation of the text of the Old Testament. The rabbis stated: "These ten tribes will never return, because it is said about them:" And he cast them into another land, as now we see " (Deut. 29:28). And just as today (now) passes and will never return, so they are gone and will never return. And just as today the dark night comes, and then again the light, so the light will shine again for those ten tribes for which there was darkness.

2. The second forced migration of the Jews took place around 580 BC, when the Babylonians conquered the Southern Kingdom, the capital of which was Jerusalem, and took many, including the noblest, into Babylonian captivity (2 Kings 24:14-16; Ps. 1:36). In Babylon, the Jews behaved independently: they stubbornly refused to assimilate and lose their national identity. They were settled in the cities of Nehareda and Nibisis. It was in Babylon that Jewish learning reached its peak, and there the Babylonian Talmud, the most extensive sixty-volume exposition of the Jewish law, was created. Josephus wrote "The Wars of the Jews" originally not in Greek, but in Aramaic, since this book was intended for scholars in Babylon. Josephus writes that the Jews achieved such power there that for a certain period the province of Mesopotamia was under their control. The two Jewish rulers of Mesopotamia were named Asideus and Anileus; According to information that has come down to us, after the death of Anileus, more than 500,000 Jews were slaughtered.

3. The third forced resettlement of the Jews took place much later. Pompey, having defeated the Jews and taken Jerusalem in 63 BC, brought many Jews to Rome as slaves. The Jews' adherence to ritual law and their stubborn observance of the Sabbath made it difficult for them to be used as slaves, and so most of them were set free. The Jews settled in a special quarter on the far side of the Tiber and soon flourished throughout the city. Dio Cassius says of them this: "They were often belittled, but nevertheless they grew stronger and even gained the right to freely practice their customs." The great patron of the Jews was Julius Caesar; the Jews mourned him all night at his tomb. According to information that has come down to us, many Jews were present during Cicero's speech in defense of Flac. In A.D. 19, the Jews were expelled from Rome, accused of having robbed a wealthy Roman proselyte, promising to send her money as a donation to the Temple in Jerusalem. 4,000 Jews were taken into the army to fight against the robbers on the island of Sardinia, but they were soon returned back. When the Palestinian Jews sent a delegation to Rome to complain about the ruler Archelaus, the delegates were joined by 8,000 Jews living in Rome. Roman literature is full of contemptuous remarks about the Jews, so that anti-Semitism is not a new phenomenon, but a large number of references to the Jews is clear evidence of what a big role the Jews played in the life of the capital of the Roman state.

These forced migrations led to the fact that thousands of Jews settled in Babylon and Rome, but an even greater number of Jews left Palestine in search of more convenient and profitable places: they were sent, first of all, to two neighboring countries - Syria and Egypt. Palestine was sandwiched between these two countries and could at any time become a battlefield between them. Therefore, many Jews left Palestine and settled in these countries.

In the era of Nebuchadnezzar, many Jews voluntarily went to Egypt (2 Kings 25:26). There is evidence that as early as 650 BC there were Jewish mercenaries in the army of the Egyptian pharaoh. When Alexander the Great founded Alexandria, the settlers were granted special privileges, and this brought large numbers of Jews there. The city of Alexandria was divided into five administrative districts, two of which were inhabited by Jews. The population of the latter two was over one million. The settlements of the Jews in Egypt grew so much that about 50 BC a temple was built for them in Leontopolis, in the image of Jerusalem.

Among the Syrian cities, most of the Jews lived in Antioch. The gospel was first preached to the Gentiles there, and the followers of Jesus were first called Christians in Antioch. According to information that has come down to us, 10,000 Jews were once massacred in Damascus.

In Egypt, in Syria and far beyond their borders, there were also many Jews. According to information that has come down to us, the population of Cyrinea in North Africa was divided into farmers who lived in the country of strangers, and Jews. The historian of Rome, the German Mommsen, wrote: "The inhabitants of Palestine are only a part of the Jews, and, moreover, not the largest; the Jewish communities of Babylon, Asia Minor and Egypt are much larger in number than the Jewish population of Palestine."

Mommsen mentioned another area where many Jews lived - Asia Minor. After the death of Alexander the Great, his empire collapsed: Egypt fell under the rule of the Ptolemies, and Syria and the surrounding areas fell to the Seleucids. The Seleucid dynasty pursued, on the one hand, a policy of suppression of peoples, in the hope of eradicating nationalism, and on the other hand, they were very fond of building new cities. These cities needed residents and the Seleucids provided special privileges and favorable conditions to those who settled in them. The Jews settled in such cities by the thousands and constituted a large and prosperous part of the population of the cities of Asia Minor, the great cities of the Mediterranean, and other great trading centers. But even there they were subjected to forcible resettlement. Antiochus III the Great resettled two thousand Jewish families from Babylon to Lydia and Phrygia. The flow of Jews outgoing from Palestine was so powerful that the Palestinian Jews complained about their brothers who left their harsh homeland for the sake of the baths and feasts of Asia and Phrygia, and Aristotle told that he met a Jew in Asia Minor who "was a Greek not only by language, but also in spirit.

All this clearly shows that the Jews lived throughout the world of that time. The Greek geographer Strabo wrote: "It is difficult to find a place in the whole world where the Jews would not live and rule," and the Jewish historian Josephus Flavius ​​wrote: "There is no such city and no such tribe, where the Jewish law and Jewish customs would not take root" .

