Der Jakobusbrief
Abstract
The commentary attempts a thorough philological and historical interpretation of the Greek text of the Epistle of James. The author argues that it is not a genuine letter from James, the brother of Jesus, but a pseudepigraphon dating from the end of the 1st century AD. He claims that it is a well-organized piece of literature based on a distinct theological conception. Its purpose is to enjoin feeble Christians to live up to their supernatural status as first-born creatures of God and not to forego admission to eternal life.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
- Authors
- Burchard, C.
- Corresponding author
- Burchard, Christoph
- Venue
- Mohr Siebeck eBooks
- Publisher
- Mohr Siebeck
- Published
- 2022
- OpenAlex
- W4297583294
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- book
- Language
- de
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Mohr Siebeck eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Biblical Studies and Interpretation
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Classical Studies and Philology
- Social Sciences › Anthropology › Classical Antiquity Studies
- Keywords
- Epistle of James, pseudepigraphy, authorship, New Testament philology, Greek text, early Christianity, 1st century AD, eternal life, New Testament commentary
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
