A. Jesus and James as Sons of the Father

The First Apocalypse of James opens with Jesus’s declaration: “Now, since I see the end of my redemption (ⲥⲱⲧⲉ), I shall tell you these things, my brother James” (10.1–3). The things that Jesus refers to are his identity, and James’s, in relation to the divine and earthly: he is from the Preexistent Father, as is James, but the guard and toll-collectors are from Achamoth, who brought them forth without the Father.

The main themes in this opening sentence are departure and revelation. This will be the final conversation between James and Jesus before Jesus’s crucifixion, and Jesus acknowledges that it is only “since” he is about to leave him that he will reveal their shared identity and redemption. This concept draws from the Johannine farewell discourse. The Jesus of the Fourth Gospel is famous for his role as revealer, but it is less frequently pointed out that his revelations are linked to his looming departure. Jesus tells his disciples: “I did not say these things to you from the beginning, because I was with you, but now I am going to the one who sent me” (John 16:4b–5a). Like the Jesus of 1 Apoc. Jas., Jesus here is admitting that he previously withheld truths from his disciples, but his imminent departure necessitates soteriological revelation.

The predominant revelation of the Johannine Jesus is his identity. Questions of origin (πόθεν) and destiny (ποῦ) permeate the gospel. Even before Jesus is involved, the priests and Levites ask John the Baptist “Who are you?” (1:19) and he responds by declaring his identity in relation to Jesus’s identity. The “Jews” want to know how Jesus, son of Joseph, can claim to have come down from heaven (6:42) and continue this line of questioning in chapters 7–8. At the trial, Pilate asks Jesus to declare where he is from (19:9) and then assigns Jesus the title “King of the Jews” (19:19). What Jesus reveals, to those who understand, is that “he has been sent by God and that God is his Father.”^{Footnote 23} He is the “stranger from heaven and Son of God.”^{Footnote 24} The farewell discourse and the following prayer also reveal the role of the disciples in relation to Jesus. They are sent into the world (17:18) to bear witness (15:27), just as Jesus was sent to bear the Father’s words (14:24); they have received “the words” that Jesus received (17:8), as well as the glory (17:22) and love (17:26); and they are hated by the world, just as Jesus is (15:18; 17:16). Jesus’s departure necessitates that the Johannine disciples are to take on certain of his characteristics.

Comparable to John in linking the origin and destiny of Jesus with that of James (and other disciples), 1 Apoc. Jas. takes the link further by developing an ontological identity shared between Christ and his followers. This is illustrated in the opening passage: “But you are ignorant about yourself, so that [I] shall tell you who I am (ⲁⲛⲟⲕ ⲛⲓⲙ)” (10.5–7).^{Footnote 25} It is revealed that as Jesus has descended from the Father, James has likewise; as Jesus will ascend through the archons, so will James. Jesus tells James that when James ascends, he will be assimilated to the Father: “You will reach the One Who Is, and no longer will you be James, but one who in every way is in the One Who Is” (13.24–14.2). Thus, 1 Apoc. Jas. connects Johannine christology and human salvation.

With regard to the questions of origin and destination, it is the dialogue between Jesus and the “Jews” in John 7–8 that finds particular parallels in 1 Apoc. Jas.^{Footnote 26} In John, as Jesus teaches in the temple, a debate breaks out regarding whether he is the Messiah.^{Footnote 27} Jesus declares that his testimony is valid, because “I know where I have come from and where I am going,” but the Pharisees “do not know where I come from or where I am going” (8:14). Jesus’s testimony is that he has been sent by the Father (8:18) and that he will soon leave and is “going to the one who sent me” (7:33). Continuing with the Jesus-disciple parallelism, this conversation mirrors the dialogue that James must expect with the soul-collecting powers in 1 Apoc. Jas. As James ascends through the cosmos, he will meet a guard who will ask him: “Who are you and where are you from?” James is to say “I am the Son, and I am from the Father” (20.10–13).^{Footnote 28} The guard will also ask “Why have you come?” and James is to say “I have come to all those who are mine and those who are not mine” (ⲛ̄ⲧⲁⲉⲓ ϣⲁ ⲛⲉⲧⲉⲛⲟⲩⲓ̈ ⲧⲏⲣⲟⲩ ⲁⲩⲱ ⲛⲉⲧⲉⲛⲟⲩⲓ̈ ⲁⲛ, 20.23–25), echoing John 1:11 (εἰζ τὰ ἴδια ἦλθεν // ⲁϥⲉⲓ ϣⲁ ⲛⲉⲧⲉⲛⲟⲩϥ).^{Footnote 29} James must finally tell the guard, “I will go to those who are mine, to the place from which I have come” (ⲉⲉⲓ[ⲛ]ⲁⲃⲱⲕ’ ϣⲁ ⲛⲉⲧⲉⲛⲟⲩⲓ̈ ⲛⲉ ⲉⲡⲙⲁ ⲛⲧⲁⲉⲓⲉⲓ ⲙ̄ⲙⲟϥ, 21.17–18), and then he will be saved. The descending-ascending Jesus, who tells his disciples in John, “I came from the Father and have come into the world; again, I am leaving the world and am going to the Father” (16:28), parallels the disciple of 1 Apoc. Jas. who has come into the world and will return to the Father.