In the "Divination of Saville", written about 140 BC, it is said that every sea and every land is full of Jews. Philo of Alexandria quotes a letter allegedly written by the Jewish king Herod Agrippa I to the Roman emperor Caligula, which states that Jerusalem is the capital not only of Judea, but of most countries; for in Egypt, and in Phoenicia, and in Syria, and even further - in Pamphylia and Cilicia, in most of Asia Minor to Bithynia itself and the remote corners of the Black Sea coast and in Europe: in Thessaly, Boeotia, Macedonia, Etomia, Argos , Corinth - in many the best places Peloponnesian peninsula - everywhere there are colonies of the Jews. And not only on the mainland, but also on the largest and most important islands of Euboea, Cyprus, Crete - not to mention the areas beyond the Euphrates River - Jews live everywhere.

The Jewish dispersion, the diaspora, really covered the whole world and this played an extremely important role in the spread of Christianity.

TESTED AND STANDING (James 1:2-4)

James never taught his readers that Christianity is the easy way out. He warned Christians that various temptations awaited them: in Greek, this word Peirasmos, the meaning of which we must understand well in order to realize the essence of the Christian life.

Greek Peirasmos- this is not a temptation in the truest sense of the word - it is trial; a test with a specific purpose, which is to make the test subject become stronger and purer after the test. Corresponding verb peiracein, which is now more commonly translated as test, has the same meaning and comes down not to temptation and introduction into temptation and sin, but to the strengthening and purification of a person.

So, for example, the Greeks said that the chick is experiencing ( peiracein) their wings. About the Queen of Sheba (1 Kings 10:1) that she came to experience peiracein) the wisdom of Solomon in riddles. The Bible also says that God tempted (i.e., tested - peiracein) Abraham, appearing to him and demanding to sacrifice Isaac (Gen. 22:1). When Israel came to the promised land, God did not take away the peoples living there: He left them in order to tempt (test - peiracein) by them Israel in the fight against them (Judges 2:22; 3:1.4). The life trials of Israel served the formation and strengthening of the people (Deut. 4:34; 7:19).

This is an important and lofty thought: Christians must be prepared for the fact that on their Christian path they will meet trials. We are waiting for a variety of experiences and trials, sorrows and disappointments that can take away our faith; temptations that can lead us astray from the path of righteousness; dangers, distrust of others, which so often have to feel in relation to themselves Christians, but all this is not aimed at leading us to a fall, but to raise us higher; all this falls upon us, not in order to overcome us, but in order that we may overcome it all; all this should not weaken us, but make us strong, and therefore we should not weep and complain about these trials, but rejoice at them. A Christian is in a way like an athlete: the more he trains (works), the more he rejoices, for he knows that this contributes to ultimate success. As the English poet Robert Browning put it: "we should rejoice at every push that makes it difficult to move on earth," because every difficulty overcome is a step on the way up.

THE FRUITS OF THE TEST (James 1:2-4 (continued))

The very process of testing Jacob defines the word dokimion. And this is a very interesting word - with the meaning net coin, full-bodied, genuine. The test is to cleanse a person from all impurity.

If we meet these trials correctly, they will give us an unbending hardness. In the Bible it patience(in Greek - hupomone), but patience is too passive a character trait. Hupomone- this is not only the ability to endure and endure, but also the ability to accomplish great and glorious deeds. Pagans throughout the centuries of persecution of Christians were amazed that the martyrs died with songs, and not in despair. One Christian, standing smiling in the midst of the flames, was asked why he was smiling: "I saw the glory of God," he said, "and I am glad." Hupomone- this is a character trait that gives a person the ability not only to endure difficulties, but also to overcome them. A properly endured test gives a person the strength to endure even more and win even harder battles.

Unbending hardness gives a person:

1. Perfection. In Greek it is teleios, What means purposeful excellence. So the sacrificial animal is defined as teleios if it is without defects and can be offered as a sacrifice to God. Schoolboy, student, becomes teleios - when he is well trained. Man becomes teleios when he was fully grown. Man's test helps man fulfill his assigned task on earth. And this is a great idea. As we overcome the trials of life that have fallen to our lot, we either prepare ourselves for the fulfillment of the task assigned to us by God, or we become unfit and incapable of fulfilling it.

2. completeness. In Greek this word holocleros, What means whole, complete in all parts. This word characterizes an animal intended as a sacrifice to God, as well as a priest who can serve Him; this means that an animal or a person does not have any flaws that disfigure them. Unbending firmness eventually frees a person from the weaknesses and shortcomings of his character; helps him overcome old sins, get rid of old shortcomings and acquire virtues, until he gains the ability to fully serve God and his fellows.

3. The complete absence of any shortcomings. In Greek it is leipesfay; this word defines the victory over the enemy, the cessation of the struggle. The man who has duly passed the test that has fallen to him, in which this inflexible firmness is perfected day by day, will overcome and gradually draw closer to Jesus Himself.

GOD GIVING AND MAN ASKING (James 1:5-8)

This passage is closely related to the previous one. James has just told his readers that by rightly using their experience, they will acquire that unbending firmness which underlies all virtues. But then a question arises in a person: "Where can one find the wisdom and intelligence necessary for a correct attitude to life's trials?" And to this Jacob answers: "If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach, and it will be given to him."

One thing follows from this: for Jacob, a Christian teacher with a Jewish upbringing and background, wisdom is a practical thing, connected with real life and not with philosophical reasoning and intellectual knowledge. The Stoics defined wisdom as "the knowledge of the human and the divine." People defined Christian wisdom as "the highest and divine property of the soul, which gives a person the ability to recognize righteousness and act in accordance with it," or "a spiritual and mental gift necessary for a righteous life." In Christian wisdom, of course, there is also a knowledge of the divine depths, but in essence, it is of a practical nature; it actually represents the knowledge of the divine depths, realized in decisions taken and in personal everyday relationships with people. When asking God for such wisdom, one must remember two things.

