The Commandment 'Love your Neighbour as Yourself' in the Epistle of James

The Old Testament commandment ‘love your neighbour as yourself’ (Leviticus 19:18, further referred to as the commandment to love one’s neighbour as well) has an indisputably privileged position among other commandments not only in Jesus’ teachings but also in Paul’s ethical challenges, as well as in the Epistle of James. The commandment is found in the individual New Testament books in various contexts. These, in a specifi c way, emphasise its extraordinary importance in the life of early Christian communities. This study deals with the interpretation of the commandment to love one’s neighbour in the Epistle of James (2:8). Its specifi c concept is fundamentally conditioned by both contextual coherence and terminology and phrases which surround this interpretation and which are associated with various interpretive diffi culties of linguistic, semantics, and theological character. The commandment to love one’s neighbour as yourself is presented here as the norm that provides the Jewish-Christian addressees of the letter with guidance. It concerns the process of deciding on the practical implementation of the individual requirements of the Torah in the context of faith in the Lord


Introduction
Th e commandment of love from Leviticus 19:18 is found in the New Testament eight times (Matthew 5:43; 19:19; 22,39; Mark 12:31,33; Luke 10:27; Romans 13:9; Galatians 5:14; James 2:8). Th is makes this commandment the most oft en directly quoted Old Testament text in the New Testament. In all places, it is stated in connection with the Law 1 or other commandments of the Ten Commandments. 2 Th e various contexts of the Synoptics, Paul, and James confi rm and emphasise its undeniable and extraordinary importance in the life of early Christian communities. Th e importance concerns especially the process of refl ections upon the ways of the fulfi lling of Old Testament commandments and prohibitions in the context of faith in Jesus Christ, the Son of 10 2020 God and the Messiah. In this study, we are interested in the way of presenting this commandment in the Epistle of James. Attention will fi rst be paid to its contextual setting within the pericope 2:1-13. Th e content of this pericope is richness (verses 1-7) connected with the theme of the law (verses 8 -13). We will also explore other contextual coherence within the epistle. In the following sections, the individual segments of the eighth verse of the second chapter will be discussed. Th ere are various interpretive diffi culties of a linguistic, semantic, and theological nature. Th eir clarifi cation will allow us to gain an idea of the position of the commandment to love one's neighbour in the environment of the Jewish-Christian community to which the Epistle of James is addressed.

Context
Th e commandment to love one's neighbour is a part of a broader text unit of James 2:1-13. Th ere is quite a fundamental agreement in the literature about the defi nition of this text. Th e text itself is usually further divided into two interconnected basic parts: 2:1-7 and 2:8-13. Even if there is the signifi cant presence of the 'law' at fi rst sight in 2:1-13, its overarching theme is a certain appropriate action which corresponds to the faith in the Lord Jesus Christ (cf. 2:1). 5 In verses 8-13, there is a clear dominance of the subject of the law. Th is is mainly due to fi ve of the ten occurrences of the word νόμος in the Epistle of James (1:25; 2:8,9,10,11,12; 4:11 (four times)). Th e direct quotation of the commandment to love one's neighbour, together with the two quoted commandments (more precisely the prohibitions of the Ten Commandments in verse 11), give a specifi c character to a group of verses 8-11 which can be easily distinguished from their immediate context by vocabulary and syntax. 6 -7 None of the cited commandments, in its content, corresponds directly to the author's accusation about the preference of some people which is in the introductory verse of the second chapter. 8 While in verses 1-7, the contrast between rich and poor comes to the fore (or rather between showing respect and disrespect to them), verses 8-11 are based on the contrast between those who keep the law and those who transgress it (νόμον τελεῖτε vs. παραβάται, τὸν νόμον τηρήσῃ vs. παραβάτης). Th e diff erence between the two paragraphs is also in the style: the rhetorical questions in verses 4-7 9 (addressing directly the addressees in the 2nd person plural) are in verses 8-11 replaced by argumentation in the form of conditional sentences (the 2nd person plural and the 3rd person singular are alternating there) which are connected by causal conjunctions. 