Although the identities of Jesus and James are paralleled, as sons of the Father, they are far from identical. James describes Jesus as being uncontaminated by his incarnation: “For you descended (ⲁⲕⲉⲓ ⲉϩⲣⲁⲓ̈) into a great ignorance, but you have not been defiled by anything in it. For you descended (ⲁⲕⲉⲓ ⲉϩⲣⲁⲓ̈) into a great mindlessness, and your recollection remained” (NH 28.11–16).^{Footnote 30} James then compares himself with Jesus, saying that unlike Jesus, coming into the world has made him forget his heavenly origins. Here, there is a noteworthy difference between the two Coptic recensions. James says:

Johanna Brankaer and Hans-Gebhard Bethge write:

The same concept is there in the CT, but the tenses are not so differentiated. What the CT text clarifies is what, exactly, the difference is between James’s original and current state: It is forgetfulness.^{Footnote 33} Despite the emphasis throughout the gospel that James must leave the “weak flesh,” its focus is on reaching a state of recollection rather than disembodiment.

Jesus’s identity as a stranger from heaven, who has come into the contaminated world, is also applied to the believer in 1 Apoc. Jas.; however, the believer needs help to remember his/her origin. Only then can they return to their “roots” (22.22). Jesus’s self-knowledge that authenticates his authority in John is reformulated in 1 Apoc. Jas. as the knowledge that James must acquire about himself.

B. The Heavenly and Earthly Persecutors

Identity is often formed in relation to the “other.” In John and 1 Apoc. Jas. the “other” is represented by those who do not belong to the Father. The cosmic powers, named the “guard” and the “toll-collectors” (ⲧⲉⲗⲱⲛⲏⲥ), are described in terms of a lack of shared identity with Jesus and James. They are not from the highest Father; they are from Achamoth. They may be compared with the Johannine Jews, who are of the “world” (8:23), whose Father is not God but the devil (John 8:44). When the “Jews” ask Jesus for his identity, he answers by juxtaposing his divine heritage with their earthly one: “You are from below, I am from above; you are of this world, I am not of this world” (John 8:23). Comparably, in 1 Apoc. Jas., James is to tell the three toll-collectors that as a son of the Father, he is “a vessel that is more precious than Achamoth, the female who created you” (21.25–27).

