The Devil Will Flee: James 4:7, the Jesus Tradition, and the

Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs

M. John-Patrick O'Connor

Journal of Biblical Literature, Volume 138, Number 4, 2019, pp. 883-897 (Article)

Published by Society of Biblical Literature

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/jbl.2019.0047

For additional information about this article

https://muse.jhu.edu/article/747089

[ Access provided at 6 Jun 2020 12:21 GMT from Rutgers University ]

JBL 138, no. 4 (2019): 883–897
https://doi.org/10.15699/jbl.1384.2019.11

The Devil Will Flee: James 4:7,

the Jesus Tradition, and the
Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs

m. john-patrick o’connor
maurice.oconnor@ptsem.edu
Princeton Theological Seminary, Princeton, NJ 08540

Recent interest in the Epistle of James has included probes into the relationship
between the Jesus tradition and James. The epistle presents a set of salient con-
nections to the developing literary milieu of the second century, including com-
pelling examples from the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs and the Shepherd
of Hermas. One of the more striking literary parallels comes from a single line
in James 4, “Resist the devil and he will flee from you” (4:7). After examining the
parallel evidence found in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs and the Shep-
herd of Hermas, I contend that this line in James—the devil will flee—may sum-
marize the story of Jesus’s temptation in the gospels.

Scholars of the book of James have often noted the similarities between the
epistle and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs.1 Among the more common
links observed are the theme of “double-mindedness” and the Testament of Asher
(T. Ash. 3:2–6:1) and the subject of poisonous venom in Jas 3:8 and the Testament
of Gad’s mention of “diabolical poison” (T. Gad 5:2). In the words of Luke Timothy
Johnson, “The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs provide by far the most complex

1 To name a few scholars in recent years: Luke Timothy Johnson, The Letter of James: A New

Translation with Introduction and Commentary, AB 37A (New York: Doubleday, 1995), 43–48;
Luke L. Cheung, The Genre, Composition and Hermeneutics of James, PBTM (Waynesboro, GA:
Paternoster, 2003), 6, 212–13, 227; Dale C. Allison, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the
Epistle of James, ICC (New York: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2013), 55. Often James commentaries
cite the Testaments as “Jewish” examples of the same concept; so Scot McKnight, The Letter of
James, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2011), 348–49. Older examples include Arnold Meyer,
Das Rätsel des Jakobusbriefes, BZNW 10 (Giessen: Töpelmann, 1930), 179–94; Joseph B. Mayor,
The Epistle of St. James: The Greek Text with Introduction Notes and Comments (London: Macmil-
lan, 1910), 118–21; Édouard Massaux, Influence de l’Évangile de saint Matthieu sur la littérature
chrétienne avant saint Irénée (Louvain: Universitaires de Louvain, 1950), 314–15.

883
884 Journal of Biblical Literature 138, no. 4 (2019)

and compelling set of comparisons to James.”2 Among this handful of similarities,

both James and the Testaments present a similar appraisal of the devil or Beliar as
an inimical entity human beings can (a) resist and (b) cause to flee. Furthermore,
in addition to literary evidence in 1 Peter and the Shepherd of Hermas (1 Pet
5:8–9; Herm. Mand. 12.2.4 [45.4]; 12.4.7 [47.7]; 12.5.2 [48.2]), the concept of the
devil or spirits fleeing because of positive moral action appears at least four times
in the Testaments (T. Iss. 7:7; T. Benj. 5:2; T. Dan 5:1; T. Naph. 8:4; cf. T. Sim. 3:5)
and once in James (4:7), each time using markedly similar Greek constructions (ὁ
διάβολος φεύξεται ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν in T. Naph. 8:4). Often overlooked in the secondary
literature, the image of a fleeing tempter found in James also memorably ends the
temptation scene in the Jesus tradition (Matt 4:11 // Luke 4:13). If James is familiar
with the Jesus tradition, the temptation scene would provide a plausible source for
the origin of this saying.

I.  James in the Modern Commentary Tradition

The present case begins with the commentary tradition on the book of James.
Much of the secondary literature in recent years has assumed that Jas 4:7b belongs
either to a Jewish tradition, with specific references to the Testaments exclusively,
or to a Christian tradition, with specific references to 1 Pet 5:8–9 or Eph 6:11. Vir-
tually no references are made to the possibility that the Jesus tradition influenced
Jas 4:7. Scot McKnight, for example, states that 4:7 is “thoroughly Jewish,” citing
Tobit (ch. 6), the Testament of Simeon (3:5), and the Testament of Dan (6:2).
McKnight appears to assume that these “parallels” in the Testaments precede
James.3 McKnight’s position is representative of many modern commentators
before him.4 There are others who suggest that this saying is Christian in its current
form, referencing only 1 Pet 5:8–9, Eph 6:11, or the Shepherd of Hermas (Herm.
Man. 12.2.4 [45.4]; 12.4.7 [47.7]; 12.5.2 [48.2]).5
In a recent publication on the historical Jesus, Craig Evans comments on the
close parallels between Jas 4:7 and T. Naph. 8:4 that “it is more likely that James

2 Johnson,Letter of James, 43.

3 McKnight, Letter of James, 349.
4 James Hardy Ropes, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle of St. James, ICC

(New York: Scribner’s Sons, 1916; repr., Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1948), 268–69; Str-B 3:757;
­Martin Dibelius, James: A Commentary on the Epistle of James, trans. Michael A. Williams, Her-
meneia (Philadelphia; Fortress, 1976), 226; Ralph P. Martin, James, WBC 48 (Waco, TX: Word,
1988), 152–53; C. Freeman Sleeper, James, ANTC (Nashville: Abingdon, 1998), 111; John Painter
and David A. deSilva, James and Jude, Paideia (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2012), 143.
5 John Adam, An Exposition of the Epistle of James in a Series of Discourses (Edinburgh: T&T