1. A person must remember how God gives. God gives generously and never remembers it. "All wisdom," said Jesus, the son of Sirach, "is from the Lord, and abides with him forever" (Sir. 1.1). But the Jewish sages were well aware that the best gift in the world can be spoiled by the manner in which it is made. The Jews could say a lot about how a foolish person gives: “My son! when doing good deeds, do not reproach, and with every gift do not offend with words ... Is not a word higher than a good giving? But a benevolent person has both. mercilessly reproaches, and the beneficence of the ill-disposed tempts the eyes" (Sir. 18:15 - 18). “The gift of a fool will not benefit you, for instead of one he has many eyes to receive. He will give a little, but he will reproach a lot, and he will open his mouth like a herald. Today he lends, and tomorrow he will demand back: such a person is hated by the Lord and people" (Sir. 20:14-15).

There are people who give only with the expectation that they will receive more than they give; or giving only to satisfy their vanity and a sense of their superiority, in order to put the recipient in the position of a debtor, giving, and then constantly reminding them of the gift they made. God gives generously. The Greek poet Philemon called God "who loves gifts," not in the sense that he loves to receive them, but in the sense that He loves to give. God does not recall His gifts, He gives them in the radiance of His love, because it is His nature to give.

2. A person must remember how to ask. A person should ask God without any doubt that he will receive what he asks. A person must be sure that God can give what he asks and that He is ready to give. The mind of a person who asks God with a feeling of doubt is like the waves of the sea, tossed here and there by a random gust of wind, or a cork, which the waves carry to the shore, and then they are carried to the sea. Such a person walks, like a drunkard, unevenly and unsteadily, hither and thither, and does not come anywhere. James very clearly characterizes such a person with the word dincihos, What means with a double soul or double thoughts. One believes and the other does not and the person is walking civil war in which faith and unbelief lead the desperate. In order to correctly evaluate and use the experience of life and be cleansed, a person must ask God for wisdom and remember that God is very generous and that you need to ask in faith that God gives everything that He finds useful and necessary for us.

TO EVERYONE HIS OWN (James 1:9-11)

James believed that Christianity brings to every person exactly what he needs: the despised poor man gains self-esteem, and the proud rich man knows self-humiliation.

1. Christianity brings the poor man a new sense of his own importance.

a) He learns that he is considered in the Church. There were no class distinctions at all in the early Christian Church. It could be that the slave was the presbyter of the community, preaching and celebrating the Lord's Supper, and his master was just an ordinary member of the church. Social distinctions have been erased in the Church and everyone has the same weight and importance.

b) He learns that he has a certain meaning in the universe. Christianity teaches that every person in this world performs or should perform a certain task. Every person is needed by God. And even if he is chained to a bed of suffering, his prayer can have an impact on the human world.

c) He learns what matters in the eyes of God. As someone said a long time ago, "Call no one worthless for whom Christ died."

2. Christianity gives the rich man a new sense of self-abasement. Wealth is a great danger because it gives a person a false sense of security. The rich man believes that he has everything and can redeem himself from any position in which he does not want to be.

Jacob paints a vivid picture that is well known to the inhabitants of Palestine: after rain, grass sprouts in the desert, but one hot day destroys them completely, as if they did not exist at all. Withering Heat(in Greek causon) is a southeasterly wind. He came from the deserts and poured over Palestine, like heat from an open red-hot furnace. This wind could destroy all vegetation overnight.

Such is life built on wealth. A person who puts his hope in wealth hopes that at any moment it can be carried away by accidents and changes in life. Life itself is an uncertain and unreliable thing. And in Jacob’s mind is a phrase from the book of the prophet Isaiah: “All flesh is grass, and all its beauty is like the flower of the field. The grass dries up, the flower withers when the breath of the Lord blows on it: so the people are grass” (Isaiah 40:6-7; compare Ps. 102:15).

Jacob wants to say this: if life is so fragile, and a person is so vulnerable, disaster and destruction can befall him at any moment, then the person who hopes for material values, wealth, which he can lose at any moment, is stupid. Wise is he who relies on what he cannot lose.

Thus, James urges the rich not to rely on what they have only appearances, but to realize their human helplessness and humbly trust in God, Who alone can give that which abides forever.

THE CROWN OF LIFE (James 1:12)

A person who correctly meets the trials of life and worthily emerges from them is destined for bliss both in this world and in the world to come.

1. In this world, a person acquires the highest respect; he - dokimos, it is like a metal purified from any impurities; all weaknesses of character have been eradicated in him, he came out of trials strong and pure.

2. In the life to come he will receive crown of life. This expression has several meanings: in ancient times, a crown ( stephanos) associated with the following important points:

a) A wreath of flowers was worn on the head in joyful moments of life - for a wedding, on holidays (cf. Is. 28:1.2; Song. P. 3:11). The crown symbolized festive joy.

b) The crown was a sign of royal dignity. Crowns were worn by kings and people who had royal power; sometimes it was a golden crown, sometimes it was a linen ribbon or a narrow bandage worn around the forehead (Ps. 20:4; Jer. 13-18).

c) the winner of the games was crowned with a laurel wreath; it was the highest award for an athlete (2 Tim. 4:8).

d) The crown was a sign of honor and dignity. The instructions of parents can be a beautiful crown for those who listen to them. (Prov. 1:9); wisdom gives a man a crown of glory (Prov. 4:9). In a period of misfortune and dishonor, you can say: "The crown has fallen from our head" (Lamentations 5:16).

There is no need to choose between these meanings - in this phrase there is from everyone. The Christian is given bliss, which no one else has; life for him is like an eternal feast, he is given greatness which others can never even think of; no matter how humble a place he occupies in life, he is a child of God; he wins victories which others cannot do, because against all life's adversities he is clothed in the all-conquering power of the presence of Jesus Christ. The Christian is given a new self-esteem because he knows that God deemed him worthy that Jesus Christ would give His Life and die for him.

What is this crown? it crown of life, which means that this crown is life. The crown of the Christian is a new way of life, it is real life: through Jesus Christ, life has become more complete.