10 Th e specifi c thinking and actions which are typical of a group of addressed persons are replaced by more general 11 statements of a moral nature based on the norms of the Law in the Scriptures of the Old Testament. 12 Verses 1-7 express a negative aspect of the criticism of the addressees. It is directed against the bad attitude concerning favouring which is incompatible with their faith in Jesus Christ. In verse 8, the author formulates the positive side of his religious argument. He presents the implementation of the 'royal law according to Scripture' as an alternative. It is done in a manner corresponding to the commandment to love one's neighbour 13 which is incompatible with the criticised favouring of the rich people. Verses 9-10 present this favouring as a sinful act and a transgression of the law. Any 'stumbling' (πταίσῃ δὲ ἐν ἑνί) in connection with the law makes a person an off ender against the law (παραβάτης νόμου) and guilty in respect to the whole (πάντων ἔνοχος) law. According to this law, the addressees will eventually be judged (verse 12). For the sake of completeness, it should be added that the attitude of the community towards both the rich and the poor is, according to the author, in direct confl ict not only with the attitude of God himself (verses 5-6a) but also with their own experience with rich people. Th e rich are the ones who, according to the description in verses 2:6b-7, have a negative attitude towards the addressees. Th ey oppress them, drag them into the courts and blaspheme the good name called upon them. 14 Naturally, the important connection between the two parts cannot be neglected. Th e connection is done through the terms expressing favouring on the basis of external appearance (verse 1: προσωπολημψίαις; verse 9: προσωπολημπτεῖτε). 15 Th is favouring gives a lot of honour to certain persons and denies it to others for reasons which have nothing to do with their real merits. At the same time, such actions contradict faith in Jesus Christ (verse 1). Th e addressees of the epistle dishonour the poor (verse 6: ἠτιμάσατε τὸν πτωχόν) who are God's loved ones (v. 5). At the same time, they give service to the rich (v. 3). Th e topic of favouring is in verses 8-11 explicitly connected with the topic of the law. 16 Th e passage 2:1-13 is connected by the term 'faith' (πίστις) with the second part of the second chapter (2:14-26) where the relationship between faith and deeds is themed. Faith is 9 Verse 4 is grammatically an apodosis of an extensive conditional sentence, and its protasis includes verses 2-3. 10 2020 dead (νεκρά, 2:17,26), or 'inactive' (ἀργή, 2:20) unless accompanied by appropriate deeds. Th e deeds of the community which sides with the rich thus do not correspond to its faith or to the commandment to love one's neighbour. Th e latter is a decisive indicator of proper behaviour in accordance with the proclaimed faith. 17 Verses 2:1-13 are connected with the immediately preceding text (1:26-27) through the term κόσμος. Th is word is associated with an irreconcilable contrast between God and the world 18 concerning the realisation of authentic religion (1:27), or the right attitude towards the poor (2:5) both in the life of the individual and in the life of the community. Based on this context, the topic of favouring the rich and despising the poor as manifestations of the mentality of the 'world' can be related to the care of widows and orphans (1:27). 19 Both highlight and confi rm the author's strong emphasis on the social aspects of community life and his interest in them (see also 2:15-17; 5:4). 20 Th rough the term νόμος, the fi rst part of the second chapter also refers to the 'perfect law of freedom' in 1:25. It is mentioned there in connection with the subject of listening and speaking. In this section, the author urges the addressees not only to be passive recipients of the word but also to be its active doers (1: [19][20][21][22][23][24][25]. Section 2:8-11 is also important in this context because it clarifi es the content of the 'law' . 21 Verses 4:11-12, in addition to condemning slander, clearly identify God as 'the only Lawgiver and Judge' , and are very important for an overall understanding of the 'law' in the Epistle of James.