Clark, 1867), 314; Ropes, Epistle of St. James, 268–69; James B. Adamson, The Epistle of James,
NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976), 66; Martin, James, 152–53; Dan G. McCartney, James,
BECNT (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2009), 219.
 O’Connor: The Devil Will Flee 885

alludes to (perhaps even quotes) Naphtali than that we have another instance of a
Christian interpolation.”6 Yet, in a contradictory aside a few sentences later, Evans
admits, “Satan’s flight, the presence of wild animals (θηρίος), and the ministration
of angels [in Naphtali] recall the temptation story.”7 Evans, like the modern com-
mentators before him, assumes a line of development from the Testaments to the
Jesus tradition to James.8 However, might Evans’s observation be reversed? If, as
Evans admits, T. Naph. 8:4 recalls the temptation story, James may depend on the
Testament of Naphtali, as Evans and others argue, or James and Naphtali could both
depend on a third source. As I will demonstrate, one could claim on equally plau-
sible grounds that sections of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs and James
depend on the Jesus tradition.
Dale Allison provides a footnote on Jas 4:7 that takes us to the edge of the Jesus
tradition. He writes, “Although the image of the devil fleeing does not recall any
traditional Jewish narrative, Christian expositors have sometimes thought of the
temptation stories in the Synoptics.”9 In support of his observation, Allison cites a
few older commentators who held this view, including the great hymnist Isaac
Watts. Commenting on Jas 4:7, Watts observes:
And this sword of the spirit will put Satan to flight. Jesus, the captain of our
salvation has given us himself for a glorious example: he defeated the tempter in
all his assaults with these words, “It is written,” Matt iv. 4, 7, 10.10

To add to Allison’s observations, before the eighteenth-century comments of Watts,

John of Damascus’s Sacra Parallela likewise reads the temptation scene alongside
Jas 4:7.11 After recounting the Matthean passage in full, John of Damascus quotes

  6 Craig Evans, “Exorcisms and the Kingdom: Inaugurating the Kingdom of God and
Defeating the Kingdom of Satan,” in Key Events in the Life of the Historical Jesus: A Collaborative
Exploration of Context and Coherence, ed. Darrell L. Bock and Robert L. Webb, WUNT 247
(Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009), 151–79, here 161.
  7 Ibid.
  8 Arguments concerning dating are further complicated by the growing number of scholars
who date James to the mid-second century. For example, David R. Nienhuis’s conclusion is helpful
in this regard: “the letter shares similarities of word and thought with known second-century
texts.… James’ Sitz im Leben is more likely the second century than the first” (Not by Paul Alone:
The Formation of the Catholic Epistle Collection and the Christian Canon [Waco, TX: Baylor Uni-
versity Press, 2007], 120–21; cf. Allison, Epistle of James, 29). In other words, if the sources in
question, especially James and the Testaments, are dated to the middle of the second century, then
it would be equally plausible that the Testaments draw from James or a third source.
  9 Allison, Epistle of James, 625; see also David A. deSilva, The Jewish Teachers of Jesus, James,
and Jude: What Earliest Christianity Learned from the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha (New York:
Oxford University Press, 2012), 248–49, 305 n. 41..
10 Isaac Watts, A Defence against the Temptation to Self-Murther (Dublin: Jones, 1737), 65;

cf. Allison, Epistle of James, 625 n. 220.

11 PG 95:1408. John of Damascus’s Hiera or Sacra Parallela is fraught with textual difficulty.

Andrew Louth makes a case for genuine authorship in St. John Damascene: Tradition and
886 Journal of Biblical Literature 138, no. 4 (2019)

Luke 10:18, 1 Pet 5:8, and Jas 4:7. Modern commentaries, as has been stated previ-
ously, are quick to connect James and 1 Peter, in harmony with John of Damascus,
but the parallels with James and the Jesus tradition disappear.
Another patristic tradition, commenting on Ps 1:1, places the Jas 4:7 saying
(Ἀντίστητε δὲ τῷ διαβόλῳ, καὶ φεύξεται ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν) alongside a saying of Jesus in
John 14:6 (πρὸς Κύριον ἥξει, τὸν εἰπόντα Ἐγω εἰμι ἡ ὁδός).12 This tradition is unclear
because both sayings lack biblical references, but nonetheless it may suggest a tra-
dition in which Jesus is connected to the saying in James. Similarly, the twelfth-
century Byzantine theologian Michael Glykas appears to attribute Jas 4:7 to Jesus
when he alludes to Matt 17:21 with “as Christ commanded” (καθὰ Χριστὸς ἐντείλατο),
followed by Jas 4:7 and the phrase “he says” (Quaest. Sac. Scrip. 31.364.20–25).13
Lastly, one passage in Ephrem the Syrian’s Ad imitationem proverbiorum relates the
temptation of Job with James’s pithy phrase. Ephrem concludes:
Listen, then, to what it says in Job—and the Lord said to the devil, “From where
are you coming?” Then the devil said before the Lord, “Roaming under heaven
and walking the entirety of it.” Know then that heaven is higher than you, wher-
ever you may go. Therefore hold fast to the place in which you were called, and
resist the devil and he will flee from you. Draw near to God and he will draw near
to you. (CPG 3910; TLG 4138.006; my translation)14

While there is no direct reference to the Jesus tradition here, the Ephrem text shows
that a reading tradition of Jas 4:7 connected it with the story of Job’s temptation by
Satan. DeSilva has argued elsewhere that Jas 4:7 resonates closely with the Testa-
ment of Job, where Job’s “successful resistance in the face of all the devil’s assaults”
results in the devil’s departure.15 DeSilva’s position is that the Testament of Job is a
more likely candidate than the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs for James’s

Originality in Byzantine Theology (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), 24–25; see also Karl
Holl, Die Sacra parallela des Johannes Damascenus (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1896).
12 I refer here to fragments of a commentary on Ps 1 by both Origen and Didymus the Blind.

