05_Biblica_Aletti_Layout 1 01/04/14 12:04 Pagina 99 99 JAMES 2,14-26 The order of the examples concerning Abraham — Genesis 22 before Genesis 15 — also shows that for James God justified Abra- ham because He knew that later the Patriarch would obey Him per- fectly. His reading of the narrative from Genesis is the same as that of the Judaism of his day, according to which Abraham was justi- fied before God because he obeyed the Lord and His Torah. Commentators point out that the term no,moj does not appear in Jas 2,14-26: “It is important to note that James never connects the Law to the problem of justification nor to the issue of works” 21. In its absence, one could conclude that, because the problem of Gala- tians and Romans is completely different, Jas 2,14-26 is in no way making an allusion to Paul’s position. Indeed, the difficulty con- fronted by the latter is the circumcision of ethnic Christians. For Paul, having them circumcised would have meant their becoming Jews and thus subjects of the Mosaic Law. Paul, therefore, could not have failed to confront the connection to the Law since he re- jected it as a means of salvation. The problem of works for Paul is thus in relation to the Law: circumcision makes one a Jew, and a Jew is subject to the Law. But here, the problem is not the passage of ethnic Christians to Judaism but that of good works (for salvation) for Christians already justified by faith and by baptism. Whether ethnic or Judaeo-Christians, all are invited to have an operative faith by coming to the aid of the poor (v. 16) and thus by putting to work what the apostolic tradition related regarding Jesus’ exhortations to his disciples 22. Because the problem was different from that of the Pauline letters, one can understand why James chose to use a maxim and not a chreia, which would have necessitated mentioning Paul. IV. The Author of the Letter? The preceding thoughts on the manner of proceeding in James raises another question, much debated today. If the Greek style and language of the letter are of an advanced level and if its dispositio follows the rules set by ancient Greek rhetors and further utilized by many for short argumentations during this era, who then is the 21 R. PENNA, “La giustificazione in Paolo e in Giacomo,” RivBib 30 (1982) 341. 22 Cf. Matt 19,21 and parallels; 25,34-36; Luke 14,13; 16,19-31.