Verses 2:8 and 2:9
Th e interrelationship of verses 8 and 9, which show connections on several levels, deserves special attention. From a syntactic point of view, these are two conditional clauses connected by the construction εἰ μέντοι… εἰ δέ. 22 Th e particle μέντοι (which occurs only in this place in James) can have two basic meanings, namely (1) affi rmative, confi rming: 'really, indeed, for sure' , and (2) adversely, contradicting: 'but, nevertheless' . 23 Th e following interpretation of the relationship between verses 8 and 9 supports the use of this particle in verse 8 in the fi rst sense, although in all other places in the New Testament it seems to have a rather adverse meaning. 24 In the sense of 'really' , it then refers to what follows and it creates the transition to sub-section of verses 8-11. 25 Verses 8 and 9 contain the inclusion created by the term 'law' . It stands as the normative quantity of action at the beginning of verse 8, and as the judicial quantity that convicts of sin at the end of verse 9. Th e content of this inclusion in the mentioned verses forms an antithetical par-allelism, 26 where the statements of both antecedents (εἰ μέντοι νόμον τελεῖτε βασιλικὸν vs. εἰ δὲ προσωπολημπτεῖτε), and both consequents (καλῶς ποιεῖτε vs. ἁμαρτίαν ἐργάζεσθε) are in opposition. 27 Th e sentences in both verses belong to the category of real conditional sentences whose relationship (through protasis) to reality is indeterminate; they express only the fact that the relationship between antecedent and consequent is real, respectively logically necessary. 28 However, this leaves open the real status quo in the community on this issue. 29 It is very likely that verse 9a refers to a real (not just a fi ctitious or hypothetical) case (cases?) of favouring the rich described in verses 2-4. 30 Due to this fact, it can be concluded 31 (if we take into account the contrasting nature of both verses) that verse 8a also describes reality, that is, that the addressed community in some way fulfi ls, or is able to fulfi l, the royal law according to the commandment to love one's neighbour. Th e addressees, on the one hand, violate the law by their favouring the rich, but on the other hand, they are able to do good if they show love to their neighbours in some other way. 32 Th is discrepancy does not surprise the reader of the epistle. It is, in essence, only one of the manifestations of ambivalence in the actions of the community. It is, though, fundamentally connected with the ambivalent relationship of the community with God. 'Th e community in the Epistle of James is divided in itself because it is not able to submit fully to God, God's will. Th ey live a life full of compromise with the 'world' , its reasoning, values, and norms (cf. 2:1-13; 4:1-3,13-16). ' 33 Th e two described actions are thus not mutually exclusive on the basis of this consideration, and therefore it is possible to agree with the opinion (1) interpreting the two conditions as simultaneous in the sense that those who love their neighbour also favour the rich. According to this interpretation, the author of the epistle says that if the addressees although otherwise able to show love to their neighbours 34 favour the rich, they are transgressors of the law in this one respect (ἐν ἑνί, verse 10). 35 From a factual point of view, favouring the rich would be perceived more as a violation of the prohibition formulated in Leviticus 19:15 this is probably alluded to in verse 9. 36 Although the commandment to love one's neighbour has a certainly more privileged position than the other commandments, it is neither in verse 8 nor anywhere in the Epistle of James identifi ed with the 'law' . Th erefore, it also seems to be the less convincing -otherwise major -second opinion (2). Th is interprets the conditional sentences in verses 8 and 9 as contradictory. 37 It says that those who favour the rich transgress precisely and above all the commandment to love one's neighbour. 38 Th is clarifi cation ('above all') plays an important role here. Th e fi rst opinion (which is used here) does not imply that the addressees do not sin against the commandment to love one's neighbour through their behaviour towards the rich (and the poor). According to it, they sin against the 'law' . In fact and in the fi rst place, they sin against the prohibition of favouring someone (Leviticus 19:15), 39 and thus also against the commandment to love one's neighbour. 40 Th e very commandment of love is very broad in content. Subsequently, all regulations concerning interpersonal relationships can be applied to it in some way as the commandment represents a guiding or summarising principle. 41 Another argument in favour of the abovementioned view (1) is a certain similarity between verses 8-9 and 10 and 11. According to verse 9b, those who favour the rich are convicted to be the transgressors of 'the law' 42 (cf. verse 11: παραβάτης νόμου). Verses 10-11, which the author presents as a justifi cation for the statement or rather the accusation in verse 9, contain a certain variation of the abovementioned discrepancy, or inconsistency from verses 8-9 (understood as simultaneous conditions). 43 A similar reasoning in these verses 44 can be approached as follows.