For Origen, see J. B. Pitra, Analecta sacra spicilegio Solesmensi parata, 7 vols. (Paris: Jouby et Roger,
1876–1891), 2:445. For Didymus, see Ekkehard Mühlenberg, Psalmenkommentare aus der Kate­
nen­­überlieferung, 3 vols., PTS, 15, 16, 19 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1975–1977), 1:121.
13 The two sentences are set up in parallel to each other, both containing the word φησί:

“Therefore if we have been clothed, just as Christ commanded—for this kind of demon, he says,
may not be cast out except by prayer and fasting [τὸ γένος γάρ, φησί, τῶν δαιμόνων οὐκ ἐκβάλλεται,
εἰ μὴ ἐν προσευχῇ καὶ νηστείᾳ]—we also drive away the enemy himself and his schemes by staying
unwavering. Resist the devil, he says, and he will flee from us [ἀνίστητε γάρ, φησί, τῷ διαβόλῳ
καὶ φεύξεται ἀφ᾽ ἡμῶν]” (my translation). For the Greek text, see S. Eustratiades, Μιχαὴλ τοῦ
Γλυκᾶ: Εἰς τὰς ἀπορίας τῆς Θείας Γραφῆς (Athens: P. D. Sakellarios, 1906).
14 For the full Greek text, see Ephrem, Ὁσίου Ἐφραίμ τοῦ Σύρου ἔργα, ed. K. G. Phrantzoles,

7 vols. (Thessalonica: To Perivoli tis Panagias, 1988–1998), 1:185–280; Ephrem, “Ad imitationem
proverbiorum,” in Sancti patris nostri Ephraem Syri Opera omnia quae exstant Graece, Syriace,
Latine, ed. J. S. Assemani, 6 vols. (Rome: Vatican, 1732), 1:70–111, here 81.
15 DeSilva, Jewish Teachers of Jesus, James, and Jude, 249.
 O’Connor: The Devil Will Flee 887

saying in 4:7.16 In a similar manner, I argue that the Jesus tradition in Matt 4:1–11
and Luke 4:1–13 is an equally plausible candidate for the origin of this saying.

II.  Dating the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs

One of the dominant trends in modern scholarship on Jas 4:7 is to suggest

dependence on an early form of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. The Tes-
taments, however, is a composite text and is difficult to date. If it can be determined
with reasonable probability that the final form of the Greek Testaments belongs to
the second century CE—that is, contemporaneous with James17—then arguments
for James’s dependence on the Testaments become less tenable. Furthermore, the
Jesus tradition’s temptation scene would predate both of the sources in question.18
The scholarly division over dating the Testaments is, in a word, “troubling.”19
While the quest for a Hebrew original has been largely debunked, the Aramaic Levi
Document and the Hebrew Testament of Naphtali naturally invite suspicion.20

16 Ibid.
17 See n. 8 above for arguments related to the dating of James.
18 To clarify further, my argument assumes a pre-second-century dating for at least
­Matthew’s version of the temptation scene. For a full discussion of an earlier date for Matthew,
see W. D. Davies and Dale C. Allison, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel accord-
ing to Saint Matthew, 3 vols., ICC (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1988–1997), 1:127–28; and R. T.
France, The Gospel of Matthew, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), 18–22. In addition, the
scope of the present article precludes a robust discussion of the Synoptic problem. For the sake
of simplicity, I am suggesting that it is more likely that the Testaments depends on the Synoptic
Gospels rather than the reverse. For those who suggest that the Synoptic Gospels may depend on
the Testaments, see n. 4 above. To get this claim off the ground, I operate under the assumption
of (a) Markan priority and (b) a two-source hypothesis (see the fair assessment by John S.
Kloppenborg, “On Dispensing with Q? Goodacre on the Relation of Luke to Matthew,” NTS 49
[2003]: 210–36). In other words, I am not arguing for the Testaments’ dependence on a specific
gospel, because the temptation scene or, in the case of Mark, fragments of it, occurs in all three
of the Synoptic Gospels. Instead, I am raising the possibility that the majority position on Jas 4:7
(i.e., that its content derives exclusively from the Testaments and not the gospels) may be wrong.
19 Joel Marcus, “The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs and the Didascalia Apostolorum:

A Common Jewish Christian Milieu?,” JTS 61 (2010): 596–626, here 598. For a helpful survey of
the debate, see H. Dixon Slingerland, The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs: A Critical History
of Research, SBLMS 21 (Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1977); Tom de Bruin, The Great Contro-
versy: The Individual’s Struggle between Good and Evil in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs
and in Their Jewish and Christian Contexts, NTOA 106 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,
2015), 13–27.
20 James L. Kugel, “Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs,” in Outside the Bible: Ancient

Jewish Writings Related to Scripture, ed. Louis H. Feldman, James L. Kugel, and Lawrence H.
Schiffman, 3 vols. (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 2013), 2:1697–1855, here 1700–1701;
Graham H. Twelftree, “Exorcism and the Defeat of Beliar in the Testaments of the Twelve Patri-
archs,” VC 65 (2011): 170–88.
888 Journal of Biblical Literature 138, no. 4 (2019)

However, as Howard Clark Kee demonstrated, the final form of the Testaments was
likely composed in Greek—a new creation entirely.21 Even so, those who accept the
possibility of a new Greek composition propose dates varying from ca. the second
century BCE to ca. the third century CE.22 For this reason, Robert Kraft and, more
recently, James Davila have made a convincing case for interpreting contested
pseudepigrapha as decidedly Christian in their final form. In Kraft’s words, “The
burden of proof lies with claims of Jewishness.”23 Or, as Davila claims, “we should
try to understand these documents initially as Christian works.”24 The history of
dating the Testaments is fraught with hypothetical reconstruction in search of an
original Urtext, but one that has proved to be elusive.25 Instead, Davila and Kraft
start with what is known—the Testaments was preserved and transcribed by Chris-
tians.26 More so, it is Christian in its final form. Most notably, Marinus de Jonge
has dedicated much of his scholarship to proving the thoroughly Christian tenor
of the Testaments.27 I follow the suggestions by, among others, Kraft, Davila, and
de Jonge to begin with this final, Christian form.

21 Howard Clark Kee, “The Ethical Dimensions of the Testaments of the XII as a Clue to

Provenance,” NTS 24 (1978): 259–70; Harm W. Hollander and Marinus de Jonge, The Testaments
of the Twelve Patriarchs: A Commentary, SVTP 8 (Leiden: Brill, 1985), 27–29.
22 For earlier research, see Howard Clark Kee, “Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs,” in

OTP 1:775–828, here 777–78; for later work, see Hollander and de Jonge, Testaments of the Twelve
Patriarchs, 16–17; Marcus, “Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs,” 597.
23 Robert Kraft, “The Pseudepigrapha and Christianity Revisited: Setting the Stage and

Framing Some Central Questions,” JSJ 32 (2001): 371–95, here 373; cf. Kraft, “The Pseudepigra­
pha in Christianity,” in Tracing the Threads: Studies in the Vitality of Jewish Pseudepigrapha,
ed. John C. Reeves, EJL 6 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1994), 55–86.
24 James Davila, The Provenance of the Pseudepigrapha: Jewish, Christian, or Other?, JSJSup

