J.W. Roberts Commentary On James 1SECTION ONE THE GIFTS OF GOD IN TRIALS James 1:1-18 Salutation--James 1:1 In the typical fashion of good Greek correspondence James has three main elements in the salutation: He names himself as the au¬thor, gives the "twelve tribes which are of the Dispersion” as the recipients of the letter, and includes the "greeting.” Notice that the name is put at the beginning rather than at the end as is our custom. James 1:1 ---James,—The English name is derived from the Italian Form Giacomo. The Greek for it is the equivalent to our "Jacob” and is, in fact, the same word that is translated "Jacob.” The name was fairly common in Palestine. In this study James is assumed to be James the brother of Jesus. He was not one of the twelve but rose to prominence in the church at Jerusalem after the stoning of Ste¬phen. Compare Acts 12:17 Acts 15:13 Acts 21:18; 1 Corinthians 15:7; Galatians 1:19 Galatians 2:9 Galatians 2:12; Mark 6:3 and Matthew 13:55. For further identification and character of this James and for consideration about the authorship of this letter ,see the Introduction, pp. 8 ff. We assume that James writes as a leader prominent in the church at Jerusalem. He has in mind the problems of the church scattered abroad. He probably was in contact with the churches through the continual travel to Jerusalem of those coming to the feasts and for other business. It is known from contemporary accounts that James was held in great reverence and esteem as a righteous man and a leader of the church. James 1:1 ---servant—. From the Old Testament point of view the term was a term of honor and carried a meaning close to that of "worshipper.” It had been worn with honor by the greatest of the Jewish worthies: by Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Deuteron¬omy 9:27); Joshua and Caleb (Judges 2:8; Numbers 14:24); Job (Job 1:8); Moses (1 Kings 8:53; Daniel 9:11); and Isaiah (Isaiah 20:3). It was especially used of the prophets (Amos 3:7; Zechariah 1:6; Jeremiah 7:25). It was used collectively of the church at Jerusalem in one of the early narratives (Acts 4:29). There is prob¬ably also a subtle blending of this O. T. religious significance and the more common secular meaning of the word, which was that of a civil slave. The slave had no rights, privileges, or will of his own. He owed complete submission and loyalty to his master, who ac¬tually held the power of life and death over him. James’ use from this background would, then, be a conscious term of humility, of self-denial, and of loyalty. It would carry the affirmation that the will of God and Christ is the only rule of faith and life for one be-longing to the church. Notice that there is a complete lack of claim to special prestige or attention as a brother of Jesus. Some have thought this unnatu¬ral, but it is a mark of modesty. Paul usually joins some other title with his frequent use of the term "servant,” such as "apostle” (Titus 1:1). Only in Philippians 1:1 and Jude 1:1 do we find the term used singly in address as here. The use of the term "servant” for "slave” is said to be confined largely to early American usage and English Biblical translations. The present custom is still to keep the two words sharply separate. Hence the margin of the ASV conveys the proper meaning of the original. James 1:1 ---to the twelve tribes—"The twelve tribes” was a synonym for the nation of Israel as a whole (Acts 26:7). It was true that the twelve tribes no longer existed as settled units in Palestine as in earlier times. We speak of the "lost tribes of Israel,” thinking of the ten tribes taken into Assyrian captivity (2 Kings 17). But many of the individual members of such tribes knew their tribal identity. Even so, the term was spiritualized to include the nation without regard to the loss of identity of the tribes. There are different understandings of how James uses the term here. Some contend that the book was written originally to Jews — fleshly Israel as God’ s people. This would be the literal meaning of the expression. This is unlikely, however, in view of the book as it now stands. So it is assumed by some that the present book has been worked over by a Christian hand and that the references to Jesus and the distinctly Christian material have been added to the original, which was addressed to Jews only (See Introduction, p. 14). Of this there is no evidence. It is unlikely that Christians would have so appropriated such a writing. Also it has been pointed out that it would have been unlikely that anyone would have attempted to reach such a widely separated group as all the scat¬tered people of the Jews. A second meaning is that the term "twelve tribes” is equal to "Israel,” used figuratively for the church. In Luke 22:30 Jesus seems to use "twelve tribes of Israel” in this way. This idea of the "Jew” as the spiritual worshipper of God under the gospel rather than a physical descendant of the fleshly offspring of Jacob is quite well documented. Paul said, "We are the circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God, and have no confidence in the flesh” (Philippians 3:3). Compare Romans 2:29 Romans 9:6. This may also be the meaning of "Israel” in Galatians 6:15 . In Revelation 7:4 ff those sealed as the servants of God are presented as 144,000, out of "every tribe of the children of Israel.” Thus it is quite possible that James is simply using this figurative way of addressing the whole church of Christ. There is, however, a third possibility. There are those who in¬sist that the term "twelve tribes of Israel” as spiritualized in the above manner refers only to the remnant of faithful Jews who ac¬cepted the gospel and thus that it means all "Christian Jews.” On this point, compare Burton, International Critical Commentary on Galatians 6:15. Though it does not seem possible, over-all, in the New Testament to limit the term "Israel” in this way, there does seem much to support the idea that James is written especially to Jewish Christians. The book is Jewish to the core. There is little or nothing which would imply that the writer had a Gentile group in view. The argument of Knowling (Westminister Commentary') that the book was written at an early time when the writ¬er still anticipates the acceptance of the gospel by all Israel does not seem plausible. This places the book too early. Most commentators who place the book very early think that it was written by James the Apostle (died 44 A.D., Acts 12:1). It is most plausible to this writer that James the Lord’ s brother had in mind Jewish Christians as those whose interests were closest to him and that, though "the twelve tribes” may mean "the whole church,” partic¬ular stress is laid on that part allied to his own concern— the Jewish part. James 1:1 ---of the Dispersion,—The King James "scattered abroad” is bet¬ter translated by "Diaspora” as a technical term for all Israel liv¬ing outside of Palestine— the Dispersion. In New Testament times Israelites were living in "every nation under heaven” (Acts 2:5-11). This exile from their native land had taken place over a long period of time and in many ways. First, it had been the result of forced removal at the times of the captivities of the Northern Kingdom (to Assyria, 721 B.C.) and then of Judah (to Babylon, 606-586 B.C.). The people of Judah retained their identity by refusing to inter¬marry with their captors. The great monument of this residence in Babylon is the Babylon Talmud, an immense library of commen¬tary on the law. Josephus bears witness that many such Jews re¬mained in the East to his day. Hillel, the grandfather of Gamaliel (Paul’ s teacher), had been educated in Babylon. Much later the Romans at the capture of Jerusalem (63 B.C.) carried many Jews into slavery, from which many of them were eventually freed to constitute the "Freedmen’ s” class (Acts 6:9). But many Jews moved out of Palestine of their own accord. According to 2 Kings 25:26 Jews in large numbers removed themselves to Egypt out of fear of the armies of Nebuchadnezzar. Alexander the Great (d. 323 B.C.) enticed many Jews to different parts of the Empire with offers of special privileges. More than a million Jews were said to reside in Alexandria, the capital of Egypt. Egypt even saw the building of a temple there for Jewish worshippers. In Syria, Da¬mascus, in Cyrene of North Africa, in Crete, and all over Asia Minor the Jews lived and set up their synagogues. At one time Anti- ochus the King of Syria transplanted 2,000 families from Babylon to the provinces of Lydia and Phrygia. So widespread was this scattering that the geographer Strabo said, "It is hard to find a spot in the whole world that is not occupied and dominated by Jews.” This Dispersion is witnessed in the book of Acts as the reader sees Paul visiting the synagogues for his first contacts with the community. Along with these, there were large numbers of devout Greeks ("Godfearers") who were already attracted to the religion of the Old Testament by the teaching and lives of their Jewish neighbors. This was certainly one of the great providential fac¬tors in the spread of early Christianity. The book of James, then, in all probability was written to Jew¬ish Christians living among the Dispersion, with special thought given to those living in the nearer regions to Palestine where the book might reach. James 1:1 ---greeting.—The form of this greeting is peculiar to this passage among the epistles of the New Testament. It occurs elsewhere in the N.T. in Acts 15:23 (the letter of the church at Jerusalem to their Gentile brethren suggested by James) and in Acts 23:26 (the letter of the Captain Claudius Lysias to Felix the Governor). In the original it is an infinitive used as an imperative. The verb lit¬erally means "to be happy" or "rejoice." But it was used as an informal greeting meaning something like our "Hello" or "How do you do?" At the beginning of a letter, as here, it is simply a saluta¬tion, and the rendering "Greeting” is a good way of expressing it in English. The more usual epistolary salutation in the N.T. is the "Grace to you” type. This most often has no verb expressed. In I and II Peter and Jude it is used with the verb "be multiplied,” where the verb is in the mood of wishing. The form used by James is a more formal type and presents evidence of a more stylistic language in the letter. THE JOY OF TRIALSJas_1:2-4 The first section of the epistle seems to include James 1:2-18. The central idea is that God is the giver of every good and perfect gift (James 1:17). The benefits of God are, however, often paradoxical; they often seem to be burdens and difficulties instead of blessings. The case in point is the difficulty or trials to which Christians are often subjected. The right view of these trials is presented, with the implied suggestion that wisdom is needed from God to accept this conception of suffering. This wisdom is promised as an answer to believing prayer. In this connection a warning is given to the doubting petitioner. As such trials seem heaped upon the poor disciple, James presents a view of the acceptable attitude of both the poor and the rich. James then promises the reward for faithful endurance of temptations. He assures the readers that temptations cannot be thought of as coming from God, as He gives only good gifts. Finally, the supreme gift of all— salvation (presented under the figure of birth into the family of God)— is mentioned. The material of this section is calculated to help us count our blessings even in the midst of seeming adversity. The first subject treated, then, in the epistle is that of trials and the way they are to be received by Christians. The idea is not that trials are pleasant in themselves but that, since they are beneficial to the individual, they are to be received gladly rather than with sorrow and dispair. Their main effect is to produce perfection in the Christian’ s character by developing stedfastness. James 1:2 ---Count it all joy,—The word "count” means to "reckon” or "consider.” It is not to be thought that trials are to be courted be­cause they are enjoyable. It is only when they are understood to be the occasion of benefit that they may be reckoned as joy and re­ceived as such. "All joy” probably means "every kind of joy.” The joy is as varied as the manifold tests themselves. Others take the idea as that of "pure joy,” "nothing but joy.” Cf. Acts 4:29, "com­plete candor.” The sufferer is to be glad that he can suffer. He is not to dwell on the unpleasantness of the experience. There should be no such thing as a complaining, grumbling disciple of Jesus. We must develop the attitude of Jesus, who "for the joy that was set before him endured the cross” (Hebrews 12:2). James 1:2 ---my brethren,—Fifteen times in the course of the epistle James uses this expression. Both the Greek and Hebrew words for "broth­er” originally have reference to those born of the same mother or womb. The Hebrew developed the wider sense of relative also (Genesis 13:8, where Abraham called his nephew Lot his brother). It is used of tribal relationship, of those who belong to the same group or people (Exodus 2:11; Leviticus 19:17). It could even ap­ply to a proselyte (Leviticus 19:7), to a covenant brother (Amos 1:9), or to a friend (as David and Jonathan, 2 Samuel 1:26). James uses it here of the wide sense of fraternal relation of those born together into the family of God. The former distinction be­tween "brothers” of fleshly relations and "brethren” for fraternal ties ought to be kept. The sons of Jacob and Mary were "brothers” (John 2:12; Acts 1:14); this should not be rendered "brethren.” James’ frequent use of the term is a touch of humility and affection, though he exhorts pointedly and strongly at times as a brother (James 2:1 ff). James 1:2 ---fall into—The trials under consideration are outside the man. As the man in the story of the Good Samaritan, who "fell among” the robbers, so the Christian in the course of this life will encounter many things from without which will test him within. Usually such experiences will catch him unawares. He cannot anticipate what they will be or just when they will come. He cannot be prepared for the circumstance of each; he can only be prepared in attitude for whatever form it may happen to take. manifold temptations;— The marginal rendering "trials” is un­doubtedly the meaning of James here. The word may have the sense of "temptation” (enticement to sin), but this does not fit this con­text. David prayed that God would try or test his heart and mind (Psalms 26:2). The sense of the "trial of suffering” is well known to Jewish literature (Wisdom of Sir 6:7 Sir 27:5 Sir 27:7). In Revelation 2:2 the sense of "trying or testing” of false teachers (by examining their teaching) is found. In James 1:13 James uses the word in the sense of enticement to sin, but he is warning against taking his former use (in the passage now being discussed) as meaning that. It is most certain that James here has the sense of "testings” or "trials” in mind. But what in particular does he mean? One should read Hebrews 10:32 ff, where the writer mentions "a great conflict of sufferings.” Among the things mentioned are "being made a gazingstock both by reproaches and afflictions,” "the spoiling of your goods,” and "bonds.” These are the adversities of life, the unexpected disap­pointments and sorrows, the oppositions of the enemies of the truth. In Romans 5:3 Paul mentions "tribulations” and in Romans 8:18 ff the "sufferings of this present time,” to which is added "the groan­ing and travailing in pain of the whole creation.” Compare also 1 Thessalonians 2:14 f. "Manifold” means that the writer has no specific kind in mind but thinks that there are many possible ways of being tested. In the book itself James mentions the oppression of the rich (James 2:6), being dragged to court and having one’ s religion blasphemed (James 2:6-7), the keeping back of wages due one (James 5:1 ff), and even the killing of the righteous (James 5:6). Then of course there is the passage on sickness (James 5:13 ff)- James 1:3 ---knowing—The Hebrew idea of "knowledge” tends toward the idea that knowing is an act of the will, i.e., an acknowledgement. One must himself allow something to be said to him. Compare such passages as 1 Samuel 2:12; Isaiah 1:3; Jeremiah 2:8 Jeremiah 9:2-5; Psalms 9:10 Psalms 36:10; Daniel 11:32. This does not mean to learn or make sure of something, but to recognize and accept the conse­quence of something which is revealed to one. Hence the verb is used often to call special attention to something, by way of warn­ing. See Matthew 24:43; Luke 10:11; Ephesians 5:5; 2 Timothy 3:1; 2 Peter 1:20 2 Peter 3:5. The calling to attention is usually given as an imperative or command. Here it is given in a participle following an imperative. These could almost be translated as two impera­tives: "Count it joy; recognize that.. .”1 "Accept the fact that. .. ” that the proving of your faith— The reason the Christian is to count or reckon an unpleasant trial as a joy is that he is to know or recognize from his instruction as a Christian that there is value to him in the experience. That reward comes when the proving of faith works patience. But the expression "proving” or "trying,” in the opinion of most modern commentators, rather means the "genuineness” (what is left as the real thing after the testing has taken place) instead of the "testing” itself. This is undoubtedly the meaning of this word in 1 Peter 1:7. It is not certain, but this could be the meaning here. Moffatt translates: "The sterling tem­per of your faith produces endurance.” But Arndt and Gingrich and the majority of the late translators (Phillips, RSV, Goodspeed, and NEB) still hold to the more traditional rendering. The mean­ing "genuineness” would give the following sense: "Count it joy when you are tempted, since you may recognize that what is gen­uine in your faith will produce stedfastness.” If our faith is gen­uine, we can not only stand the trial, but we will be stronger for'; the experience. On this basis the occasions of trial may be consid­ered a joy. But the other meaning of "testing” or "trial” can also make good sense. The trying of faith produces patience because such faith (assuming that it is genuine) can be strengthened by such experiences, and greater loyalty and fidelity to God will be wrought in us. In either case the trial results in stedfastness in the true believer. James 1:3 ---worketh patience.—The verb means "works out, brings about, or creates.” It is a more emphatic compound form of the simple verb of the same meaning, which was a favorite of Paul. Compare Romans 5:3, "Affliction worketh patience.” The uncompounded verb occurs in 1:20 and in James 2:9 . "Patience” is perhaps too passive for the Greek word. It means "endurance,” "stedfastness,” "perseverance.” Thayer says in the N.T. it is "the characteristic of a man who is unswerved from his deliberate purpose and his loyalty to faith and piety by even the greatest trial and sufferings.” Notice Romans 2:7 and 2 Corinthians 6:4 . Other scriptures which stress this need of sted­fastness are Hebrews 10:36 Hebrews 12:1; Luke 21:19. Many of the Jews considered this quality the queen of the virtues. In view of the longsuffering which the nation had undergone, this is understand­able. Persecutions were new to the Gentile Christians, but the Jews were longsuffering. When the Christian’ s faith is what it ought to be, the difficulties of life only make him both desire and enabled to continue. A muscle is strengthened and hardened by strenuous labor. The more the runner trains and punishes himself the more likely he is of winning. This is the "knowledge” or "recognition” which James calls for in such trials. It is this which can enable him to treat trials as joys. James 1:4 ---perfect work,—Patience is to have its perfect work. "Work” here means "manifestation” or "practical proof” (Arndt and Gingrich). Paul spoke of the "work of faith” (1 Thessalonians 1:3), i.e., faith manifested in work; "work of ministry” means theactual manifestation or practice of service or ministering. Thus James says that this stedfastness or patience must be put to actual work; it must be allowed to work in our lives in the midst of trials. Goodspeed translates: "Stedfastness must have full play.” The RSV has "must have its full effect.” The NEB renders "If you give fortitude full play . . .” Thus the word "perfect” is taken in the sense of complete or full. Arndt and Gingrich translate: "Let en­durance show itself perfectly in practice.” James 1:4 ---that ye may be perfect—James sees the chance that some may lose heart amidst struggles; but these never become perfect; that is, they do not attain the end or stature which God intends for them. They fall short or are "lacking.” "Perfect and entire” does not mean moral perfection or sinlessness. The idea is that patience al­lows one to fulfill his lot or destiny as a Christian, to attain to the station or stature to which God has called him. NEB renders "You will go on to complete a balanced character that will fall short in nothing.” The one who has genuine faith amid persecutions and difficul­ties finds endurance developed in himself. "We also rejoice in our tribulations; knowing that tribulation worketh stedfastness; and stedfastness approvedness; and approvedness hope” (Romans 5:3-4). Much teaching needs to be done in the church on the subject of trials and stedfastness. Too many members are going back into the world because of weak faith. .They need to be taught the pur­poses of God in difficulty. Elders and teachers need to study how to involve members in the work of the congregations where they may be encouraged through fellowship, helped and comforted in adversity, shielded and strengthened in temptation, restored from sins and mistakes, and made to grow in the grace and knowledge of Jesus. This is the real duty of shepherds of the flock who watch over the souls of the disciples. entire, lacking in nothing.— The word "entire” is used of that which has no blemishes and is complete in all parts. It is often used to describe sacrifices which meet all the requirements of the rit­ual. The noun form is used of the lame man healed by Peter and John (Acts 3:16). Hermas uses it of faith that is intact or blame­less (Mandates 5, 2, 3). Here it has the sense of a character that meets all the requirements of maturity. "Lacking in nothing" is the opposite or negative counterpart of completeness. NOTE ON MORAL word needs to be said about the teaching of the gospel on per­fection of character. We have emphasized that when James says "Ye shall be perfect and entire, lacking in nothing," he means, not moral perfection or sinlessness, but the reaching of the de­sired goal— full growth or maturity of character. James will say later (3:2), "We all sin in many respects." Sinlessness is not the meaning of "sanctification" in the New Testament, though this is the goal toward which all should aspire. The fullness of God (Ephesians 3:19) or the measure of the stature of Christ (Ephe­sians 4:13) must be our aim. The idea of an entire sanctification by the Holy Spirit as a second work of grace is not a Biblical idea. The New Testament teaching is that of a progressive perfecting of hol­iness (2 Corinthians 7:1) through daily renewal (2 Corinthians 4:16). The rendering of the New English Bible in Matthew 5:48 ("You must be all goodness, just as your heavenly Father is all good.") is certainly not supported by anything in the context of the passage. Since the context is that of complete love— for both just and unjust, the perfection is that of the perfect love which characterizes the Father. James uses the word "perfect" again (3:2) of the man able to bridle the whole body. Its basic meaning is that of maturity of character. See Colossians 1:28 Colossians 4:12; I Corin­thians 14:20; Hebrews 5:12-14; and Philippians 3:15. WISDOM IN TRIALS James 1:5-8 Verse 5 begins a subsection in which "wisdom” is stressed. James connects the thought by picking up the word "lacking” in the previous verse, as he had done with "patience" in verses 3-4. There is much discussion as to whether in such passages one is to consider this a new subject or a part of the larger context of the subject "trials." Some contend that James simply strings subjects together like pearls or beads on a string and no connection should be sought. But a deeper study of the whole section seems to indi­cate that throughout (verses 2-18) the general subject is pursued. In verse 12 James returns to the subject of trials (as though sum­marizing). Hence it is better (and certainly does no violence) to connect the subject of wisdom and poverty with that of trials. The thought is elliptical and is to be understood something as follows: If anyone lacks wisdom to see the value and ability in trials as just explained, he must go to a divine source for such wisdom. He should ask of God. James 1:5 ---lacketh wisdom,— What is wisdom? It is not mere knowledge. Knowledge comes from experience, particularly through the reve­lation of God and our study and learning of it. But one may be a "walking Bible” and not be wise. Nor does it mean knowledge gained by direct revelation. This was the mistake made by Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism. He read this promise and de­cided to pray for a revelation, which he claimed he got. Wisdom is the common sense to put into practice the principles and in­structions given us in the revelation of God’ s word. The man who believes in God, who fears or reverences Him, and who lets His will have its way in his life is wise, but "the fool despises instruc­tion.” The Jews, as many other people of the Near East, had a special interest in wise sayings. Wisdom writing was one of the genre of literature of the section. But the Jews grounded their wisdom lit­erature on the revelation of God’ s word. Notice that in the book of Proverbs, especially in the first chapters, wisdom is personified. She speaks to man to inform him what is good for him. Hort says that the sense of the word is "that endowment of heart and mind which is needed for the right conduct of life.” Proverbs, Psalms, Job, and Ecclesiastes, as well as the Jewish apocryphal book of Ec- clesiasticus and the Wisdom of Sirach, are examples of wisdom literature. Job shares with James the thought that wisdom is needed to develop the right attitude toward suffering. There is a sense in which wisdom is the central emphasis of the book of James. Mayor says that James gives it the emphasis which Paul gives to faith, Peter to hope, and John to love. James will elaborate on the "wisdom from above” in the latter part of the third chapter (James 3:13-18). James knows that in the midst of trials no matter how well Christians may know God’ s will they will face circumstances which will demand that they be "wise as serpents and harmless as doves.” They will often not know how to act or "how to answer” those who attack their faith (1 Peter 3:15). James gives the answer to those who feel the lack of wisdom. In all areas of Christian conduct we need wisdom: as elders, preachers, parents, or teachers. We need to remember its source. James 1:5 ---let him ask of God,—The source of wisdom is God, and the method of obtaining it is prayer. Notice the reflection of Jesus’ words in the Sermon on the Mount: "Ask, and it shall be given un­to you” (Matthew 7:7). Prayers for wisdom are frequent in Jew­ish literature: 1 Kings 3:5-15 1 Kings 4:29-34; Proverbs 2:6; Wis 7:7 Wis 9:4. James 1:5 ---who giveth to all liberally—God gave Solomon wisdom in an­swer to his prayer. No other will ever attain that stature of wis­dom which he had (1 Kings 3:12). But still God will give wisdom to all who ask, and in a generous quantity. The word for "liberally” is difficult to translate, for it can mean many things. Sometimes it seems to mean "simply” or "singly,” that is, without any condi­tions or strings attached. In Barnabas 6:5 "to write simply” means to write plainly. Again, it seems to be equivalent to our word "liberally,” since the gift which is willing and unconditional tends also to be liberal. Let the student consider the word in the follow­ing contexts: 2 Corinthians 8:2 2 Corinthians 9:11; and Romans 12:8. The "single eye” (Matthew 6:22; Luke 11:34) seems to mean "gener­ous,” as opposed to the "evil eye” which means "stingy” : Matthew 20:15; Mark 7:22 (Cf. Cadbury in Harvard Theological Review, 47, ’ 54, pp. 69ff). So the meaning here seems to be that God is lav­ish in his gifts, especially in the giving of wisdom. God as Father knows how to do exceedingly abundantly above all that we ask or think. Thus the man who desires, asks for, and seeks wisdom throughout a life of patience and stedfastness may expect to re­ceive it. It is interesting to note that the description of God as the one who giveth is so placed in Greek as to be a direct modifier or at­tribute: "Let him ask of the giving God.” It is the very nature of God to give, just as it is for him to love and forgive. We need not worry as to how God will impart that wisdom. If we ask, He will give. James 1:5 ---and upbraideth not;—God does not reproach or upbraid the one to whom He has given. Some give so that they may throw it up to the one who has received by reminding him of their generosity and his debt. The Book of Wisdom has the following, which may be what James (who certainly must have known the book) is think­ing of: "My son, blemish not thy good deeds, neither use uncomfort­able words when thou givest anything . . . Lo, is not a word better than a gift? and a gift of the envious consumeth the eyes" (Ec- clesiasticus 18:15-18). From the same book we have, "After you have given, upbraid not" (41:22). No one likes a gift given so that the giver can parade his liberality. Lowell said, "The gift with­out the giver is bare.” Oesterley points out three characteristics of God as a giver: "to all,” "liberally,” and "upbraiding not.” James 1:6 ---Ask in faith,—Jesus often said that faith is a condition of ac­ceptable prayer (Mark 11:23): "Whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou taken up and cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that what he saith cometh to pass; he shall have it.” To pray in faith means to pray in the trust that God will answer the prayer according to His will. We are not only to believe that God is, but also that "he is the rewarder of those who diligently seek him” (Hebrews 11:6). There have always been materialists who doubt the power of God to answer prayer in a world of science. But law and order answer to the lawgiver. Others doubt the goodness of God or His disposition to bless us. Is it not strange that the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ should be thought of as a harsh God? What is needed is belief and trust in God, not an "understanding” of all God’ s ways in the universe. James 1:6 ---nothing doubting:—The Classical meaning of this verb is "to divide, to make a distinction, judge, or dispute.” But the meaning "doubt,” "be at odds with one’ s self,” appears in the New Testa­ment. It occurs with this meaning elsewhere in Matthew 21:21; Mark 11:23; Romans 4:20 Romans 14:23; Jude 1:22. "Hesitate” would be a better translation in Acts 10:20. The King James "wavering” blends in the context with the figure of the wave of the sea. This "doubting” shows that the praying person has not committed himself fully to trust in God. The same word is used by James in James 2:4 and in James 4:3 f. In the latter passage it is indecision between friendship with God and the world. James 1:6 ---like the surge of the sea—The doubting petitioner is changing and uncertain like the surge of the sea. The word for "surge” means the "billows, the rough water, the breakers” upon the shore. The word is used elsewhere in the N.T. only in Luke 8:24, of the waves of the storm on the Sea of Galilee. One is reminded of the old song which speaks of the time when the "fearful breakers roar.” When the surf is "wind-driven and tossed,” it is then really surg­ing. The whole picture is one of indecision, of uncertainty. Perhaps the thought is that the one praying is lifted high like the crest of the wave by hope one minute and then lowered by doubt and de­spair of receiving the next. There is an old saying that some peo­ple have just enough religion to make them miserable. Knowling points to Ephesians 4:13-14, where perfect or mature Christians are contrasted with those who are tossed about by every wind of doctrine. James 1:7 ---For let not that man think—The "for” connects with "let him ask in faith.” The reason for the prayer of faith is that the one not praying thus need not even think to receive. "That man” is the doubter, and there is something of contempt in the expression, as though a doubting, halting man of prayer is a contradiction. The verb "think” means "to suppose,” or "to imagine.” It is used in the LXX (Genesis 37:7) of what Joseph supposed in his dream. The ASV is uncertain whether to take the latter part of the sen­tence beginning "a doubleminded man . . .” as modifying the sub­ject of the verb "shall receive” or to take it as being in apposition with the noun. Either is possible, and the thought is the same either way it is expressed. The construction means to "stop thinking.” James 1:7 ---that he shall receive anything of the Lord;—"The Lord” here is probably the Father, inasmuch as the prayer for wisdom is to be directed to Him. But the same expression in 5:14 probably refers to Jesus. One who prays in doubt may receive God’ s blessings in natural ways, as God blesses both the just and the unjust. But his prayers are not answered. James 1:8 ---a doubleminded man,—The ASV takes this and the following adjective probably correctly as an appositive to "that man” : "that man— a doubleminded man” will receive nothing. The word is not found in Biblical texts outside of James’ use here and in 4:8. But in later ecclesiastical Greek (Cf. Lampe, Patristic Greek Lexicon) it is a frequent word occurring not only in the adjective form but as a verb (dipsucheo) meaning "to hesitate,” or "be doubleminded” and also in the noun form (dipsuchia) meaning "indecision, doubt, or hesitancy.” In I Clement 11:2 we have: "For the doubters and the uncertain about the power of God are for judgment.” The Did- ache mentions the sin of doublemindedness as a part of the way of death. As already noted, James uses this word again in 4:8 of the man who would serve God and the world at the same time. Both uses portray men who act as if they had two minds and thought with both at the same time. Cf. Sir 2:12, "Woe ... to the sinner who goes on two ways.” James 1:8 ---unstable in all his ways.