Could we say here that what James is talking about here is when we pass judgments about others which exceed our understanding? We know murder is wrong. We -know- that. But what about sectarian disagreements about theology? What about Palagians? What about Buddhists? What about secular humanists? Are we not putting ourselves into a place of authority we have no claim to when we judge and slander people with whom we disagree by claiming that we -know- The Law with regards to these things and they do not?
Which is not a call for pluralistic relativism where all points of view are equally valid. It is a call to humble conversation in which all points of view are equally suspect until we can all, in love, agree.
Do we not judge The Law when we claim to know and understand all of it and how it ought to be applied? A place only G-d can occupy? We judge The Law to be something completely comprehensible to a human mind (which anything which arises from G-d’s perfection cannot be) while simultaneously insisting that The Other does not understand or own it the way we do.
Yes?

I am not saying that Scott agrees with my thinkng, but my thinking flows easily with his proposition:
I believe the word Law is used variously in the NT, though NT expositors, obsessed with the Law v. Grace dichotomy, seem always to take it to mean specifically the Torah. I would agree that this passage points to the perfect law of liberty, which I take as the very theme of James epistle.
If I am wrong on this the sky does not fall. I could argue the opposite, noting that the man who sits as judge is in a position superordinate to the law itself (after all, te law does not climb off the paper and execute judgement, the judge determines whether it is of any actual effect.) I viewed the passage thus for many years, and I still think it has some explanatory power that way.
Still, over time I have come to think that James’s summary of All Truth is expressed in this life governed by and flowing from this Perfect Law of Liberty. It’s a gross abbreviation, but since I am working on the virtue of brevity, I’ll now shut up.

Jim Marks and Joe B
Yes