105 (Leiden: Brill, 2005), 5; see also David Frankfurter, “Beyond ‘Jewish Christianity’: Continuing
Religious Sub-Cultures of the Second and Third Centuries and Their Documents,” in The Ways
That Never Parted: Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity and the Early Middles Ages, ed. Adam H.
Becker and Annette Yoshiko Reed (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), 131–43.
25 The two major volumes representative of this approach include Jürgen Becker, Unter­

suchungen zur Entstehungsgeschichte der Testamente der Zwölf Patriarchen, AGJU 8 (Leiden: Brill,
1970); and Anders Hultgård, L’eschatologie des Testaments des Douze Patriarches, 2 vols., AUU.HR
6–7 (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1977–1981). Hultgård (2:164), in search of a Semitic origi-
nal, sees the final text as much more homogeneous than Becker; see the summary in John J.
Collins, “The Testamentary Literature in Recent Scholarship,” in Early Judaism and Its Modern
Interpreters, ed. Robert Kraft and George Nickelsburg, BMI 2 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1986),
268–85, here 272–76.
26 Of course, this case did not begin with Kraft. See F. M. Braun, “Les Testaments des XII

Patriarches et le problème de leur origine,” RB 67 (1960): 516–49; Kraft, “Setting the Stage,” 372
n. 2.
27 De Jonge’s arguments for a later date for the final form of the Testaments are compelling

for at least five reasons. First, the terminus ad quem for the Testaments is a reference by Origen at
the beginning of the third century. Second, the theology of the Testaments closely compares to
that of second-century Christian authors, including Israel’s rejection of Jesus (e.g., T. Levi 16:1–4),
gentile inclusion (e.g., T. Dan 6:6–7) and resurrection of the patriarchs (e.g., T. Benj. 10:6–7).
 O’Connor: The Devil Will Flee 889

III.  Fleeing in the Testaments

As stated in the introduction, the Testaments contain at least four relevant

passages for this investigation:
T. Iss. 7:7 Ταῦτα καὶ ὑμεῖς ποιήσατε, τέκνα μου, καὶ πᾶν πνεῦμα τοῦ Βελίαρ
φεύξεται ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν28
Do these things also, my children, and every spirit of Beliar will flee
from you.
T. Naph. 8:4 Ἐαν ἐργάσησθε τὸ καλόν, τέκνα μου … καὶ ὁ διάβολος φεύξεται29 ἀφ᾽
ὑμῶν, καὶ τὰ θηρία φοβηθήσονται ὑμᾶς30
I f you do the good, my children … And the devil will flee from you
and the beasts will be afraid of you.
T. Dan 5:1 ἀπόστητε δὲ ἀπὸ θυμοῦ, καὶ μισήσατε τὸ ψεῦδος, ἵνα Κύριος κατοικήσῃ
ἐν ὑμῖν καὶ φύγῃ31 ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν32 ὁ Βελίαρ
Renounce wrath and hate lying so that the Lord may dwell in you and
Beliar may flee from you.

Third, as Joel Marcus has put forth in his recent article, the content of the Testaments shows
considerable overlap with the third-century Christian text the Didascalia apostolorum, including
a “tremendous emphasis on the Levites” and the rending of the veil sequence found in T. Benj. 9:4
(“Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs,” 609, 613–14). Fourth, the Christian content cannot be
assigned, in its entirety, to Christian interpolations. Fifth, and closely related to the previous point,
major sections that are integral to the Testaments possess Christian content. In other words, one
cannot pluck out selected Christian lines, words, or phrases without damaging the integrity of
major literary sections of the Testaments. Two prominent examples offered by de Jonge include
the “Sin, Exile, Return” (S.E.R) passages scattered throughout the Testaments and the “Exhorta-
tion” passages. See further Marinus de Jonge, The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs: A Study of
Their Text, Composition and Origin, 2nd ed. (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1975), 12; de Jonge, “The Pre-
Mosaic Servants of God in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs and in the Writings of Justin
and Irenaeus,” VC 39 (1985): 157–70; de Jonge, “The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs: Chris-
tian and Jewish,” in Jewish Eschatology, Early Christian Christology and the Testament of the Twelve
Patriarchs: Collected Essays of Marinus de Jonge, NovTSup 63 (Leiden: Brill, 1991), 233–43, here
241; de Bruin, Great Controversy, 35.
28 There are no significant manuscript variations of relevant Greek according to R. H.

Charles, The Greek Versions of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (Oxford: Clarendon, 1908),
115; M. de Jonge, The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs: A Critical Edition of the Greek Text,
PVTG 1 (Leiden: Brill, 1978), 88.
29 Charles’s text α has φεύξονται. This reading can be explained by the plural subject τὰ

ἀκάθαρτα πνεύματα.
30 There are no significant manuscript variations according to Charles, Greek Versions, 156;

de Jonge, Critical Edition, 122.

31 Charles’s eclectic text α has φεύξεται; d (Vatican 1238) and e (Mount Athos) have φεύγει.
32 ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν is omitted in Mount Sinai MSS h and i, according to Charles.
890 Journal of Biblical Literature 138, no. 4 (2019)

T. Benj. 5:2 Ἐὰν ἦτε ἀγαθοποιοῦντες, καὶ τὰ ἀκάθαρτα πνεύματα φεύξεται ἀφ᾽
ὑμῶν, καὶ αὐτὰ τὰ θηρία φεύξεται ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν φοβηθέντες33
If you do good, even the unclean spirits will flee from you, and the
beasts themselves will flee from you, afraid.