It is not Judaism itself, or the Jewish people, that is the “other” in 1 Apoc. Jas. Jesus’s and James’s earthly persecutors are not called “Jews” or “high priests” as in John (e.g., 5:18; 7:1; 18:35), but rather “elders” (ⲛⲉ ⲛ[ⲉ]ⲡⲣⲉⲥ[ⲃⲩⲧⲉⲣⲟⲥ], 11.12–13) and “people” (ⲗⲁⲟⲥ, 18.1; 30.10–11), and also the “judges” (ⲛⲉ ⲕⲣⲓⲧⲏⲥ, 30.7–8) in the case of James.^{Footnote 34} The term Ἰουδαῖοι is never used, nor does the text appear to refer to a historical group of people.^{Footnote 35} The author(s) main interest lies in applying the idea of the Johannine “Jews” to cosmic beings, and steering clear of earthly titles such as “Jews” and “chief priests” directs the readers’ attention to the cosmic realm. Overall, 1 Apoc. Jas. does appear to have a relatively negative attitude toward the “God who dwells in Jerusalem” (23.18–19), with James “the Just” rejecting both the people who condemn Jesus (perhaps to be identified with the Jewish authorities) and the “Just God” (18.16–25), and Jerusalem being cast as a negative place (11.23–12.3; 23.18–19). However, 1 Apoc. Jas. also understands certain Jewish Scriptures as divinely inspired and quotes Isa 11:2 as an authoritative text (26.6–27.2). It seems that although the God of the Jewish Scriptures is the “Just God” that James turns away from and is also identified as the ignorant ruler Addon (26.13), Jewish Scripture can refer to the Father and also be read christologically.

The “toll-collectors” in 1 Apoc. Jas. are connected with Valentinian mythology, as they have been produced by Achamoth alone and are ignorant of this fact, reflecting the common myth of the demiurge’s origins.^{Footnote 36} However, the term τελώνηζ also stems from the canonical gospels, and Origen reads Luke and John together to demonstrate that “toll-collectors” are evil spirits who stop and examine souls in their ascent to heaven.^{Footnote 37} He writes that the Lukan τελώνηζ who come to be baptized in 3:12 can be subjected to a simple interpretation and a “loftier” and “mystical” interpretation. The latter reads:

Origen creates this “loftier” reading by creatively linking the Lukan earthly “toll-collectors” with the Johannine cosmic “ruler of the world.” This exegetical move is not dissimilar to what we find in 1 Apoc. Jas., in which the “toll-collectors” are cast as the cosmic enemies of Jesus, whom Jesus overpowers at his death—as he does the “ruler of the world” in John (16:11; cf. 12:31).

The persecution narrative in 1 Apoc. Jas. is enacted on two levels, with the challenge of the cosmic toll-collectors mirroring the earthly persecution by the “elders,” “people,” and “judges.” When Jesus tells James that “they” will seize him and “many” will oppose him because of his “powerful word (ⲡϣⲁϫⲉ ⲙⲡⲉⲕⲁⲙ̣ⲁ̣ϩ̣ⲧⲉ)” (19.24–20.1), he refers to both earthly arrest and death, as well as heavenly challenge from the guard and toll-collectors.

A. Jesus’s Death as Defeating Cosmic Powers

The dialogue between Jesus and James in 1 Apoc. Jas. begins during Jesus’s ministry, is interrupted as Jesus undergoes his death, and continues a short time after his resurrection. The traditional passion story is presupposed, as Jesus foretells: “They will [seize me after] three days, and then [the crowd …] will [accuse] me and condemn me and [rebuke] me” (11.9–14). His death is not narrated. It is said that, through his death, “he prepared what was destined for him” (16.26–27) as well as the inheritance (ⲕⲗⲏⲣⲟⲥ) for the believers (15.23–26). Jesus then says that after his death he will “[appear] in order to convict the archons [and I will] reveal to them that there is one who cannot be detained (ⲁⲙⲁϩ̄ⲧⲉ). When he is detained (ⲁⲙⲁϩ̄ⲧⲉ), then he overpowers (ⲁⲙⲁϩ̄ⲧⲉ) them” (16.16–21).^{Footnote 39} James too must die. The text does not make it clear why, but Jesus instructs him not to fear his death and explains what will happen afterward.

The main purpose of Jesus’s death, ascension, and return is to show the archons their ignorance and inferiority, and that he and his followers are stronger than them because God is their Father. This revelation overpowers the archons, paving the way for the disciple to follow Jesus to heaven.^{Footnote 40} James is concerned about the powers and hosts who are armed against him (NH 27.14–17), but Jesus explains that the powers are actually armed against Jesus himself (NH 27.18–24).^{Footnote 41} To understand Jesus’s death as overcoming cosmic powers is not often stressed in Johannine scholarship; however, John 12:31–32 demonstrates that Jesus’s death brings about the judgment of and victory over Satan.^{Footnote 42} Jesus in John is at odds with the “world” and his departure means that the “world” will be proven wrong and that “the ruler of this world has been condemned” (16:11). As we saw for Origen, the ruler of the world is akin to the toll-collectors, and, for 1 Apoc. Jas., Jesus’s death means that they will be overpowered. Furthermore, the motif of the cosmic powers being armed first against Jesus and then against his disciples is reminiscent of John 15:18–19: “If the world hates you, be aware that it hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own. Because you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world—therefore the world hates you.” The Johannine “world” and the “ruler of the world” are comparable to the cosmic powers and hosts in 1 Apoc. Jas. who are armed, first against Jesus, but then against James because he belongs to the Father, and who are defeated or overpowered by Jesus’s death.