—The doubter is unstable or restless. In 3:8 James uses the same word of the tongue; it is a "restless” evil, that is, a continual, neverceasing evil. Here the idea is unset­tled, fickle, and, hence, unreliable. Such a man cannot be trusted. Oesterley thinks that James may be suggesting that the man who cannot trust God cannot be trusted by others. "In all his ways” means in his paths. The word in the plural of­ten means conduct as a whole. Arndt and Gingrich refer to Acts 14:16 and to Romans 3:16 . The usage is a frequent Old Testament one: Proverbs 3:6; Psalms 10:5; Jeremiah 16:17. Solomon said, "In all thy ways acknowledge her (wisdom; the Hebrew has Him) so that she may direct thy ways” (Proverbs 3:1). In 1:11 the word is different and means "under­takings, pursuits, or schemes.” Goodspeed renders it "uncertain about everything he does.” The NEB paraphrases: "Can never keep a steady course.” THE TRIALS OF POVERTY AND RICHESJas_1:9-11 James progresses to a new phase of the subject. Mayor rightly sees this section as set within the framework of the whole section in James 1:2-18. The verb "boast” is set forward emphat­ically in the sentence, probably because of its similarity to the word "joy” in James 1:2. It expresses a Christian’ s continued confidence in any circumstance in which he finds himself. Also it is a contrast to the doubting, hesitant man of the previous section. The general idea of the section is that of Solomon, "The rich and the poor meet together, Jehovah is the maker of them all” (Proverbs 22:2). The poor is not to be depressed by the trial of poverty, nor the rich proud of his wealth. Life is uncertain. The gospel teaches each person to make adjustment to a new and common station in Christ, and each in turn can find something to boast of in what Chris­tianity has done for him. James 1:9 ---let the brother,—There has been much discussion as to wheth­er both of those addressed in the section are to be thought of as Christians. James uses the term "brother” in the first case but not in the second. Some (e.g., Easton) take the position that the teach­ings of the gospel assume that no rich man can be a Christian. But this position is certainly false. Many of Jesus’ friends and early disciples were well to do: Joseph of Arimathaea, Barnabas, Nic- odemus, Mary (sister of Lazarus), and the women of Galilee. James would hardly have written in the supposition that no rich were potential Christians. In James 2:6 he does speak of the rich as a class in a derogatory manner, but this is to be explained on the grounds that this was the general rule, to which the devoted and humble Christian among the rich is the exception. In his teaching on the uncertainty of riches James is reflecting the teaching of Jesus: Matthew 6:19-34 Matthew 19:16-30; Luke 12:15-21 Luke 16:9-31; Mark 10:24; and compare 1 Corinthians 7:29-31; 1 Timo­thy 6:17. The gulf between the rich and poor in New Testament times was great—greater perhaps than in our modern times. There was no large middle class with its abundance due to industrial jobs. (See Deane, A. C., The World Christ Knew, Michigan State Col­lege, 1953.) The poor were despised and often oppressed (James 5:1 ff). There was in the possession of riches a constant source of pride. The desire for money under such circumstances would be keen (1 Timothy 6:9). James 1:9 ---of low degree—As in Luke 1:52, the word here means "poor” in terms of wealth. In other passages, such as James 4:6, the word is a character trait; so also in Romans 12:16, "Condescend to men of low estate.” The rich man is set over against the word in the next verse, showing that material poverty is the meaning here. James 1:9 ---glory in his high estate:—James’ statements in this section are capable of being interpreted in several ways, as a check of several commentaries or even of translations will reveal. The descriptive phrases following the. word "boast” are nouns standing in prepo­sitional phrases: "In his exaltation” and "in humiliation.” In each case some would read into these a temporal relation and trans­late "when he is raised” (Moffatt) and "when he is brought low.” Taken in this way, the admonition is that Christians are to do their duty in whatever circumstances the changing fortunes of life may thrust upon them. If the poor should become rich, he is to accept the fact without exulting or taking pride in it; if the rich man, on the other hand, should lose his money and become poor, let him boast or glory in his poor estate, since riches are notoriously fleeting. Another possibility is that the phrases are to be taken as irony: the rich man who now boasts in his wealth is to boast (if he can when it happens) in the poverty which is coming upon him. This would be as if James says, "Your wealth is soon to be taken away; then we’ ll see if you can boast.” It is better, however, to take the words as they stand to mean that in whichever of the two states one finds himself, there is some­thing of which he may at that time boast: if poor— in the wealth of his station in Christ; if rich— in the position of humility which he is to assume in the church in spite of his riches. So Barclay heads the section "As Each Man Needs” and says, "Christianity brings to every man what every man needs.” Mayor sees the teaching of the whole as "the intrinsic effect of Christianity in changing our view of life.” Phillips puts it: "The brother who is poor may be glad because God has called him to the true riches. The rich may be glad because God has shown him his spiritual poverty.” Lenski’ s comment also agrees with this. Mayor’ s comment is worthy of quoting: Far from being thus undecided and unsettled, the Christian should exult in his profession. If in low es­tate, he should glory in the church where all are broth­ers and there is no respect of persons; he should realize his own dignity as a member of Christ, a child of God, an heir of heaven: if rich, he should cease to pride him­self on wealth and rank, and rejoice that he has learnt the emptiness of all worldly distinctions and been taught that they are only valuable when they are re­garded as a trust to be used for the service of God and the good of man. Mayor thinks of the "humiliation” of the rich man as that of the disdain of the world at one who becomes a Christian. Oesterley objects to this in that in the words of James it is the rich man (not merely his wealth) who passes away. But when the riches pass away, "the rich man” (as such) is gone, just as we might say, "There are no rich men since the depression.” Further, he argues that "in your exaltation” and "in your humiliation” cannot both refer to Christianity since they are in contrast to each other. However, the reasoning above has shown that they can both refer to different people in the church in different circumstances. The last interpre­tation set forth above is to be preferred and is the one on which the comments here are based. The word "glory” in the sense of boast or take pride in (in a good sense) is common in the New Testament, and Paul is espe­cially fond of it. A check of the concordance reveals that Paul uses it of glorying in God or Christ (Romans 5:11 Romans 15:17; I Corinthi­ans 1:31; Philippians 3:3), in the cross (Galatians 6:14), in the hope of salvation (Romans 5:2), in those he had converted (2 Thessalonians 1:4, etc.), in affliction (Romans 5:3), and in infir­mities (2 Corinthians 12:9). Paul feels foolish for glorying in his accomplishments in answer to his critics (II Corinthians ll:l6ff). Boasting in the Law (Romans 2:17), in self-righteousness (Romans 3:27), in the mistake of a fellow Christian (1 Corinthians 5:6), or in racial advantages (Galatians 6:13) is condemned. James uses the term in 4:16 of glorying in "vauntings” in a bad sense. Here the poor may boast in his attainment in Christ. He need not be ashamed of or intimidated by his poverty; he has something which balances it. James 1:9 ---in his high estate:—Literally "in his height." The word can mean "pride,” and, in a concrete usage in the plural, "the heavens.” But here it means "high position” or "rank.” Cf. Luke 1:52 and Job 5:11. The verb is used in the frequently quoted paradox: "The one who humbles himself shall be exalted” (Luke 14:11 Luke 18:14). The Christian’ s spiritual condition is one of richness, of exaltation in Christ. He is priest and king (Revelation 1:6 Revelation 5:10; 1 Peter 2:9). He is to participate with Christ in judgment (1 Corinthians 6:3). His spiritual blessings constitute promises "exceeding great and precious” (2 Peter 1:4). Christ became poor that we might be made rich (2 Corinthians 8:9). Compare Hebrews 11:26; Philip- pians 4:19; Ephesians 3:8. Though the world may scorn the Chris­tian, he is heir of all God’ s honor, glory, and wealth. In all such as this he may take pride. James 1:10 ---the rich, in that he is made low:—Literally "in his humilia­tion.” Arndt and Gingrich and a few translations have it: "Let him boast in irony of his coming humiliation.” But James means rather that he should boast in his humble station as a Christian (see dis­cussion above). The world looks on a Christian as a nobody. The rich man’ s fellows would probably belittle his faith. He himself has voluntarily taken on the attitude of a servant (James 4:10). He may accept the fact that his wealth counts for nothing and challenge even the poor to be more humble than he. Jesus taught: "Let him that is chief become as he that serveth” (Luke 22:26). Compare the attitude of Paul in Philippians 3:5-8. If the rich should lose his wealth, he may take it joyfully (Hebrews 10:34), but this is not James’ point here. James 1:10 ---because as the flower of the grass he shall pass away.—Life is as fleeting for the poor man as for the rich, but James’ warning here is directed toward the rich, because the tendency to trust in the uncertainty of riches may make him more likely to forget the fact. If only one’ s wealth recommends him, then when it is gone he has nothing to boast of. Thus James is saying that the rich should glory in his self-abasement, in that which some would consider as worthless, but which is for him the earnest of his eternal inher­itance. Quickly he will pass from this life, leaving behind his earthly wealth (1 Timothy 6:7) in which most rich people glory. Hence he should glory in the things that are more abiding. Like the flower of the grass the rich man is soon to pass away. He is here today but gone tomorrow. In James 4:14 to the rich merchant who is presumptuous in planning his future he says, "Ye are a vapor that appeareth for a little time and then vanisheth away.” It is not the wealth itself that James sees as fleeting (though it is certainly that) but the life of the rich. Palestine has two rainy seasons. After the spring rains the grass grows profusely; but, af­ter they cease, the flower soon disappears. Cf. Matthew 13:6. The expression "pass away” for death and disappearance is not uncom­mon. Cf. Matthew 24:34, "This generation shall not pass away.” For the figure compare ” My heart is smitten like grass and with­ered” (Psalms 102:4) and also Isaiah 40:6 (of fleeting human life), which is quoted in full in 1 Peter 1:24. Cf. also Psalms 37:2; Job 14:2. James 1:11 ---For the sun ariseth with the scorching wind,—The words "no sooner” of the King James are not in the Greek. The verb here (along with the next two) is in the past tense (aorist) and represents what customarily or repeatedly happens. The verbs are correctly translated present in English. The hot sun beams down on the grass in summer after the rains cease. The original only says "with its scorching . . .” Our translators understand the word "wind” as being implied, thinking of the Sirocco or Southeast Palestinian wind. So also does the LXX in such passages as Hosea 12:1 and Jonah 4:8. Arndt and Gingrich, however, incline to the King James’ "burning heat” of the sun. At any rate, the grass dd€*s not last long in the summer. James 1:11 ---withereth the grass and the flower thereof falleth.—The word "grass” is usually used of green grass of the meadow (Matthew 14:19). But here it must include also flowering plants as growing together. The verb "falleth” refers to the falling of the petals of the flowers. James 1:11 ---the grace of the fashion of it perisheth:—More literally, "the beauty of its face or appearance.” For the use of "face” for "appearance” see Matthew 16:3, of the face of the sky. Even Jesus re­marked about the beauty of the flowers (Matthew 6:28-29) as well as of the fact that the flower is "here today and tomorrow is cast into the oven." James 1:11 ---so also shall the rich man fade away— both as a rich man and as a man. His riches may be lost as suddenly as the flower falls. But whether his wealth is lost or not, the individual is mortal and will not remain. Man must put his confidence in something more per­manent than riches. The verb is used of the withering of flowers (Job 15:30), of the fading of beauty (Josephus, Antiquities, 11:56), and elsewhere of the untimely death of a loved one. The word in a negative form furnished the name of an evergreen plant used by Peter (1 Peter 5:4) to typify the crown of life. James 1:11 ---in his ways.—Either "in his pursuits of business” (trade jour­neys, James 4:13) or (probably more likely) in his busy pursuits and cus­toms of life, he is suddenly gone. James’ point in this discussion is that, though wealth is to be thought of from a worldly viewpoint as a trial, the Christian may view it otherwise. The poor is thus not to bemoan his fate or t he rich take pride in his wealth. It is quite possible that the subject of partiality toward the rich at the expense of the poor in 2: iff may be connected with this passage. The thoughts certainly are paral­lel. If Christians are judging their poor brethren as described, they are certainly not considering the "exaltation” or "high estate” of the poor brother in Christ. This verse seems to complete the thought begun in verse 2 of finding joy in the midst of trials. It also forms the transition to the next section. James has asserted that trials are a joy in that they are intended to work in us the spirit of patient endurance. Now James further promises that they become a beatitude because the one enduring them will, when he is approved, be awarded a crown. PATIENT IN TRIALS Jas_1:12 Jas 1:12 ---Blessed is the man that endureth temptation;—The word "blessed” could be translated "happy,” or "fortunate.” In a reli­gious setting it probably suggests something of the life or condition apart from the world’ s ills, for it denoted to the Greeks the kind of life the immortal gods lived. (Compare 1 Timothy 1:11 1 Timothy 6:15— the only instances in the N.T. where it refers to God.) The same Greek words for "Blessed the one enduring" occur in the Septuagint of Dan 12:12, which James may have remembered. The endurance is in bearing or suffering temptation and remain­ing faithful. This does not necessarily mean that one must always overcome in a trial or that one can never err in a trial. But since errors must be corrected and repented of, some who backslide never recover. One must never be overcome and give up. "In your patience ye shall win your souls” (Luke 21:19). "Temptation” here is still probably to be thought of primarily as "trial” in the sense already used. Of course such trials also become the occasions for inducement to sin when the devil takes advantage of them to tempt us. Thus they may yield different results from receiving the crown contemplated in this verse. "But if he shrink back, my soul hath no pleasure in him” (Hebrews 10:38). The reason for the blessedness is stated in the closing part of this verse— the reward of the crown. This result is restated in James 5:11 in different terms. James 1:12 ---when he hath been approved,—The Greek word1 means some­thing tried and proved genuine; hence, as in Romans 16:10 , it means "the tried and true Christian” (Arndt and Gingrich). Compare also 1 Corinthians 11:19; 2 Corinthians 10:18 2 Corinthians 13:7; 2 Timothy 2:15. Thus the King James "when he has been tried” is not quite the correct meaning of the original. When the Christian endures the trials which come his way— neither growing weary and quitting nor being fatally captured by Satan through his wiles, thus being perfected and strengthened by successive triumphs— he will receive the reward. God is not unwilling that we should be tested in this way. The Spirit was the agent of Jesus’ being led into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil (Mark 1:12). This knowledge of the use of trials leads the Christian to joy in meeting them. James 1:12 ---shall receive the crown of life,—The Greek word for "crown” is the source of our name ’’ Stephen.” The crown was usually made of leaves of laurels or palms. Jesus’ was of thorns (Matthew 27:29). The wreath was worn by the victor at athletic contests (I Corin­thians 9:25), at festivals (Isaiah 28 :lf), and also at times by kings and dignitaries as a sign of rank (so Christ in Revelation 14:14). But the usual headdress of an Eastern ruler was a purple band trimmed with white on a tiara, the diadem. The term ’’ crown” is often used figuratively of a virtue or reward: ’’ crown of grace” (Proverbs 1:9) or “ glory” (Proverbs 4:9). So here “ crown of life” means the crown which consists of life (Matthew 7:14), that is, immortality.1 Jas 1:12 ---which the Lord promised—The term “ Lord” is added in the translation, though a few MSS. have it. The subject is understood. There is no specific promise to "the crown of life” from the lips of Jesus. But the content of that promise is frequently dealt with (Mark 10:30; Matthew 19:29 Matthew 25:46; Luke 18:30). Similar promises occur in the O.T. Reference could be to them, if the subject be understood as the Father. Some speculate that this could be a re­membered saying of Jesus which is not recorded in our four gospels (as in Acts 20:35). James 1:12 ---to them that love him.—Promises of blessings on those who love God are frequent both in the Old Testament and in the New: Exodus 20:6; Psalms 5:11; 1 Corinthians 2:9 (here Paul has quoted the LXX, Isaiah 64:4, though the Greek translation differs some­what from Paul); 1 Corinthians 8:3. Jesus had taught that keep­ing His word was evidence of love for Him (John 14:23 John 15:10). Love is conceived as the motivating power which makes endurance possible. Knowling quotes Bengel, "Love begets patience (endur­ance).” Note: The "crown of life” in this verse is not to be confused with the new life in Christ, which is described as the promise of the Christian in this world. What Paul calls the “ newness of life” (Romans 6:4; cf. 2 Timothy 1:1; 2 Corinthians 5:17; Galatians 6:15; Ephesians 4:23 f) John calls "the more abundant life” (John 10:10) and “ life eternal” in many passages (John 5:24 John 5:39 John 6:27 John 6:40 John 6:47 John 6:54 John 6:68 John 17:2 f; 1 John 3:15 1 John 5:11 1 John 5:13 1 John 5:2 i0; and compare John 3:36). John sees our relationship to God as His newborn sons as a quickening into new life. This life is qualitatively (not quantita­tively) related to our future life in heaven. It is of the same kind of life as the divine life (2 Peter 1:4), as it is a foretaste of that life which we will have with God. The mistake of those who apply these scriptures to the doctrine of the impossibility of apostasy is that the term '‘ eternal” is conceived quantitatively so that it is thought that once one has such life it cannot be lost. There is a type of duality in the Bible’ s speech about eternal life, for some scriptures speak of that life as a future gift. But others, failing to recognize this duality and reacting against the Calvinistic doctrine of never falling from grace, have denied the teaching of the New Testament on the blessing of that life here and now. See the article on "life” (zoe) in Arndt and Gingrich. : THEY DO NOT COME FROM GODJas_1:13-16 What James has said about trials might be used by some to blame God for the temptations which are the occasions for their sins. In Greek -the same word is rendered "trial” and "temptation.” Only the context will indicate which of the meanings is present. In these verses James is guarding against a misapplication of his teaching in the section on trials. God does not tempt people to do wrong. James 1:13 ---Let no man say when he is tempted,—The term "trial” in verse 2 and "temptation” are from an action noun formation in Greek, while the verb in this verse is a verb from the same root. It is much discussed as to whether the sense of the words is the same or not. The consensus of commentators seems to be that James’ habit of taking up the words used previously as the lead­ing idea of the new section shows that James has reference to a common conception, though with a double sense. The noun has reference to the objective trial, the verb to the subjective temptation (Mayor). Here, then, James is dealing with the inner yielding of the man to inducement to sin which may accompany the out­ward trial designed by God for man’ s good. Man is not to think that because God permits us to be tested he is therefore to blame if we yield to an urge to sin which Satan may present on the occa­sion. Several commentators cite a parallel in Sir 15:1 iff, "Say not thou, It is through the Lord that I fell away: for thou oughtest not to do the things that he hateth. Say not thou, He hath caused me to err: for he hath no need of the sinful man. The Lord hateth all abomination; and they that fear God love it not.” "When he is tempted” is a participle in Greek, "while being tempted.” In the course of temptation one should not excuse himself into yield­ing by thinking that he can blame another. James 1:13 ---I am tempted of God.—The Greek preposition here actually means "by,” as in Matthew 16:21. Some Jews blamed God for sin. They observed an evil tendency in man, which they called Yetzer hara. There was an argument over the origin of this tendency. Some argued that Satan put the tendency in man; others said man alone was responsible. But it was boldly reasoned by some that God created all things and so He must have created the evil in man. If true, this would make God responsible for man’ s sin. See Bar­clay, The Daily Study Bible, on these verses. Carr (Cambridge Greek Testament) suggests that a misunderstanding of the model prayer, "Lead us not into temptation,” may have led to the cur­rency of the idea in the church. James 1:13 ---for God cannot be tempted with evil,—The margin has "untried in evil,” with "evil” meaning sin, not merely difficulties. But the sense of the context is in favor of the other translation. The form could mean "not tempting anyone” or "not being tempted.” The form is not found elsewhere in either the LXX or the New Testa­ment. Most of the verbal adjectives of its type have the sense of the perfect passive; for example, "is subject to suffering” (Acts 26:23). Compare Funk, Section 65. 3. Arndt and Gingrich point out that the active idea of "not tempting” is expressed in the next phrase, and hence this word is to be taken as passive "cannot be tempted.” The other idea would make James repeat himself mean­inglessly. This passage confirms the conclusion that "temptation” here means seduction to do evil. The truth expressed is that God’ s nature is such that he is not susceptible to evil or sin. Bible writers affirm the absolute holiness of God. He is love (thus above hate in its moral sense); He cannot lie (Titus 1:2); He is a God of holiness (1 Peter 1:15). James 1:13 ---and he himself tempteth no man.—The argument is that, since God is completely free from the power of temptation, it is also beyond His nature to tempt others. That would in itself be an evil. The "himself” may emphasize that God is not personally re­sponsible for enticement to sin. There is a sense in which one might say that God is indirectly responsible for such, since he may or­dain an incident of testing which the devil may use to seduce one to sin. But even here God is not responsible for sin. He works in such instances to counteract the work of the enemy. Paul tells us, "He will not suffer us to be tempted above that which we are able, but will with the temptation make also the way of escape, that ye may be able to endure it” (1 Corinthians 10:13). James 1:14 ---but each man is tempted,—The possibility of temptation and sin is universal. The Bible knows nothing of the idea of entire sanctification wherein one rises above the possibility of sin by the eradication of evil tendency in himself. "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us” (1 John 1:8). Even the Son of God was tempted in all points as we are (Hebrews 4:15). Paul said that he had to buffet his body and bring it into subjection (1 Corinthians 9:27). James 1:14 ---when he is drawn away by his own lust,—The verb means to be "dragged or taken in tow by.” This is a strong word to express the intensity of the lusts or passions in us. Compare Paul’ s equally strong language in Romans 7:5 Romans 7:18-24. The law of sin in our mem­bers leads us to do evil while our minds will to do what is good. The situation led Paul to describe himself as a "wretched man.” The same lusts are described by James later (4:1) as warring among our members. James emphasizes that it is by our own lusts (Cf. 2 Timothy 4:3; 2 Peter 3:3; Jude 1:18 f), rather than by God, that we are tempted. The origin of temptation is within. Satan is bound as far as we are concerned (Matthew 12:29; Hebrews 2:14) and has no power over us that we do not give him (1 Corinthians 10:13). His enticements would have no power unless something within us were appealed to by his temptation. There would be no temptation to gluttony or fornication if there were no appetites for food or sex. Certain desires are stronger in some than in others. One may be strongly influenced by strong drink; for another, drink may have no enticement. Satan searches out the weak spot in our mem­bers. The term ’’ lust” is a neutral term in its predominant use in sec­ular authors. In the Bible it may have a good sense, as in Proverbs 10:24 ; Philippians 1:23; and 1 Thessalonians 2:17. In a bad sense (as here) it means a desire to do what is forbidden, especially in respect to the lower desire of the flesh. For this use, especially of illicit sexual desire see Romans 7:7 f; Colossians 3:5; 1 Thessalonians 4:5; Galatians 5:24; 1 Peter 4:3; 1 Timothy 6:9; 2 Timothy 2:22 2 Timothy 4:3; 2 Peter 2:10; Ephesians 4:22. Knowling quotes Charles: "The real force of this verse is that man’ s guilt and sin are not derived from Adam but are due to his own action. The evil impulse does not constitute guilt or sin unless man obeys it. As the Talmudists say, 'It was placed in man to be overcome.’ ” One might also observe that James’ teaching strikes at modern philosophical theories of determinism, which at­tempt to put the blame for man’ s sin on surrounding circumstances, natural forces, and inheritance factors. Every honest man’ s con­science bears witness to his responsibility for sin. Like David he must confess, ” 1 know my transgression; and my sin is ever before me” (Psalms 51:3). Thousands rise above their circumstances. Man falls, not because of circumstances, but because of yielding to what is within. It is also interesting to note that lusts or desires are personified in the passage: "One’ s own inward concupiscence meeting him as a soliciting unchaste woman” (Lange). This figure introduces the following words and prepares the way for the descriptions of sin’ s being born: "conceived,” "brings forth” (verse 15). James 1:14 ---and enticed.