Of these, T. Naph. 8:4 has received the most scholarly attention. R. H. Charles, for
example, in the introduction to his English translation of the Testaments, placed
the Greek of T. Naph. 8:4 alongside Jas 4:7 in order to showcase how the Testaments
influenced James.34 This comparison remains today in the critical apparatus of
Nestle-Aland.35 In another example, Kee cross-references Mark 1:13 in his OTP
translation, but only because of the “wild beasts” mentioned in the latter half of this
verse.36 While complicated and rigid form categories rightly raise skepticism, the
studies by both Jürgen Becker and Anders Hultgård suggest that one explanation
for the repetition of the fleeing tempter motif is either a shared form category (e.g.,
moral exhortation) or a shared source tradition. For the sayings in question, a
shared source tradition seems likely. According to the evidence of Becker and
Hultgård, three of the four sayings appear in similar form types, such as teaching
or exhortation material (T. Iss. 7:7, T. Naph. 8:4, T. Dan 5:1).37 Three of the four
sayings also have identical thematic material connected with them, such as the
“wild animal” reference (T. Iss. 7:7, T. Naph 8:4, T. Benj. 5:2). Therefore, because at
least three of the “devil will flee” texts occur in similar blocks of literary material,
any effort by redaction-critical approaches to abstract a single line or phrase
becomes, in a word, tenuous. In this sense, Evans is right to assert that a Christian
interpolation in T. Naph 8:4 is highly unlikely. Contra Evans, however, the entire
sections of T. Iss. 7:1–8, T. Dan 5:1–13, T. Naph. 8:1–10, and T. Benj. 5:1–5 might
be viewed as Christian, and, if so, they resonate closely with James and the tempta-
tion narratives found in the gospels.

33 The phrase φεύξεται ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν φοβηθέντες occurs only in b. Most other manuscripts read

φοβηθήσονται ὑμᾶς. The latter reading appears dependent on T. Naph. 8:4; Hollander and de Jonge
advise that “any certainty cannot be reached” (Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, 422). According
to Hultgård, the phrase φεύξονται ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν is omitted in the Armenian versions due to a copying
error (L’eschatologie des Testaments, 2:45–47).
34 R. H. Charles, The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs: Translated from the Editor’s Greek

Text (London: Black, 1908), xc; followed by Jürgen Becker, “Die Testamente der zwölf Patriar­
chen,” in Unterweisung in lehrhafter Form, 3 vols., JSHRZ 3 (Gütersloh: Mohn, 1974), 3:17–158.
35 The editors list a total of eighteen New Testament passages parallel to the Testaments; see

Marinus de Jonge, Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament as Part of Christian Literature: The
Case of the Twelve Patriarchs and the Greek Life of Adam and Eve, SVTP 18 (Leiden: Brill, 2003),
160–61.
36 Kee, “Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs,” 813.
37 For example, see the discussion of T. Naph. 8:4 in Hultgård, L’eschatologie des Testaments,

2:196; and Becker, Untersuchungen zur Entstehungsgeschichte, 216–17.

 O’Connor: The Devil Will Flee 891

IV.  Fleeing in Other Sources: A Common Motif?

In addition to the Testaments, James shows salient connections with the Shep-
herd of Hermas and 1 Clement.38 For this reason, it is important to consider a wider
variety of sources in which the fleeing-tempter motif appears. The evidence reveals
three basic saying types.39 The first type appears in magical texts, such as the PGM.
In these sources, evil is caused to flee by way of an incantation, a ritual act, or the
name of either the evil spirit itself or God. The second type depicts evil fleeing from
God or righteous people more generally. In these texts, nothing is said or done by
humans: evil departs because it cannot exist in, among, or near that which is good.
As in the Sentences of Sextus 313, “an evil soul flees God” (ψυχὴ κακὴ θεὸν φεύγει).
The third and final type directly links one’s moral actions to the fleeing of evil or
the evil one. In the case of James, it is resistance (ἀνθίστημι) that prompts the saying
“the devil will flee from you.” From the evidence below, it seems likely that a form
of this third saying type circulated in the second-century sources of the Testaments,
James, and the Shepherd of Hermas.
To begin, the first type frequently appears in various magical texts. In these
sources, evil is caused to flee by an incantation, a ritual act, or the name of either
an evil spirit or God. The collection of Jewish Babylonian Aramaic Magic Bowls
(JBA), for example, contains the repeated refrain—and flee and go out and take
flight (JBA 33:6, 37:8, 42:7, 43:8, 46:7, 58:5). In the JBA, “incantations regularly use
a series of three verbs (qdḥ , npq, rq) to expel the demon.”40 These stock sayings
are familiar to other magical texts in the PGM (I. 185; IV. 254–255; XII. 282).41
38 Johnson, Letter of James, 72–80; Carolyn Osiek, Shepherd of Hermas: A Commentary,

Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1999), 26.

39 The range of the data has been reduced for heuristic purposes. One could also mention,

for example, the pervasive phenomenon of exorcism in Second Temple Judaism and early Chris-
tianity closely related to the first type as a separate category. For a helpful survey of demons and
exorcism in Second Temple Judaism, see Graham H. Twelftree, “Exorcism and the Defeat of
Beliar,” 170–88; and Loren T. Stuckenbruck, The Myth of Rebellious Angels: Studies in Second
Temple Judaism and New Testament Texts (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2017).
40 Shaul Shaked, James Nathan Ford, and Siam Bhayro, Aramaic Bowl Spells: Jewish Babylo-

nian Aramaic Bowls, vol. 1, Manuscripts in the Schøyen Collection 20, Magical and Religious
Literature of Late Antiquity 1 (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 157.
41 The best example of the three listed here (PGM XII. 282) has φεύξεται τὸ δαιμόνιον. The

larger context (XII. 270–350) refers to the proper use of a magical ring. The ritual act of using an
object to dispel demons is why it has been placed in this type. In PGM I. 185 (see the larger section
I. 42–195), the text has καὶ ἀπελεύσεται (“and he will flee”). The context deals with the πάρεδρος,
or “special type of daimon” (Hans Dieter Betz, ed., Texts, vol. 1 of The Greek Magical Papyri in
Translation, Including the Demotic Spells [Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986], 332). For
more on the “assistant spirit” in the PGM, see Eleni Pachoumi, The Concepts of the Divine in the
Greek Magical Papyri, STAC 102 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2017), 35–61. Finally, IV. 254–255 (see
PGM IV. 154–285) has καὶ ἀπελεύσεται. While the section from which it derives deals with
892 Journal of Biblical Literature 138, no. 4 (2019)