B. Suffering and Not Suffering

When Jesus returns after the crucifixion, he reveals himself as: “I am the one who preexists in myself” (18.6–8).^{Footnote 43} He tells James: “I have not suffered anything, nor did I die, and these people did me no harm. Rather, this was laid upon a figure (ⲧⲩⲡⲟⲥ) of the archons, for whom <it was fitting> to be prepared. It was the archons who prepared it, then it finished” (18.8–16).^{Footnote 44} The “figure” (or “type”) of the archons refers to Jesus’s material body as opposed to his preexistent “self.” The opening of this quotation was once seen as indicating a “docetic” christology that denies that Jesus suffered and died.^{Footnote 45} Yet, elsewhere 1 Apoc. Jas. suggests that Jesus did suffer: James hears of Jesus’s sufferings (ϩⲓ̅ⲥⲉ [16,28]; ⲙ̄ⲕⲟⲟϩ [NH 30.14]) and is grieved. Jesus tells James that he must suffer (NH 32.18; 33.2–3), presumably as he did himself.^{Footnote 46} Certainly, there is no denial that Jesus’s body or “figure” suffered and died. The text’s claim is that his preexistent “self” did not.

The playing down of Jesus’s suffering pushes his death in a more Johannine direction, as opposed to what we find in the synoptic passion narratives. John highlights Jesus’s autonomy, exaltation, and glorification.^{Footnote 47} His suffering is implied, as he is nailed to a cross and dies, but this is not stressed. Rather, at his death he professes “it is finished” and actively lowers his head and “gave up his spirit” (19:30). In the reworking of the Gethsemane story, he willingly takes up his cross without fear (12:27; cf. 10:18). 1 Apoc. Jas. does not narrate the crucifixion but it appears to go further than John in portraying death with a lack of suffering. A dichotomy is created between Jesus’s flesh that suffered, which belonged to the archons, and Jesus’s “self” that came from the Father.

This dichotomy is also applied to the disciple. James is told that the “weak flesh will get what is assigned to it” (19.13–14), and he should not be distressed about it. Death is not James’s end but the beginning of his journey to the Father. James’s death scene in 1 Apoc. Jas. also depicts a self-governing death, in which he cries, “My Father [in] heaven, forgive them, for they do (not) know what they do” (30.24–26). Brankaer and Bethge write: “Comparable to Jesus in John 18:1–8, James appears sovereign and dignified in his martyrdom. Like Jesus, James is fundamentally untouchable, and he himself determines events.”^{Footnote 48} We have already seen that James spoke about clothing himself in what belongs to the archons and that, like Jesus, he existed in a previous state. The distinction between the weak flesh and the self can exist because James preexisted in the Preexistent Father. It is only by overcoming the “bond of the flesh” that James can “reach the One-Who-Is” (13.22–24).

The absence of Jesus’s suffering in 1 Apoc. Jas. is linked to the martyr experience. As Haxby writes:

The division of the unsuffering true “self” and the suffering body is not something peculiar to 1 Apoc. Jas., or to texts that show a Valentinian or “gnostic” influence, but it is a relatively common trope in martyrdom literature.^{Footnote 50} Candida Moss notes that 1 Apoc. Jas. and martyrdom literature share a “common rhetorical vocabulary and martyrological grammar”; yet, she argues that 1 Apoc. Jas. places no value on suffering and so is ideologically opposed to other martyrdom literature.^{Footnote 51} In actuality, a number of martyrdom narratives depict suffering during martyrdom as deviating from other suffering due to the martyr already participating in the divine. Thus, as we see in John and 1 Apoc. Jas., the agony foisted upon the body through crucifixion, stoning, or other forms of torture is upstaged by the martyr’s immunity to earthly concerns which results in a lack of suffering in the self.