Thus, James says: if a Christian consistently, with the firmness given to him by Jesus, endures the trials sent down to him, his life will become more beautiful than ever. Wrestling is the path to glory, and wrestling itself is also glory.

ACCUSED GOD (James 1:13-15)

This passage is inspired by the notion of the Jews, to which, to some extent, we have become indebted. James upbraids those who place the blame for temptations on God.

Jewish thinking reflected the internal duality of man. Paul was also haunted by this question: “According to the inward man, I delight in the law of God; but I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin that is in my members.” (Rom. 7:22-23). A person is torn into two parts, the Jews believed, and therefore they came to the conclusion that in every person there are two aspirations, two inclinations: ietser hatob - good intention, and ietser hara - sinful desire. But this problem was only formulated, not explained. In fact, it has not even been established where these sinful strivings come from. And so the Jewish thinkers sought to explain it.

The author of the book of the Wisdom of Jesus, the son of Sirach, was deeply struck by the harm that this sinful desire causes: "O evil thought ( ietser hara)! from where did you invade to cover the earth with deceit?" (Sir. 37:3). In his opinion, the sinful desire is a product of the devil, the only defense of a person against him is his will. "He (the Lord) created man from the beginning, and left him in the hand of his will. If you wish, you will keep the commandments and keep pleasingly faithful" (Sir. 15:14-15).

Some Jewish thinkers traced this sinful desire all the way back to the Garden of Eden. The apocryphal book "The Life of Adam and Eve" tells the following story: the devil turned into an angel and, speaking through a serpent, inspired Eve with the idea of ​​tasting the forbidden fruit. He also took a promise from her that she would offer Adam a taste of the forbidden fruit. “When he took an oath from me,” Eve says in this book, “he climbed a tree. But into the fruit that he gave me to taste, he put the poison of his malice, that is, his lust. For lust is the beginning of all sin. And he tilted the branch to the ground and I took the fruit and ate it. "According to this version, the devil himself succeeded in putting this sinful desire into a person, and this sinful desire is identified with carnal lust. Further development of this theory led to the fact that in The basis of all sin is the lust that the devil had for Eve.

There are two versions in the book of Enoch. According to one, fallen angels are responsible for sins. According to the second theory, the person himself is responsible for this. "Sin was not sent to earth, but man himself created it." But each of these theories only takes the problem further and further back in time. Maybe the devil really put a sinful desire in a person, maybe the person himself did it. But where does it come from ultimately appeared?

To answer this question, some rabbis ventured to argue that since God created everything, He also created sinful desire. And therefore we meet such statements of the rabbis: "God said, I am sorry that I created a sinful desire in man, for if I had not done this, he would not have rebelled against Me. I created a sinful desire and I created a law in order to correct this "Whoever keeps the law will not fall under its power. God has placed good desire on the right hand, and sinful desire on the left." The danger of such an approach is obvious - in the end, a person can lay the blame for their sins on God. He can declare, as Paul says, "It is not I who do this, but sin that dwells in me." (Rom. 7:17).

Of all the strange theories, the strangest is the one that places the responsibility for sin ultimately on God.

AVOIDING RESPONSIBILITY (James 1:13-15 (continued))

Man's first impulse has always been to accuse someone of the sins he has committed. When God demanded from Adam an account of his sin, Adam said, "The wife You gave me, she gave me from the tree, and I ate." And when God accused Eve of the perfection, she said: "The serpent deceived me, and I ate." Adam said "Don't blame me, blame Eve" and Eve said "Don't blame me, blame the snake" (Gen. 3:12-13). Man has always been a master at blaming others. Robert Burns wrote:

You know that you created me

With strong and wild passions;

I went off the right path.

In other words, Robert Burns claims that he acted this way because God made him that way, he puts the blame for his behavior on God. Similarly, people shift the blame for their sins on fellow citizens, on comrades, on circumstances and conditions, on innate character traits.

And James severely condemns this way of thinking. He believes that the responsibility for human sin lies entirely with a person who indulges his vicious desires. Sin is powerless if it has nothing to appeal to in man himself. And desires can either be warmed up and kindled in oneself, or suppressed and strangled. A person can control his desires and even, by the grace of God, completely get rid of them if he immediately chooses the right course of action. But he can allow his thoughts and feet to move along certain paths to certain places, and his eyes to dwell on certain objects, and thereby kindle his desires. A man can give himself completely into the hands of Christ and devote himself to good works, then he will have neither time nor opportunity for evil desires. For idle hands, the devil finds evil deeds and, first of all, an inexperienced mind and an unenlightened heart are vulnerable. Desire turns into action.

The Jews believed that sin leads to death. In the book "The Life of Adam and Eve", it is said that at the moment when Eve ate the forbidden fruit, she saw death for a moment. The word used by James in v. 15 and translated in the Bible as gives birth death means in the original be fruitful, spawn, and therefore has the meaning here - sin generates, causes, produces death. A person who has become a slave to his desires loses his human dignity and descends to the level of a stupid animal, a "cattle".

This passage is extremely significant because James is pointing out to the people that they themselves are responsible for their sins. No one has yet been born without a desire to commit some evil deed. But if a person consciously and deliberately nourishes and cultivates such a desire in himself until it finally becomes so monstrously strong that it results in a sinful deed, then the person will be on the path of death. This thought - and all human experience shows that it is just - should lead us to the grace of God, which alone can make us clean and keep us clean, and access to it is open to everyone.

GOD'S PERMANENCE IN GOOD (James 1:16-18)

Again, James emphasizes the great truth that every good gift and every perfect gift is from God. Verse 17 could be translated as follows: every gift and every gift from God is good. In the original Greek, this is a very interesting place. The phrase translated in the Bible as "every good gift and every perfect gift" is a perfect hexameter verse. Either Jacob had a great sense of poetic rhythm, or he is quoting from a source unknown to us.