—The verb originally was used of the devices of the hunter. But it came to be associated with the wiles of the evil wo­man. 2 Peter 2:14 2 Peter 2:18 warns of false teachers who "entice unsted- fast souls” and even pictures how it is done: "enticing by lusts of the flesh, by wantonness those just escaping from them that live in error, promising them liberty, while they themselves are slaves of corruption.” This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/zerrcbc/ James 1:2. Count it all joy cannot mean to pretend that they get enjoyment out of that which is disagreeable, for that would be an act of insincerity. The idea is they should regard it as something that would result in a benefit. Temptations refers to adversities or hardships such as might be imposed upon them by their enemies. James 1:3. Patience means endurance and if the disciples remain true to Christ amidst the trials, it will demonstrate the genuineness of their faith. James 1:4. Since the good result of trials that have been endured through faith is to demonstrate patience, the disciples are urged to "let the good work go on." The word perfect means complete, and if the good work is allowed to continue to the end, it will result in a life that is completely devoted to God or that is willing to go far enough that it will be wanting (lacking) nothing. James 1:5. The word wisdom is from the Greek word SOPHIA which occurs 51 times in the New Testament. It has many shades of meaning concerning which Thayer makes the following statement: "Used of the knowledge of very diverse [different] matters, so that the shade of meaning in which the word is taken must be discovered from the context [connection] in every particular case." We are sure that God will not change the physical conditions of any man's brain, therefore the wisdom which James says He will give in answer to prayer cannot mean the natural gift colloquially called "horse sense." Hence the passage means to ask God to help us in our efforts to use our faculties in acquiring useful knowledge. Upbraideth not means God will never tire of hearing the requests of His children. James 1:6. Regardless of what may be said as to how or when God answers prayer, we are sure He will not grant any petition that is not in harmony with His word. Therefore to ask in faith means to ask for such favors that are in harmony with that word since faith comes by hearing it (Romans 10:17). Furthermore, we must believe that word after we hear it or else our attitude will be a wavering one. James likens such a mind to a wave that is unsteady because It changes its position every time the wind changes. James 1:7. Again, regardless of how or when God answers prayer, He will not grant any petition made by a person such as the preceding verse describes. James 1:8. Double minded means to be uncertain or doubting. Thayer defines it at this place as one who is "divided in interest." Since the passage says he is unstable in all his ways it puts him in the class described in verse six. James 1:9. Low degree. Those in the humble or lowly walks of life may take satisfaction from the exaltation or honor of being a servant of Christ. That is the most dignified station or manner of life that any man can maintain. James 1:10. The rich man who trusts in his wealth (Mark 10:24) has no Just cause for rejoicing unless he become low or humble. The uncertainty of the wealth of this world is likened to the flowers that are flourishing so briefly. James 1:11. As the sun overcomes the beauty and show of the blossoms, so the test of time will finally nut an end to the vanity of riches. Ways means purposes or schemes that a man has that have the accumulation of wealth as their chief motive. This does not condemn the lawful production of property that is intended to be used for doing good. (See Ephesians 4:28.) James 1:12. Temptations means trials same as in verse 2. They are bound to come especially to a man who is determined to serve Christ in the midst of sinful men. But such experiences are calculated to become a test of his faith. The test will not be completed until the end of life (Revelation 2:10), and if the disciple is thus faithful he will receive the crown promised by the Lord. James 1:13. The Bible does not contradict itself, so when it says for us to consider temptations as cause for Joy (verse 2) then here tells us that God does not tempt any man, we know there is a difference between temptations. The key to the subject is in the word evil which is not the same as trials or adversities. It is from an original word that always means the opposite of good; is always morally bad. Of course God does not use such means to test His creatures in their religious life. James 1:14. James uses the process of natural reproduction to illustrate the course of sin. First a man's lust (evil desire) entices the object or victim of wicked design. James 1:15. With the consummation of the evil design, that is, when it has accomplished its gratification the conception takes place. After the conception the next step is the bringing forth of the creature that was conceived. The name of the creature so conceived and brought forth is SIN. The final destiny of such a creature is death or separation from God. The way to avoid such a regrettable reproduction is for a man to resist all of the enticements as a virtuous woman should resist all who would lure her into a life of shame. James 1:16. In the preceding two verses the writer draws an illustration from the natural process of reproduction. In this and the following verse he makes one out of the motions of the heavenly bodies. Err is from the Greek word PLANAO, and it is the verb form of a noun in the same class which is "planet," coming from the Greek word PLANATE% which Jude 1:13 uses where he speaks of "wandering stars." Since these planets or stars were believed to wander from side to side, their action was adopted into language to describe men who stray from the straight path. The verse means that Christians should not imitate the action of those planets here translated by the word err. James 1:17. We may rightly feel indebted to any thing or person that is the source of benefits to us. The planets are not such a source in the sense of being the giver, but instead are themselves a gift to us. The giver of them is God and James calls Him the Father of lights, the last word meaning the planets because they are luminous bodies. Since the Father (or creator) of these lights is the giver of all good things, we should imitate Him and not the planets which have the habit of erring or wandering about. God does not waver and as an indication of the steadiness of His example. James declares that He does not even produce a shadow by turning. The figure is drawn from the circumstance that at certain seasons and at particular places on the earth, when the sun is straight over the equator it cannot cause any shadow. But when it turns to go either north or south (as it seems to do), it will then cast a shadow. James thus describes God as more fixed in His characteristics than the sun. James 1:18. The writer again uses the thought of reproduction for an illustration. A father begets his own children and they become of the same kind of creatures as himself. God begets men by the word of truth concerning Christ (1 John 5:1). First-fruits is used in the sense of seniority because Christians are the first creatures who are said to have been born to God through faith in Jesus who is the "only begotten" Son of the Father in the sense of personality of being. James 1:19. Wherefore means because of such a truth, namely. that belief of the word concerning Christ begets one unto God, it is a great reason for giving respect to that word. Swift means eager or ready to hear the word of the Lord. No man can be too eager to hear the word of God, but he should be slow or discreet in what he says. Likewise he is not condemned for the mere fact of becoming angry (Ephe-sians 4:26). but he should bring himself into control and not be inclined to fly into a rage at every provocation. James 1:20. A man who controls himself may do right in spite of his anger, but no person will work the righteousness of God because he is worked up by wrath. James 1:21. Lay apart signifies that a man must put his evil practices out of his life himself, and not expect God to work some special influence over him to purify him. All filthiness means any kind of impurity either of body or mind. Naughtiness is a stronger word than is usually attached to it, and means that which is injurious and wicked. Superfluity signifies something that is extra or that is useless as an item of a man's character. The sentence denotes that any evil principle is such an item when it is a part of a man's conduct. Receive with meekness means to accept the word in humility and not in the spirit of resentment. Engrafted signifies to be implanted or received in the heart with the spirit of obedience. If it is so received the word of the Lord will save the soul. James 1:22. Even a good seed that is implanted in the soil will produce no fruit unless it becomes active. So the engrafted word will be fruitless unless the receiver of it becomes active and does what it directs. It is a matter of self-deception to imagine that hearing the ward is all that is required to be acceptable to the Lord. Even men will not be deceived (much less the Lord) by such a character, for it will be apparent to all that such a person is not producing anything useful to others. James 1:23. While a man is standing before a mirror he is seeing himself in reflection but no action is being shown. Likewise as long as a person is only hearing (or reading) the Bible he is seeing his duties portrayed but seeing nothing being done. James 1:24. The moment he leaves the mirror the image disappears from his mind, and he will need to return to it again to "see himself as others see him." It he could remain constantly before the glass he would never forget the vision of his appearance. However, in a literal sense a man could not remain always in front of the mirror and also attend to his other business, but that is not the part of the subject James is illustrating. James 1:25. In mental and spiritual matters it is possible to accomplish things that are impossible with material activities. Hence it is possible to he constantly in the view of the spiritual mirror and at the same time be actively engaged in the Lord's work as the writer now insists. It is called the perfect law of liberty because it makes us free from our sins and gives us the spiritual liberty that cannot be had from any other source. (See Romans 8:2) It is necessary to look into the Bible in order to learn what kind of work the Lord desires, then what is done will be correct as to activity and such will bring the blessing of God. James 1:26. Thayer defines the original for religious as "Fearing or worshipping God," and religion is the noun form of the same term. Bridleth not his tongue would violate verse 19, and such a person is considered self-deceived (verse 22). Such a religion is vain which means "without any force" according to Thayer's definition. James 1:27. Pure means unmixed and undefiled denotes something that is unsoiled. There is not much difference between the two words, but the former has the idea of something not attached to another ingredient to begin with, while the latter denotes that it remains so afterward. Visit. One definition of the word is "To look upon in order to help or benefit" Thayer. It has to do with one's actions toward others. Unspotted from the world means to be free from the vices commonly practiced by mankind. J.W. Roberts On James 2SECTION THREE THE SIN OF RESPECT OF PERSONSJas_2:1-13 The second chapter of James begins with a warning against the sin of partiality or respect of persons. It grew out of a sin which James seemingly knew to be prevalent among the Jewish churches and was related to his previous discussion by furnishing a further example of inconsistency on the part of those whose practice of pure and undefiled religion was defective. Just as those who were hearers and not doers lacked self-control over their tongues and did not exhibit the love that led to visiting the fatherless and wid­ows, so also they showed that they did not possess the right atti­tude toward the poor people. James rebukes them sharply and calls them “ evil” and “ sinners.” The thought of James l:26f that reli­gion must reflect the great importance of conduct is now enlarged in a specific illustration of something of which many of his readers were guilty. James 2:1 ---My brethren,—That is James’ oft-repeated address and (as Mayor says) seems very appropriate here, where he is to address them on a breach of brotherly love. James 2:1 ---hold not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ,—“ Have (hold) faith” is a characteristic Greek expression for possessing a trait or inner quality. It occurs in such expressions as “ have love” (John 5:42) and “ have hope” (Acts 24:15). Other occurrences are Acts 14:9; Romans 14:22; 1 Timothy 1:19. It means virtually the same as to “ believe in” something. Thus “ faith” is subjective and does not refer to the teaching or doctrine to be received (as in Galatians 1:23). This indicates also that “ of the Lord Jesus Christ” is ob­jective and means “ have faith in” or "believe in” the Lord Jesus Christ. For this usage see Romans 3:26; Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 3:12; Philippians 3:9. Having such faith is an essential element of being a Christian. “ To have faith” in such a context is virtually the same as “ to be a Christian.” “ The believers” or simply “ be­lieving” is often a simple way of saying “ Christians.” The text of Westcott-Hort and several commentators (Cf. the margin of the ASV) take this sentence as a question. There is no way except the context to tell for sure. The Greek verb form here is the same for the imperative and the indicative (question), and the particle with which the sentence begins may be the negative with an imperative or an interrogative particle expecting a nega­tive answer. Knowling points out that the conjunction "for” in verse 2 is smoother if read after an imperative than after a question. Too, the question expecting a "no” answer would be quite ironic: "You don’ t hold the faith . . . with respect of persons, do you?” On the whole, the reading of the ASV is best. Taken as an im­perative the construction means "Quit having faith ...” James knows that his brethren are guilty. James 2:1 ---the Lord of glory,—Jesus is either described as "Lord of glory” or as "the Lord, the glory” (apposition). The arrangement of the words makes it difficult to decide; both yield good sense. The first expression means either that He is the Lord of the realm of glory or brightness, where God lives, or it is a qualitative (de­scriptive) modifier meaning "the glorious Lord.” If it is to be taken as an appositive with "the Lord Jesus Christ,” it means Jesus "who is the glory.” The thought is that of the identification of Jesus (or the transference to Him) of the Shekinah or "glory” of God by which His presence was signified at the tabernacle in the Old Testament. See Exodus 24:17 Exodus 40:34; Numbers 14:10. James 2:1 ---with respect of persons.—Some things are incompatible with faith in Jesus Christ. John taught that one could not love God and hate his fellow man (1 John 4:20). Faith in Jesus as Lord excludes partiality or respect of persons. To hold Jesus in proper respect as Lord necessitates the right attitude toward men. So James demands that Christians quit combining faith in Jesus with the wrong atti­tude toward the poor. "Respect of persons” in the Greek originally meant to "lift up the face of someone” or to "receive him with favor.” So in Mala- chi 1:8, "Will he accept thy person?” It then came to mean "show favoritism” (see Leviticus 19:15; Psalms 82:2). The noun itself is not used in the Septuagint, but its meaning is clear. It is found in Romans 2:11; Ephesians 6:9, and Colossians 3:25. One of the laws of the Old Testament was: "Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honor the person of the mighty; but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbor” (Leviticus 19:15). The Pharisees and chief priests flattered Jesus that "he did not receive persons,” i.e., "show not favor” (Goodspeed) or "pay no deference” (NEB). It is distinct­ly noted in the New Testament that there is no respect of persons with God (Acts 10:34). For this reason, masters must not threaten (Ephesians 6:9); slaves must not do wrong (Colossians 3:25). God does not even favor the "pillars” of the church (Galatians 2:6). He will judge impartially (Romans 2:11; I Peter 1:17). Using another word of the same meaning, Paul tells Timothy that he is to treat elders impartially (I Timothy 5:21). Thus the importance of the principle is seen. In the context the evil judging of people by ap­pearances or partiality is called "evil thinking,” "sin,” and "trans­gression.” James is dealing with the sin of showing partiality because of wealth. In our age it might be the same, or it might be social standing, occupation, nationality, or color. Whatever sociological grounds we may insist on for distinctions and separations in our communities, schools, etc., James would insist that distinctions of persons in the church are sins. James 2:2 ---For if there come into your synagogue—James dramatizes the sin of partiality by a concrete example: action in the very as­sembly of the church. "Synagogue” was the technical term for a Jewish congregation or group meeting for worship (Matthew 4:23; Acts 17:1). It was also used by metonomy for the place of meeting (Luke 7:5). The literal meaning of the word, however, had no religious connotation. Compare its use in Genesis 1:9 for the gatherings of water. It means literally a "bringing together” or "assemblying” . The use here to describe an assembly of Christians is probably to be seen as a reflection of the situation where the churches (espe­cially the Jewish churches) are still so closely related to the syn­agogues of the Jews that no great distinction is made between them. Notice how Paul separated the disciples from the synagogue (Acts 19:9). The Jewish Christians would probably continue for some time to call their own assemblies after their Jewish names. It is certain that the synagogue influenced the early churches a great deal. The organization of the local churches with a plurality of elders seems to have been taken over from the synagogue. So it is not surprising that James still uses the term. An inscription of the early fourth century A.D. is mentioned in Arndt-Gingrich (Dit. Or. 608) bearing the reading "synagogue of the Marcionites" from near Damascus. James 2:2 ---a man with a gold ring, in fine clothing, ... a poor man in vile clothing;—One can almost see the picture of the congregation meeting together in some rented hall or some house belonging to a member and the two strangers (certainly outsiders) entering (not necessarily at the same time). It is implied that they are strangers, for the treatment accorded each is based upon looks, not upon previous knowledge of their characters. The first visitor is a rich man, who comes probably out of curiosity. His gold ring (Luke 15:22) and fine clothing indicate that he is rich. The sources show that the wearing of rings was a custom. Often rings were worn on all but the middle finger. So bad did the ostentation become that some early Christian writers thought that Christians should avoid rings altogether except for sealing documents. "Fine clothing" is literally "bright" or "shining” apparel. Luke uses the same ex­pression for the clothing of the angel who appeared to Peter (Acts 10:30) and for the clothes Herod put on Jesus in mockery (Luke 23:11). The rich man is followed by a poor man in "vile" clothes. James is even more specific; the words literally describe his dress as "dirty" or "filthy" (cf. the figurative use of the word for moral uncleanness in Revelation 22:11). James 2:3 ---and ye have regard to—The verb means "take a look at” (Luke 9:38) or "fix the eyes upon." Then it means to "gaze fixedly on" or "pay special attention to” (NEB). In Luke 1:48 it has a sense of "care especially for.” Here the verb calls attention to the fixing of the eyes of the people on the visitor, then to the special at­tention paid to him as the impression is created by his dress that he is "somebody." James 2:3 ---and say, Sit thou here in a good place;—This would be the leader of the congregation, who indicates a place for the visitor, or perhaps the usher. It might even be a member who yields his good place to the rich visitor. There is some discussion as to wheth­er the word rendered "in a good place" really means this or rather "please.” At any rate, the suggestion is that of a cordial reception. Our sources mention the custom of designating seats in assemblies: Luke 11:43; 20:46; Mark 12:39. James 2:3 ---and ye say to the poor man, Stand ... or sit under my footstool. — Letting a visitor stand rather than providing a seat (even if some member has to stand) is a mark of discourtesy among most people. To have to sit on the floor at someone's feet is equally a slight, unless it is that of voluntary submission of the student to his teacher, as in Luke 8:35 Luke 10:39 (of Martha at Jesus’ feet); and Acts 22:3. The incident which James has recreated is probably just a typical way in which the respect of persons was shown. There may have been other ways (Cf. 1 Corinthians 11:22). James 2:4 ---do ye not make distinctions among yourselves,—The verb here has the double sense of making distinctions and of doubting or wavering. This accounts for the margin of the ASV "Are ye not divided in your own mind?" Oesterley takes the verb in the latter sense as indicating a spirit of class distinctions among them which would divide the church, a meaning which is in Josephus \ James 2:1. Have is from ECHO which requires two full pages in Thayer's lexicon for definitions. The specific meaning of it in any given passage must therefore be determined by the way it is used. In this verse the writer discusses the subject of proper treatment for others and hence it means they are not to hold or exercise the faith as stated. Respect of persons comes from one Greek word that means "partiality." The faith is used as a term for the whole system of religious practice under Christ. Therefore the verse means they should not show partiality in the exercises that pertain to the public assembly. (See verse 4.) James 2:2. This verse merely describes two men in different classes as to their possessions and personal appearance. Nothing is said of character or anything that pertains to actual merit. James 2:3. This verse indicates they had the services of ushers, and they would seat the audience as they were coming in, showing a preference for the "well-dressed" ones by giving them the most desirable places. James 2:4. Here the writer uses the very word of our definition by saying they are partial. Judges of is rendered "judges having" by The Englishman's Greek New Testament. The passage means those people had evil thoughts when they were judging or deciding on who should sit where. James 2:5. A man will not be given any special credit in the kingdom of heaven by virtue of his being poor. The conditions of salvation are such that the poor have the same chance as the rich. Moreover, since the conditions require a great deal of humility and sacrifice, the poor generally are the more ready to accept it. In that sense the poor are chosen to be rich in faith. Such richness in faith is what makes them heirs or entitles them to the advantage of the kingdom. This is also according to the promise that has been made by Christ and the apostles. James 2:6. To despise means to belittle or look down upon, and some of the disciples had been guilty of such an attitude toward people who were poor. It is usually the rich people who resort to the courts in suits of oppression in order to squeeze a little more money out of unfortunate debtors. James 2:7. Thayer defines the original for blaspheme as follows: "To speak reproachfully, rail at, calumniate [accuse falsely]." The worthy name is Christ whom oppressors would be inclined to belittle because His teaching condemns their practices. James 2:8. Royal means kingly and the greatest laws ever given to men have come from the King of heaven. Among those laws is the one which commands to "love thy neighbor as thyself." James says if we obey this we will do well. James 2:9. No man who loves his neighbor as himself will mistreat him because he is poor. Hence he will not show respect to persons which we have seen is defined as "partiality." Convinced of the law denotes that the one who shows partiality is guilty under the law of being a transgressor of that law. James 2:10. Whole law as James is using it refers to the ten commandments. Not that the decalogue is still the law of God as it once was, for it has been replaced by the law of Christ. But it is used to illustrate the point which the writer has under consideration, because it is formed into a certain number of separate commandments each of which is a complete unit of law. Thus if a man rejects a single one of these ten commands he is guilty of all because they all were given by one authority. James 2:11. The command at the end of verse 8 is not in that exact form in the first account of the decalogue but it is so worded in Leviticus 19:18. It is also virtually included in the last six of the ten, for if a man loves his neighbor as himself he will observe all those six. In our verse the writer mentions two of the original ten commandments. The point he is making is that since the same God who gave one of them gave the other also, therefore no matter which a person rejects he is rejecting God. So the verse has no application to the mistakes that all people are liable to make through forgetfulness or other weaknesses of the flesh. In other words, the whole matter that James is considering pertains to the question of the Lord's authority. James 2:12. Law of liberty is the one named in chapter 1:25 and refers to the New Testament. So speak ye and so do. Since that law is the one by which we will be judged, our lives should be regulated by it now. James 2:13. Matthew 5:7 says the merciful shall obtain merey, which is the affirmative side. The present verse deals with the negative and teaches that if a man shows no mercy to others, he likewise shall have no mercy given him at the day of judgment. Mercy rejoices against judgment. If a man is merciful to others he will not have any fears of the judgment day as far as this subject is concerned. James 2:14. The writer is still treating the subject introduced in the early verses of the chapter which concerns the proper conduct toward the poor. This verse states a principle that has general application in the Christian life, but it will be used for a specific purpose at present with reference to those in need. James 2:15. The conditions mentioned designate needs that are actual and not merely some imaginary ones, so that the persons deserve assistance of their brethren. James 2:16. It is well to have sympathy for those in need if the expressed wishes are supplemented with actions. But the most touching sentiments that can be spoken will not put any clothing upon a naked body. James 2:17. Faith is a grand principle and no man can be a Christian without it. Neither will he be regarded by the Lord as one unless he makes his faith a living one by good works, such as supplying the comforts of life to those in need and worthy. James 2:18. The first sentence represents a man who seems to think that faith and works are two distinct virtues of equal worth, and that a person is at liberty to make his own choice of them and the reward from the Lord will be the same in either case. James replies with a remark that shows he will not endorse either without the other. Show me thy faith without thy works only states what the pretender claims to show, not that James is admitting that the claim is true. He does not ask anyone to take his word but proposes to prove his faith by actions. James 2:19. It is well to believe there is one God if a man does not stop there; if he does he is no better than the devils (or demons). Matthew 8:29 gives one account of the trembling of these beings. But while they trembled their expressions of terror did not bring them any benefit, which shows that trembling or belief is not enough. James 2:20. Vain means empty or useless, and James so considers a man who makes a profession of faith but does not back it up with something helpful. James 2:21. Hebrews 11:17 says Abraham's faith was tried by the event. about his son. The present verse says it was works that did it or that justified him. There is no disagreement between the passages. It was his faith that caused him to offer up his son; his works put his faith into a practical proof. James 2:22. The word perfect means complete, and thus the works of Abraham completed or rounded out the character which was founded upon his faith. James 2:23. Scripture was fulfilled or made good. This refers to Genesis 15:6 where God had just assured Abraham that he would have a great many descendants. He knew that Abraham would finally prove his faith by his works, and hence he was regarded as a righteous man. Abraham is called the friend of God in 2 Chronicles 20:7 and it is repeated by James. This is on the same principle that Jesus uses the word "friend" in John 15:14. He says they are His friends "if ye do whatsoever I command you." There are people today who glory in calling themselves "friends," yet they stoutly disobey and even resist many of the commands of Christ. According to Jesus they are not His friends; if not friends then they must be considered enemies. James 2:24. The works that James means consist of doing what the Lord commands. He is not considering the works of the law of Moses, for at the time of this epistle those were termed "dead works" (Hebrews 6:1 Hebrews 9:14). James 2:25. Rahab was justified by works in the same sense as that of Abraham. (See the comments at verse 21.) James 2:26. The spirit or soul of a man does not operate in this world separate from his body. Neither can the body act without the spirit and hence when alone the body is dead. The circumstance is used to illustrate the difference between faith and works. J.W. Roberts Commentary On James 3 SECTION FIVE TO Jas_3:1-18 THE TONGUEJas_3:1-12 Chapter three treats of two subjects directly related to each other: The bridling of the tongue (a metonomy for "speech,” com­pare "word” in verse 2) and the analysis of true wisdom. These subjects both refer to the teacher; the first part relates to his re­sponsibility and control of his speech (3:1-12) and the second to the teacher’ s wisdom (3:13-18). That verses 1-12 are to be inter­preted in this manner is quite plain. But the second point must be deduced from the context. It appears that "the one wise and under­standing” of verse 13 also describes the teacher. For the evidence see the commentary on verse 13. Ropes says, "Chapter 3 relates to the teacher and wise man. That the two are treated as substantially identical is significant.” Wisdom and speech are connected in Proverbs 31:26, "She openeth her mouth with wisdom, and the law of kindness is on her tongue.” James is demanding that the Christian allow the gospel of Christ to impose this rule upon him. In James 3:1-12 James returns to a subject mentioned in Chapter 1:16,26. There he had said, "Be swift to hear, slow to speak.” In a sense, Chapter 1:19-27 is a development of proper hearing; in the present section the proper attitude toward speech is developed. In 1:26 lack of control of the tongue is mentioned as proof of the absence of practical application of religion that made religion vain. The whole subject is now enlarged. There may also be im­plied (in the view of the plea for consistency in verse 9) that this proper use of the tongue is to be connected in development with the consistency in faith (partiality) and demonstration of faith (faith and works.) Self-control and meekness of wisdom are fur­ther indications of pure religion or a part of the works as a Christian by which justification is achieved. As Paul would have said it, this is a part of working out our salvation as obedient children (Philippians 2:15). James 3:1 ---Be not many of you teachers,—The King James has "masters,” an older usage in English, for example in "schoolmaster” or "head­master” of a school. The Greek work is didaskalos , which means "teacher.” "Master,” therefore, is not to be taken as master of a slave. (Check Malachi 2:12 in the King James and see the article "Master” in Hastings Dictionary of the Bible.) "Teachers” here must certainly be seen against the background of Jewish Rabbinical tradition. "Teacher” here equals "Rabbi.” The Rabbis were local teachers in the synagogues. They were also called "lawyers” and "scribes.” The contemporary records show that the position was esteemed as one of honor and prestige and desired as an end in itself. Jesus criticized those "who loved to be called Rabbi” (Matthew 23:7-8). The criticism is probably due to the fact that the position was used to exercise power over others. Jesus saw the charge that he was in league with Beelzebub as an attempt to turn the multitude against him and thus considered it a misuse of the tongue. He said, "By thy words thou shalt be justi­fied, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned” (Matthew 12:37). Compare also Romans 2:19 f. Some form of the title Rabbi was often applied to Jesus: Mark 9:5 Mark 11:21 Mark 14:45; John 1:38 John 3:2; John 4:31 John 6:25, etc. In the church the office of teacher seems (as in our modern Bible classes) to have depended upon ability to teach (Titus 2:3-4) and not on official appointment. Teachers are mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12:28; Acts 13:1; and Ephesians 4:11. In 1 Corinthians 14:26-40 we have a passage which is especially instructive. Teaching (v. 26), along with the exercise of spiritual gifts, seems to have been the privi­lege of those wishing to rise to speak. The author of Hebrews in­sists that all disciples by reason of time "ought to be teachers.” The exercise of the right in the assembly was denied women (1 Corin­thians 14:34; 1 Timothy 2:12), but opportunity for the exercise of the ability to instruct by them must have been found in several other places (1 Corinthians 11:5; Titus 2:3 f)- Teachers were dis­tinguished from prophets only in that the latter were inspired teachers. With all the encouragement to teach in the N.T., it is evident that the prohibition here against "many becoming teachers” is not due to an excess of teachers or to any discouraging of the proper ambition to teach. James is warning of the dangers inherent in the responsibility of teaching, especially in view of the confusion and vileness (verses 13ff) resulting at times from the misuse of the po­sition. All teachers, among whom James classes himself, will bear heavy responsibility for their influence, which is due to their power in the eternal destiny of men whom they affect for good or ill. James, therefore, is saying in effect, "Don’ t many of you be­come teachers, if you are not certain that you can control your tongue, unless your teaching ministry will yield peaceable results and unless you are willing to shoulder the responsibility for your work.” James 3:1 ---knowing— a causal participle, calling attention to the fact that Christians who aspire to teach should already be aware of the great responsibility of teaching. Compare again Jesus’ words in Matthew 12:37. James 3:1 ---heavier (margin, greater) judgment.