Likewise, Solomonic exorcism traditions illustrate evil spirits fleeing with the use
of magical formulae. In the Testament of Solomon, for example, evil spirits flee
at the sign of the cross or at the mention of the spirit’s name (T. Sol. 17:5, 18:6).
Josephus preserves similar demonic expulsion stories regarding Solomonic tradi-
tion (A.J. 8.2.5 §§45–49), in one place describing Eleazar’s extraction of a demon
through specific odors (cf. Tob AB 6:18). Scot McKnight’s so-called parallel
between Jas 4:7 and Tob 6:18 belongs, more appropriately, to this category.42
Finally, several homilies in the Pseudo-Clementine literature use fleeing lan-
guage reminiscent of James, but with a more magical tone.43 In this case, it is the
use of oaths or the “honored name,” even by wicked people, that cause evil spirits
to flee, and not positive moral action:
Ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως κἂν πάντες δαίμονες μετὰ πάντων τῶν παθῶν ὑμᾶς φεύγωσιν, οὐκ ἔστιν
ἐν τούτῳ μόνον χαίρειν … ἔσθ᾽ὅτε δέ τινας ἀνόμους ἄνδρας δαίμονες φεύγουσιν
δι᾽ὄνομα τίμιον … ἐνίοτε δὲ καὶ τοὺς μὴ θεῷ προσκειμένους ὅρκους φεύγειν
ὑποκρίνονται. (Ps.-Clem. Hom. 9.22 [PG 2:257])
But likewise, even if all the demons with all the diseases flee, do not rejoice in
this alone.… It also is the case that demons flee on account of some lawless men
because of the honored name.… Other times they pretend to flee by oaths of
entreaty not to God. (my translation)

The second type depicts evil fleeing from God or righteous people more
generically. In these texts, nothing is said or done by humans: evil departs because

necromancy and divination specifically, it still contains elements of this first type, namely, dismiss-
ing a god or demon one has summoned by speaking the name of the “great god.” Each of these
three examples from the PGM, generally speaking, may be classified as magical in type.
42 Tobit AB 6:18: καὶ ὀσφρανθήσεται τὸ δαιμόνιον καὶ φεύξεται, καὶ οὐκ ἐπανελεύσεται τὸν

αἰῶνα τοῦ αἰῶνος (“and [the odor] will be smelled and the demon will flee, and it will never ever
return” [my translation]). Sinaiticus (‫)א‬: καὶ ὀσφρανθήσεται τὸ δαιμόνιον καὶ φεύξεται, καὶ οὐκέτι
μὴ φανῇ περὶ αὐτη τὸν πάντα αἰῶνα (6:18). 4QToba 14 I, 12 is too fragmentary to consider, restored
in DJD as ]‫“( שדא וי[ערק‬and the demon will [flee]”) (see J. Fitzmyer, “4QpapTobita ar,” in Qumran
Cave 4.XIV: Parabiblical Texts, Part 3, DJD XIX [Oxford: Clarendon, 1995], 7–39, here 20); VL:
et odorabitur illud daemonium et fugiet; vulgate: ipsa autem nocte incenso iecore piscis fugabitur
daemonium.
43 Cf. Ps.-Clem. Hom. 9.16, 21, 22. While Hom. 9.22, quoted below, is not overtly magical,

it deploys an oath formula familiar to the examples listed above (see n. 41 on the PGM). The
emphasis is not on the subject’s moral activity but on the effectiveness of an oath formula or the
name of God. In the temptation narrative, however, each of Jesus’s attempts to thwart the devil by
Scripture is virtually powerless (Matt 4:4 , 7, 10 // Luke 4:4, 8, 12). Instead, the collective image is
one of resisting temptation (πειράζω; Matt 4:1 // Mark 1:13 // Luke 4:2). Additionally, scholarship
has long acknowledged the use of the Jesus tradition in Pseudo-Clementine corpus, including
Matthew’s temptation account (e.g., Ps.-Clem. Hom. 8.21; see Georg Strecker, Das Judenchristen-
tum in den Pseudoklementinen, TUGAL 15 [Berlin: Akademie, 1958], 117–36; Leslie L. Kline, The
Sayings of Jesus in the Pseudo-Clementine Homilies, SBLDS 14 [Missoula, MT: Scholars Press,
1975]).
 O’Connor: The Devil Will Flee 893

it cannot exist in, among, or near that which is good. For this type, both evil as a
source of temptation and positive moral actions are noticeably absent. Evil simply
flees because it cannot stomach the presence of God. One example from the Shep-
herd of Hermas illustrates this point:
Then [the earthly spirit of the prophet who accepts payment for prophecy] does
not draw near the synagogue of righteous men at all, but flees from them … and
when he comes into the synagogue full of righteous men who have the spirit of
divinity … the earthly spirit flees from it in fear (Herm. Mand. 11.13–14 [43.13–
14]; my translation)

In this case, the “earthly spirit” cannot withstand the presence of “the spirit of divin-
ity.” Neither James nor the Testaments appear to draw such a connection.
The third and final type directly links one’s moral actions to the fleeing of evil
or the evil one. In the case of James, it is resistance (ἀνθίστημι) that prompts the
saying, “the devil will flee from you.” The notion of “resisting” temptation is at
home, in a broad sense, in the theology of the New Testament (cf. 1 Pet 5:8; Eph
6:11). The devil’s mischievous schemes to steer Christians off track abound, thus
requiring the believer to stand firm (e.g., 1 Cor 10:12–13). In the case of Jas 4:7, the
Testaments, and Hermas, however, the Greek constructions are all nearly identical:
subject + future form of φεύγω + either ἀπὸ σοῦ or ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν. This appears to be
more than a coincidence: the motif of the devil fleeing in these sources may derive
from imagery in the Jesus tradition.

A.  Shepherd of Hermas

Before turning to the temptation narratives, we must first examine a selection
of sayings preserved in the Shepherd of Hermas, which, much like the Testaments,
has a complicated relationship with the Epistle of James.44 The Mandates, in particu-
lar, yield numerous parallels, including references to double-mindedness (9.1–5
[39.1–5] // Jas 1:8; 4:8), “pure hearts” (4.1.4 [9.4] // Jas 4:8), and resistance to the
devil (12.5.1–4 [48.1–4] // Jas 4:7).45 Nonetheless, Hermas’s relationship with James
remains a puzzle.46 Below is a list of the relevant similarities to Jas 4:7.47

44 Dibelius writes, “Here there is found a kinship which goes beyond lexical and conceptual

agreements” (James, 31). Osiek refers to the quest for Hermas’s literary sources as “long and frus-
trating” (Shepherd of Hermas, 24).
45 For a full list of parallels, see Johnson, Letter of James, 75–79; Allison, Epistle of James,