And he emphasizes the immutability, constancy of God and uses two terms from astronomy for this: parallage(changes) and trail(changes). Both words denote visible changes and deviations in the movement of celestial bodies, changes in the longitude of day and night, apparent deviations in the trajectory of the sun, differences in the brightness of stars and planets at different times, etc. Change and change are inherent in all created things. God is the Creator of everything. The morning prayer of the Jews sounds like this: "Blessed be the Lord God, who created the luminaries." The brightness of the luminaries changes, but the One who created them never changes.

Also kind and merciful are always His purposes. word of truth- this is the gospel, the good news; God sent this good news so that man would be reborn to a new life. This revival is a revival into the family of God and into His possession.

AT ancient world there was a law according to which all the first fruits were dedicated to God and offered to Him as a sacrifice. They were offered to God in thanksgiving because they belong to Him, and therefore, when we are reborn from above with the good news, we come into the possession of God, just as the firstfruits came into His possession.

James asserts that the gifts and giving of God have nothing to do with the temptation of man and are unfailingly good. They are unchanging in all the changes and contingencies of this changing world, and the highest purpose of God is to recreate the world through the truth of the good news, so that people know that they are rightfully His.

WHEN TO HURRY AND WHEN TO SLOW (James 1:19-20)

Only a few intelligent people understand the danger of quick speeches and unwillingness to listen. You can make a very interesting list of things in which you need to be quick, and things in which you need to slow down. In the "Proverbs and sayings of the Jewish sages" we read: "There are four types of students: some quickly grasp (hear) and quickly forget - their advantage is reduced to zero by their disadvantage; others grasp slowly, but also slowly forget - they help themselves with memory. Still others quickly grasp and forget slowly - they are wise; the fourth grasp slowly and quickly forget - these are the worst students. The Roman poet Ovid asks people to slow down with punishment and be quick to reward. Philo of Alexandria asks people to be quick to do good to others and be slow to harm anyone.

Wise people understand very well that there is no need to rush to speak. Rabbi Simon said: "I grew up all the time among the wise and found that for a person there is nothing better than silence. Whoever multiplies words commits a sin." Jesus, the son of Sirach, wrote: "Be quick to listen and deliberately give an answer. If you have knowledge, then answer your neighbor; but if not, then let your hand be on your lips. In speeches - words and dishonor" (Sir. 5:13-15). The book of Proverbs of Solomon is full of indications of the danger of speaking too quickly. "With verbosity, sin cannot be avoided" (Prov. 10:19). "Whoever keeps his mouth keeps his soul" (Prov. 13:3). "And a fool, when he is silent, may seem wise" (Prov. 17:28). "Have you seen a man reckless in his words? There is more hope for a fool than for him" (Prov. 29:20).

A truly wise person would rather listen passionately to the voice of God than arrogantly, garrulously, and loudly jump out with his opinion. Already the writers of antiquity agreed with this opinion. Thus, the ancient Greek philosopher Zeno said: "We have two ears and only one mouth, so that we can listen more and speak less." One of the seven Greek sages is credited with the following words: "If you do not like quick speeches, you will not make a mistake." Another, when asked how best to rule the country, replied: "Not angry, speaking little, but listening a lot." And one major linguist was once given such a compliment: "He can be silent in seven languages." Many of us would benefit greatly from listening more and talking less.

James also advises us to be slow to anger. Obviously, he does not agree with those who allow angry reproaches to people. This, of course, is also partly true, for the world would be much poorer without those who flare up in anger at the recurrence of sin and its tyrannical nature. But people so often abuse it.

That's teacher can get angry at a slow, clumsy, and even more often just a lazy student. But, patience can achieve a greater understanding than a sharp reproach or shout. And preacher can be angry. But let him always remember good advice - "do not grumble." If his every word and every gesture does not prove to people that he loves them, he will lose all power over them and all influence. A sermon in which anger, contempt and dislike are felt will not turn souls to the path of truth. And parent may become angry, but parental anger often causes even more stubborn resistance. A note of love in the voice always has a greater effect than an angry one. When anger develops into constant irritation, indignation or captious grumbling, it does more harm than good.

Being slow to speak, slow to anger and quick to listen - it always helps in life.

A TEACHABLE SPIRIT (James 1:21)

James uses a number of very vivid images and expressions. In Greek, the word translated in the Bible as postponing, has the meaning take off in what sense take off one's clothes, get naked. In other words, Jacob implores his listeners to get rid of all filthiness - impurity and wickedness, just as they take off dirty clothes, and a snake sheds its skin.

Both words used by James to refer to filth, very expressive: the Greek word ruparna translated in the Bible as impurity, can mean impurity that stains both clothes and the body. But it has one interesting feature: it is derived from another Greek word rupos, which, as a medical term, has the meaning wax plug in ear. It may well be that this word retains its original meaning in this context. James encourages the listeners to free their ears from everything that prevents them from perceiving the true Word of God. Sulfur plugs in the ears can deafen a person's hearing, and a person's sins make his mind deaf to the words of God.

James speaks further about perisseia- about the growth of vice (translated in the Bible as remainder malice), meaning by this a vice that has grown and tangled like a young undergrowth, or like a cancerous growth that needs to be cut off.

James asks his hearers to accept, as translated in the Bible, implanted word in meekness. For implanted in the original Greek is the word emfutos, which can have two values.

1. It can matter congenital in what sense natural as opposed to acquired. If James used the word in this sense, then he means the same as Paul when he spoke of the Gentiles doing what is lawful by nature, because the work of the law is written in their hearts. (Rom. 2:14-15) or the understanding of the law in the Old Testament (Deut. 30:14), where it is said that this commandment "is very close to you; (it) is in your mouth and in your heart." Practically it is equivalent to our word conscience. If James used the word in this sense, then he meant by this that in the human heart there is an instinctive knowledge of good and evil, and we must always follow its guidance.