—The word "judgment,” which may be either good or bad, has the adverse meaning in pas­sages like Mark 12:40, where Jesus warned that those who devour widows’ houses and make long prayers will receive heavier judg­ment. The word may here signify censure for failure in duty, as it seemingly does in Romans 13:2 or 1 Corinthians 11:29 . In these passages, or course, the censure may be accompanied by pen­alty. Thus this passage may mean that the offending teacher may be condemned at the last judgment for not having lived up to his stewardship as a teacher. The one who knows and does not will receive heavier judgment (Luke 12:47 ff). One in the position of teacher is certainly assumed to know the Master’ s will. Hence, the teacher must be prepared for greater censure and penalty for failing. The teacher proclaims God’ s will and must proclaim it as God desires (1 Peter 4:11; Galatians 1:10 f). He will be judged on how well he does this. Of course one who does not teach (though he might be judged for his neglect) is not judged for wrong teaching. Note: The damage wrought by wrong teaching in the world is colossal. In the light of the pointed instruction of the New Testa­ment we must be concerned about teaching not founded on the ex­press revelation of the Scriptures. Paul taught the seriousness of this matter (Galatians 1:6-10) in promising an anathema on those who teach a different gospel. I Timothy l:3ff shows how strife and questionings follow such teaching. In modern times the lack of restraint in teaching heresies and hobbies continually divides and keeps the church in turmoil. Such unscriptural things as dispen- sationalism (premillennialism), instrumental music, and the ex­treme legalism which spawned the "anti” spirit in the Restoration Movement cannot be looked upon in indifference. There are those who are so anxious for peace and harmony in the church that they would let such false teachers with their undisciplined tongues take over. But Paul said, "Their mouths must be stopped” (Titus 1:11). Some unthoughtful people blame the defenders of the sound doc­trine, rather than the man of party spirit, for the discord which develops. James puts the responsibility for the damage where it belongs— on the shoulders of the teacher whose tongue is not con­trolled by the law of Christ. Who is to decide what is false? This is done by an appeal to the truth of the Bible. This means free dis­cussion, free exegesis, which should be carried on in a spirit of goodwill and brotherly love. This process results inevitably in the formulation of a consensus or understanding of the truth on ques­tions. The resulting conclusion is not a creed and should not be treated as such. But it Is represented in the attitudes of elders and memberships of the local churches. To be out of harmony with this understanding and to press one’ s dissenting views is to run the risk of dividing the church and being the cause of strife. This is partly, at least, what James is hitting at. Usually, opposition to a false teacher’ s ideas reveals further that false motives and attitudes of jealousy and faction lie at the root of the trouble. So Paul also un­masked the motives and characteristics of the false teacher (1 Timothy 6:3 ff). A teacher should be careful of his teachings and motives. All who listen should be neither gullible nor intolerant of views. James 3:2 ---For in many things we all stumble.—(The King James "of­fend” is less accurate.) James says that we all are guilty of many kinds of faults and offenses. Literally, "We all stumble with re­spect to many things.” For the use of "stumble” see James 2:10; 2 Peter 1:10; Jude 1:24. That sin is universal is an almost axiomatic assertion of the Scriptures. It is also of universal admission. "We have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:24). "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” (I John 1:8). There is no human infallibility. James’ point is that, since this is true, it is clear that we should avoid (on any but the noblest motives) the taking up of the calling which brings the greatest responsibility and the greatest tempta­tion of all to sin. Lenski makes a difference in this word "stumble” and the word "fall,” that is, to bring the effort to live as a Chris­tian to an end. James 3:2 ---if any stumble not in word,—The sins of the tongue seem to the writer to be the most prevalent of all sins and the most difficult to avoid. There is probably a bit of hyperbole (exaggeration for em­phasis) in the following verses of James, just as there is in Paul’ s representation of the love of money as "root of all evil” (I Timo­thy 6:10). If a person could be found who does not make a mistake in word (in his speech), he would indeed be a remarkable man. Either in teaching or in wicked or empty speech we have all sinned. For the thought compare the non-inspired Jewish work, "Who is the one not sinning with his tongue?” (Sir 19:16). James 3:2 ---the same is a perfect man,—Compare the comment of Jas 1:4, where it is said that the man who lets patience have its perfect work is perfect and entire, lacking in nothing. As explained there, the word perfect means "attaining its end or purpose, complete, nothing lacking.” Ethically it means a "mature,” a "full-grown,” "well-rounded” person. Specifically it means that as a Christian the kind of character which God is trying to develop in all of us as we grow into the image of Christ has been achieved. This does not necessarily mean a sinless man, though in this passage in view of James’ idea of its difficulty, it approaches that. The idea is that the man who has mastered the most difficult task can certainly do the others which are less difficult. Hence the one not sinning in word must be all that God desires in a Christian. Compare 1 Corinthians 9:27 for Paul’ s statement of the difficulty of keeping his body under and using it in the intended way. James 3:2 ---able to bridle the whole body also.—This is further amplifica­tion of the principle just explained. It is almost apposition. Since one has controlled what James will describe as the most unruly member, he certainly must be able to subject all the other members of the body— eyes, hands, stomach, etc. The figurative use of the term "bridle” suggests the illustration of bridling the horses in the next verse. In Matthew 5:29 we have another use of one member at odds with the whole body. James 3:3 ---Now if we put the horses’ bridles into their mouths that they may obey us, we turn about their whole body also.—This verse is a simple illustration. As one controls the body of a horse by con­trolling his mouth, so, if we can control our speech, we can regu­late the entire body. There is some difficulty, however, with the text. Some commentators take the whole verse as a protasis (a de­pendent clause): "If we put bridles. . .and (if we turn). . .” This leaves the sentence unfinished.1 This would demand that we com­plete the sentence mentally with some such conclusion as, "then we should do the same with our tongues, that we may control the whole body.” However it is permissible to translate the Greek as the ASV does, making the sentence read, "If we put the horses’ bridles into the mouths, then we are able to turn their whole bodies also.” This means that, when we have controlled and directed the horse’ s mouth, we control his whole body. The application of the illustration is left unexpressed but it is plain from the context. The change of the King James "Behold” to the ASV "If” is based upon different manuscript evidence (following the Vatican MS and the Latin versions). From this commonplace illustration of a larger instrument con­trolled by a much smaller one, James goes on to develop in re­verse the way the tongue is a little member but influences the whole body (even the whole circle of existence) for evil. James 3:4 ---Behold, the ships also,—The particle serves to enliven a nar­rative and to call attention or consideration to something. James uses it six times: James 3:4-5 James 5:4 James 5:7 James 5:9 James 5:11. The "also” calls attention to a second illustration: "In addition to horses, consider ships, too.” Ships were a common sight on the seas of the Mediterranean world. In Palestine they could be seen on the coast, as well as on the Sea of Galilee. Jesus crossed over the latter in a small boat, with his twelve disciples. Luke records that there were 276 persons aboard the ship taking Paul to Rome (Acts 27:37). The ocean-go­ing ships were called triremes because they had three decks of oars. Such ships also made use of sails when the winds were favorable. James 3:4 ---so great—They are large in fact— to carry so many people, as shown above, but even larger in relation to the small rudder. James 3:4 ---driven by rough winds,—For the strong winds on the seas, con­sider Jesus’ experience (Matthew 14:24) and Paul’ s on the Medi­terranean (Acts 27-28). A blowing wind in a storm is indeed rough or harsh. Paul’ s ship was driven for fourteen days and nights out of control. Yet a ship uncontrolled in the face of such powers may be controlled by a small instrument. James 3:4 ---are yet turned about by a very small rudder,—The verb "turn about” in James’ characteristic style repeats the verb of verse 3. Even in winds which may blow unfavorably a ship may make prog­ress by the use of the sails and rudder . The rudder was a steering paddle or oar (not a helm, as in the King James). It worked in the back of the ship or through a porthole. An interesting illustration of a small boat with its rud­der is given in the Illustrated World of The Bible (New York, McGraw-Hill, 1961) Volume V, page 257. In Acts 27:40 (as in P. London, 1164, h, 8) the word is plural because the ship often had two paddles fastened by a crossbar and was worked by two men (See the word for "rudder” in Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament). James 3:4 ---whither the impulse of the steersman willeth.—The word "im­” means "desire,” "inclination,” or "impulse.” It is the word whence our English word "hormone.” Wherever the steersman in­tends for the ship to go, the rudder can direct the boat. The word "steersman” is a substantive participle: "the one guiding straight.” The technical word for a "pilot” or "governor” of a ship is not used by James. The one who holds the rudder can turn the ship about and thus control it. James 3:5 ---So the tongue is a little member,—The "tongue” here is the literal member of the body, a small unit indeed of our bodies. But the tongue is used here by metonomy for the thing it does; it is the organ of speech. The tongue is little, like the rudder of the ship; but, just as the rudder can determine the course of the large ship, so the tongue has power to influence man’ s whole course and des­tiny. There is more on this in the following verses. James 3:5 ---and boasteth great things.—The damage such a little member can do is so great that it can boast of its power and influence. Like the bramble in Jephthah’ s fable which asked the mighty trees to take refuge in its shade, so the tongue might say to all the larger members of the body, "I can determine the course of all of you. Let all take note of my power.” James shows that unfortunately such a boast is not an idle one. For the use of such a personification by which one member of the body (like the tongue here) is individ­ualized and shown to influence the whole body compare (with Mayor) Matthew 5:29 f (of the right hand), Matthew 15:19 (of the mouth), 1 John 2:16 (the eye). Behold, how much wood is kindled by how small a fire!— The margin has "how great a forest,” and the word can have this sense (Josephus, Antiquities, 18. 357, 366). The Greek literally has the following play on words: "What size fire kindles what size forest!” It is left to our knowledge that the fire is very small on the one hand, but the thing burned is very large. One has only to envision a small match, a spark, or a cigarette lighting a fire which may burn over a whole forest of possibly millions of acres to grasp the vividness of the illustration. Many Old Testament passages as well as Classical passages utilize the same figure: Isaiah 9:18 Isaiah 10:16-18; Zechariah 12:6; Psalms 83:14. Little things often have great power. So a careless word can consume a whole church. Compare Paul’ s figure of a church devouring itself (Galatians 5:15). James 3:6 ---And the tongue is a fire: the world of iniquity among our mem­bers.—The editors of the Greek texts and translators differ slightly over the way the words are to be arranged: Whether we should render "The tongue is a fire. The world of iniquity among our members is the tongue" (two complete thoughts) or "The tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity. The tongue is that which defileth the whole body." The thoughts are the same; but, since the original MSS. had no punctuation, either arrangement is possible. In either arrangement the language describes the tongue as a fire and a world of iniquity. Like the small fire which kindles a whole forest, so the tongue is a fire (a use of a metaphor rather than a simile, "like a fire"). The tongue may as completely destroy the whole body as the fire a forest. "The world of iniquity” is very expressive. Just as we say, "There is a world of wisdom in that statement,” so that phrase means there is a very large sum here (perhaps even the entire sum total), that is, the whole universe or compass of the thing. Bauer quotes the Martyrdom of Polycarp (17:2), "Christ the one suffering for the whole world of those who are saved." Thus James says that the tongue is the whole world of iniquity. The phrase "of iniquity" may mean "world composed of iniquity”1 or "characterized by in­iquity.” Taken either way, the phrase is an assertion (somewhat hyperbolic) that the tongue is a universe of evil in itself. It voices every evil feeling and every kind of sinful thought; it sets in mo­tion or gives concreteness to every kind of sinful act. Nothing evil is beyond its power of accomplishment. Thus the tongue is not merely a world of iniquity in itself (which would be vivid enough), but it is the world of iniquity. As has already been pointed out, this is comparable to Paul’ s thought of the love of money (1 Timo­thy 6:10). Both illustrations are to be understood in their con­texts as slight hyperbole. Some people think of sex as the principal motivation of human activity. James and Paul do not contradict each other. The fault which each is combatting is so powerful as a source of evil that figuratively it may be said to constitute the whole story. James 3:6 ---among our members is the tongue,—"Is” is somewhat weak here as a translation of the Greek word. The verb means "be appointed,” "be constituted,” "made,” or "caused to be.” Compare James 4:4, "Whoever therefore wishes to be a friend of the world is made (constituted) an enemy of God” and 2 Peter 1:8, "This makes you to be not barren.” Thus the tongue is made to be or is constituted a world of iniquity among our members, being so made that it is able to produce all the sins of the catalog. Knowling prefers to in­terpret the verb as middle (reflexive) "maketh itself,” saying that it is not so constituted by God. But it is not every tongue which is thus constituted. It is the "tongue defiling” ; the verb "defileth” is a descriptive participle modifying "tongue.” James 3:6 ---which defileth the whole body,—One member is able to bring the whole body to contamination or stain. The verb is used else­where only in Jude 1:23, where Jude says that we should snatch some out of the fire having mercy with fear, "hating even the garment spotted (defiled) by flesh.” Fire is not thought of usually as defil­ing or staining; thus there is some mixing of metaphors. James’ point is that as the fire can destroy the whole, so the tongue can de­file the whole by inflaming the whole body and bringing it to sin. James 3:6 ---and setteth on fire the wheel of nature,—The Greek has all this in modifying participial phrases all descriptive: "the fire, the world of iniquity— the one defiling the whole body, both setting on fire . . .and being set on fire.” It is hard to reproduce the vivid­ness and expressiveness of the original. It has often been remarked that James was a close observer of natural phenomena. The words "wheel of nature” are difficult; they seem to mean "the whole course of life” : "the whole round or course of life is set on fire or inflamed by the tongue.” This is a way of saying that the evil spreads from the tongue like a fire to all the members, appetites, and passions of man’ s whole nature or life. Lenski in­terprets: We are a part of the wheel of existence; we do not live isolated lives but affect others by what we do or say. Hence the tongue of one person sets in motion a flame (for example, gossip, lying, profanity) which then spreads destruction to others like a house in a city which catches fire and by spreading burns the whole town. (So also Mayor, who thinks that the meaning is "to stir up one person against another, one class against another, one nation against another, etc., until the entire complex of existence is af­fected.) Some such idea is what is meant. The complexity of interpretation is due to the fact that the terms used by James may have more than one meaning. "Nature” (mar­gin, birth') may mean "birth” or "origin” (Luke 1:14) or "exist­ence,” as in James 1:23 . The other term may be accented in two ways in Greek and may mean either "wheel” or "a course” or "path.” It was used (compare Arndt and Gingrich) in the Orphic Mysteries with the sense of "the wheel of human origin,” where men were thought of as being caught up in a continuing repetition of reincarnations as a succession of renewings of the world would occur. Others, like the Concise Bible Commentary, think of the Indian idea of the wheel of life which regards man’ s endless existence through a series of transmigrations. But such ideas could hardly be attributed to James. He must refer to the whole course of one’ s existence, the whole course of life about him, or the whole circle of his own members. In some way he is saying that everything around man seems affected by the tongue. The translations of the phrase are interesting: Phillips, "It can make the whole of life a blazing hell.” Schonfield, "The tongue . . . is the inflamer of the process of generation.” NEB, "It keeps the wheel of our existence red-hot.” Moffatt, "Setting fire to the round circle of existence.” Goodspeed, "Setting fire to the whole round of nature.” James 3:6 ---and is set on fire by hell (margin Gehenna).— Such a fire as that just described could have its orgin only in the fires of Hell. This is a figurative use of the word "hell.” Only fire such as that pic­tured in the lake of fire, the second death, could light such a de­structive fire as that spread by the tongue. Compare James’ use in 3:15 of the wisdom producing strife, etc., as being demonic or Paul’ s description in 1 Timothy 4:1 of the teaching of false teachers as being inspired by demons. Jesus traced evil speech to the heart (Matthew 15:19). James shows that the evil heart is influenced by hell. This is the only use of the Greek Gehenna outside of the Gos­pels (Matthew 5:22 Matthew 5:29-30 Matthew 10:28 Matthew 18:9 Matthew 23:15 Matthew 23:33; Mark 9:43 Mark 9:45 Mark 9:47; Luke 12:5). The King James Version translated three words by the same English word "hell” : Hades ("the unseen world, the in­termediate state where the spirit awaits the resurrection), Gehenna (literally, "the valley of Hennon,” but signifying a place of tor­ment after death for man’ s spirit), and Tartarus (In Greek and Jewish thought, the lower part of Hades, where the wicked dead are punished, cf. Job 41:20; Enoch 20:2; Josephus, Against Apius, 2:240. The word occurs only in 2 Peter 2:4 in the New Testament). The Greek thought regarding these places differed from that re­vealed in the New Testament only in that they knew of Hades and Tartarus alone (with the latter as the place of punishment for the wicked) and in that they thought of the states of the dead in these places as permanent (with no hope of a resurrection). Like the concept of Paradise (2 Corinthians 12:4; Luke 23:43), the Greeks thought of the good as enjoying happiness in Hades. The New Testament enlarges upon the use of these terms by showing that the states are only between death and the resurrection. The new term Gehenna is used of the final and eternal place of torment.NOTE ON GEHENNAGehenna is the Greek form of the Hebrew ge-henom which means the "Valley of Hennom,” (Joshua 15:8 Joshua 18:16). It is also called Topheth (2 Kings 23:10). The word appears in the form Gaienna in the Septuagint in Joshua 18:16 (B). The word was transferred in Jewish thought and used as the metaphorical name for the place of the torment of the wicked after the final judgment. The valley of Hennom was the place of the idolatrous worship of Molech, the fire god ("Ahaz . . . burnt incense in the valley of the sons of Hinnom and burnt his children in the fire,” II Chron­icles 28:3). Compare Jeremiah 7:31 Jeremiah 32:35; 2 Chronicles 33:6 and Leviticus 18:21. As a result it became "polluted” by King Josiah (2 Kings 23:10) and became a place of refuse and abomina­tion. The association with the valley was not the source of the idea of a place of eternal spiritual punishment by fire. That concept oc­curs throughout the Old Testament. Compare Deuteronomy 32:22, "A fire is kindled in mine anger, and burneth into the lowest Sheol.” See also Leviticus 10:2; Isaiah 30:27 Isaiah 30:30 Isaiah 30:33 Isaiah 33:14 Isaiah 66:24; Daniel 7:10; Psalms 18:8 Psalms 50:3 Psalms 97:3. Jeremiah prophesied evil against the valley of Hinnom (Jeremiah 19:2-10) and the concept of punishment by fire combined with this to develop a belief in a place of spiritual punishment to which the dread name Gehenna (already conditioned as a place of abomination) was given to it. Gaster (Interpreter’ s Bible Dictionary') suggests that the applica­tion of the place name follows the analogy of using such Palestin­ian places as Armageddon (Revelation 16:16; Zechariah 13:11), Jerusalem (Galatians 4:26; Revelation 21:2), or Sodom (Revela­tion 11:8) to spiritual concepts. Jewish literature shows that the idea was prevalent (Enoch 10:12-14, "sinners . . . will be led to the abyss of fire in torture and in prison they will be locked up for all eternity.” ). Compare also 18:11-16; 27:1-3; 27:1-3; Jdt 16:17; 2Es 7:36; Sir 7:17; Sibylline Oracles 1:10:3; Talmud, Aboth 1:6; I Qumran M 2:8; Assumption of Moses 10:10. Some Jewish writers thought the chosen people would be exempt and that the duration would be limited. Philo taught, however, that evil Jews would be included and that the punishment was eternal (De Proem, et Poen. 921). The spiritual nature of Gehenna is shown by the fact that the Jews placed it in the Third Heaven (Ascension of Isaiah 4:14; 2 Enoch 40:12; 41:2. But it is in' the teaching of Jesus that the doctrine is most expli­citly identified and affirmed. He spoke of Gehenna as a place of future punishment. He spoke of "Being cast into Gehenna” (Matthew 5:29 Matthew 18:8-9; Mark 9:45 Mark 9:47 Mark 12:5); of the "Gehenna of fire” (Matthew 4:22); of destroying both body and soul in Gehenna (Matthew 10:28); of the "condemnation of Gehenna” (Matthew 23:33); of making one "a son Gehenna,” i. e., one worthy of its punishment (Matthew 23:5). It is used elsewhere in the New Test­ament only in James 3:6, our present passage. But the concept of this eternal spiritual punishment of the wicked is found frequent­ly: 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9; Romans 2:7-9; 2 Peter 3:7; Hebrews 12:29; Revelation 14:10 Revelation 19:20 Revelation 20:10 Revelation 20:14. The New Testament clearly teaches that the punishmeilt suffered in Gehenna will be eternal (Mark 9:47-48; Matthew 25:46; Revelation 14:11). James 3:7 ---For every kind of beasts and birds ... is tamed, —All creatures are subject to being controlled and tamed, but by human efforts the tongue seems to be uncontrollable. Animals, birds, and fish are all included. The ''for” points to the fact that this statement con­tains the evidence for the preceding statement of the hellish source of the tongue’ s evil. That it (of all creatures) cannot be tamed by man is proof of the tongue’ s perverseness. It is more vicious than any of the wild creatures. In the "are tamed” and "have been tamed” James unites the present and perfect tenses of what is now going on and what has long been going on. The art of taming is as old as man and is continuing. The verb "tamed” is used elsewhere in the N.T. only in Mark 5:4, of subduing demons. James says "every kind of” meaning "every individual nature” (qualitative) of beast, etc. The Greek word is phusis. The manner of speaking is tautological; the word means "species” and as such often is not translated: "The phusis of the stars” simply means "the stars” themselves. So the expression means simply "all ani­mals, birds, and fishes.” The enumeration of living creatures in this way (classifying all living creatures except man) is based up­on the Greek Old Testament (Genesis 1:26 Genesis 9:2; 1 Kings 4:33). James 3:7 ---by mankind:—The margin has (as the Greek) "by the human nature” . Other species are in subjection to the human species. This is as God said it would be (Genesis 1:26). James 3:7 ---but the tongue can no man tame;—Nothing in the human spe­cies is able to subdue the tongue as it can wild creatures. Augus­tine interpreted this to mean that if it is ever done it must be done by divine help. Such help from God may be had by prayer. Only in this way may we hope to "refrain our tongue from evil” (Psalms 34:13; cf. 1 Peter 3:10). So David prayed that God might "set a watch before my mouth, and keep the door of my lips” (Psalms 141:3). Johnson interprets somewhat differently: "cannot control the tongue as a whole. Some may rule their own, but the organ it­self as a whole does its evil work still in the world.” Augustine’ s view seems to bring out the force of the "no one of man” accurately. James 3:8 ---it is a restless evil,—"Restless” here is the same word James used in James 1:8 of the unstable man. The sense "unstable” or "incon­sistent” could apply here as agreeing with the inconsistent action of both blessing and cursing in verse 9. But the vividness of the figure of the tongue as a wild and restless evil, which like a caged beast never is still but walks back and forth, back and forth, is striking and is probably the meaning. How like this is the wag­ging tongue of gossip, of profanity, or the mouthings of a con­ceited hobbyist, speculator, or false teacher. But the restlessness is not mere restlessness; it is restless evil. Not merely disagreeable or destructive, the tongue is evil, bringing sin. Hermas (Mandate 2:3) says, "Slander is evil; it is a restless demon.” Grammatically "restless evil” could be taken as an appositive with "tongue”: No man is able to tame the tongue, "a restless evil.” But the ASV is perhaps correct in taking it as the predicate nom­inative of an independent sentence: "It (the tongue) is a restless evil.” Some commentators (e. g., Erdman) read "uncontrollable” with some witnesses (C, the Koine, Peshitto Syriac), but ASV text (the better attested reading) makes good sense. James 3:8 ---full of deadly poison.