20–22.
46 Tom de Bruin’s dissertation represents a recent attempt. He posits that the Testaments of

the Twelve Patriarchs share “the same world-view” as Hermas, displaying striking similarities
(Great Controversy, 223).
47 The Greek follows Molly Whittaker’s critical edition, Der Hirt des Hermas, vol. 1 of Die

apostolischen Väter, GCS 48 (Berlin: Akademie, 1956). Two additional texts in Hermas refer to
humans fleeing evil: “Therefore, the one who fears the Lord, you will flee the works of the devil
894 Journal of Biblical Literature 138, no. 4 (2019)

Jas 4:7 ἀντίστητε δὲ τῷ διαβόλῳ και φεύξεται ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν

Resist the devil and he will flee from you.
T. Naph. 8:4 Ἐαν ἐργάσησθε τὸ καλόν, τέκνα μου … καὶ ὁ διάβολος φεύξεται ἀφ᾽
ὑμῶν καὶ τὰ θηρία φοβηθήσονται ὑμᾶς
If you do the good, my children … And the devil will flee from you
and the beasts will be afraid of you.
Herm. Man. ἡ ἐπιθυμία ἡ πονηρὰ ἐὰν ἴδῃ σε καθωπλισμένον τῷ φόβῳ τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ
12.2.4 (45.4) ἀνθεστηκότα αὐτῇ, φεύξεται ἀπὸ σοῦ μακράν
If the evil desire sees you fully equipped with the fear of God and
having resisted it, it will flee from you far off.
Herm. Man. μὴ φοβήθητε οὖν αὐτον, καὶ φεύξεται ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν.
12.4.7 (47.7)
Therefore do not be afraid of [the devil], and he will flee from you.
Herm. Man. ἐὰν οὖν ἀντισταθῆτε αὐτῷ, νικηθεὶς φεύξεται ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν
12.5.2 (48.2) κατῃσχυμμένος
Therefore if you resist [the devil], he will flee from you having been
overcome and ashamed.
The Mandates contain a total of three sayings comparable to Jas 4:7 and T. Naph.
8:4, two of which refer to the devil specifically.48 Hermas uses a form of ἀνθίστημι
twice, and all three passages present evil as being overcome by positive moral
action. The formula of subject + future form of φεύγω + either ἀπὸ σοῦ or ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν
occurs in all five of the passages listed above. The similarities among these three
sources are remarkable. It is beyond the scope of the present article to determine
which text depends on another, if at all. However, the possibility that all three
sources depend to some extent on the temptation scene preserved in Matt 4 and
Luke 4 is a possibility to which we now turn.

B.  Fleeing in the Jesus Tradition

After noticing the similarities between Hermas, the Testaments, Jas 4:7, and
1 Pet 5:8, Philip Carrington argued for a “common source,” from which these

and you will not work them, but you will stay away from them” (Herm. Mand. 7.3 [37.3]; my
translation), Φοβούμενος οὖν τὸν κύριον φοβηθήσῃ τὰ ἔργα τοῦ διαβόλου καὶ οὐκ ἐργάσῃ αὐτά, ἀλλ᾽
ἀφέξῃ ἀπ᾽ αὐτῶν; Latin has abstine for φεύγω). The second text is a MSS variant in P.Iand. 1.4, inv.
45 on Herm. Mand. 12.1.3 [44.3], which contains: ἵνα φύγω ἀπ᾽ αὐτῶν. In context, αὐτῶν refers
to the works of the evil desire; cf. Pseudo-Phocylides 12.146, 151.
48 Herm. Man. 12.2.5 (45.5) refers to “evil desire,” recalling the “spirits” in T. Iss. 7:7 and

T. Benj. 5:2.
 O’Connor: The Devil Will Flee 895

catechetical sayings developed over and against a Pauline source for the data.49
Indeed, Carrington is not the first to posit a “common source” in order to explain
these remarkable similarities.50 If Carrington and others are right, the Jesus tradi-
tion appears to be a possible source for the fleeing-tempter motif presented in the
data above. Matthew and Luke illustrate each element of this saying found in the
Testaments in the form of (a) the devil as the tempter (Matt 4:1 // Luke 4:2), (b)
Jesus’s resistance (Matt 4:4, 7, 10 // Luke 4:4, 8, 12), and (c) the devil’s abrupt depar-
ture as a result of Jesus’s resistance (Matt 4:11 // Luke 4:13).51 Not only are these
broad details shared by the temptation narrative in Matthew and Luke and the
sayings found in the Testaments, but they also explain the appearance of wild beasts
in T. Naph. 8:4 and T. Benj. 5:2 (cf. Mark 1:13).
More recently, Kloppenborg, Allison, and Patrick Hartin have offered cogent
explanations for James’s use of the Jesus tradition.52 The source-tradition argument
must be approached with caution, however. As in the case of Hermas, the author
exhibits the “habit of thoroughly rewriting his sources.”53 With regard to the Jesus
tradition, James follows suit. Once a source is rewritten or paraphrased by another
author, determining its point of origin requires cautious consideration and often
dodges precision.
At this point, Kloppenborg’s invaluable work on paraphrased sayings of Jesus
in James is helpful.
The rhetorical practice of paraphrase thus provides us with a model for under-
standing both the lack of verbatim agreement between a predecessor text and its
re-performance, and the fact that the product of paraphrase might be represented
as the work of the paraphrast rather than as an [sic] citation of some earlier text.54

Kloppenborg introduces the rhetorical category of aemulatio to better evaluate

James’s rephrasing technique. In his words, “it is not unreasonable to suppose that

49 Philip Carrington, The Primitive Christian Catechism: A Study in the Epistles (Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 1940), 31–41.

50 Ropes comments, “There may be, indeed, a common dependence on some single current

book of practical religion, but the existence of such a book is not proved” (Epistle of St. James, 89);
see also Dibelius, James, 31; Oscar J. F. Seitz, “Relationship of Shepherd of Hermas to the Epistle
of James,” JBL 63 (1944): 131–40, https://doi.org/10.2307/3262650.
51 As Allison observes, this connection may be found among some Christian expositors

(Epistle of James, 625; see esp. n. 220).