2. But it can also matter congenital, in what sense planted like a seed planted in the ground. If Jacob uses this word in this sense, then perhaps his thought goes back to the parable of the sower (Matt. 13:1-8), which speaks of how the seed of the Word is sown in the human heart. God, through His prophets and preachers, and primarily through Jesus Christ, sows His truth into the hearts of people, and a wise person accepts and welcomes it.

It is quite possible that we do not need to choose between these two meanings: after all, perhaps James means that people receive knowledge of the true Word of God immediately from two sources: from the depths of our being, as well as from the Spirit of God through the sermons of people. Both from within and from without, voices come to us, showing us the true path; the wise man listens to them and follows them.

And he listens to them meekness. Meekness is an attempt to translate an untranslatable Greek word prautes, which Aristotle defined as the average between excessive anger and the complete absence of it; this word defines a character trait of a person who is in complete control of his feelings and emotions. One Greek commentator on Aristotle writes: Prautes is moderation in anger... Prautes can be defined as clarity and willpower not to be captured by feelings, but to direct emotions in the way that common sense suggests. "According to Plato's "Definitions", prautes- this is the normalization of the movements of the soul caused by anger.

It is hardly possible to describe the spirit in one word understanding and humble and therefore enough obedient to learn and teach. Teaching Spirit does not know feelings of indignation and anger, he is able to recognize the truth even when it hurts and condemns, he is not blinded by irresistible prejudice and does not close his eyes to the truth, he is not overcome by laziness, and he is so in control of himself that he willingly masters academic discipline. Prautes- this is the perfect possession by a person of his nature and the conquest of that part of it, which can interfere with seeing the truth, obeying it and knowing it.

HEARING AND DOING (James 1:22-24)

A person who goes to church to listen to the reading and interpretation of the Word of God and considers that such hearing has already made him a Christian closes his eyes to the fact that everything read and heard in church should be brought to life. And in our time there are people who identify going to church and reading the Bible with Christianity.

James compares such a person to a person who looks into mirror and sees the spots that ugly his face and disheveled hair, but then calmly moves away from the mirror and completely forgets about his unpleasant appearance and does nothing to correct it. Listening to the true Word of God in church, a person discovers his true essence in himself and recognizes the ideal to which he should strive; sees all the discrepancy, all the deviations and all that needs to be done to correct it, but he remains a listener who does not change from what he hears.

James again reminds us that what we hear in the holy place must be put into action in the marketplace of life. Otherwise, there is no point in such a hearing.

THE LAW IS PERFECT (James 1:25)

This is one of those passages in the Epistle of James that Martin Luther did not like so much: he did not like the idea of ​​the law at all and was ready to repeat after Paul: "The end of the law is Christ" (Rom. 10:4). "James," says Luther, "refers again to the law and the works."

James characterizes the law in these words:

1. Law perfect. There are three reasons for this:

a) This is the law of God, which He Himself gave and revealed to people. The way of life commanded by Jesus and His followers is in full accordance with the will of God.

b) It is perfect because nothing in it can be improved upon. The Christian law is the law of love, and the requirements of love are difficult to meet. When we love someone, we know that we cannot love perfectly.

c) But the Christian law is also perfect in another sense. In Greek this word teleios, which almost always means perfection, directed towards some specific final goal. So, if a person keeps the law of Christ, he will fulfill his destiny for the purposes of God in this world; he will be the person he should be, and he will make his due contribution to the development of the world and will be perfect in the sense that, fulfilling the law of God, he will realize the destiny set for him by God.

2. The law of freedom it is a law, the observance of which gives man true freedom. All great people agreed that only by fulfilling the law of God can a person become truly free. "Obedience to God," said Seneca, "is freedom." "Only the wise are free," said the Stoics, "and all fools are slaves." And Philo of Alexandria said: "All who are in the power of anger or desire or other passion are slaves in the full sense of the word; all who live according to the law are free." When a person has to obey his passions, feelings or desires, he is just a slave. And, only by recognizing the will of God, he becomes completely free, because then he is free to become what he should be. Serving Him is perfect freedom and in doing His will is our peace.

REAL WORSHIP FOR GOD (James 1:26-27)

This is a very important passage. Word piety(in Greek frescoia) means rather than piety, but reverence for God in the sense of the outward manifestation of piety in ritual and ritual worship. James actually says this: "You can do the best service to God by helping the poor and remaining clean from filth." For Jacob, true worship of God does not lie in fine robes or fine music or elaborate rites, but in practical service to people and a pure lifestyle. It happens that the church community or the Church in general devotes a lot of time and money to decorating the building and developing worship services. This often takes time and money for practical Christian ministry. James condemns this approach.

Actually, James condemns what the prophets condemned for a long time. "God," said the psalmist, "is the father of orphans and judge of widows." (Ps. 67:6). The prophet Zechariah also complained that people turned away and hardened their hearts when the God of hosts demanded of them to treat their brothers fairly, not to oppress widows, orphans, strangers and the poor, and not to think evil in their hearts against each other. (Zech. 7:6-10). And the prophet Micah argued that all ritual sacrifices have no meaning if a person does not act justly, does not love works of mercy and does not walk humbly before his God. (Mic. 6:6-8).

Throughout history, people have tried to replace the true worship of God with the rite, they have replaced the service with the internal splendor of the churches, neglecting its effect outside. This does not mean at all that it is a sin to conduct a beautiful worship service in the church itself; but this means that such a worship will have no meaning and meaning if it does not move a person to love God through his brothers and keep himself unspotted from the world.