—"full of deathbearing poison.” Compare "full of adultery” (2 Peter 2:14); "full of envy” (Romans 1:29). Undoubtedly the term is drawn from Psalms 140:3 (Psalms 58:4) quoted in Romans 3:13, "The poison of asps is in their lips.” This is the last of James’ vivid metaphors describing the great influence of small things as the tongue. In verses 9-12 James points to the inconsistency of the tongue (as he has just demonstrated its wickedness). We bless God with it and thus profess ourselves His children. Yet as Christians we curse men who are made in His likeness and are His children in another sense. Even nature is more consistent than this. James chooses this inconsistent cursing of our fellowmen as one of the improper uses of the tongue. He might have chosen many others. James 3:9 ---Therewith—that is, with the tongue. James 3:9 ---bless we the Lord and Father;—Mayor cites the custom of the Jews when they spoke God’ s name of adding "blessed (be) He." From this arose the name for God— "the blessed.” Compare Mark 14:61, "Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?” If James is not thinking of this custom specifically, then the verb means cus­tomarily to "praise or extol someone,” as in a eulogy, prayer, or song of praise. See Luke 1:64, "He spoke blessing God.” It also means "to give thanks” (Mark 14:19; 26:26; 1 Corinthians 14:16). The opposition with "curse” probably shows that the meaning of "praising” or "extolling” is the proper one. , James 3:9 ---curse we men,—To curse is to put someone under an impreca­tion, to invoke evil or, even sometimes, damnation upon him. This is what we do when we damn someone. The incongruous combi­nation of blessing and cursing is often noted: Psalms 62:4, "They bless with their mouth, but they curse inwardly.” See Romans 12:13, "Bless and curse not.” Compare 1 Corinthians 4:12. An ex­ample of cursing men is the bitter description of the chief priests and Pharisees who spoke of the common folk as "this crowd who knoweth not the law are accursed” (John 7:49). James 3:9 ---who are made after the likeness of God.—By this the inconsist­ency is made to stand out. The Greek echoes the exact wording of the Greek Old Testament (LXX) "Let us make man after our image and likeness” (Genesis 1:26 cf. Genesis 5:21 Genesis 9:6). James uses the perfect tense, "has been made and remains in his likeness.” The argument is that, since man bears the image or likeness of God, to harm him is in a sense the same as harming God. So for this reason one must not kill (Genesis 9:6), oppress the poor , or hate his brother (1 John 4:20). Interpreters have argued as to what sense man is made in the likeness of God. The consensus is that it is in his being a partaker in such attributes as reason, conscience, knowledge, the power of dominion, and the capacity to assimilate the moral and spiritual holiness of God. Man even in his fall is still an immortal spirit. Mayor says that, though such an image is traceable in every child of God, only in Christ as the perfect image of God (Hebrews 1:3; Colossians 1:15; 2 Corinthians 4:4) do we see the perfection of this image. It is our task as Christians through the Gospel and the in­dwelling of the Spirit to transform ourselves more and more into such an image (Colossians 3:10; Ephesians 4:24; 2 Corinthians 3:18). The process is progressive (2 Corinthians 7:2; Romans 8:29; II Peter l:4ff) and will be completed at the Second Coming of Christ (Philippians 3:21; cf. 1 John 3:1-3; 1 Corinthians 15:5 If). Then indeed we shall bear the perfect image of God and Christ. But even now unregenerate man bears the impress of that image. Some have thought of Jewish Christians cursing Gentile Christians in order to get the "one made in the image of God" to mean a Christian. It could be that this is the cursing that James has in mind, but the principle of the likeness of God remaining in fallen man is certainly sustainable from Scripture (1 Corinthians 11:7; Genesis 1:26 Genesis 5:1 Genesis 9:6; Malachi 2:10). James includes himself ("we") as the representative of the people guilty. James 3:10 ---out of the same mouth cometh forth blessing and cursing.— Mayor has a long note as to why the Old Testament allowed many curses (Proverbs 11:26 Proverbs 24:24; Genesis 9:25 Genesis 49:7; Joshua 6:26; Judges 5:23 Judges 9:20 Judges 9:57), since cursing is not allowable by James. He finds the answer in the combination of cursing and blessing here. The mixture of cursing proves the unreality or insincerity of blessing. Cf. Matthew 12:34 Matthew 12:23 f. But Lenski seems to be more nearly right when he argues that no curse of our own can be pro­nounced by a Christian upon a fellow man without reflecting the curse upon the God whose image man bears. Only the curses which God Himself has pronounced upon the men whom He has had to curse may a Christian repeat (such as 1 Corinthians 16:22; Gala­tians 1:9). Otherwise he usurps God’ s place as judge and reviles God. "How shall I curse whom God has not cursed?" (Numbers 22:8) James 3:10 ---these things ought not so to be.—The "so" is somewhat redun­dant, but it sums up what James has said about the combining of blessing and cursing with an uncontrolled tongue. Inconsistency ought not to exist in such a fashion. James 3:11 ---Doth the fountain send forth from the same opening—As is characteristic James enforces his argument with illustrations drawn from nature. Nature is not so incongruous that one may expect contradictory produce from the same sources. He begins his Greek sentence with an introductory interrogative particle which expects a negative answer: "A fountain doesn’ t send forth . . . does it?” Compare the use of the same particle in 2:14, "Can that faith save?” Thus James pointedly rejects his own hypothetical illustration. Such could not be; yet Christians were doing what was comparable to it. James 3:11 ---sweet water and bitter?—The words are usual ones for a spring of water (Revelation 8:10 Revelation 14:7 Revelation 16:4) or a cleft or opening (compare Hebrews 11:38). "Bitter water” means "salty” or "brack­ish” water (cf. Exodus 15:23), of the waters of Marah; Revelation 8:11). James is probably thinking of the Dead Sea, which is so salty one floats in it. Into its waters flow springs which give off both kinds of water, but not from the same source. The word for "send forth” above is more commonly used of the bursting forth of flowers or of spring. "Sweet” (water) is pure or fresh water. James 3:12 ---can a fig tree, my brethren, yield olives, or a vine figs?—James, as in the last verse, begins with the particle expecting a neg­ative answer again, using the same verb as in 2:14: "A fig tree cannot, can it . . .?” The fig, olive, and grapevine were all very common in Palestine and the area of the Great Sea. It was a com­mon saying that a tree must bear fruit after its kind (Genesis 1:11; and compare Matthew 7:16 Matthew 7:20 Matthew 12:33). One would not expect to find a mixture of fruit on one tree. Yet the fruit of James’ readers’ lips was a mixture of blessings and cursings. James 3:12 ---neither can salt water yield sweet.—The Greek word for "salt” (water) may mean "a spring” (Arndt and Gingrich), but else­where in the Bible it is used only as an adjective describing the Dead Sea as the "Salt Sea” (Numbers 34:12; Deuteronomy 3:17). The text of the last clause of the verse is quite uncertain, with some MSS. reading "thus neither” and others reading "no salt spring also.” But the sense is not materially affected by these dif­ferences. THE TRULY WISE TEACHERJas_3:13-18 This portion of the third chapter of James is best interpreted as a continuation of the subject begun in verse 1 on the influence and use of the tongue. After mentioning the teacher in the first verse, James digresses in a sense to the more specific subject of the tongue’ s influence and evil. In verse 13 he reverts to the subject of verse 1 (the teacher). Under the contrast of heavenly and earthly wisdom he sets forth the deadliness of the sins of the tongue of the unwise teacher and the beauty of righteousness as the fruit of the truly wise teacher. There is abundant evidence that the term "wise man” is to be taken in the sense of "teacher.” The truly wise teacher will have his fruit in peace and understanding leading to righteousness, and not in faction, jealousy, and vile deeds. This is an admonition which every individual who teaches or preaches God’ s word needs to study and take to heart. He should ask whether the fruit of his ministry indicates that his wisdom is from above or below. He may be sure that if faction, strife, and division follow his work, the source is not the "wisdom from above.” James 3:13---who is wise and understanding—These words are connected1 in Deuteronomy 1:13, referring to judges. The term "wise man” was frequently used of learned men such as philosophers and teachers (Romans 1:14 Romans 1:22; I Corinthians 1:19, 26ff; 3:20). It was used in the New Testament for the Jewish teachers (Matthew 11:25; Luke 10:21) and by Jesus to describe the teachers whom He would send out (Matthew 23:34). Jesus’ use in the latter passage is in the same sense as that of James in this passage. This usage does not mean that James infers that wisdom is the possession of the teacher alone, but as a rule the teacher posed and gained the reputation of having more skill and knowledge than the ordinary man. The argument is that, since this is true, he should show by his conduct that it is true in fact. An analogy might be drawn between this and the use of the word "widow” in I Timo­thy 5:3ff, where the term widow is from the root "need.” Thus there is a play on the word in that some widows would be widows "indeed” (destitute) and some not (having an income from rela­tives). The word "understanding” means "skilled” or "scientific” as opposed to what is untrained or unskilled . James’ point is that the reputation of Christian teachers as wise and skilled men is to be justified in a practical way by the right kind of deeds and influence. Compare the reputation of Apollos as a teacher (Acts 18:24). James 3:13 ---let him show—The sense of the verb (as in 2:18 and Acts 10:23) is "prove” or "demonstrate.” A tree is known by its fruits, a prin­ciple which James has alluded to in the preceding verses. James 3:13 ---by his good life—The King James "conversation” is older Eng­lish which has changed its meaning. The Greek word means "con­duct,” or "manner of life” (literally one’ s turnings or "meanderings” in life). In Latin the word conversatio meant the same and from this came the term "conversation.” It earlier in English meant "conduct.” It is now limited to speech, so the rendering is no long­er adequate (see also 1 Peter 2:15 and Galatians 2:13). The term translated "good” means "excellent,” "noble,” "beautiful or ideal” conduct. This is the kind expected of all Christians. The same ad­jective describes Jesus (John 10:11) as the Good Shepherd. We should excel in conduct as He does in his work. The sense of the passage would be that of conduct which manifests real goodness. James 3:13 ---his works in meekness of wisdom.—Goodspeed renders "show that what he does is done in the humility of wisdom.” The sense is "Let him prove by his conduct that he has meekness, doing what he does in the kind of meekness or humility that comes from wis­dom. If the teacher’ s deeds are the right kind (and James goes on to develop this), they will be characterized by meekness and such meekness as will demonstrate that wisdom is present. A lack of meekness proves a lack of wisdom. As an ethical attitude "meekness” means "gentleness,” "humil­ity,” "courtesy,” and "consideration toward others” ; it is the op­posite of a rough, egotistic, unyielding attitude. Notice how James elaborates on the right attitude in verse 17. The key words are "peaceable, gentle, easy to be entreated, full of mercy.” Passages elsewhere in the New Testament which illustrate the usage include 1 Corinthians 4:21; 2 Corinthians 10:1; Titus 3:2; Galatians 6:1; and 2 Timothy 2:25. On the word "wisdom,” see comment on 1:5. It is used here against the background of its Old Testament use for practical good judgment or common sense in the face of the concerns and duties of life, especially as those judgments are shaped by the teachings of God’ s word. Meekness is coupled with teaching in the Old Testament: Psalms 25:9. It is not only the wise who know how to receive instruction (Proverbs 12:15), but the wise teacher also knows both what kind of counsel to give and how to give it (Prov­erbs 11:14; 17:28; 29:9). James 3:14 ---But if you have bitter jealousy—The man whose conduct re­veals jealousy and faction shows by the absence of meekness that wisdom is missing. Notice that James assumes that jealousy and faction are opposite in character to the deeds of wisdom. The wise man will never produce such fruits. "Jealousy” in Greek is a neutral word and may have either a good sense of zeal or ardor (2 Corinthians 7:7 2 Corinthians 11:2) or the bad sense of envy or jealousy (as in 1 Corinthians 3:3; 2 Corinthians 12:20; Galatians 5:20). The use of the descriptive adjective "bitter” and the connection with "faction” (verses 14, 16) show that James has the bad sense in mind here. The word "bitter” means "harsh” and refers to the feeling of anger or animosity inherent in such jealousy. James likely refers to the jealousy between the teach­ers in the local churches in their vying for positions and seeking for honors and the praise of their hearers. Or one might think of the following chapter and the questions concerning the sources of wars and fightings among the readers. Jealousy can certainly provoke bitter feeling and strife. The mod­ern proverbial speech sees jealousy as green-eyed. The attitudes of jealousy and strife were much in evidence among the Jews on a national level, especially politically in the party bickerings and cleavage in the years preceding the outbreak of the Jewish wars. The rise of the Zealot party and the revolution which brought on the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 by the Roman army sharply divided the Jewish people and produced bickering and strife. See Klausner, Jesus of Nazareth, pp. 135ff, for the story of the rise of this party. And see Introduction pp. 22ff. James 3:14 ---faction in your hearts,—This is a word of uncertain meaning. NEB renders "selfish ambition.” Moffatt and Goodspeed have "rivalry.” It has been customary to derive the word from eris mean­ing "strife” or "discord.” In Galatians 5:20 and II Corinthians 12:20 this word is found with eris and thus it has been argued that they are not related. But some writers (Dibelius, Leitzmann, and Sichenberger, according to Arndt and Gingrich) still hold to this meaning and would translate "strife” or "contention,” especially in view of the use in Philippians 1:17 and 15. On the other hand the Classical meaning (Aristotle, Politics, 5.3p. 1302b, 4; 1303a, 14) is that of unethical political seeking. This seems to fit the context of all the New Testament uses: Philippians 1:17; 2:3; Romans 2:8; II Corinthians 12:20; Galatians 5:20) (In the last passage the plural would mean "disputes” or "outbreaks of selfishness.” See Arndt and Gingrich and see Funk, Section 142). "The heart” is used in the Bible as the seat of the faculty of thinking and so of moral and re­ligious actions. See also James 4:8 and Matthew 15:19. If a man has these attitudes in his heart, they will come out in "confusion and vile deeds” (verse 16). Actions proceed from the heart. The pre­tense of wisdom when the heart and life are not right is valueless and under such circumstances is a lie. James 3:14 ---glory not and lie not against the truth.—The word "glory” means "boast” or "brag.” The idea seems to be that a pretense of wisdom is a boast, especially if it shows itself in a gloating over another on grounds of superiority. Such in effect is the wearing of the name "wise man” as a designation of a teacher. But if one does not demonstrate the wisdom in actual life, he should not bear the title or pretend to be wise; such a boast is really then a lie against the truth. "Truth” here means either simply "what is true”— his actual condition (the article being used with the abstract noun) or "the Gospel truth” . "The boast would be lying to the great injury of the Gospel Truth, and this must stop” (Lenski). The former ex­planation seems preferable. For one to pose as a wise man is a lie against reality when the fruit of foolishness is so plainly mani­fested. James 3:15 ---This wisdom— A "wisdom” which produced jealousy and selfish ambition (or strife), if it could be called wisdom at all, would be wisdom of the wrong kind. James is here ironic— this would not in the terms of Biblical teaching be wisdom. A man with great learning and knowledge and with potential skill in imparting his ideas might be exceedingly wicked in his heart. Any wisdom which might be attributed to him would (like the fire which sets the tongue aflame from hell in verse 6) be from the lower regions. James 3:15 ---is not a wisdom that cometh down from above,—The phrase "cometh down from above” is a descriptive participle. It defines the kind of wisdom a teacher ought to have: it is a "coming down from above” wisdom; it is a God-given wisdom. Wisdom has al­ready been described as God’ s gift in answer to prayer. Jewish thought often personified wisdom and pictures her as coming from God. But with the "not” James affirms that the wisdom of the factious is in opposition to this heavenly wisdom. James 3:15 ---but is earthly, sensual, devilish.—James describes positively the nature of a ."wisdom” which produces jealousy and selfishness. First, it is "earthly.” This word is usually used in opposition to what is heavenly and often has the sense of "human” as against something divine. Thus Hermas, a second century Christian, (.Mandates, 11:6) uses the adjective to describe the human and false prophet as opposed to the divinely commissioned and inspired one. Compare Paul’ s description of those who "mind earthly things” (Philippians 3:19)and the "wisdom which is of this world” (1 Corinthians 1:20). Thus James means that the wisdom from v/hich jealousy and selfishness come is a product of fallen human, earthly sources. The word "sensual” is derived from the word psuche> which is ordinarily translated "soul.” That a word derived from it may have a bad meaning, as here, may seem strange. But the word often had a meaning con­nected with natural life as opposed to the spiritual or supernatural. Thus it might mean the "unspiritual” or "merely human,” as in 1 Corinthians 2:14, or the physical man and the physical body, as in 1 Corinthians 15:44 . Perhaps "carnal” could often translate the sense as in James here. The phrase has been explained as "man as he is as a result of Adam.” While the root word is often translated "soul,” the adjective form in this passage could not rightly be rendered into English by a derivative of that word, as "soul” usually expresses the spiritual and higher nature of man. In this sense "soul” is equivalent to "spirit.” When the three terms "body, soul, and spirit” are used together, the soul is probably to be thought of as the life of man which he has in com­mon with natural life around him. It is from this, then, that the meaning in the present passage is derived. "Devilish” should be "demonic” or "demoniacal” as in the mar­gin, as the word is connected with the word "demon” and not "devil.” Demons are evil spirits in the service of Satan (the prince or ruler of demons, the same as Beelzebub, Matthew 12:24). Brit­ish translators for some unknown reason (the Revisors as well as the NEB) persist in mistranslating the term "demon” by "devil.” The term "devil” without the article is always merely an adjective, "slanderous.” There is only one devil. 1 Timothy 4:1 ascribes false doctrines to the influence of demons. They may influence others to be the instruments of the spread of heresy, but this is the real work of demons or of such as they are. So it is the work of demons to spread jealousy and selfish ambition and every vile deed. Those who possess these in their hearts are acting, at least, as demons do. The wisdom which begets this action is then demonic. Note: This writer is amazed that students often express surprise that he as a teacher of the New Testament should believe that there were such things as demons really in existence. Much of our modern world is like the Sadducees of Jesus’ day who "did not be­lieve in spirits.” It is often asserted that the belief in demons in the New Testament was merely an accommodation to a popular cur­rent superstition or was a part of the so-called "human element” in which they were involved. But one can hardly read the New Testa­ment documents without seeing that Jesus actually acknowledged the existence of these unclean spirits. They showed superhuman knowledge of the sonship of Jesus. Jesus taught that power to cast them out was a sign of the coming of the Kingdom (Matthew 12:28). To attribute the power by which they were cast out to the devil was a blasphemy, a sin which was unforgivable (Mark 3:29-30). While at times Jesus seemed to connect sickness and de­mon possession, at other times he distinguished between them. The Bible does not offer an explanation of the origin of demons (wheth­er they were fallen spirits or the spirits of the wicked dead who were allowed to return and possess people). Nor does the Bible give any hint as to whether we may still be faced with the phenom­enon and unable to recognize it at present. Some have thought that the statements about the demons being sent back into the abyss (Luke 8:31) and being tormented ’’ before their time” imply the termination of their power to affect men. For a good discussion of the subject of demons see R. C. Trench, On the Miracles, on the healing of the demoniac at Capernaum; also Unger, Biblical De­monology; and the article by Sweet in the New International Stand­ard Bible Encyclopedia. James 3:16 ---For where jealousy and faction are, there is confusion and every vile deed.—Jealousy and faction, which have already been mentioned as being in the hearts of the false teachers, produce their natural fruits of confusion and vile deeds. This is the proof that the wisdom behind these attitudes is earthly, sensual, and demonic; confusion and vileness are the natural fruits of the evil world and the under­world. The word rendered ’’ confusion” has the sense of disturbance, disorder, or unruliness. The New Testament instances of its use are 1 Corinthians 14:33; 2 Corinthians 6:5 2 Corinthians 12:20, "insurrections” ; Luke 21:9. The passage from Luke refers to political tumults; those from the epistles have to do with church disturbances. Notice the opposition to the word in this passage is "peace.” The word "vile” in "every vile deed” means evil in its "good- for-nothing” sense. It is what is opposed to the "good.” The an­tithesis here is with the "full of mercy and good fruits” of the fol­lowing passage. The basic meaning is "worthless,” but it can also have the meaning of "wicked” or "bad,” ’’ malignant.” (Romans 9:11; Titus 2:8). James 3:17 ---But the wisdom that is from above—True wisdom is now described. It has already been mentioned in verse 15 in a negative way. The wisdom which truly becomes a teacher (and any other Christian) proceeds from above, being a gift from God (James 1:5). This is, of course, the kind that James recommends, though he is content with definition and leaves the admonition to the read­er himself. Notice that the wisdom from above has seven charac­teristics, as does the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22 f) and the Christian graces (2 Peter 1:5-9). Perhaps seven is thought of by James as the typical or complete number. James 3:17 ---is first pure,—The prime quality (above everything else) of wisdom is purity. Both God (1 John 3:3) and His word (Psalms 12:6) are pure. What is pure is dedicated to God and hence is holy. Therefore the wisdom from above is chaste and without defilement. True wisdom produces only what is holy and pure (not the evil things mentioned in the context). The adjective often has the quality as an ethical term of the "clean” or holy inward moral at­titude: Philippians 4:8; 2 Corinthians 11:2; 1 Peter 3:2. Lenski comments "It is pure wisdom, unmixed. Clean in all respects.” James 3:17 ---peaceable,—The word here is used of orderliness as opposed to confusion (compare 1 Corinthians 7:15 1 Corinthians 14:33). It means "not given to conflict,” "that which is harmonious and unifying” as opposed to the strife and vile deeds of the earthly wisdom. Much is said by Paul (in whose churches there was doctrinal and personal strife) of this harmony and unity. In a striking passage in Colos- sians Paul said that peace should "be the umpire” in our lives, like the official judge at the races (Colossians 3:15). This is the mean­ing of the word translated "rule.” Paul urged the Ephesians to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace (Ephesians 4:3). This is connected to, but it is also different from, the full meaning in the New Testament of peace to express the Messianic salvation, that is, peace of mind flowing from a consciousness of peace with God through the forgiveness of sins. (Compare Philippians 4:7). James 3:17 ---gentle,—This is another word in Greek which is hard to render into English. It is variously defined as "kindness,” "being yield­ing or forbearing” (1 Timothy 3:3; Titus 3:2; 1 Peter 2:18). The corresponding noun appears in Acts 24:4 (of the governor’ s graciousness). In 2 Corinthians 10:1 it is the ''graciousness” or "gen­tleness” of Christ. It is rendered "forbearance” in Philippians 4:5. The commentators like to mention the phrase coined by Mat­thew Arnold "sweet reasonableness” in connection with it. It some­times has the meaning of "yielding” when one does not need to, that is, to inferiors: not insisting on one’ s rights. Trench illustrates with Matthew 18:23 as an opposite characteristic in the man who was forgiven and was himself implacably harsh. Thus it is seen that the word carries the idea of "reasonableness” and "graciousness,” the absence of bad manners and quick temper. James 3:17 ---easy to be entreated,—This word ordinarily means "obedient,” or "compliant,” "openminded,” "yielding to entreaty.” Its etymol­ogy leads back to the meaning "of good, i. e. easy, persuasion.” In a teacher, as here, it would be the opposite of dogmatic and un­yielding. The teacher must himself be teachable— ready to be taught and guided in turn. It is a poor teacher who does not learn from his pupils. The word is not used elsewhere in the New Testament. James 3:17 ---full of mercy and good fruits,—in opposition to "vile deeds.” "Mercy” means "compassion” or "pity” and is generally used in the Bible as a description of a human attribute associated with deeds of charity toward the poor and sick (James 2:13; Luke 10:37). "Good fruits” refers to deeds or acts, the "produce” or "effects” of the Christian religion that are "good” rather than evil. The use of "full of” to express the presence of something in large degree in a person’ s character is common. Compare "full of hypoc­risy and iniquity” (Matthew 23:38), "full of all unrighteousness” (Romans 1:29), and "full of goodness” (Romans 15:14). James would insist that not only in the disposition to avoid confusion, but also in the practical results of life the teacher must demon­strate true wisdom. His life must be one of moral and spiritual usefulness. It was said of Jesus that "He went about doing good” (Acts 10:38). If pure and undefiled religion is to do such things as visit the widows and orphans in their affliction, it is certainly to be expected that the teachers of that religion excel in demonstrat­ing this fruit in their lives. Compare Paul’ s advice to Titus, "Show­ing yourself a pattern of good works” (Titus 2:7). Especially can they use their tongues as productive of good works and acts of mercy, rather than to sow discord. "A tongue controlled by divine grace can be a mighty influence for good.” James 3:17 ---without variance,—The word means "a lack of discord,” then "lack of uncertainty or partiality.” Here the word seems to mean "not vacillating,” "not acting one way in one circumstance and an­other in a different one.” James is saying that a teacher in his at­titudes should be consistent. Paul often charged Timothy and his helpers to do nothing with partiality (1 Timothy 5:21). The leader loses the confidence of his followers if they get the idea that there is no consistency in his words and deeds or in his attitude toward others. James 3:18 ---And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace—The "And” (Greek de) indicates an additional thought. But this is not a part of the description of wisdom. It is an enlargement of the "full of good fruits.” That fruit might also be described as "the fruit of righteousness.” The expression is equivalent to "and the fruit, righteousness” or "the fruit is righteousness, which is sown . . . .”1 For the expression, compare Proverbs 11:30 and Amos 6:12. Knowling calls attention to Old Testament parallels where "fruit of righteousness” is used opposite to "bitterness” (Amos 5:7; Hosea 10:12; Proverbs 9:21; and Isaiah 32 :l6f). Thus a righteous life of good deeds or fruits is what is reaped by the one who sows in the right way. The construction logically is one where the pro­duce is put for the seed sown. "In peace” stresses that the sowing which produces this fruit is done under conditions of peace (not jealousy and faction leading to confusion and vile deeds). Under these conditions alone will the preaching and teaching of God’ s word grow and develop into a life of righteousness. Peace is as­sumed as the climate necessary for producing righteousness. Note further that "righteousness” here evidently means "good fruits or deeds.” It is conduct and action pleasing to God as in Matthew 5:6; 1 John 2:29; 1 Timothy 6:11; 2 Timothy 2:11. Com­pare the note on 1:20. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/zerrcbc/ James 3:2. For in many things. If we do have too many of such professed teachers we will offend all or all (of us) will offend or stumble. The importance of our language is the subject in several verses. If a man does not offend (or stumble) with the improper use of his tongue he will prove to be a perfect or complete man, controlling even his body. James 3:3. The great influence of apparently small things is the idea James is illustrating in this and the next verse. In size and weight a bridle bit is very small, yet with it we control the direction of the entire animal. James 3:4. The same thing is true of the helm or rudder of a ship. It is but a few inches or feet long, yet it may guide a ship that is many hundreds of feet in length. James 3:5. The application of the illustration is made to the tongue. The last word is from GLOSSA, which means as its first definition the literal organ that is a member of the fleshly body. The Greek term is used because the tongue is the instrument by which the speech or words of a person are produced. Actually it is the language of the individual that is being considered, although the form of the phrases is related to the physical organ of speech. James uses another illustration for the same purpose as that in verses 3 and 4. If a man wished to burn a structure as tall as a tower, he would need only to use a torch an inch long. James 3:6. James calls the tongue a fire because he had just used the illustration of "a little fire." It is called a world of iniquity because the original word for world means mankind. The evil use of the tongue will affect mankind in general if it is not curbed. Defiles the whole body. Our organ of speech if allowed to work sinfully will result in evil conduct of the whole body. Course literally means "a wheel" according to Thayer, and nature means the procedure of human existence. The figure represents it as a wheel that is rolling onward. James means that the evil tongue sets this wheel on fire. It is set on fire of hell (GEHENNA); not literally, of course. But a torch has to be "lighted" from some source, and James regards a wicked tongue as so bad that he renre-sents its owner as having applied to hell to "get a light." James 3:7. The facts of controlling a horse with a bit, guiding a ship with a rudder or training a beast by man all have one thing in common, namely, the feat is accomplished by another party; the things controlled are acted upon by an outside force. James 3:8. Such a feat cannot be accomplished upon the tongue because of its characteristic of poison which defies being subdued by another man than its owner. James does not say a man cannot subdue his own tongue; in truth he teaches that a man can and should bridle his own tongue (chapter 1:26). James 3:9. The main point in this and the next verse is to show the inconsistency in the uncontrolled tongue. Man is made after the similitude of God, therefore He should be regarded with respect. Yet the evil tongue will bless one and curse the other. James 3:10. This repeats the thought of the preceding verse in another form of expression. The words same mouth emphasize the inconsistency in a more direct way. James 3:11-12. James refers to the consistency of the things in the natural creation, to shame the man who is double-minded in the use of his tongue. The same God who made the inanimate things named also created man and gave him a tongue wherewith to express his intelligence. How inexcusable it is therefore in him to make such an evil use of the blessing of speech. James 3:13. Wise man is one who has learned to exercise good judgment, and knowledge means information concerning which he may exercise that good judgment. James gives some specific suggestions on how such a man may manifest those traits in his conversation, which means conduct or manner of life. He is to do it with meekness of wisdom; a truly wise man will be meek or humble and not boastful of his knowledge. James 3:14. Bitter envying denotes a mind that is resentful toward another person who is fortunate. The original word for strife means an attempt to outdo some other person by fair means or otherwise. Should such a person succeed he is admonished not to glory in it. Lie not against the truth. Certainly all lies are against the truth, but the special thought Is that an envious person cannot oppose a righteous or fortunate one without contradicting the truth involved. James 3:15. Wisdom is from a Greek word that has a great variety of meanings. Thayer comments on this phase of the subject as follows: "Used of knowledge of very diverse matters. so that the shade of meaning in which the word is taken must be discovered from the context [connection] in every particular case." In general the word refers to knowledge or Information that a person may have (or claim to have), whether it be good or bad. true or false. This should prepare us to see why James calls something by the word wisdom when he is sneaking of that which he disapproves. Earthly is used as a contrast to above; sensual pertains to the natural or animal part of our nature; devilish is an adjective and means something that has the character of demons. James 3:16. James verifies his description of this wisdom (preceding verse) by repeating virtually the sentiments of verse 14. He emphasizes it by adding the results of such "wisdom." namely, confusion and every evil work. James 3:17. In verses 14-16 James designates the kind of wisdom that does not come from above (or heaven); the present verse describes the kind that does come from the higher source. First pure signifies that it is of the most importance for a man's information to be pure or unmixed with anything false. Then peaceable indicates that peace is not to be desired unless it is according to the truth. That is why Paul placed it on condition in Romans 12:18. Gentle means to be mild and fair in one's temperament even when insisting on truth as being preferable to peace. Easy to be in-treated is all from one Greek word that means to be of a yielding disposition and not stubborn when the heavenly wisdom is presented. Full of mercy means that one's life is merciful toward those in difficulties whenever the occasion arises, and not only when it is the most convenient to be so. Fruits are the deeds that are performed and heavenly wisdom will prompt one to produce good deeds. Without partiality denotes an attitude that does not show respect of persons. (See chapter 2:1-4.) Without hypocrisy means that our expressions of friendliness to others will be sincere and not a mere pretense. A tree Is known by its fruit, hence if a man is being influenced by the wisdom that is from above, he will exhibit the characteristics that are described in this verse. James 3:18. If a man possesses good fruit he usually wishes to reproduce it by sowing or planting it. Hence he will sow it righteously by conforming to the rules of peace that have been formed in harmony with the pure wisdom. J.W. Roberts Commentary On James 4 SECTION SIX IN THE CHURCHJas_4:1-12THE SOURCE OF WARS AND STRIFEJas_4:1-10 Chapter four begins with a warning against strife and conten­tion. A connection may be seen between this and the previous sec­tion in the third chapter. Divine wisdom leads to peace and right­eousness. But since there is strife and fighting among the readers, what is the source of such? James answers by identifying the source as the lusts and desires which crave worldly satisfaction. Prayers are unanswered or avoided. But friendship with the world means enmity against God, whose Spirit longs for the undivided loyalty of His children and who gives grace to achieve the purpose. A call to repentance and humility is needed to bring the readers back into the favor of God. This section, while it may not be pleasant to read and contem­plate, is one which ought to be studied and taught. Worldliness is one of the continual problems in the church. Christians are in the world, but they are not of the world (John 17:14). God has ac­cepted them as His children or sons. He justifies them and accepts them as though they were as spotless as angels, but He leaves them here in the world. The final transformation into the image of God Himself will come when Jesus is seen in the resurrection and His followers become like Him. But God expects them to grow grad­ually into that image by continually purifying themselves while here on earth as they wait the hope of the resurrection (read 1 John 3:1-3, where these ideas are set forth). This divine sonship in the heavenly family calls upon the Christian to break the ties which he had as a sinner and alien. "Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If a man love the world, the love of the father is not in him” (1 John 2:15). This is the problem that James is concerned with here. Some critics think that this passage is exceedingly harsh and even unrealistic. It presents, if taken literally, a picture of sin within the scattered church which is unbelievable to some. Can it be possible that the church would have grown so worldly in such a short time? Some even use this passage to prove that the book was not written to Christians but is a purely Jewish book which some Christian had later worked over to make it into a Christian document. Note especially the sins of war and murder. Is it think­able that Christians were actually guilty of these sins? It will be seen that it is not necessary to take these as actual fightings in carnal battles. Even if this were so, it would not have to be as­sumed that all Christians were acting in such ways, though there is evidence that some did walk the low road (e. g., the Corinthians). If it had been written to Jews, one would not assume that they all were guilty of these sins. Others think that, if the literal meaning is insisted on, James may (as in the fifth chapter) have been writ­ing to the Jews (Christians and non-Christians) whom he hoped would read his book and that he had the Jewish situation politi­cally in mind. James 4:1 ---Whence come wars and whence come fightings—The mean­ing of "wars” and "fightings” is crucial here. Does James mean literal fightings and wars? Some assume that he does, and it seems unrealistic to them that this should be so among Christians. Actu­ally the language does not demand this assumption. Arndt and Gingrich say concerning the word "fightings” that in the literature covered by their lexicon the word is used always in the plural and always of battles carried on without weapons. In other words, the meaning is always figurative. Its other uses in the New Testament bear this out: 2 Corinthians 7:5; 2 Timothy 2:23; and Titus 3:9 . The word for "war” (polemos) also has a well-established figurative use. Again Arndt and Gingrich assert that since Sophocles’ time the word has been used in the figurative sense of quarrelling, conflict, or strife. It will be seen that "mur­dering” in the same context will fit into a figurative interpreta­tion. Some commentators argue that this is taking the easy way out of the difficulty, but it is also true that they may be closing their eyes to the obvious contextual meaning of the language. It is pos­sible, of course, that James means engaging in actual carnal con­flict, and this can be explained in the context of the book, but it is more likely that James means internal bickerings and strife, leading to hatred. James 4:1 ---among you?—Does James mean Christians, i. e., his readers? As pointed out, some commentators have doubted the probability of this. In answer it has been supposed that this is addressed not di­rectly to the Christian part of James’ readers, but to the larger cir­cle of Jewish people who (James still hopes) respected him enough that they would read his letter.1 It is well known that such activ­ity as the Zealot revolutionary movement from Galilee was going on. Many Jews were engaging in this, which was a form of rob­bery, plunder, and murder. James may have had this circle of readers in mind. Obviously in 5: Iff he is addressing readers out­side the church. Perhaps some Christians still belonged to these bands of rebel fighters. If so, their fighting spirit may have spread into the churches. In America during our Civil War, many Chris­tians did engage in carnal war and against each other. But it is still better to suppose that if James is speaking to Christians, he speaks in a figurative sense. James 4:1 ---come they not hence, even of your pleasures—"Pleasures” is from the word from which we get our "hedonite,” one who lives for pleasure. The word in a bad sense means "evil desires for grat­ification of the flesh.” Thus here it is a metonomy for lusts. The selfish desires of 3:14 reflect this. They do not reflect the purity connected with the wisdom from above (3:13-17) and so do not have the peace which goes with it. This is not far different from the "desires” or "lusts” which James had identified as the source of sin in temptation in 1:14. These pleasures were the giving away to the desires of the flesh in a selfish, wanton, and lascivious way, though some think that money basically is meant (Huther). For the use of the word "pleasure” in a bad sense elsewhere see Luke 8:14; Titus 3:3; and 2 Peter 2:13. The strife or conflicts were the direct results of such pleasure and satisfaction. James 4:1 ---that war in your members?—Such pleasures were at war in their members. Does this mean among the members of the physical body (as in James 3:6) or among the members of the church? If the latter, then James means that the different Christians seeking to gratify their pleasures find other disciples standing in their way. From this, conflict naturally arises. But more likely James means that such pleasures fight among the members of the individual’ s body. So in 3:2 the tongue is set over against the whole body. Paul speaks of the law of sin and death which works in his members (Romans 7:23). The verb means "to campaign,” "to serve in a war as a sol­dier.” Pleasures (or really the lusts, the satisfaction of which brings pleasure) using one part of the body as a base of operations carry on war with everyone and everything which might seek to block their gratification. James does not spell out the figure to say that the hand is at war with the foot (for instance). But this is the general idea. Some part of man’ s nature may seek to curb and con­trol and keep under other parts, bringing conflict. James may be still thinking of the strife caused by the teachers (chapter 3). Or beginning with this he may be thinking of the many different ways that Christians might allow their interests to lead them to strife. Such may have spread from their Jewish back­ground, but enough of such is seen in the church today to prove that James may be speaking realistically of Christians of his day. In verses 11-12 we see that they were speaking against and judg­ing one another. James 4:2 ---Ye lust, and have not:—The words of this verse are further explanation of why Christians were fighting. "Lust” is another word suggesting strong desire for gratification of the instincts. It is a verb form of the word "lust” in James 1:14. It means "desires” and here "bad desires.” When men live merely to satisfy their desires, they never realize their goal. He who lives for the satisfaction of his pleasures and desires will always "have not.” The more he gets the more unsatisfied he will be. Sensations lose their pleasantness when indulged in too frequently. The only way they can then be fulfilled is to heighten the kind of attempted satisfaction. Solomon in the long ago learned all this when he gave himself to worldli­ness to see what was good for man. He learned that "all was vani­ty and vexation of spirit.” Man’ s whole (duty) is to fear God and keep his commandments (Ecclesiastes 12:13). Tacitus’ description of the progressive nature of Nero’ s passions in his Histories is a good example of the way such living develops. If self-control is not exercised, soon there is no satisfaction at all. Indulgence leads to unsatisfaction. James 4:2 ---ye kill,—Or "murder.” It is hardly likely that James means this literally, though some Christians may have gone so far as to do such a thing. We have all perhaps known some professing Chris­tians who have done such a terrible deed. But there is scriptural background for thinking that James means something else. Jesus in Matthew 5:22 had taught that hate in the heart is equal to murder from the Christian point of view. John taught the same thing in 1 John 3:15 : "whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer.” It could hardly be more specific (in view of the established figurative meanings of the words "wars” and "fightings” ) than this. In ad­dition, it is possible that the verb may mean no more than the de­sire to kill (a tendential present). Jesus spoke of those who were killing him, when actually they had only wished or attempted to do so (John 10:33). Parallels exist. Knowling points to Deuteron­omy 24:6, where it is said that one takes his neighbor’ s life who takes his mill as a pledge. In the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasti- cus (34:21f) we find: "The bread of the needy is the life of the poor: he that taketh away his neighbor’ s living slayeth him.” That jealousy and envy lead to murder is argued by Clement of Rome (1 Corinthians 4:7-9). James 4:2 ---and covet,—This is not the ordinary word for "covet.” It has a double meaning of either "be jealous” ("bitter jealousy,” James 3:14; Acts 17:5, "the Jews moved with jealousy” ; 1 Corinthians 13:4, "love envieth not” ) or "to desire earnestly,” "to strive for” e. g., "desire earnestly the best gifts” (I Corin­thians 12:31). These facts are evidenced by the marginal reading. The King James says, "Ye kill and desire to have.” Arndt and Gingrich take "ye are jealous” as the correct meaning. Between the idea of desire (covetousness) and jealousy there is not a great deal of difference. The King James adopted an inferior reading "Ye envy and desire to have.” Westcott-Hort margin suggests a full stop or period after "ye kill,” with "You covet and are not able to obtain” beginning a new sentence. Meyer supports this. This is possible; the MSS. have no punctuation. But it is merely a rear­ranging of the same ideas. The language of the whole passage is abrupt, broken into sentences that contain verbs with no connectives.1 This is a style of colloquial speech (but also of orators and comedy; compare Funk, Sec. 494). The brevity of the sentences heightens the points of the description. The best solution is to translate "Ye are jealous" and begin the new sentence with this. James 4:2 ---and cannot obtain:— In spite of your strong jealousy or desire, your virtual murder, you do not get what you want. Just as the "wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God" (James 1:20), so neither do jealousy, hatred and lust lead to God’ s bless­ings. The verb means "to attain one’ s goal or purpose” (cf. Romans 11:7). God answers prayer, but not all prayer, especially not in giving the ungodly the ingredients for selfish gratification. James 4:2 ---ye fight and war;—James uses verbs in the continuous sense, "go on fighting and warring." The verbs represent the same words as in verse I. He has rounded the thought and returned to the question "Whence come wars?" The whole thought is "Since you lust but don’ t have, you kill and envy (or covet) and still do not succeed, so you go on fighting and warring.” All this is because of pleasure seeking in the bodily members. James 4:2 ---ye have not because you ask not.—The nuance of this sentence is "You cannot obtain what you desire. Since you do not succeed in getting it, you cannot have (hold) it.” The failure to have their desired objects related directly to their unsuccessful prayer life. Either they did not pray for what they desired or (verse 3) they asked amiss. For some, their attitudes and actions were such that they would not pray. Perhaps they realized that their desires were such that their prayers would be a mockery. Hence they went about trying to get what they wanted without prayer, without taking God into their thoughts. "Ask” here and in the next sentence are the same verb, but they are in different voices. The first has a reflexive (middle) idea, "ask for one’ s self." The other is active. Some commentators doubt that James intends any great difference in the meaning. In Classical Greek the middle meant "to ask for something as a loan." But James uses it here to mean "pray for something for one’ s self.” Lit­erally we have: "Ye ask for yourselves ... ye ask, and receive not.” The thought, then, is: "Because you cannot pray for the blessings which God as a loving Father will give (Matthew 7:11), you do not pray; and thus God does not give you His blessings.” James 4:3 ---Ye ask, and receive not because ye ask amiss,—James had just said that they did not ask. His style has no connectives. He means "Some do not ask and do not receive, while others ask amiss; and so their prayers are not heard.” God does not answer all prayer. His rules for prayer must be met. James has already said that a prayer must be in faith (1:6). Further, it must be according to His will (I John 5:14). There arc other conditions. The thing that was wrong with the prayers of those who did pray was that their prayers were evil. The word "amiss” means lit­erally "in an evil manner,” that is, with wrong or wicked motives. What those motives were is explained in the next verse. Illustration of the meaning of this word in John 18:23 "If I have spoken evil \ James 4:1. Wars and fightings are virtually the same except the first refers to a state of conflict in general and the second to the single battles of the war. James is writing of spiritual or moral things and not of warfare in its usual sense. Lusts refers to unrighteous pleasures and the strife after such gratifications is bound to bring conflicts between different members of the body of Christ. James 4:2. Lust and have not. They had the unholy desires but were not always able to obtain what they craved, and that caused them to kill (have murderous thoughts, 1 John 3:15) those who resisted their unrighteous desires. Fight and war is the same as wars and fightings in the first verse. In some cases they might have obtained things they had asked for had they asked for them in a lawful manner. James 4:3. While they did not ask in the proper way, some did make unlawful demands but were refused because of the impure motive that prompted the requests. That unrighteous motive was that their personal cravings might be gratified and not that lawful benefits might be obtained. The passage as a whole (verses 1-3) pictures a group of professed disciples who were confused and unsettled in their lives, trying to partake of the same practices as those of the world, at the same time pretending to be serving the Lord in things spiritual. James 4:4. In the temporal world a person who commits unlawful intimacy is guilty of immorality. Likewise in the realm of the family of God, those who are intimate with the sinful pleasures of the world are guilty of spiritual adultery because they are untrue to Christ, who is their lawful partner. This intimacy is here called friendship and James says it is enmity (at war) with God. On this principle James declares that a person cannot be a friend (be intimate with) of the world without being an enemy of the Lord. This is the same thing that Jesus teaches in Matthew 12:30. James 4:5. Envy and jealousy have some phases of meaning in common and hence are used to show God's great concern for the purity of His people. Exodus 20:5 says He is a jealous God and Paul writes on behalf of the Lord and says he is jealous about his brethren (2 Corinthians 11:2). In Genesis 6:3 the Spirit of God is said to be striving with man, that is the same Spirit that our verse says dwell-eth in us. James asked if they think that this concern of the Spirit is in vain or to no purpose. A negative answer is implied and means that the brethren should take the admonition seriously and not provoke the Lord too far. James 4:6. James does not wish his brethren to become too downcast over the stern remarks of the preceding verses, hence the consoling remark that he giveth more grace (or favor) is made. In order to profit by His grace it is necessary to be submissive, so the statement is made concerning the proud and the humble. James 4:7. Submit yourselves calls for a voluntary act on the part of man, else his pride will come up against the resistance of God. Resist requires more than a mere aversion to the devil; it calls for active opposition. If a disciple will put up that kind of fight he is assured of victory over the enemy. James 4:8. This verse also indicates a voluntary action on the part of man. The Lord has made full provision for the spiritual welfare of the human creature, hence it is necessary for man to make the next move. Cleanse your hands specifies what is to be done, and ye sinners designates to whom the demand applies. No person is accused nor even specifically admonished except the guilty ones. To purify means to remove all mixture of evil desires, and the heart can be thus purified only "by [the] faith" Acts 15:9. Double minded is explained at chapter 1:8. James 4:9. This verse is directed toward those who are unconcerned about their worldliness, and who are finding joy in such activities. They should reverse all of such false grounds of gratification, after which they will have something real and lasting in which to take joy. James 4:10. This is virtually the same admonition as in verse 6. James 4:11. Speak not evil means to say that which slanders another and injures his reputation. This bad use of the tongue is treated in several verses of the preceding chapter. Speaketh evil of the law. One of the commandments is not to bear false witness against another (Exodus 20:16), and the same is taught in many places in the New Testament (Matthew 19:18; Romans 13:9). If a man claims the right to ignore this law he is thereby assuming that such a law is unnecessary. That is why James says such a person becomes a judge of the law instead of a doer. James 4:12. There is one lawgiver who is the Lord, and no man should dare put himself up as a judge of His law. The author of the true law is able either to save or destroy ("To give over to eternal misery"--Thayer). Who art thou--why do you dare judge another or slander him? James 4:13. Go to is from AGE, a Greek word that Thayer defines, "Come! come now!" It is a pointed expression made to someone, calling attention to foolish presumptions. The things mentioned are not necessarily wrong in themselves, but the folly is in taking it for granted that nothing can prevent it. James 4:14. The foolishness of the matter is in the uncertainty of human existence. Regardless of what one plans to do as to whether it is right or wrong, it cannot be carried out unless he lives. The comparison to a passing cloud by James shows this to be his principal thought. James 4:15. If the Lord will has been much strained by many whose intentions were good toward God. The expression is made to mean if the Lord does not interfere with some "providential act" that will make the plan impossible. God is not doing such things as that in these days. During the formative centuries while the Bible was being revealed and God's dealings with man were not yet fully made known, He performed various miracles to demonstrate in the ears and before the eyes of man what it means to displease Him. That is all past now and no special act is theatened to show God's favor or disfavor for what man does; that has to be learned from the written word. The thought is, therefore, that we should make all our plans subject to two provisos, namely, that the Lord wills (that it is according to His will as revealed in the Bible), and that we live to do it. The additional conjunction "and" that is in the Greek text has been omitted by the King James Version. The Englishman's Greek New Testament renders this verse as follows: "Instead of your saying [the saying expressed in verse 13; the thing they should say is], if the Lord should will and we should live, also, we may do this or that." This shows the two conditions mentioned above, and rules out any need for "special providence." James 4:16. Rejoice in your boastings denotes they first presumed they could do whatever they wished, then used the presumption as a basis of boasting. Such rejoicing is evil because it ignores the truths set forth in verse 14. James 4:17. Knoweth to do good has special reference to the information offered in the preceding verses. We should first learn if what we plan is right, then also remember the frailty of human life and plan accordingly. This is the way to do that which is good and not in the boastful manner as described. But the principle expressed for this special case would apply to all other relations of life. J.W. Roberts Commentary On James 5 THE SIN OF WEALTH James 5:1-6 James continues his apostrophe, or direct address, of those not Christians and not his immediate readers, with the "come now” as in the section in which the address began (James 4:13). But he shifts the subject from the arrogant and boastful living of life without God, in the pursuit of wealth, to the unjust and shameful oppression of workers. James foretells the fearful punishment of God for such sin. The use of wealth that is condemned here is not wealth as such. James does not oppose rich men indiscriminately. Those who have understood Christianity as being anti-wealth and anti-prop­erty have misunderstood it. It is the wrong use of wealth and the acquisition of wealth in the wrong manner which are condemned, along with the envy and desire for wealth as an end. In this chap­ter, especially, James is speaking of wealth acquired by robbing laborers of their just wages. One of the sins which Paul listed as barring one from being an elder is that of being "greedy of base gain” (Titus 1:7). The term means obtaining money by an unlaw­ful occupation or getting it in a wrong manner. As pointed out above, the rich directly in mind are not Chris­tians. They are such as the rich men who were visiting the congre­gation (2:2) and who dragged them before judges and blasphemed the name called upon them (James 2:6). They are not the humble rich of Jas 1:10. The section is a warning to any guilty Jew who might chance to read it. Perhaps James thinks that poor Christians might use it as an appeal for justice to their employers. It certainly would be a warning to any Christian who might be tempted to act in the wrong way (just as the preceding admonition in James 4:13-17 is). But the probable purpose which James had in mind was to put such unjust people in the proper perspective before the church. Those who suffer as Christians from the hands of such people are not to envy the rich. They are to commit themselves to God as the avenger of His people (Cf. Romans 12:14-21). They are to see these sinful people for what they are in God’ s sight: wretched people fattening themselves for a day of slaughter. The Old Testament had many similar passages comforting the poor in their oppression (like Psalms 73) as well as such apostrophes in which condemnation is addressed directly to heathen countries and peoples (like Edom, Assyria, or Tyre). It is quite possible that James, with his reputa­tion for righteousness among the unbelieving Jews (attested by Josephus), may have hoped to appeal to this audience as potential secondary readers. James 5:1 ---Come now, ye rich,—Compare Isaiah 14:31 and Isaiah 13:6 for Old Testament examples of this type of condemnation addressed as an aside to an audience not di­rectly contemplated in the address. James in the manner of an Old Testament prophet feels the injustice of the situation and cries out against the wrong. The section is thus not primarily for the people addressed, but for the effect on his readers. On the use of "come ye,” see on James 4:13. The Greek has "the rich” with the article used in a vocative similar to our nominative of ad­dress, a not uncommon idiom in Greek. The designation is of a class of people. James is not thinking of every rich man, but of a class in their over-all characteristics. Not all rich people committed sins attributed to the class here. But the characteristics of the group as a whole lead Bible writers at times almost to class the rich with the evil and the poor with the good. Most of the mem­bers were among the poor; most of Christianity’ s enemies were from the well-to-do. There was no large middle class as today in our society. James 5:1 ---weep and howl—James uses the same word for "weep” as in James 4:9, but the meaning is different here. There it was a weeping of repentance and sorrow for sin (addressed to backsliding Chris­tians); here it is bitter denunciation and prediction of the future wrath of God (cf. Revelation 6:16 Revelation 18:15). The word "howl” is a touch of vividness; it is a word which reproduces its meaning by its sound (onomatopoeia). It means to "shriek” and is frequently used in the LXX (especially in Isaiah) of the howls of those con­demned by God (Isaiah 16:7 Isaiah 65:14; Amos 8:3). James means that, if the rich understood their coming fate, they would literally shriek over the prospect. Compare Acts 24:25 where the meaning of "ter­rified,” the word used to describe the feelings of Felix when he heard Paul preach to him of his fate, originally meant for the hair to stand on end. The language used in the New Testament to de­scribe the punishment to the wicked is awful to contemplate. James 5:1 ----for your miseries that are coming upon you.