In the Passion of Perpetua and Felicitas, suffering in martyrdom is joyful (17.1), as opposed to suffering through, say, childbirth. While the pregnant slave girl Felicitas undergoes a premature labour, she claims that her experience at death will be different: “Now alone I suffer what I am suffering, but then there will be another inside me, who will suffer for me, because I am going to suffer for him” (15.5–6).^{Footnote 52}

She implies that the pain of untimely childbirth and the pain she will feel in the arena are incomparable. At her death, she will suffer for Christ, and Christ will be within her and suffer for her. Her suffering is shared with Christ, making it divine. Another case is Blandina, a martyr who, while undergoing torture, is described as insensible to pain because of her communion with Christ (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.1.18, 55).^{Footnote 53} Along with her, Sanctus endures extensive torture until red-hot bronze plates are applied to the tenderest parts of his body (1.21), but we read that there is “nothing painful where we find Christ’s glory” (1.23). The example most akin to 1 Apoc. Jas. is found in the Martyrdom of Montanus and Lucius, in which martyrdom and resurrection/ascension happen simultaneously. In a vision, the renowned martyr Cyprian tells the martyr Flavian: “It is another flesh (alia caro) that suffers when the soul is in heaven. The body does not feel this at all when the mind is entirely absorbed in God.”^{Footnote 54}

The focus of the narrative in 1 Apoc. Jas. is different to most other martyrdom literature in that it is not the endurance of bodily suffering that is addressed but the knowledge that bodily suffering is of no real importance.^{Footnote 55} James must become free from “the bond that is in the flesh” in order to reach the Preexistent Father. But the lack of suffering at death is not so different. The interest in the text is not the real, human experience of pain, suffering, and death but what happens in the cosmic sphere where the challenge is to remember one’s identity when met by the powers. Although endurance and suffering in death is included, it is a subplot to the conflict with the heavenly toll-collectors.

The recasting of the earthly drama into the heavenly sphere is another point of commonality between 1 Apoc. Jas. and other martyrdom literature. Judith Perkins argues that Christian martyrdom narratives

In the Passion of Perpetua and Felicitas, a dream allows Perpetua to realize “that it was not with the wild animals that I would fight but with the devil” (10.14). Her visions “represent a cosmic conflict with Satan resulting in martyrdom … martyrdom is interpreted as the means by which the devil is defeated.”^{Footnote 57} The day of execution is called the “day of their victory,” and they enter the arena “as if they were going to heaven” (18.1). In 1 Apoc. Jas., it is James’s autonomous death that will enable his victory over the archons and return to his root in the Preexistent Father.

A. Ascension, Return and the Way

After Jesus’s “figure” dies in 1 Apoc. Jas., he ascends through the archons and then returns to meet James and tell him about it. This appearance of Jesus appears to be the final one. There is no indication that Jesus will come again, and a future parousia expectation may be implicitly negated by Jesus’s words “the Son of Man has come and has revealed” (25.26–27). The ascension-return motif in 1 Apoc. Jas. is distinctly Johannine. The Johannine Jesus is the Son of Man who descends from heaven (3:13) and reascends to “where he was before” (6:62) through being “lifted up” (3:13–14; 8:28–29). Yet, he has not fully ascended through being lifted up on the cross—as we will see, it can be read that he continues to ascend during his conversation with Mary Magdalene (20:17). His ascension has consequences not only for himself as manifesting his glory, but for all people: “When I am lifted up from the earth,” he says, “I will draw all people to myself” (12:32).^{Footnote 58} Furthermore, he promises to return to his disciples and take them to heaven: “In my Father’s house there are many dwelling places. If it were not so, would I have told you that I go to prepare a place for you? And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, so that where I am, there you may be also” (14:2–3).

In both texts, Jesus prepares access to the Father through his ascension to God, and this allows his disciples access to follow him to heaven.^{Footnote 59} Reimund Bieringer reaches this conclusion for John, although by a different means, writing:

It is to John 20:17 that we now turn—a statement that might have had a big influence on the ideas within 1 Apoc. Jas.