52 Patrick J. Hartin, James and the Q Sayings of Jesus, JSNTSup 47 (Sheffield: JSOT Press,

1991); Allison, Epistle of James, 56–61; Allison, “The Audience of James and the Sayings of Jesus,”
in James, First and Second Peter, and Early Jesus Traditions, ed. Alicia J. Batten and John S. Klop-
penborg, LNTS 478 (New York: T&T Clark, 2014), 58–77; John S. Kloppenborg, “The Reception
of the Jesus Tradition in James,” in The Catholic Epistles and the Tradition, ed. J. Schlosser, BETL
176 (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2004), 93–141.
53 Allison, Epistle of James, 23.
54 Kloppenborg, “Reception of the Jesus Tradition,” 121.
896 Journal of Biblical Literature 138, no. 4 (2019)

the author likewise understood the principles of paraphrase and aemulatio in his
reproduction of the early Jesus tradition.”55 In a convincing example of this para-
phrasing technique, Kloppenborg cites James’s exhortation to rejoice in suffering
(Jas 1:2–4, 12), a concept “particularly common in the literature of the Jesus
movement.”56 The case in James alone is admittedly weak on verbal grounds (James:
χαρά + ὅταν; Matt 5:11–12 // Luke 6:22–23: ὅταν + χαίρω), but when one considers
the additional cluster of evidence in 1 Pet 4:13–14, the macarism in Jas 1:12, the
notion of eschatological reward from God, and the additional vocabulary of “trials”
(πειρασμός), “testing” (δοκίμιον, δόκιμος) and “endurance” (ὑπομονή) in verses 2–4
and 12–15, “it is difficult to see how deriving James 1,2 from Jewish tradition is a
more efficient explanation.”57 The Jesus saying is an equally sound, if not more
obvious, explanation, according to Kloppenborg.
In the present case, Jas 4:7 does not contain a saying of Jesus; therefore, deter-
mining whether James rephrases the entire temptation scene falls outside the
parameters set by Kloppenborg’s methodology. Kloppenborg’s strict paradigm
does not consider the possibility that James (or another source for that matter) may
paraphrase entire stories of Jesus, such as the major elements of the temptation
scene. In this regard, Allison has added to the conversation by distinguishing
between allusions and “investigating influence” in the Jesus tradition and James.
The latter category of “influence” opens the door to “strong thematic parallels” as
well.58 On these grounds, the temptation scene preserved in both Matthew and
Luke proves useful. The narrative elements include “temptation” by the devil (Matt
4:1 // Luke 4:2) or Satan (Matt 4:10; Mark 1:12), a series of tests, and, finally, Satan’s
flight. In Matthew’s version, Satan’s departure is prompted not only by the quota-
tion of Scripture but also by the exhortation ὕπαγε σατανᾶ! (“away with you,
Satan!”). Moreover, the mention of “wild beasts” (θηρίον) in the Markan account
also appears in two of the sayings in the Testaments, as noted by Evans (T. Naph.
8:4; T. Benj. 5:2), which also claim that the “beasts will be afraid of you.” Addition-
ally, T. Naph. 8:3–4 mentions the administration of angels following one’s tempta-
tion (Matt 4:6, 11 // Luke 4:10). In this way, the Testaments may provide a clue to
the origin of this saying in the Jesus tradition.59 In both Matthew and Luke, the

55 Ibid., 122.
56 Ibid., 125.
57 Ibid., 126.
58 Allison, “Audience of James,” 70–73, esp. n. 34; Allison, Epistle of James, 58; Allison, The

Intertextual Jesus: Scripture in Q (Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 2000), ix n. 3. As

Allison suggests, “If we are investigating influence rather than attempting to detect allusions, we
should not confine ourselves to asking whether a certain verse in James draws upon a certain
saying attributed to Jesus. Our epistle exhibits a number of strong thematic parallels with the Jesus
tradition” (Epistle of James, 58); see also Samuel Emadi, “Intertextuality in New Testament Schol-
arship: Significance, Criteria, and the Art of Intertextual Reading,” CurBR 14 (2015): 8–23.
59 Scholars have long noticed the similarities between Mark and the Testaments of the

Twelve Patriarchs; see, e.g., Jeffrey B. Gibson, “Jesus’ Wilderness Temptation according to Mark,”
 O’Connor: The Devil Will Flee 897

scene ends with the devil departing, and in Luke it is ὁ διάβολος ἀπέστη ἀπ᾽αὐτοῦ
(“the devil departed from him,” 4:13). In light of the data, the notion of a fleeing
tempter may still derive from a Jewish tradition. My intention is not to exclude this
possibility, especially if one considers certain rabbinic parallels,60 but, to quote
Kloppenborg once more, it is not clear how this is “a more efficient explanation.”61

V. Conclusion

In sum, the Jesus tradition provides a plausible if not more reasonable expla-
nation for the source of the saying “the devil will flee from you” appearing in Jas
4:7, the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, and the Shepherd of Hermas. If one
follows the increasing number of scholars who date the Testaments to a period
roughly contemporaneous with James, then claiming that James may borrow a so-
called Jewish (i.e., not Christian) idea from the Testaments is untenable. The
numerous literary connections between James, Hermas, and the Testaments
deserve to be explored in the very least. Kloppenborg’s work on paraphrase seems
to offer a reasonable approach for explaining this literary phenomenon. In other
words, James, or a source now lost to us, paraphrased a didactic story in the life of
Jesus into a pithy phrase: “resist the devil and he will flee from you.” This phrase
and verse, a favorite among Christian interpreters such as Ephrem the Syrian and
John of Damascus, may have been picked up by the Testaments as well.

JSNT 53 (1994): 3–34; Gibson, The Temptations of Jesus in Early Christianity, JSNTSup 112 (Shef-
field: Sheffield Academic, 1995), 80; Joel Marcus, Mark 1–8: A New Translation with Introduction
and Commentary, AB 27 (New York: Doubleday, 2000), 170. The problem here, as with the con-
nections between Jas 4:7 and the Testaments noted above, is the underlying assumption that the
Testaments precede Mark as “background” material. If one accepts a later dating for the Testa-
ments, then the Testaments may borrow from Mark. I thank Jeffrey Gibson for his personal cor-
respondence regarding this observation.
60 For example, one could cite the use of Scripture to dispel the prince of the spirits in y. Pe’ah

21b; as does Allison, Epistle of James, 625.

61 Kloppenborg, “Reception of the Jesus Tradition,” 126.