—The word "mis­eries” is the word in Romans 3:16 in a quotation describing the wicked: "destruction and misery are in their ways.” The adjective is used to describe the mental distress of the unjustified man in Romans 7:24. The participle used as an adjective, "coming upon you,” is always used in the literature of the Bible and early Christians (when referring to what the fu­ture holds) of what is distressing or unpleasant (Luke 21:26 and cf. Proverbs 3:25; Job 2:11). Here the trouble which James sees as coming upon the rich is either their final condemnation at the judgment (cf. verse 7) or, as others think, the awful punishment and suffering brought upon the nation of the Jews at the destruc­tion of Jerusalem. Perhaps one ought not to omit the thought also that the rich may bring suffering upon themselves in this life by their sins. Verses 2-3 contain the charge that the riches of the wealthy are corrupted and ruined by non-use. "Your wealth” (as though not everybody’ s is in the same condition) probably shows that James recognizes that a proper use of wealth could be made (as in I Tim­othy 6:17ff). But the wealth of these people, being tied up in gar­ments, property, and metal coins, is deteriorating from disuse and testifies against its owners. The stewardship of possessions is a clear-cut teaching of the whole Bible. Luke l6:lff teaches that our wealth belongs to "another” (that is, to God, cf. verse 12). We are accountable for its use. The rich man (Luke l6:19ff) lost his soul because of disuse of money when an opportunity was laid daily at his door. The rich fool of Luk 12:13 ff was a fool for not using what his grounds brought forth other than for feeding his own "soul.” Thus one of the sins of these rich is shown by the corrup­tion of their wealth. James 5:2 ---Your riches are corrupted,—"Riches” is the Greek word for money, but it also has a general sense of wealth of any kind. "Cor­rupted” means "rotten” or "decayed.” Since other words for money are mentioned later, this word may refer to wealth which could rot or decay, such as fruits, oils, trees, or vines. Like the rich fool, these treasured up the produce of their lands, but the fruit had not lasted. That it had not been preserved was the fault of the owner in not using it. James 5:2 ---your garments—In eastern countries, and even among the Ro­mans, acquiring expensive cloth was a common means of holding wealth (Cf. Genesis 45:22; Joshua 7:21; Judges 14:12; 2 Kings 5:5 2 Kings 5:22; Acts 20:33; Matthew 7:19; 1Ma 11:24). James had described the rich man entering the assembly as dressed in a fine way (2:2). For the word "moth-eaten,” compare Job 13:28, where Job described his wretched condition . In both verbs James uses a perfect tense to indicate that these conditions were not new ones. The deterioration had been going on and was still going on. James 5:3 ---Your gold and your silver are rusted;—Another means of ac­cumulating wealth was metal coins which were in use from early antiquity. These they had kept until they became rusted (again the perfect tense is used). The verb may mean "tarnished” or "cor­roded.” The Epistle of Jeremy (a Jewish document) uses this word to describe the rotting of the purple cloth with which the idols were clothed ("And ye shall know them to be no gods by the bright purple that rotteth upon them,” verse 72). Silver and gold do not rust, but they may corrode. James 5:3 ---and their rust shall be for a testimony against you,—Greek (fol­lowing the LXX and the Hebrew) often uses the preposition eis after the verb "to be” to express the predicate nominative. But the "to be for something” here is different. Here it means "to be inclined toward some end” or "to be useful” or to "serve for some purpose.” There is a difference of opinion as to how to translate the "against you” or "unto you” (margin). Some would under­stand the meaning "it testifies to you,” as if the rich should them­selves learn their error from the condition of their possessions. It is better to take it as a dative of disadvantage as in Matthew 23:31 (Cf. Goodspeed’ s translation) and translate "against.” The wit­ness is about the non-use of the materials; the rust becomes the proof of their sin. James 5:3 ---and shall eat your flesh as fire.—The "rust” is the subject. It will eat the flesh of the rich. The influence of the rust is trans­ferred by a figure to the rust itself. It will cause the well-fed bodies of the rich to be destroyed like fire devours. Old Testament pas­sages emphasizing God’ s judgments often liken them to fire: Psalms 21:10; Isaiah 10:16; 30:27; Ezekiel 15:7; Amos 5:6. Solomon says, "A worthless man deviseth mischief; and in his lips there is as a scorching fire” (Proverbs 16:27). The LXX reads here, "he treas­ures up fire on his own lips.” This probably means that such a man destroys himself by his folly (as well, perhaps, as others around him). There is another arrangement possible for the words of this and the following sentence, though the sense is not materially different. It is possible in Greek that James meant his words to be read (with Ropes, Schonfield, etc.) "Their rust . . . will eat your flesh because you have treasured up fire which shall be in the last days.” This has the advantage of defining the fire which is meant as the fire of Gehenna. This makes the Greek of this passage agree with the passage in Proverbs 16:27 quoted above. It also makes the verb "treasure up” more understandable; otherwise it has no object. It is not usually used as ah intransitive verb. This commends itself to this writer. If the translation stands as in the ASV, the destruction may re­fer to either the death of the rich Jews in the Roman wars (de­struction of Jerusalem and other towns, A.D. 70, Josephus, Wars 5:10, as in the Abingdon Commentary') or in the future Gehenna of fire (Matthew 5:22, 29, 30; 10:28; James 3:6). In either case it is a striking way to put it. The rust of unused wealth testifying against them will bring the rich to destruction. Verse 1 has already indi­cated that the miseries are coming upon them. N. B.: There is an awful warning in this to the church today. So many in the churches in our day have been blessed with much of this world’ s goods. What is being done with it? We cannot give a token to the Lord (even a liberal share) and feel that the rest is ours to live upon in luxury and ease. We must give account to God for all of it (Luke 16:9-12): There are many things that a Christian may use his money for: for his family (I Timothy 5:4), for his own needs and helping others (Ephesians 4:28), for payment of taxes and good deeds (Romans T3:Iff; Titus 3:1,14). One need not give all he has to the Lord. But this should not lead us to think that we are not responsible for it all. "If we have not been faithful in that which is another’ s, who will give us our own riches” (Luke 16:12). We are stewards of it all. Will the rust of our unused blessings eat our flesh as fire in that day, too? This is a serious question for members of prosperous churches. James 5:3 ---Ye have laid up your treasure—This translation of the ASV translates one word "ye treasured” ) in the original. Jesus used a cognate object after the same verb: "Do not treasure up for your­selves treasures” (Matthew 6:19). Even if "fire” is to be taken as the object of this verb (see comment on previous phrase), the con­text shows that the rich were heaping up wealth which was to testify against, them. It is not necessarily wrong to possess and ac­cumulate wealth (i.e., to build an estate). But God’ s word certain­ly teaches that it imposes heavy responsibilities and dangers upon those who do. To amass wealth through covetousness or greed is idolatry (Colossians 3:5). Godliness with contentment is great gain (I Timothy 6:6). With the proper exercise of stewardship money can be used to further the kingdom of God. Many Chris­tians with means do this. Yet many die and leave their estates un­used and let them go to the state in taxes or to relatives who are not Christians or are not faithful and who will not use them to God’ s glory. Many desiring fortunes "have pierced themselves through with many sorrows” (I Timothy 6:9). James 5:3 ---in the last days.—If the text of the ASV be followed, then James says that the rich have treasured up treasure in the last days. This might be the last days of the Jewish dispensation (Abingdon, Johnson). Or it may be eschatological and signify that James thinks of the coming end of the world possibly as soon. It may refer, as elsewhere (Hebrews 1:1), to the Christian dispensation as the last division of time. On the second of these, see comment at the beginning of verses 7-9. James may have identified the consum­mation of the age with the predicted destruction of Jerusalem and wondered if he was not living near the end of time. This is what Jesus’ own disciples did (Matthew 24:3). If one takes the translation of Ropes (mentioned above), then it is plain that James means the judgment of fire. James 5:4 ---Behold,—(Cf. James 5:9 James 5:11 and James 3:4-5) This is a Hebraistic type of graphic earnestness. James is intense in his earnestness. James 5:4 ---the hire of the laborers who mowed your fields,—The word for "laborers” is that used especially of agricultural workers (Arndt and Gingrich). Palestine was rather unique in that fields were cultivated by hired labor. In most countries the work was done by slaves. James is thinking of the wheat and barley harvests where the grain was cut and shocked by hand. The Gospel references mention wages paid to laborers in fields and vineyards (Matthew 20:1 ff). The Old Testament contained special safeguards against withholding wages: "The wages of a hired servant shall not abide with thee all night until the morning” (Leviticus 19:13). See also Deuteronomy 24:14. For passages on violation, see Malachi 3:5; Jeremiah 22:13; Job 24:10. Lenski points out that the scene here is set in harvest time when the rich would be more affluent and when oppression of the poor would be even less excusable. James 5:4 ---which is of you kept back by fraud,—This is the text adopted by ASV. The other possible reading is simply "which is held out by you.” One verb means "to rob” ; the other "to hold back.” In ei­ther case James infers that the wages owed the laborers were not paid and that this contributed to the ill-gotten gain of the rich Jews. James 5:4 ---crieth out—a figurative use of the demand that injustice be avenged. Quite often this expression occurs in the Old Testament where it has almost a poetic touch: the blood of Abel cries out (Genesis 4:10; Hebrews 12:24) or the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 18:20). Compare Job 31:38 ff; Revelation 6:10; and Psalms 34:17. Jesus used the figure when he said that if no other testified to Him "even the stones would cry out” (Luke 19:40). James 5:4 ---the cries . . . have entered into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth.—This is from Isaiah 5:9. As already seen, the idea of men's cry for justice entering into God’ s ears is frequent. See further in Psalms 18:6 Psalms 34:15. "Sabaoth" (not Sabbath) is the transliteration of the Hebrew word meaning "hosts" or "armies." Though it occurs on­ly here in the New Testament (besides the quotation in Romans 9:24), the word occurs some 282 times in the Old Testament (Knowling), being at times translated in the LXX by the term "Lord-almighty.” Compare 2 Corinthians 6:18; Revelation 1:17. The original idea was that of God fighting on the side of Israel to vindicate their cause and give them victory in battle (1 Samuel 15:2; Isaiah 2:12; 2 Samuel 5:10; Psalms 59:5). But the idea was ex­tended to include the hosts of angels which God might send forth to carry out His will (Joshua 5:14; 2 Kings 6 :l4ff). The word thus became one of the highest titles for the power and majesty of God (Isaiah 1:6 Isaiah 6:3). Prayers for help were often expressed to God under this title (1 Samuel 1:11). The reference here then means that the same omnipotent God who fought with Israel and whose word even the hosts of angels carried out in heaven has listened and heard the cries of injustice from the robbed laborers. "Vengeance belongs to me, I will repay saith the Lord." All who are tempted to cheat a fellowman should remember. James 5:5 ---Ye have lived delicately on the earth,—The wages fraudulent­ly kept back were used to live luxurious and self-indulgent lives, thus adding to the flagrance of their crime. One is reminded of the rich fool’ s "Soul, thou hast much goods . . . take thine ease, eat, drink and be merry.” The verb here means "to live a life of ease, to "revel" or "carouse" and carries with it generally a bad sense even in the Classics. It is connected with the word which means "effeminacy." At other times ft has merely the sense of "well-fed,” "contented.” Hermas (Sim. 6: Iff) uses it of sheep, figuratively representing luxury-loving men. The expression "on the earth” is possibly James’ way of indicating that this condition is temporary. Only on earth (and not for long here) will this indulgent use of ill-gotten gain last. We are re­minded of Abraham’ s answer to the rich man, "Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things.” We will take with us neither our money (1 Timothy 6:7) nor the pleasures it buys. James 5:5 ---taken your pleasure;— Again the verb has a bad history. It gen­erally signifies a voluptuous and excessively indulgent life. In the LXX it occurs of Sodom, "prosperous ease was in her and in her daughters” (Ezekiel 16:49). A compound verb is used in the well- known passage in Amos 6:4. In the New Testament it is used else­where only in 1 Timothy 5:6, of the widow who lives in pleasure and thus "is dead while she liveth.” The whole picture of the rich here is one of wasteful, self-indulgent, luxurious living with a hint of lasciviousness and this off money retained by fraud. Their end is now to be told. James 5:5 ---nourished your hearts in a day of slaughter.—The thought is not unlike Jeremiah 12:3, where the wicked are said to have been pulled out like sheep for slaying and prepared for slaughter by the Lord (Cf. Jeremiah 25:34; Isaiah 34:2, 61; Ezekiel 21:15). The difference here is that the rich have fattened themselves up for the fatal day. This is as though animals supplied their own food which eventually prepared them for the slaughter. This fattening contin­ued right down to the day of slaughter. This certainly would fit the description of Josephus (Wars 5, 10, 2; 13, 4. Cf. Plummer in loco and Farrar, The Early Days of Christianity, pp. 344f) for the way the rich were killed, often by torture, at the destruction of Jerusalem. More than likely, however, in view of the over-all context, James means the fatal destruction at the final judgment, with the idea of "slaughter” occurring because of the figure of animals used. So James means that they are fattening themselves right down to their death or to the coming of the Lord. Lenski’ s statement that the preposition en does not mean "on the day” is erroneous. The prep­osition is used regularly with the locative to express "time at which.” James 5:6 ---Ye have condemned, ye have killed the righteous one;—This is the climax of their sins. The key to the interpretation is the mean­ing of the term "righteous one.” If this (as in Acts 3:14 Acts 7:12 Acts 22:14; 1 John 2:1) means the Lord Jesus Christ, the picture is that of the rich Jews (Sadducees), who were in charge of the Sanhedrin which put Jesus to death lest the Romans take the control of the temple and its rich revenue from them (see John 11:48). In this case James sees the same greed and covetousness being extended in the rob­bery of the poor laborer’ s wages. If, on the other hand, the expres­sion is used generically ("the unrighteous,” as in 1 Peter 3:18), then the picture is that of the poor Jew, wronged by his evil, wealthy neighbor and condemned for this small bit of means. "The right­eous one” then would mean just any good man who was treated in this way and who did not resist. Here one thinks of Ahab and Jezebel and Naboth's vineyard (1 Kings 21). The rich in 2:6 were said to drag Christians before judges. On the expression, see Amos 2:6 ff. The solution is not easy. Blass-Debrunner (Funk) consider the term to mean here an individual example. The aorists point to a single example (though it could be a timeless use of the tense); yet "he doth not resist you” (present) sees the reaction as still going on. This writer would lean toward the idea that James is thinking of the righteous man in general and not Jesus, though he could have had Jesus in mind as one of the examples. The righteous do not resist. Christians have learned to bear condemnation and death with resignation. NOTE ON THE BIBLE AND SOCIAL JUSTICEThere is no book which champions the cause of the unfortunate more than the Bible. The laws of Israel demand a fair deal for the laboring and poor classes; indeed this is true almost to the point of seeming unfairness to the wealthy (Money must be lent with­out interest, etc.). The rich are warned against the accumulation of wealth "adding house to house and field to field” (Isaiah 5:8; Amos 3:10; 11:28). Amos cried out with a passion against the in­justices toward the poor (Amos 5:11 Amos 8:4-7). It is strange (as Barclay ob­serves) that the Marxists would consider the Bible or the religion based upon it the opiate of the masses, calling upon them to ac­quiesce in an unjust social structure. It is true that the poor are not encouraged to revolution, but the wrath of God is turned in warning against those who exploit the worker and disregard the rights and needs of the suffering. Too often, professing Christians have not heeded the cry for social justice and helping the needs of the unfortunate. But still most of the gains of the workers and most of the hospitals, homes fpr unfortunates, etc., have been founded under the impulse of people who called themselves Christians. Schools and hospitals and en­lightenment have gone with the missionary. The Social Gospel of the early part of this century was a curious example of the un­easy conscience of Christianity. It was based upon the false evolu­tionary optimism that had lost real faith in the divinity of Jesus Christ and the saving gospel of the Lord. It wanted to see the def­inition of the Kingdom of God limited to doing good to one’ s neighbor. It thought the other parts were only the Jewish clothes that the teaching of Jesus wore. Thus it viewed the lack of prog­ress in social benefits in horror and set to work to bring about the kingdom of God on earth. It called on the church to turn from the proclaiming of the gospel of the New Heaven to seeking Heaven on earth. It saw the church’ s ministry as lying in hospitals, social work, corrective social legislation, and general improvement through the handout. This movement did not bring about its mil­lennium. Its optimism died in the throes of the two world wars. One does not have to reject the theology of the Bible to accept its ethics and responsibilities. But one thing the movement did was to make the churches conscious of neglect of duty. It is unfortunate that some see any expression of concern for so­cial justice and help for the unfortunate as a revival of the Social Gospel. The church does have its mission, and every congregation must decide where its opportunity to serve lies. One may view with rejoicing the development of institutional care for orphans and old folk. The opportunities for practicing pure and undefiled religion should be multiplied. The works in existence should be supported. A church may think that the more direct spread of the gospel in mission work is more the mission of the church. But they go hand in hand without competition. The gospel carries its message home to the hearts of the hearers as the preachers sound the words of Christ: "Inasmuch as you did it unto others, ye did it unto me." To teach the wealthy that his unused wealth is a sin and will be a testimony against him and that he ought to "weep and howl for the miseries that are coming upon him” is to awaken him to his duty and responsibility. To teach Christians that to visit the widows and orphans in their afflictions is to practice pure and undefiled religion is to help accomplish God’ s will in God’ s way. The gospel is social in its demands, and we do not need the Social Gospel to remind us of this fact. Nor can we avoid our duty because we reject the Social Gospel.SECTION EIGHT TOWARD Hebrews 5:7-12 TO Hebrews 5:7-11 This section stresses that Christians (in spite of the wrong suf­fered at the hands of the rich) are to bear their injustices patiently until the Lord comes, just as the farmer plants his seed and waits for the harvest. It also touches on the question of the expectancy of the Second Coming of Jesus in the First Century. James 5:7 ---Be patient therefore, brethren, until the coming of the Lord. —Brethren are addressed directly because the previous section had had non-Christians mainly in view. Now the Christians are confronted with their own duty to develop the proper attitude to­ward their persecutors. This is not the ordinary word translated “ be patient.” The verb here means to be "long-tempered” . The meaning is to hold the mind in check rather than give way to wrath or wavering (as in verse 12). God is described as longsuffering (same word) in 2 Peter 3:9; our sins do not pro­voke Him to destroy us. The command is in the aorist (constative) emphasizing the command categorically until the event referred to, without reference to the interval. James 5:7 ---until the coming of the Lord.—The word for "coming” used here is parousia, which is literally the "presence” of Christ. The word, which has become an English word (Parousia), in secular Greek referred to the presence or arrival of a person, especially of a visit of an important person. Jesus promised when he went away he would be present with His disciples always unto the end of the world (Matthew 28:19 f). But the Holy Spirit is the agent of ful­fillment of that promise. Christ is in and with us through the Spirit (Ephesians 2:21). The presence of Christ will become manifest when he comes visibly at the end. Then every eye will see him (Rev­elation 1:7). This is the appearance or manifestation which is called the Parousia of Christ. The coming is called his Second Coming (Hebrews 9:28) by contrast with the First Advent. The parousia is a frequent New Testament term for the Lord’ s coming: Matthew 24:3 Matthew 24:27 Matthew 24:37 Matthew 24:39; 1 Thessalonians 2:19 1 Thessalonians 3:13 1 Thessalonians 4:15 1 Thessalonians 5:23; II Thes- salonians 2:1; 1 Corinthians 15:23; 1 John 2:28; 2 Peter 1:16 2 Peter 3:4. Another New Testament expression for the coming is the Epiphany \. This is important, for it bears on whether James is prohibiting oaths absolutely. James uses the term "any other oath” to shorten his quotation of Jesus, and he means "not by another oath like these.” Now Jesus’ words, rightly understood, do not forbid oaths absolutely either. He says, "Swear not at all, neither by heaven, earth, Jerusalem, or your head.” "Not at all” is not absolute in meaning, but modifies the things distributed in the prohibitions and is equivalent in our language to saying, "Don’ t swear by these things at all.” But this does not prohibit oaths taken in God’ s name. Neither Jesus nor James thus prohibits solemn religious or civil oaths taken in God’ s name. This is proved by the fact that Jesus Himself took oaths (Matthew 26:63 f; Mark 8:12 in the Greek where the same type of construction is found as in the oath in Hebrews 6:13-14). Paul did likewise (1 Thessalonians 5:27, where Paul has the word for "swear” and the accusative of oaths). On this see the note following this section. James 5:12 ---But let your yea be yea, and your nay, nay:—This also repeats the words of Jesus. He said, "Let your speech (or conversation) be . . .” This is to be taken in context. The Jews took the lesser oaths and claimed that they were not binding. Jesus called this hypocrisy (Matthew 24 :l6ff). This made oaths which were bind­ing under the Law mere profanity. Hence Jesus means that in ordinary speech one should avoid oaths which do not have God’ s name (whether they are binding or not) and simply give his word, "yes” and "no.” This leaves us (as it did Paul and others) free to use oaths in God’ s name when they are demanded or called for. James 5:12 ---that ye fall not into judgment.—To say more than "yes” and "no” by the use of lesser oaths when they are not considered oaths at all is to bring the user into the act of profanity and thus to bring him into judgment or condemnation. Jesus had said, "More than this is of the evil one.” One will be condemned or justified by his words (Matthew 12:36-37). NOTE ON The whole range of Biblical teaching on oaths is instructive. Moses prescribed that oaths should be by God’ s name (Deuteron­omy 6:13; 10:20). The third commandment did not prohibit oaths; it made sure that they were taken seriously with intention to keep them rather than that God’ s name be taken lightly. An oath must be kept: "Ye shall not swear falsely by my name” (Leviticus 19:12). "Whatsoever man shall vow a vow to the Lord, or swear an oath, or bind himself with an obligation upon his soul, he shall not break his word: all that shall come out of his mouth he shall do” (Numbers 30:2). The Old Testament used a variety of constructions to express oaths. Some of these bear directly on the New Testament teaching. The most common word for "swear” in Hebrew is saba’ . It is usu­ally followed by the preposition be, "by” (of that by which one swears) and le, "to” (to express the person to whom the oath is made). The LXX translates usually with omnum't (173 times in the LXX). Several different constructions follow it to express that by which one swears. The most important is the accusative of oaths (Genesis 21:23, "swear by God, ton theon). Compare the following variations: "by my right hand” (Deuteronomy 32:40); "by the Lord God” (Joshua 9:18 f); "by thy name” (Proverbs 24:32); "by the living God” (Hosea 4:15); "by the true God” (Isaiah 65:16). This is the standard way in Greek from earliest times tO/express an oath. But the verb "swear” does not itself have to be expressed. Fre­quently asseverative particles such as ma, men, or na accompany the oath, and the negative particle ou and the affirmative nai are quite typical. Cf. Homer’ s Iliad, 1, 86, "For no one by Apollo (ou ma gar Apollona) shall lay hands on you.” Moses swore by saying, "I witness by heaven and earth” (Deuteronomy 4:26). Again the preposition kata with the genitive is frequent: "I swore by myself (kata kemautou')" (Genesis 22:16). See "by the fear of his father” (Genesis 31:53); "by thyself” (Exodus 32:23); "by thy throne” (Judges 1:12); and compare Amos 4:2; Isaiah 62:8; Jeremiah 28:51. The other typical construction is to follow the verb with the sim­ple dative ("by my name,” Deuteronomy 6:13 in some MSS.); 1 Kings 1:17. In some cases the preposition en or epi, "by” or "upon,” may appear. The other LXX verb is horkizo, a causative which means "I make someone swear,” or "I adjure someone.” It may be followed by en (Nehemiah 13:25) or by kata ("I adjured him by God,” II Chron­icles 36:13). Once the expression "before the Lord” (enantion) oc­curs, Joshua 6:26. Oaths made simply "before God” or "in the sight of God” are common as are those made by the use of "as Je­hovah liveth” (1 Samuel 28:10). The Oath with the Emphatic Future Negative: The most distinc­tive form of oath in Hebrew uses the particle em and the emphatic future negative. It is used either with the verb "swear” or by some form, of the asseverative particles, to indicate the oath form. The full condition appears in Psalms 7:4, "If I have requited evil, may I perish” (optative of wish). Without the conclusion (but with it understood) this construction was regularly used as an oath: "by myself I swear (if) righteousness shall (not) proceed out of my mouth (Isaiah 45:23). As illustrations of this frequent oath formula see 1 Samuel 28:10 1 Samuel 19:6 1 Samuel 14:11; 2 Samuel 19:7; Psalms 88:5 Psalms 94:11 Psalms 131(2):2; Ezekiel 4:14 Ezekiel 14:16 Ezekiel 20:3 Ezekiel 20:31 Ezekiel 33:27. It is this type of oath which is quoted in Hebrews 6:14 (quoted from Genesis 22 :l6f from the Hebrew, not the LXX) when the writer said that God swore by Himself saying, "Surely blessing I will bless thee.” The Greek (et men eulogon eulogeso') is identi­cal with the O.T. passage in this construction. This is the oath form which is on the lips of Jesus in Mark 8:12, etc. New Testament Oaths: The N.T. employs much the s£?ne con­structions. Omnumi ("I swear,” 26 times in the N.T.) is followed by the preposition (Revelation 10:5 f; cf. Matthew 5:34 f Matthew 23:20 ff), by the prep, kata (Hebrews 6:13 Hebrews 6:16). Horkizo and also a compound enorkizo occur as in the O.T. The usual con­struction, as in ordinary Greek and the O.T., is to follow the verb by the accusative of oaths, as "I adjure thee b^ God” (Mark 5:7); "by Jesus whom Paul preaches” (Acts 19:13). Paul is definitely using an oath then when he says, "I adjure thee by the Lord” (1 Thessalonians 5:27). This is quite in custom with Paul, who is frequent with strong asseverations in the name of God (II Corin­thians 1:23; Romans 1:9; Philippians 1 :S; 2 Timothy 4:1 ff). In 1 Corinthians 15:31 Paul uses one of the particles of oath (ne) with the accusative of oaths with the verb omntimx in ellipsis: (I swear) "by our glorying.” Compare also Acts 18:18 for Paul’ s taking a vow, and see Numbers 6:1-21 for its significance. Jesus answered in the affirmative when he was ad­jured by the High Priest "by the living God” to tell whether he is the Christ (Mark 14:62). But just as significant is Jesus’ typical use of the ei with the future emphatic negative (as described above from the Old Testament and Hebrews 6:13 Hebrews 6:16) when he swore that no sign would be given (Mark 8:12). It is impossible to ab­solve Jesus and Paul from the use of oaths. In the light of this, Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 5:34 and James’ repetition of it in James 5:12 need to be better understood. When Jesus said, "Swear not at all, neither by . . .” He should not be understood as forbidding oaths absolutely. It should be noted that "swear not at all” is not followed by a period, but by a series of negatives introduced by the particle mete . This particle "divides the negative item into its component parts” (Arndt and Gingrich). That is, as Professor T. W. McGarvey pointed out in his New Testament Commentary on Matthew and Mark (com­ment on Matthew 5:34 f), "the universal prohibition ... is dis­tributed by the specification of these four forms of oaths, and is therefore most strictly interpreted as including only such oaths.” Thus the actual words of Jesus forbid only oaths taken "by heaven,” "by earth,” "by Jerusalem,” or "by the head.” To take a parallel example, when Jesus said to the apostles, "take nothing with you,” he did not give the command absolutely. He followed it as in Mat­thew 5:34 with a list of specifics all introduced by the same parti­cle mete: "Take nothing with you, neither staves (nor script, nor staff), nor bread, nor money, nor two coats.” Nothing is prohib­ited except the specifics included in the prohibitions. It is quite obvious even that one coat is authorized. In Matthew 5:34 it is quite significant that oaths bearing God’ s name are not included in the distributed specifications given. Hence, oaths of this type are not to be thought as prohibited. What Jesus is condemning in Matthew 23:16 is the type used by the Pharisees when they avoided the name of God and used the lesser oaths so that they would not be bound to keep their oaths. This made these oaths mere profanity. One might ask, "If Jesus is then reaffirming the O.T. principles that all oaths must be kept strictly, what is the difference in the teaching of Jesus and that of 'olden times’ which he was contrast­ing?” The difference is that under the terms of the Law an oath "by heaven,” etc., (as Moses used in Deuteronomy 4:31) or any other oath not using God’ s name, would have to be kept or else the swearer brought under charge of profanity or of forswearing himself. But since these oaths lent themselves to profanity in the way they were used in ordinary conversation, Jesus advised against any use of this type of oath. This is equivalent to teaching that all oaths should be avoided except those in solemn vows and in civil and religious situations and that these should be taken in the name of God and not in a lesser name.SECTION NINE THE IN ILLNESS AND SINJas_5:13-20PRAYER AND SINGINGJas_5:13 Most commentators see the final section of the epistle as a series of admonitions without much, if any, connection or general theme. Most see no connection with this section and the previous one. It seems to this writer that a close study shows that the theme of ill­ness and the issues growing out of it serve as a central idea in the whole section. James begins in James 5:13 with the question about suffering. The cheerfulness and singing of praise are simply in con­trast to show that one should do naturally what his circumstances lead him to do. From this he turns to a specific kind of suffering — illness— and instructs the ill to call for the elders and let them pray for the sick (James 5:14). In connection with this he mentions the possibility that the sick may be a sinner or backslider and promises forgiveness upon confession of sins, with the bodily heal­ing following (James 5:15-16). Then there is the section promising that prayer has power, illustrated by the example of Elijah (James 5:16-18). The last section seems to pick up the thread of the sinner in the previous verses and to encourage the faithful to seek the restitution of the erring one (James 5:19-20). The whole section is a fitting climax to the previous section on the Christian’ s attitude in the wrongs he suffers. James 5:13 ---Is any among you suffering?