(A) verses 8-9: favouring (the rich) is a transgression of the law even if one lives according to the normative directive of the law (namely the commandment to love one's neighbour) otherwise. 45 (B) verse 10: transgression of the law in one respect makes a person guilty in all others, even if he otherwise keeps other parts of the law. 46 (C) verse 11: 47 the person who commits murder has become, a transgressor of the law even if he does not commit adultery, that is, he keeps the law in another respect.
Favouring the rich (associated here with the dishonouring of the poor) was one of the 'good morals' in Roman society at that time and was part of its etiquette. For the author of the epistle, however, it is unacceptable as it is not a matter of etiquette but law. 'Living according to Roman etiquette automatically makes you a sinner according to God's Law because Roman society is built upon partiality. What is acceptable in Roman society is unacceptable according to the Law of God. Th e Roman etiquette of partiality is an off ence against God and a transgression of the love command. ' 48 Favouring persons (προσωπολημψία) as the introductory theme of the second chapter is a transgression of the law (cf. 2:9,10) in several respects: it is not only a violation of the prohibition of favouring (Leviticus 19:15) but also a transgression against the commandment to love one's neighbour and transgression against the whole royal law.

Fulfi l the Royal Law
'Law' (νόμος: 1:25; 2:8,9,10,11,12; 4:11 (four times)) is undoubtedly one of the most theologically relevant terms in the Epistle of James. 49 It is discussed in three diff erent contexts, always in the context of a certain action: 50 the law and the practical implementation of the word (1: [22][23][24][25][26][27], the law and the favouring of persons (2:1-13), and the law and slandering (4:11-12). 51 In four cases it has diff erent attributes: the 'perfect law of freedom' (1:25), 'royal law' (2:8), 'the whole law' (2:10), and 'the law of freedom' (2:12). Th ese defi nitions identify three diff erent aspects of the same law and together form its specifi c conception attributable to the Epistle of James. 52 Th e 'law' in James's letter can, in some respects, be identifi ed with the 'word' (cf. 1: 18,21,[22][23][24][25]. 53 Th is law expresses its imperative, normative and binding nature 54 hence the 'perfect law of freedom' (verse 25: νόμος τέλειος ὁ τῆς ἐλευθερίας) cannot be reduced to a single requirement of the law. 55 Th is is also confi rmed in verse 2:10 where, through the wording 'the whole law' (ὅλον τὸν νόμον), 'in one' (ἐν ἑνί) 56 and 'guilty in all' (πάντων ἔνοχος), the law is presented as an organic unity. It is a unity 'where like in a living organism, the violation of one place disturbs the balance of the whole organism.' 57 Th e law as a individual entity claims a certain authority through the process of 'convicting' . It acts as a judge and it is almost personifi ed. 58 Th e guarantor of the authority and organic integrity of the law and its individual parts 59 is ultimately God himself as the only Lawgiver (4:12). 60 In connection with the characteristic of the 'royal' law (βασιλικός) which is unique in the whole  New Testament, 61 the following several possibilities of its interpretation can be considered: 62 (1) It shows that the law comes from the king, it is a law issued by the king himself.
