of the second century for the use of the converted Jews, the epistle of James hath found a place therein, equally with the books which were never called in question. This is an argument of great weight. For certainly the Jewish believers, to whom that epistle was addressed and delivered, were much better judges of its authenticity, than the converted Gentiles, to whom it was not sent, and who, perhaps, had no opportunity of being acquainted with it till long after it was written. Wherefore, its being received by the Jewish believers, is an undeniable proof that they knew it to be written by James the apostle. Whereas the ignorance of the Gentile believers concerning this epistle, is not even a presumption against its authenticity.

That the converted Gentiles had little knowledge of the epistle of James in the first ages, may have been owing to various causes; such as, That it was addressed to the Jews, and that the matters contained in it were personal to the Jews. For on these accounts, the Jewish believers may have thought it not necessary to communicate it to the Gentiles. And when it was made known to them, they may have scrupled to receive it as an inspired writing, for the following reasons: 1. The writer does not in the inscription take the title of an apostle, but calls himself simply, James a servant of God, and of the Lord Jesus Christ.-2. Many of the ancients, by calling the writer of this epistle James the Just, have rendered his apostleship doubtful.-3. As they have done likewise, by speaking of him commonly as Bishop of Jerusalem, and not as an apostle of Christ.-It is little wonder, therefore, that this epistle was not generally received by the converted Gentiles; consequently that it was not often quoted by them in their writings. But afterwards, when it was considered that this epistle was from the beginning received by the Jewish believers, and that it was translated into the Syriac language for their use; and that Paul, though an apostle, sometimes contented himself with the appellation of a servant of Christ, Philip. i. 1. Philem. ver. 1. and sometimes took no appellation but his own name, 1 Thess. i. 1. 2 Thess. i. 1. and that the apostle John did not in any of his epistles call himself an apostle, the title which the author of the epistle of James had to be an apostle was no longer doubted, but he was generally acknowledged to be James the son of Alpheus, and the Lord's brother; and his epistle, after an accurate examination, (see Preface to 2 Peter, sect. 1. paragr. 2.) was received into the canon as an inspired writing. So Estius tells us, who affirms, that after the fourth century no church, nor ecclesi

astical writer is found, who ever doubted of the authority of this epistle. But, on the contrary, all the catalogues of the books of scripture, published, whether by general or provincial councils, or by Roman Bishops, or other orthodox writers since the fourth century, constantly number it among the Canonical scriptures. See Whitby's Preface.

With respect to what is remarked by Eusebius, that there are not many ancient writers who have quoted the epistle of James, learned men have observed, that Clement of Rome hath quoted it four several times. And so does Ignatius in his genuine epistle to the Ephesians, Sect. 10. 12. 17. 30. And Origen in his 13th Homily on Genesis, sect. 5. That it was not more generally quoted by the ancients, besides the things already mentioned, may have been owing to the following reasons: 1. Being written to the whole Jewish nation, to correct the errors and vices which prevailed among them, the Gentiles may have thought themselves little concerned with it, and may have been at no pains to procure copies of it. By which means it was not at . first so generally known among them as some other books of scripture.-2. The seeming opposition of the doctrine in this epistle, to the doctrine of Paul concerning justification by faith without works of law, may have occasioned it to be less regarded by the most ancient writers; just as in later times, it was on the same account rejected by Luther, who to show his contempt of it, called it (epistola straminea) a strawy or chaffy epistle.

To conclude, the authority of the epistle of James as an inspired writing, is abundantly established, in Mill's opinion, by the apostles Paul and Peter, who have in their writings many sentiments and expressions similar to those contained in this epistle. For example:

1 Pet. i. 1. Who hath begotten us again to a living hope, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Rom. v. 3. Knowing that af fliction worketh out patience, and patience experience.

Rom. ii. 13. Not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

James i. 18. Having willed it, he hath begotten us by the word.

Jamés i. 3. Knowing, that the proving of your faith worketh out patience.

James i. 22. And be ye doers of the law, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves by false reasoning.

Rom. vii. 23. I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind.

1 Pet. ii. 11. Lusts which war against the soul.

1 Pet. v. 8. Your adversary the devil: 9. whom resist stedfast in the faith.

1 Pet. v. 6. Be humbled under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you.

Rom. iv. 4. Who art thou that condemnest another man's household servant ?

1 Pet. iv. 8. Love covereth a multitude of sins.

James iv. 1. Come they not hence, even from your lusts, which war in your members.

James iv. 7. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.

James iv. 10. Be humbled in the presence of God, and he will lift you up.

James iv. 12. Thou, who art thou that condemnest another?

James v. 20. Will cover a multitude of sins.

SECTION III.

Of the Persons to whom the Epistle of James was addressed :—Of the Time and Place where it was written and delivered --And of the Death of

James.