From the address of King James at the opening of the conference at Hampton Court in January 1604, where it was decided to create a new King James Bible:

“I assure you that we have gathered this assembly not for any innovation, for we recognize the authority of the Church as it is, approved by the clear blessing of God, both in the dissemination of the Scriptures and in a happy and glorious world. But, since nothing can be perfectly ordered, but at any time something can be added, and corruption (as in the human body) imperceptibly increases by the will of time or people, and since we have received many complaints from the entry into this kingdom for many violations and disobedience to the law with great deviation from due, our goal, like a good doctor, is to test and check all complaints and completely eliminate their causes if they are scandalous, cure them if they are dangerous, and completely understand if they are only frivolous, thus shutting up , the mouth of Cerberus, so that he barks no more."

Six teams of translators worked on the King James Bible: two at Westminster, two at Oxford, and two at Cambridge. Each group was assigned to work on a specific part of the Bible, but in cases that required discussion, they all shared the results before reaching a decision.

From an introduction to the Bible written by King James:

“This translation will open a window to let the light in, break the shell so that we can eat the kernel, move the curtain so that we look into the holy of holies, move the lid of the well, as Jacob rolled the stone from the mouth of the source to water the sheep of Laban. Indeed, without translation into plain language, the unlearned are like children at Jacob's well, without a bucket."

A BRIEF HISTORY OF ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE

The Christian Bible originally existed mainly in Hebrew and Greek, and then, for a millennium, in Latin. The first noteworthy translation into English was made in the 1380s by John Wycliffe from the Catholic Latin Vulgate.

In 1516, the scholastic Erasmus began to correct the corrupted Latin Vulgate and published a revised text of the New Testament in parallel in Greek and Latin. Erasmus argued that the Latin Vulgate was inaccurate and that texts in the original languages ​​had to be consulted to produce a correct English translation.

William Tyndale used the Erasmus text for translation and printed the first New Testament in English in 1525. For this work, Tyndale was pursued by the Inquisition and bounty hunters for his head, but one copy fell into the hands of King Henry VIII. Tyndale was eventually captured, tortured, strangled, and burned.

This seems to have happened in 1539, when King Henry set about publishing the English Bible, known as the "Great Bible".

John Calvin published the complete Bible in English in 1560. It was called the Geneva Bible. In it, for the first time, the numbering of verses in chapters was established, which simplified references to a particular passage. In addition, each chapter was provided with copious marginal notes and references. This Bible Shakespeare quoted hundreds of times in his plays. She was the most popular among the population of England.

Queen Elizabeth accepted the Geneva Bible, but she was annoyed by the notes. They opposed the institution of the church as such and inspired a critical attitude towards the authorities in general. The Queen preferred the Bishop's Bible, also the English but less outrageous version used by the Anglican priesthood.

After the death of Elizabeth, Prince James of Scotland became King James I of England. In 1604, the Anglican priests asked him to create new translation, which would suit both priests and parishioners. Many have suggested combining the Episcopal and Geneva Bibles.

In 1605–1606, Jacob's scientists were engaged in individual research. From 1607 to 1609, joint work was carried out. In 1611, the first King James Bible came out of print.

THE NAME "JESUS" AND HISTORY OF ITS TRANSLATION

The name of Christ may be derived from the Hebrew Yehoshua, rendered in Aramaic as Yeshua, then in Greek as Jesus, in Latin as Jesus, and finally in English as Jesus.

The main root of this name comes from the Hebrew Yeshua (Joshua), which means "salvation." However, there is an opinion that a more complete explanation of the name Jesus is based on the authority of Moses. In Numbers (13:2, 3, 4, 17) we read: “And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Send men from yourselves, that they may spy out the land of Canaan, which I am giving to the sons of Israel; send one person from the tribe of their fathers, the main ones ... And Moses called Hosea, the son of Nun, Jesus.

Early Christians referred to this ability of Moses to invent names and gave secret names to the Savior and his twelve disciples (Mark 3:16-19). By the fifth century BC, the name Yehoshua (meaning "God Saves") was shortened to Yeshua (Nehemiah 8:17).

By the first century AD, the name Yeshua was further reduced to Yeshua, and then to Yeshu. From the Gospel of Philip: “Jesus is a hidden name. Christ is an open name. Therefore, Jesus does not exist in any language, but his name is Jesus, as he is called. Christ, on the other hand, is Messiah in Syriac and Christ in Greek. In general, everyone else has it, according to the language of each of them. The Nazarene is that which is revealed from that which is hidden."

The first gospels were often written in Greek, and there were two ways to render a Hebrew name in Greek: translation or transliteration. Greek translators tried to reproduce the sounds of the Hebrew language and received a name that was pronounced approximately like “ee-ai-sus”.

In 382, ​​when Jerome was working on the Vulgate, translating the Bible from Greek into Latin, he gave the Savior's Greek name as Jesus, due to differences between the Greek and Latin alphabets. (In 1229, the Council of Toulouse declared Latin the official language of the Bible and banned translations into other languages.)

Finally, in 1066, along with the invasion of England by the Normans, the previously absent letter J was introduced into the English language. It began to replace I and Y in male names, which began with these letters (because, presumably, that "j" sounded more masculine). Yeams became James, Jesus became Jesus.

However, in 1384, John Wycliffe, for the first time translating the New Testament into English, retained the Latin spelling and pronunciation of Jesus. Apparently, the name Jesus appeared in English language only with a translation by William Tyndale.

Tyndale managed to smuggle into England 18,000 copies of his illegal translation. After his arrest in Belgium, he was convicted of heresy by the Catholic Church, and in 1536 he was hanged, after which his body was burned at the stake. Apparently, King Henry VIII provided financial support for the English translation of the Bible, which set a precedent for Jacob's undertaking.