(2) It is related to the 'kingdom' mentioned in verse 5, it is the law related to this kingdom that is promised to those who love God.
(3) It characterises the royal, prominent position of the commandment of love among the other commandments.
(4) Unlike the previous one, the royal character includes not only one commandment but the whole law. Th is fact is based on its function or position.
(5) It applies to the addressees of the law who (when obeying this law) become not only heirs, or inhabitants of the kingdom, but kings themselves.
Although the third interpretation (identifying the 'royal law' with the commandment to love one's neighbour) seems to be the majority, 63 it can be considered the least likely. It is mainly because in all other places in the Epistle of James, the 'law' always means the whole law. 64 Th is means that it cannot be reduced to one commandment no matter how more prominent than all the others it is. On the other hand, even if we do not accept it, we cannot deny a certain more privileged position of this commandment within the law even in the case of the remaining options. 65 Th e other mentioned possibilities concerning the law as a whole are complementary 66 rather than mutually exclusive. Th is may be related to diff erent levels of meaning of the adjective 'royal' itself. 67 Th is adjective is left by the author of the epistle without further specifi cation. Th erefore, it is possible to formulate the characteristics of the 'royal' law. 68 as, for example a law coming from God (cf. 4:12), from the King, it has royal dignity and authority, and is valid in his kingdom. 69 In any case, the attribute 'royal' contains the idea of the highest position, the highest rank but also the perfection. In this way, it approaches the attribute of the law 'perfect' (1:25) 70 and 'clearly underlines the importance of the νόμος and so implies obligation to observe it' . 71 In connection with the transgression of the law, the two commandments of the Ten Commandments are explicitly given in 2:11 as concrete examples. It can be therefore rightly concluded that the 'law' as the main theme of sections 2:8-13 includes the law of Moses, the (whole) Torah. 72 Th e law as a whole (2:10) is an expression of the will of the one God, the Lawgiver (4:12). At the same time, it is a norm of Christian 73 action which is specifi cally formulated in the individual commandments of the law of Moses (cf. 2:10,11) and, eminently, in the commandment to love one's neighbour (2:8). Th e latter is inseparable from love for God. Th e commandment to love one's neighbour (which has a certain normative position, verse 8) 74 and the expression of mercy (which is a decisive factor in court, verse 13) frame the subject matter of the law in the second chapter of the epistle. It therefore serves 'as certain hermeneutic principles of the conception of law, the interpretation of law, as a "critical norm" with respect to the Torah. ' 75 Th ey thus provide the Jewish-Christian community of addressees with practical guidance. Th is concerns the process of deciding on the fulfi lment (τελεῖτε) of the Torah and its requirements in the context of faith in Jesus Christ. Th e epistle of James represents the concept of the Torah interpreted in a Christian way. 76 It is also based on Jesus' interpretation of the Law. 77 Th e verb τελεῖν with the basic meaning 'to complete' 78 means (in connection with 'the law') 'to fulfi l the law' in the sense of 'to do something to the fullest extent / completely' (cf., for example, Luke 2:39). 79 At the forefront is the aspect of its deliberate and conscious practical implementation. 80 Th erefore, in this context, it is also possible to use the translation 'to implement the law' , or more precisely its requirements. 81 Th e connection between νόμον τελεῖν (2:8) and νόμον τέλειον τὸν τἐς ἐλευθερίας (1:25), 82 linking the theme of law to perfection, 83 as the key theme of the Epistle of James cannot be overlooked. 84 Th e 'perfect law of freedom' (1:25) is God's gift . It accompanies believers who should live according to it (νόμον τελεῖτε, 2:8) on their path to perfection (ἵνα ἦτε τέλειοι, 1:4). As 'every perfect gift ' comes from God (πᾶν δώρημα τέλειον ἄνωθέν ἐστιν καταβαῖνον ἀπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς τῶν φώτων, 1:17), perfection in its fi nal form is also the gift of God. He ultimately decides the fi nal destiny of man (τὸ τέλος κυρίου, 5:11) because he is 'a judge who has the power to save and destroy' (4:12: κριτὴς ὁ δυνάμενος σῶσαι καὶ ἀπολέσαι). 85 Th e means for the fi nal assessment of human speaking and action is the law of freedom (2:12). Th e attribute of perfection and the attribute 'royal' related to God's 'kingdom' which, like the 'wreath of life' is promised to 'those who love God' (2:5; 1:12), confi rm and supplement the eschatological aspect of the law.