I. Beza thought the epistle of James was written to the believing Jews dispersed all over the world. This likewise was the opinion of Cave and Fabricius. Grotius says, it was written to all the people of Israel living out of Judea; in which he is followed by Wall. But Lardner, with more probability, thinks it was written to the whole Jewish nation in Judea and out of it, whether believers or not. This opinion he builds on the inscription of the epistle, which runs thus: James a servant of God, and of Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes, that is, to the whole Jewish nation, in whatever part of the world they were living. For no description of that people can be more comprehensive than the twelve tribes; and though it be added, who are in the dispersion, the expression, he thinks, includes the Jews living in Judea, who since the Romans subdued them, might be considered as dispersed even in Judea itself. Or, if this sense of the expression is not admitted, it can imply no more, but that the apostle's letter was chiefly intended for the Jews in foreign countries; consequently, it does not exclude the Jews in Judea, who were the writer's peculiar charge; and to whom, as shall be shewed immediately, some things in the epistle more especially belong.

Next, that this epistle was designed for the unconverted as well as the converted Jews, is plain from this, that the apostle did not, in the beginning of it, wish the twelve tribes grace and peace from Jesus Christ, but gave them only a general salutation, or wish of health; neither did he conclude his letter with any christian benediction, as he would have done if the whole of his letter had been intended for believers. Farther, that this epistle was designed in part for the unbelieving Jews, appears from some passages which belong more particularly to them. For example, chap. iv. 1.-10. where the writer speaks of wars and fightings among them, in which, being actuated by their lusts, they killed one another. These things could not be said of the believing Jews, but must be understood of the mutinies and insurrections which the unbelievers, especially the Zealots, raised both in Judea and in the provinces, and which brought on the war with the Romans; also chap. v. 1.-5. where James describes the miseries which were coming on the persons to whom he writes, and which fell heaviest on the unbelieving Jews in Judea; and mentions their condemning the just one, who did not resist them, and insinuates that these miseries were coming on them for that crime. Lastly, the whole of the third chapter, in Whitby's opinion, may have been intended for the unbelieving, as well as the believing Jews, the name of brethren being applicable to both, when used by a writer of their own nation.

II. With respect to the date of this epistle, they who think it was written by James the son of Alpheus, fix it to the year 62; because the wars and insurrections, which ended in the destruction of the Jewish commonwealth, are reproved in it, and the coming of Christ to destroy Jerusalem, and break the power of the unbelieving part of the nation, is said, chap. v. 8. to be near. Later than that year the epistle of James cannot be dated, if the opinion of Theodoret be admitted, who tells us, that what is said in the epistle to the Hebrews, which was written in the end of the year 62, or the beginning of the year 63, refers, among others, to the martyrdom of James the Just, chap. xiii. 7. Remember your rulers, who have spoken to you the word of God; and attentively considering the ending of their conversation, imitate their faith.

Josephus, the Jewish historian, is supposed to have spoken of the death of James the Just in the following passage: "Ananus "the younger, who had just before been nominated High Priest,

"was haughty in his behaviour, and extremely daring. He was "of the sect of the Sadducees, who are above all other Jews, "severe in their judicial sentences. As therefore Ananus was "such a man, he thinking he had a fit opportunity, because Festus "was dead, and Albinus was yet upon the road, calls a council, "and bringing before them the brother of Jesus, who is called "Christ, whose name was James, and some others, he brought

an accusation against them, as transgressors of the law, and "delivered them to be stoned to death; by which means he "offended some of the mildest Jews in the city, and such as were "most exact observers of the law." Ant. Lib. 20. chap. 8. Genev. Edit. if the words, the brother of Jesus, who is called Christ, are genuine, this passage will fix the death of James to the year 63, after Festus was dead, and before Albinus came into the province. But many learned men, and among the rest, Le Clerc, Ars. Critic Part III. sect. 1. cap. 14. and Lardner, Can. vol. S. p. 51. think these words are an interpolation. The ancient Christian writers give a different account of the death of James. They think he was killed, not in consequence of a judicial trial, but in a popular tumult, the occasion of which Eusebius thus explains, E. H. l. 2. c. 23. "When Paul had appealed to Cæsar, and had

been sent to Rome by Festus, the Jews, who had aimed at his "death, being disappointed in that design, turned their rage "against James the Lord's brother, who had been appointed by "the apostles Bishop of Jerusalem," &c. Lardner conjectures that the death of James was partly ❝occasioned by the offence "taken at his epistle; in which are not only sharp reprehensions "of the unbelieving Jews, for the crimes committed by them, "but also affecting representations of the dreadful calamities "coming upon them." Can. 3. p. 93. By laying these facts and circumstances together, we cannot be much mistaken in supposing that James wrote his epistle after the mutinies and insurrections which brought on the war with the Romans, were begun and before Jerusalem was besieged; consequently in the beginning of the year 62, or in 61, a short time before James's death. This is Lardner's opinion, p. 92. But Mill and Fabricius think it was written in the year 60, a year or two before his death.

As the apostle James commonly resided in Jerusalem, for the purpose of superintending the affairs of the church there, it is reasonable to think he wrote his epistle in Jerusalem, and deli