B. The Tangible Body of the Returned Jesus

In both the Johannine farewell discourse and 1 Apoc. Jas., Jesus’s dialogue partners are interested in Jesus’s promise to return to his disciples after his death and take them to heaven so that they can be with him. They want to know how this will happen. The question of Jesus’s return is raised by Judas in John: “Lord, how is it that you will manifest yourself to us and not to the world?” (14:22). And James in 1 Apoc. Jas. says: “Rabbi, how will you appear to me after you are condemned and the heritage is prepared and you have attained to the One Who Is?” (16.2–7).^{Footnote 61} The Johannine Jesus answers by saying that he and his Father will make their home with those who love them (14:23). In 1 Apoc. Jas., Jesus replies that he will appear “in this place” to bring unbelievers to belief and to show the archons that he cannot be overcome (16.7–21). The reappearance of Jesus in 1 Apoc. Jas. promises to be more inclusive than that of John, although the text only narrates his appearance to James.

When the risen Jesus meets James, he appears to him in his material body: Unlike other resurrection narratives, he is not “in another form” (e.g., Mark 16:12; cf. Ap. John; Wis. Jes. Chr.) but is a tangible, physical being. And yet he is the “one who preexists in myself.” This may stem from a reading of the ascension and return of Jesus of John 20.

In John 20:17, Mary Magdalene has met Jesus in the garden after he has come out of the tomb, and he tells her: “Do not touch (ἅπτου) me because I have not yet ascended (ἀναβέβηκα) to the Father. But go to my brothers and say to them, I am ascending (ἀναβαίνω) to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.”^{Footnote 62} The interpretation of the term ἅπτου has been hotly contested, with many modern interpreters preferring the translation “hold on to” or “cling to,” and it is not possible to know for sure what the author of the Fourth Gospel had in mind. However, the majority of ancient commentators understood the encounter between Mary and Jesus to be about physical touch, and I doubt that 1 Apoc. Jas. would be an exception.^{Footnote 63}

Mary is told not to touch Jesus, because (γάρ) he has not yet ascended. The γάρ, likewise, has caused numerous problems for interpreters. However, the “vast majority” opinion is that the γάρ is a “marker of cause or reason.”^{Footnote 64} The interpretative problem comes in the next episode, when Thomas is invited to touch Jesus. Bieringer asks: “Does this suggest implicitly that after having ascended to the Father Jesus may well be touched? … If in 20:27 Thomas is invited to touch, does this demonstrate that Jesus has in the meantime actually ascended and is now in a state in which he can be touched?”^{Footnote 65} For the majority of interpreters the answer is no, but for 1 Apoc. Jas. the answer is yes. In 1 Apoc. Jas., Jesus’s return as a physical, tangible being is demonstrated by his embrace with James—an embrace that is mentioned twice. First, “And the Lord appeared to him. And he stopped (his) prayer, hugged him (and) kissed him” (NH 31.2–5).^{Footnote 66} Second, “Since you are a just one of God, you have embraced me and kissed me” (NH 32.6–8).^{Footnote 67} James the Just was previously a servant of the Just God (CT 18.18), but now he has stopped praying to this God, and has embraced Jesus. James and Jesus then sit down together on a rock (19.6–10). Understandably, Hartenstein sees this detail as puzzling,^{Footnote 68} but it serves to emphasize the physicality of the resurrected Jesus.^{Footnote 69}

An interpretation that has Jesus ascending to the Father after appearing to Mary and returning before appearing to the male disciples is counter to the majority Christian reading. Yet, it is not unique. Again, we see 1 Apoc. Jas. making similar interpretative moves to Origen, who offers several different understandings of Jesus’s instruction to Mary not to touch him.^{Footnote 70} In the Dialogue with Heraclides, however, he understands Jesus to have ascended after meeting Mary Magdalene and returned from the Father before appearing to the male disciples.

The details of Origen’s and 1 Apoc. Jas.’s accounts of Jesus’s ascension and tangible reappearance might differ, but both texts show that it is possible to read John 20 in this way.