According to the Scripture
Th e wording 'according to the Scripture' (κατὰ τὴν γραφήν) which introduces the quote from Leviticus 19:18, is the only one in the New Testament in this form. 86 In the Epistle of James, it represents a very specifi c statement of a direct Old Testament quotation because in all other places (2:11,23; 4:5,6), the author uses the forms of the verb λέγειν ('to say') for this purpose. Th e preposition κατά in conjunction with the accusative itself has the meaning 'according to' in the sense of 'in accordance with' in other places in the Epistle (James 2:17; 87 3:9). Th e phrase κατὰ τὴν γραφήν is found in the Septuagint six times and always in the meaning 'according to, in accordance with' in the religious context (Deuteronomy 10:4; 1 Chronicles 15:15; 2 Chronicles 30:5; Ezra 6:18) or political context (2 Chronicles 35:4; 3 Ezra 1:4). In none of these cases does κατὰ τὴν γραφήν cite a direct quotation, but it introduces a 'scripture' as the norm by which something must be done. It therefore can be reasonably assumed that the author of the Epistle of James also used the above phrase in this normative sense: 88 'If you keep the royal law in accordance with the Scriptures. ' 89 A grammatical interpretation of the phrase κατὰ τὴν γραφήν, which syntactically belongs to the verb τελεῖτε and not to νόμον βασιλικόν, is also associated with this interpretation and the abovementioned assertion of the impossibility of identifying the commandment to love one's neighbour with 'royal law' . 90 Th e whole 'royal law' is to be fulfi lled in accordance with the commandment to love one's neighbour. 91 It is also just one among the other Old Testament commandments but with a special status towards them as these are to be carried out according to it.
Th e unusual usage of the text from Scripture can perhaps also be seen as one of the ways in which the author suggests its special position in relation to other Old Testament commandments and prohibitions within the Ten Commandments. Two of them, cited in verse 11, are introduced by the aorist forms of the verb λέγω indicating that they are simple quotations used as examples of the organic interconnection of the various parts of the 'whole Law' associated in verse 10 with the verb 'to keep' (τηρήσῃ). 92 Th e author of the epistle, through the phrase 'according to the Scripture' , the connection with 'the fulfi lment of the royal law' , and the comment 'you do well' , presents the commandment to love in its essential importance and normative function to Christians. 93 Th is function comes from the status and authority attributed to the commandment in Jesus' teaching. 94 Th e words 'according to the Scripture' explicitly represent the commandment to love as a normative part of Scripture, or of the Law (as shown in verses 8-11). Th e author of the Epistle of James (also) most likely knew and consciously used the Old Testament context of this commandment from Leviticus 19:12-18. 95 Here (in the same way as in the abovementioned place of Leviticus) it is mentioned in connection with the prohibition of favouring. Leviticus 19:15, in the context of litigation, demands impartiality for both the poor and the powerful: 'You shall do no injustice in judgment; you shall not show partiality to the poor nor favouritism to the mighty; in righteousness shall you judge your neighbour. ' (οὐ ποιήσετε ἄδικον ἐν κρίσει οὐ λήμψῃ πρόσωπον πτωχοῦ οὐδὲ θαυμάσεις πρόσωπον δυνάστου ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ κρινεῖς τὸν πλησίον σου). Th is situation, together with the characteristics and position of the 'poor' in the second chapter (πτωχός 2:2,3,5,6), does not allow James to take over the position from Leviticus and also appeal to the impartiality of the poor; God himself favours them, he is on their side, and therefore one has to be on their side. 96 Th is could also be one of the reasons 97 why he does not quote Leviticus 19:15 explicitly. Although in James 2:1-13, unlike in Leviticus 19, no specifi c court case is dealt with, the whole pericope (in which the prohibition of favouring and the commandment to love one's neighbour are found) is full of judicial terminology. 