OTHER TEXTS

1. From the introduction to the Demonology of King James: “The frightening abundance at the present time in this country of these disgusting slaves of the devil, witches or sorcerers, prompted me (beloved reader) to send by post my next treatise, which in no way (I insist) is intended to show my learning and fervor, but only (by the dictates of conscience) to resolve, as far as I can, the spiritual doubts of many: both that such attacks of Satan undoubtedly exist, and that his tools deserve the most serious punishment.

2. The book Enemies of God: The Witch Hunt in Scotland (1981) by Christina Lerner is considered a model study of the witch hunt in Scotland. A good discussion of the Berwick process can be found in Witchcraft in the 15th-17th Centuries in Scotland: The Demonology of James VI and the Witches of North Berwick, published in 2000, edited by Lawrence Normand and Garth Roberts. Moreover, Sir John Fraser's The Golden Bough, especially the chapter on Magic and Religion, was a source of constant pleasure for me.

But to hear a first-hand quote, I will refer to "News from Scotland" - a historical document describing the trial of witches in North Berwick in 1590, in which Jacob participated. I quote it verbatim: “Jellis Duncan undertook to help anyone who was in trouble or suffered from any illness or infirmity; and in a short time she performed many most miraculous deeds (for which she was suspected as a witch). Gellis Duncan was tortured with finger grips and her head squeezed or twisted with a rope. She did not confess until the executioners announced that they had found the "devil's mark" - it was discovered that in recent times he usually marks them with a secret mark.

3. The Gospels of Thomas, Mary, and Philip mentioned in The King James Mystery actually exist. They belong to the texts often referred to as the Gnostic or Apocryphal Gospels. Here they are quoted from The Nag Hammadi Library in English, edited by James Robinson.

FROM THE GOSPEL OF THOMAS

These are the secret words that the living Jesus spoke and that Didymus Judas Thomas wrote down. And he said: He who obtains the interpretation of these words shall not taste death.

1. Jesus said, let him who seeks not stop seeking until he finds, and when he finds he will be shocked, and if he is shocked he will be surprised and he will reign over all.

117. His disciples said to him: On what day does the kingdom come?

It doesn't come when expected. They will not say: Here, here! - or: Here, there! - But the kingdom of the Father is spreading over the earth, and people do not see it.

FROM THE GOSPEL OF PHILIP

Some said that Mary was conceived by the Holy Spirit. They are delusional. What they say they don't know. When did a woman conceive by a woman? Mary is a virgin whom power has not defiled. It is a great anathema for the Jews - the apostles and apostolic men. This virgin, (whom) the power has not defiled, is pure, the powers have been defiled. And the Lord would not (say): my father who is in heaven, if he had no other father, but he would simply say: my father.

Those who say that the Lord died from the beginning and he rose again are mistaken, for he rose from the beginning and he died. If someone has not reached the resurrection in the beginning, he will not die. God is alive - he will be dead.

They will not hide an object of great value in a large vessel, but often myriads, which cannot be counted, were thrown into a vessel worth an assarium. Similarly with the soul: a valuable object, it is enclosed in a despicable body.

FROM THE GOSPEL OF MARY

Peter ... asked them about the Savior: “Did he speak with a woman in secret from us, not openly? Shall we turn and all listen to her? Did he prefer her over us?”

Then Mary burst into tears and said to Peter: “My brother Peter, what do you think? Do you think I made this up in my mind or am I lying about the Savior?”

Levi answered and said to Peter, “Peter, you are always angry. Now I see you competing with a woman as opponents. But if the Savior deemed her worthy, who are you to reject her? Of course, the Savior knew her very well. That's why he loved her more than us."

FROM "GROM. PERFECT MIND"

…For I am the first and the last. I am honored and despised. I am a harlot and a saint. I am a wife and a maid. I am mother and daughter.

WATSON CONSPIRACY

Watson's plot was a rather ill-advised plan by Catholic priest William Watson to kidnap King James and force him to repeal anti-Catholic laws in England. The plot was uncovered by the English Jesuits, including Father Henry Garnet, who denounced the authorities. Garnet was guided by not entirely altruistic motives. The plan was doomed to failure, and he feared reprisals against all Catholics.

THOMAS DECKER

Descriptions of London streets are partly borrowed from Thomas Dekker's The Seven Deadly Sins of London (1606): "In every street, carts and wagons make such a rumble as if the world is rolling on wheels ...", and also from "Dead term" (1608): " Who opens his cloak to reveal a new outfit…” Dekker is quoted in Shakespeare’s England, edited by Pritchard (2000).

BRIEF LIST FOR ADDITIONAL READING

The King James Bible. Plum Books, 1974.

Daemonology. King James VI of Scotland. Originally printed Edinburgh, 1597. E. P. Dutton & Company, 1966.

The Nag Hammadi Library in English. New York: Harper & Row, 1977. James Robinson, general editor.

A quote from The Birds by Aristophanes came to my mind from a 1966 production in which I played the role of Tereus the hoopoe. Alas, I did not remember which translation the play was based on. I have checked the quotation against several modern translations and it is quite accurate.

The Nag Hammadi Library(Hardcover) by Coptic Gnostic Library Project (Corporate Author), James McConkey Robinson (Editor), Richard Smith (Editor). Boston: Brill Academic Publishers, 4th revised edition, 1997.

The Timetables of History. Bernard Grun. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1991.

Giordano Bruno's The Heroic Frenzies. A translation with introduction and notes by Paul Eugene Memmo, Jr. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1964.

Giordano Bruno: Philosopher/Heretic. Ingrid D. Rowland. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2008. This book came out too late to be used in writing The Secret of King James, but it is an excellent account of the life of Giordano Bruno.

Internet resources

Geneva Bible http://www.genevabible.org/Geneva.html

Bible Translators http://www.leamthebible.org/king_james