98 Th e author of the Epistle of James thus very closely connected the commandment to love one's neighbour and the prohibition of favouring persons more signifi cant from a social point of view in a way, similarly as in  According to him, the commandment to love is the determining norm by which the whole law of Moses is to be kept and interpreted. Th erefore, the violation of the prohibition of favouring persons is also a transgression against the commandment to love. 100

You Will Love Your Neighbour
In the Epistle of James, in addition to the Old Testament quotation from Leviticus 19:15 which occurs in 2:8, the verb ἀγαπάω occurs only two times, in 1:12 and 2:5, and its adjective derivative ἀγαπητός three times in 1:16,19 and 2:5. 101 Th e meaning of both terms is associated with the love άγάπη 102 which, like φιλία, refers primarily to 'love that arises on the basis of preference' but also (with the specifi c nuance) to 'love which can be directed through our decisions and reasoning. So preferences are based less on emotions and more on balance. ' 103 In the other two places, the verb ἀγαπάω is found in the phrase 'those who love Him' (τοῖς ἀγαπῶσιν αὐτόν). Based on the context of 'he' in 2:5, God is evidently meant by this. In 1:12c, the subject of In verses 2:19 and 4:12, regarding the oneness of God, the Lawgiver and the Judge, echoes of Deuteronomy 6:4-5 can be recognised, where faith in the one God is inextricably linked with absolute devotion and love for Him. To love God 'with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength' (ἐξ ὅλης τῆς καρδίας σου καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς ψυχῆς σου καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς δυνάμεώς σου) is implicitly but completely contrary to the attitude of the addressees of the epistle who are divided in their relationship with God. Th e author of the letter clearly expresses it by their characteristics δίψυχοι in verse 4:8. Th ey want to be well with both the world and God (see 4:4). 114 Th e ambivalence in relation to God is also refl ected in the interpersonal relationships within the community (see, for example, 2:2-4,14-16; 3:14-16; 4:1-2,11; 5:4,9). Th is only confi rms the urgency to guide them through life according to the law in accordance with the commandment to love one's neighbour.
As in all other places of the New Testament, where the commandment to love one's neighbour is quoted from Leviticus 19:18, with the exception of the Gospel of Luke (cf. Luke 10:29,36), the author of the Epistle of James does not clarify who is to be considered a neighbour. In his work (in addition to 2:8), he uses the term πλησίον in 4:12 in contexts which are related to some extent. 115 Pericopes 2:8-13 and 4:11-12 are close to each other. Th eir similarity is based on related terminology: νόμος/νομοθέτης (2:8,9,10,11,12; 4:11,12), κρίνω/κρίσις/κριτής (2:12,13; 116 4:11,12), and πλησίον (2:8; 4:12). In both cases, this terminology of law and court is used in connection with certain specifi c actions in the community of addressees: with favouring persons, or with slandering one another. Because in 4:11-12 the author moves quite smoothly from the use of 'brother' to 'neighbour' (ὁ… κρίνων τὸν ἀδελφὸν, ὁ κρίνων τὸν πλησίον), 117 it can be reasonably assumed that the contents of the two terms overlap to a large extent. A similar semantic overlap can also be inferred in sections 2:8-11 (13) where, as in 4:11-12, the addressees are addressed as 'brothers' (cf. 2:1,5; see also 2:14). To those the Old Testament citation of the command to love one's neighbour in 2:8 is addressed. 118 Th e term ἀδελφός is found in the Epistle of James 19 times in 17 verses (1:2,9,16,19; 2:1,5,14,15; 3:1,10,12; 4:11 (3 times); 5:7,9,10,12,19), 119 and the author uses it 15 times in the form of a plural vocative to address the addressees. It can therefore be stated that it is clearly applied to the members of the faithful community to which the Epistle is addressed. Whether the term πλησίον applies only to the addressees addressed 120 or should be understood in a broader, universal scope, 121 cannot be unambiguously decided on the basis of just two occurrences. It applies especially if in one case it is an adopted Old Testament citation and in the other this term fl uently alternates with the term ἀδελφός. 122 However, both contexts reveal and confi rm that the relationship to one's neighbour is fundamentally determined by and connected with subordination to the law, and with the recognition of its authority guaranteed by God himself. 123

You Do Right
If the addressees of the Epistle fulfi l the royal law in accordance with the commandment of love, they do well (καλῶς ποιεῖτε). At fi rst glance, this rather general and perhaps even banal evaluation acquires a specifi cally important meaning in the context of the Epistle of James. It is mainly given by the fact that the verb ποιέω ('to do, to act' , etc.) 124 is found 12 times in various, mostly theologically relevant contexts (2:8,12,13,19; 3:12 (2 times),18; 4:13,15,17 (2 times); 5:15). In addition to it, there is the noun ποιητής four times (1:22,23,25; 4:11) and the New Testament hapax legomenon noun ποίησις (1:25).
In verses 2:12-13, the verb ποιέω is used in connection with the court: human speaking and human activity (οὕτως λαλεῖτε καὶ οὕτως ποιεῖτε) will be judged in the Last Judgment 125 according to their extent in accordance with the law of liberty (ὡς διὰ νόμου ἐλευθερίας μέλλοντες κρίνεσθαι). Th is law is the decisive means of judging in the hands of God himself, the only Judge (cf. 4:12). According to 2:13, the fulfi lment of the requirements of the law of liberty cannot be separated (γάρ) from the manifestations of mercy. Anyone who has not been merciful (τῷ μὴ ποιήσαντι ἔλεος) can expect judgement without mercy (κρίσις ἀνέλεος). Th e extreme seriousness of this assertion comes to the fore when we consider the conclusion of verse 13 where mercy is clearly above the judgment (κατακαυχᾶται ἔλεος κρίσεως), and the characterisation of God, the 'only Judge' (4:12), who is already 'standing at the door' (5:9), in the verse 5:11 stating: 'Th e Lord is full of compassion and mercy. ' (πολύσπλαγχνός ἐστιν ὁ κύριος καὶ οἰκτίρμων). 126 Th e infi nite magnitude of God's mercy which is God's essential characteristic and quality, is limited (sit venia verbo) by the reluctance and inability of man to show mercy to one another. Because he is unable to deal with others mercifully, he is unable to accept God's mercy, 127 and he excludes himself from its reach. As mentioned above, the theme of the law in 2:8-13 is framed by the commandment to love one's neighbour in verse 8 and mercy in verse 13. Th e manifestation of mercy is thus, or should be, one of the essential characteristic manifestations of the life of the believing community which fulfi ls the requirements of the law in accordance with the commandment to love one's neighbour. Verses 2:12-13, like 1:25, show very clearly the eschatological consequences of the present action. Verse 2:19 contains essentially the same wording as 2:8: καλῶς ποιεῖς, 'you do right' . As well as the fulfi lment of the royal law in accordance with the commandment to love one's neighbour, faith in the one God is also considered a good, or right 'act' . By itself, however, it is insuffi cient (καὶ love and mercy as decisive principles of action. In the narrower context of verses 2:1-13, love to one's neighbour is presented as the basis for equal treatment of the poor and the rich. If the community favours the rich, it follows principles other than the principle of love and is convicted of violating royal law by the same law that demands love. 137