—The verb here is somewhat more general than disease and illness. In its use elsewhere it may refer to suffering hardship, e. g., "unto bonds” (2 Timothy 2:9) and the hardships of evangelistic life (2 Timothy 2:3 2 Timothy 4:5). James is repeating the same word used in James 5:10 when he mentioned the "suffering and patience of the prophets.” This verse, then, is a bridge between the difficulties mentioned before (in which the readers are admonished to patience and to forbearing of murmur­ing and swearing) and the more specific mention of illness, which is the subject beginning with James 5:14. let him pray.— In trouble prayer is the correct answer or solu­tion to the problem. James is not thinking of prayers for vengeance. In James 1:2 the reader is admonished to treat trials as joy because they work patience. Wisdom in such trials is to be sought (James 1:5) by prayer. In James 5:7 they are to be borne with patience. The idea of prayer runs throughout the section (James 5:13-20). Prayer is the outpour­ing of the righteous heart to the father whom it trusts. "God is our refuge, a very present help in trouble” (Psalms 46:1). The faith­ful are assured that the ears of God are attuned to their requests (1 Peter 3:12). "Trust in him at all times, ye people; pour out your heart before him; God is a refuge for us” (Psalms 62:8). Jesus taught that God hears our prayers as a loving father who will give his son what is good for him (Matthew 7:9-11). Praying in faith and in resignation that God’ s will be done will enable us to overcome and stand up under all difficulty and be better in the end for the trouble (Hebrews 12:12-13). It will also secure for us God’ s help in trouble; God answers prayer (James 5:16). James seems to be speaking of general situations, and it is likely that he is speaking particularly of private prayers rather than public ones. He is talking of the Christian's response to his dif­ficulties. The same is true of the following injunction to - sing praise. In neither case is he thinking of corporate or congregational singing or praying. Of course, when trouble falls upon a group or one member of a group, it is quite in order to call for prayer by the church (Acts 12:12). But James is thinking of what one does when in trouble or conversely when he is happy. In the following verses illness leads to prayer at least semipublic when the elders are called to pray for the sick. James 5:13 ---Is any cheerful?—"Cheerful” is better than the King James "merry,” which is more the outward show than the inward cheer and joy. The verb occurs elsewhere in the N.T. only of Paul’ s ef­forts to cheer up his companions in the storm on the voyage to Rome (Acts 27:22 Acts 27:25). The adjective occurs similarly in Acts 27:36. This sentence seems to be put here in contrast to the gener­al subject. It is just as we would say, "Pray when you are in trouble; sing when you are happy.” Both are natural attitudes for different circumstances of life. Together they are logical and proper re­sponses to changing moods and circumstances. James 5:13 ---let him sing praise.—A Christian can sing even in the midst of adversities (Acts 16:25). But this is because he receives trials with joy knowing that they work stedfastness (l:2ff). This is not the ordinary response to trouble. Rather, James thinks that under ordinary conditions singing is the natural expression of cheerful­ness. The Greek word (psalleto) is a present imperative ("be sing­ing") of the verb psallo. Though James is not thinking primarily of church or congregational singing here, the meaning of the verb is important, since it is the same verb used by Paul in injunctions regarding congregational singing (1 Corinthians 14:15 and prob­ably Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16). All uses of psallo in the New Testament are absolute uses (intran­sitive verbs without an object expressed); nothing in the context indicates a meaning other than that of vocal music. A number of considerations have led practically all commentators, lexicogra­phers, and translators to say that in the New Testament the word simply means to "sing praise": (1) The fact that there was a grow­ing tendency in secular Greek to use the verb in an intransitive sense with its figurative and metaphorical meaning of "singing” (derived probably from the figurative idea of striking the vocal cords or the "strings” of the heart); (2) the Septuagint usage where the predominant use was of the verb in the absolute to mean "sing," often occurring with words meaning "to sing” in the He­brew parallel; (3) the strong opposition in the early church (even in the stage where it was still largely a Greek-speaking church) to the use of instrumental or mechanical music. This took such a violent form that it led the Greek commentators to allegorize even the significance of the references to instrumental music in the Old Testament. (This is most fully documented in Johannes Quasten’ s book, Musik und Gesang in den Kulten der hetdnischen Antike und christlichen Fruehzeit, Munster, 1930.) It is in order here to quote some of the opinions of the leading commentators with reference (not to the Classical, etc.) to the meaning of the New Testament usage: Ropes, "The word does not necessarily imply the use of an instrument.” Knowling, "In the N.T. the same verb is used of singing hymns, of celebrating the praise of God, Romans 15:9; 1 Corinthians 14:15; Ephesians 5:19 (cf. Judges 5:3).” Mayor, "We find it also used of singing with the voice and with the heart, Ephesians 5:19; 1 Corinthians 14:15." Ross, "The verb used here . . . means, first, to twang the strings of a harp or some other musical instrument, then, to sing to the accompaniment of the harp, and, then, simply to sing the praises of God in song.” (All these in comment on James 5:13) Of the lexicons, Thayer is typical: “ In the N.T. to sing a hymn, to celebrate the praises of God in song, Jas. v. 13 (R. V. sing praise)” ; Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament, "properly =’ play on a harp,’ but in the N.T., as in James 5:13, = ’ sing a hymn.’ ” These are typical of many judgments of the world’ s best scholars showing that, whatever the word may have meant at other times, in such passages as these in the New Testament the word simply means "to sing.” These are important facts. There is practically unanimous judg­ment that the primitive church did not use mechanical instruments in its worship. There is no authority for its use in the worship of God under the Christian dispensation. The restored church, a church that claims apostolic sanction for its worship, cannot use such instruments. ILLNESS AND THE OF PRAYERJas_5:14-18 In this section James deals specifically with the condition of illness. The general admonition to seek help by prayer in time of trouble is made more specific in instructions regarding illness or disease. A specific kind of prayer, in a particular circumstance, is ordered for those in sickness. It is worthy of note at the outset that the commentators are sharply divided over whether the anoint­ing, prayer, and healing are (1) the use of ordinary medicinal means with the imploring of divine aid through the leaders of the church as righteous men or (2) the use of the miraculous gift of healing. It is the conclusion of this commentator (though he leans to the second view) that at this stage it is not possible to know def­initely which of these positions is correct, since the language and historical circumstances will fit both interpretations. In the com­ment each position will be examined and its implication for the church today will be touched on. The use of the passage both in modern divine healing cults and also in the Roman Catholic prac­tice of Extreme Unction will be touched on. James 5:14 ---Is any among you sick?—The general terms for "suffering” or "trouble” in James 5:10 and James 5:13 lead naturally to the more specific words for suffering bodily ailments. The verb here means to "be without strength” and is used of weakness of various kinds. But the most common meaning is that of illness. The participle used as a substantive is one of the principal words for "the sick person” . The context makes clear that this is the specific meaning of the word here. Compare the comment on verse 15 and note the added complications of the sick man’ s sins. If the sickness were merely spiritual, as some claim, that element would not need to be mentioned. James 5:14 ---let him call for the elders of the church;—The "church” here seems to be the local church or congregation.1 In James 2:2 the writer had used the Jewish term "synagogue” to designate the meeting of the congregation. The church was thought of from the universal point of view as an organism, made up of its many parts, and under this figure it was called "the church” (ekklesia, Ephe­sians 1:23; Colossians 1:18; Matthew 16:18). But the more com­mon use, and the one more closely related to the history of the word (cf. Acts 19:39), was to designate the local worshipping congregation or community. Thus the local groups of disciples were gathered into autonomous groups, just as the Jews had been in synagogues before them. There is no use of the word for church in the N.T. comparable to the modern denominational use of the term. All Christians were members of the body of Christ, having been baptized into it (1 Corinthians 10:13). They had obeyed the gospel and had been added together in that body or the church (Acts 2:47, RV). All who belonged thus to the body of Christ belonged by virtue of that fact to the church universal and also to local churches wherever they were. There were no differing denominations or parties. Indeed, the N.T. emphasizes the unity of the body in a way to indicate that such would be a sin (Ephesians 4:4; 1 Corinthians 1:10; Galatians 5:19-20). These local churches had their rulers or managers. Thus we read of the elders of the church at Ephesus (Acts 20:17 Acts 20:28), of the bishops at Philippi (Philippians 1:1), of "elders in every church’’ (Acts 14:23), and "elders in every city” (Titus 1:5). It is generally conceded from the interchanging of the terms involved in passages like Titus l:5ff; Acts 20:17 Acts 20:28; 1 Peter 5 :iff that the words "elder,” "bishop (over­seer),” and "pastor” were not different, but were interchangeable designations. It was the elders of these churches that James says should be called for in the case of sickness. 1As opposed to K. L. Schmidt, The Church (Bible Key Words) (London: Black, 1950), p. 23, who thinks James means elders of the Christian community as a whole, "to which the Epistle is addressed." But the N.T. knows nothing of the office of an elder over the community as a whole. As in the synagogues, elders were officers in local churches (Acts 14:23). Besides, the church as a whole existed in local communities or assemblies.NOTE ON THE ELDERSIn the modern confusion of church government it is useful to inquire further about these elders and who they were. The term "elder” was obviously taken over from the Jewish synagogues, where the elder was a local member of the community. He was not a Rabbi or a member of any professional group. Nor are elders of churches in the N.T. ever conceived of as ministers or preachers. They were "pastors” because they cared for the flock, but they did not serve at all in the sense of a local evangelist or preacher. They were chosen from the congregation for their high moral reputa­tion, their leadership, and their loyalty to the teaching of Christ. See I Timothy 3:iff and Titus l:6ff, where their qualifications are listed. That the term "elder” is interchangeable with "bishop” or "overseer” (from episkopos , a superintendent or overseer), and "pastor” or "shepherd” is shown by the following: In Acts 20:17 Paul is said to have called for the "elders” from Ephesus; he tells these same men that they are made "overseers” of the church and are to "shep­herd” the flock (verse 28, see NEB). In I Peter 5:1 the elders are exhorted; they are told to "exercise the oversight” (Codex A, the Common Text, Latin and Syriac) and to "shepherd the flock” (verse 2). In Titus 1:5 and 7 "elders” and "bishops” are used in­terchangeably. Despite the brilliant effort of the great Anglican scholar J. B. Lightfoot in his excursus on the Ministry in his commentary on Philippians (later published separately with additions) and those who have followed in his thinking, the monarchal bishopric, which developed in the early centuries of the church (where elder and bishop were distinguished and where there was only one bishop to a church or to a number of churches) cannot be regarded as a scriptural form of church government. It developed too late and arose out of the desire to build up a governing body for the church to counteract the threat of Gnosticism. Lightfoot saw the germ for it in the figure of James in the Jerusalem church and in the evan­gelistic helpers of the Apostle Paul such as Timothy and Titus. But though these may have served as the analogy for the develop­ment of the reigning bishop, there was no scriptural sanction for their doing so. Furthermore, though Lightfoot contends that the system developed in areas of residence of the last Apostles of Christ to die, there is no proof that they gave their sanction to the system. How early the system actually gained a foothold is tied up in the difficult question of whether the Ignatian epistles present an already settled state of bishop rule or whether Ignatius was merely trying to foster such upon the churches. Lightfoot concedes that, if his argument is sound, there is no escape from the position that history sanctions the logical development of the system into the Pope. His only counter to this is that the Pope should not be a bad Pope! We reject the contention that there is authoritative sanction in the history of the church. In this way every innovation which has crept into the church can gain sanction. Not the historic episcopacy, but a presbytery, is the form of government grounded upon the New Testament. Yet this pres­bytery is not that of an eldership over a whole city or region of congregations, but a board of elders ruling each local church. This is the only conclusion which will fit all the data given in the New Testament (e. g., Acts 14:23). What is seen is that a group of men from among the congregation itself was chosen and appointed to lead and oversee the work of the church and to watch in behalf of the souls of the saints (Hebrews 11:17; 1 Thessalonians 5:12; and compare 1 Timothy 3:5 1 Timothy 5:17; Acts 11:30 Acts 15:2). It is thus the conclusion of this writer that the elders of the New Testament congregations were what in modern religious language would be called "lay members." This means that they would be usually distinguished from the preaching or evangelistic ministry (though at times they might function also in that capacity, I Tim­othy 5:17). The qualifications laid down for them in Titus l:5ff and 1 Timothy 3 :lff are not therefore the qualifications for minis­terial candidates as they are usually treated in the* commentaries. No mention is ever made of "preaching” or "evangelism” in the qualifications and work of these elders. The churches of Christ around the world today are organized after the New Testament pattern. An eldership is selected from among the members of the congregation in light of the instructions laid down by the New Testament. An evangelist may labor with a congregation ruled over by such bishops, but he is not a part of the eldership unless so chosen to that office also. (For this the work of Timothy at Eph­esus is the main example.) The eldership of each local church, working with the appointment and consent of the local church, has the determining voice and responsibility for the community of God’ s people. There is no ecclesiasticism or denominational oversight or authority. Each group is autonomous. At the same time, there is developed a strong sense of "brotherhood” and co­operation as in the early church. With this understanding of the "elders” in the New Testament it can be seen that those called to pray for the sick were not what today would be called the preachers or ministers of the word of God. James 5:14 ---and let them pray over him,—Let the elders pray over him. Is this an example of ordinary prayer for recovery through natural means as David prayed for the recovery of his baby (2 Samuel 12), a prayer in which Christians prayed for something to happen in the providence of God (such as the prayer for Peter’ s deliverance from prison, Acts 12:12), or is this prayer in connection with miraculous healing (such as Jesus prayed before the raising of Lazarus, John 11:41, or as Peter prayed at Dorcas’ bed, Acts 9:40)? This depends upon a number of other factors in the inter­pretation of the passage before us. Certainty about the answer is probably not possible now. Whether it is the concern of this passage or not, prayers for natural recovery in God’ s providence or for help and aid in other ways are scriptural. Paul prayed for recovery from his affliction (2 Corinthians 12 :iff); and, though he did not receive the answer in his way, he was strengthened to bear his trouble. The church made prayer for Peter (Acts 12:12). Hezekiah prayed to recover and God heard his prayer (2 Kings 20). Paul implies that he had prayed for Epaphroditus in his illness and that God had had mercy on both Paul and him so that he recovered (Philippians 2:25-27). Such prayers ought to be prayed with the attitude of “ God’ s will be done.’’ It goes without saying that such prayers ought to be accompanied with all the help of medical remedy. James 5:14 ---anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:— There were two common uses of anointing with oil. One was medicinal. The bodies of the sick were rubbed with olive oil (sometimes with that mixed with other ingredients). Instances of this are to be seen in the Good Samaritan’ s action (Luke 10:34) and Isaiah 1:6 and Jeremiah 8:22; 46:11.1 Thus whatever is the decision about the kind of healing involved here, the use of medicine in healing is ap­proved in the Bible (again in spite of the modern divine healing groups and the so-called Christian Scientists). Paul approved a medicinal use of a type of wine for Timothy’ s stomach and his frequent infirmities (1 Timothy 5:23). The other use of oil in anointing was ceremonial. It was often used in the ritual of appointment (1 Samuel 16:13) and seemingly in cases of miraculous healing. When Jesus sent the disciples out to heal by His authority, oil was to be used: "And they cast out many demons, and anointed with oil many that were sick, and healed them” (Mark 6:13). This was similar to the laying on of hands in cases of healing (Mark 1:41) or to the covering of the eyes of the man born blind with clay (John 9:6). All these were evidently symbolic, calling attention to the miracle and to the one doing it. Some of them were approved as having effect in healing (e. g., the covering with clay). But as ordinary means of healing such things were not able to account for the results which were produced by the miracle which accompanied their use. Thus the ac­tivity called attention to the power of the miracle and of the one healing. As in the case of the prayer mentioned above, it is impossible to say with certainty which of the uses of anointing James had in mind. Certainly in the context of their own activity at the time, the first readers of James knew which he meant. But that context is not known to us today. We can only say which is more probable and what the application for us would be in either case. It seems to this writer that the healing was miraculous. We know that spiritual gifts (1 Corinthians 12 :iff, esp. verse 9) were bestowed upon the early church as a means of confirming the gospel in the infant state of the church (Mark 16:20; Acts 8:7 Acts 8:13). This was somewhat equal to the power of Jesus manifested to heal while on earth (John 14:12), which became one of the signs that He was sent from the Father, and yet which was often used in compassion upon the afflicted. If the healing which James has in mind is miraculous, the oil was ceremonial; prayer was a part of the preparation both of the miracle worker and the onlookers (Matthew 17:21; John ll:4lf). The reason for the elders’ being called is not so apparent. But it is probably because (since the gifts were distributed by the laying on of the apostles’ hands, Acts 8:17 f Acts 19:6) when these gifts were im­parted, the elders would be the most likely to be selected to receive them. If this is the correct interpretation of the instruction of James, then the passage has no direct bearing on the practice of the church today. It is obvious both from practice and from the teaching of the scripture that such miraculous gifts did not outlast the apos­tolic age of the church. Notice the following (1) The reason for the gifts, the confirmation of the word (Mark 16:20; Hebrews 2:3-4; Acts 14:3), no longer obtains, since the word is fully given and confirmed. (2) The scriptures themselves teach that the gifts were to cease (1 Corinthians 13:8). (3) The means of the gifts being conferred argues for their discontinuance: consider the following quotation from Smith’ s Bible Dictionary : The miracles of the New Testament (setting aside those wrought by Christ Himself) appear tQ have been worked by a power conferred upon particular persons according to a regular law, in virtue of which that power was ordinarily transmitted from one person to another, and the only persons privileged thus to trans­mit that power were the Apostles. The only exceptions to this rule were (1.) the Apostles themselves, and (2.) the family of Cornelius, who were the first-fruits of the Gentiles. In all other cases, miraculous gifts were con­ferred only by the laying on of the Apostles' hands. By this arrangement, it is evident that a provision was made for the total ceasing of that miraculous dispensation within a limited period: because, on the death of the last of the Apostles, the ordinary channels would be all stopped through which such gifts were transmitted in the church. (4) Church History confirms this conclusion, for efforts to revive such gifts in the post-apostolic church (e. g. ,the Montanists) were considered heresies. (5) Modern practice confirms it, because the "healings” performed in the cult services today are never the kind that remoye doubt, such as lost limbs, sight recovered of those born blind, or the raising of the dead. However, if the healing was medicinal and providential, then the anointing served to carry out the healing, prayer was a plea for God’ s providential help, and the reason for calling for the elders was that such men were leaders and men of holy reputation (1 Timothy 3:7) and their prayers would be valuable as righteous men (verse 16). Lenski makes a strong argument for the view that the healing was natural since the phrase "anoint with oil” in Greek is the verb and the cognate (aleipho), rather than the verb ordinarily rendered "anoint” (chio). He contends that ritualistic or "sacred” anointings with oil would always use the other verb. But in Mark 6:13, which is certainly miraculous healing, the text has aleipho. Lampe’ s Patristic Greek Lexicon shows that the verb aleipho is used rather interchangeably with the other verb in the early church. So no such clear distinction as this can be made in the verbs. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/zerrcbc/ James 5:2. Wealth that is not needed and especially that has been accumulated in an evil manner, will deteriorate by the simple fact of hoarding. James 5:3. Witness against you means that the fact of their cankering and rusting will prove they did not need them and that they had been hoarded. For the last days denotes that these treasures will be against them at the last great day of judgment. James 5:4. The mere possession of wealth does not condemn one as may be seen from Matthew 27:57; Mark 15:43; Luke 23:50-51; Mark 10:24; 1 Timothy 6:17-19. The question is as to how a man obtains his wealth and the use he makes of it. In the present verse the men became rich by withholding the wages of their employees. This does not have any bearing on disputes about what should be the wages, but is considering only what was kept back by fraud. Sabaoth means "hosts" or armies, and the thought is that He who is able to command the armies of Heaven will be able to deal with all unjust men. James 5:5. Day of slaughter signifies a day of great preparation for gratification of self at the expense of others. Been wanton means they had lived in luxury upon the things they had fraudulently taken from the poor. James 5:6. This verse might seem to be a break into the line of thought but it is not. The poor people who had been imposed upon were not receiving their just dues, and they would naturally feel disturbed over the seeming neglect of the Lord. James mentions the fact of the condemnation and slaying of the Just One, meaning Christ, that even He did not resist. (See Isaiah 53:7 and Acts 8:32.) James 5:7. James now addresses the poor brethren who had been unjustly treated, and on the basis of facts and truths just revealed, exhorts them to be patient unto the coming of the Lord when all wrongs will be adjusted. As an example of patience he refers to the husbandman or farmer as he proceeds in his business. Early and latter rain actually means the fall and spring rains. I shall quote from Smith's Bible Dictionary as follows: "In the Bible 'early rain' signifies the rain of the autumn, and 'latter rain' the rain of spring. For six months in the year, from May to October, no rain falls, the whole land becomes dry, parched and brown. The autumnal rains are eagerly looked for, to prepare the earth for the reception of the seed." James 5:8. Also patient has reference to the patience of the husbandman commented upon in the preceding verse. Christians can well afford to be patient for their interests are far more valuable than those of a farmer. Draweth nigh. Whether James has reference to the destruction of Jerusalem which was then only a few years away, at which time the persecutions of the disciples were to be somewhat eased, or to the personal appearance on earth of Jesus for the judgment, the time would be comparatively short when the endless duration after the judgment is considered. James 5:9. To grudge means to murmur against another because of oppression. Christians not only were told to be patient under the persecutions from enemies in the world, but to exhibit the same patience toward their brethren who are so unthoughtful as to mistreat them. Lest ye be condemned when Jesus comes to summon all before the judgment, at which time he will condemn all who did not maintain patience under difficulties as well as those who caused the difficulties. Judge standeth at the door is explained by the comments on the preceding verse. James 5:10. A few verses above James refers to the farmer who sets an example of patience under times of anxiety. He now makes reference to the teaching prophets of old time for the same purpose of a lesson in patience. James 5:11. Those who endure afflictions are to be counted happy because of what it indicates for them. (See chapter 1:2, 3.) Just after using the word endure James makes mention of the patience of Job which verfles the definition often given of the word patience, namely, that it means en durance. End of the Lord means the outcome of the case under the blessing of the Lord. It shows that He is merciful even though he suffers a righteous man to be afflicted for a good purpose (Job 42:12-17). James 5:12. Swear not. Jesus taught that his disciples should not make oaths in Matthew 5:34-35, and the reader should see the comments at that place. Sometimes an attempt is made to justify making oaths by saying Jesus was only condemning false oaths. But James spoils that theory by his words neither by any other oath, which rules out every shade and grade of swearing. Besides, there is nothing that should urge the Christain to make oaths, for this is a case where he can obey the command of the Lord and satisfy the laws of the land also. Instead of making an oath the Christian can notify the officer saying "I will affirm," and his word will be taken for the same value as an oath. That is what the scripture here and at Matthew 5:37 means by directing that your yea be yea and your nay be nay. The fundamental difference between an oath and an affirmation is that the latter does not use the name of God; also that one says "I affirm" instead of "I swear." Lest ye fall into condemnation is another way of saying that if a disciple makes an oath he will be condemned, because both Jesus and James have forbidden it. James 5:13. Afflicted is from KAKO-PATHEO, and Thayer defines it, "To suffer evils; hardship, troubles." It does not refer to physical diseases which will come in the next verse. When a disciple is beset with these trials he should be in the frame of mind that would lead him to go to God in prayer for strength and encouragement. Merry does not mean to be gay or frivolous, for the original is defined to denote "Be of good cheer." The phrase let him sing psalms is from the noted Greek word PSALLO, and Thayer defines it as follows: "In the New Testament to sing a hymn, to celebrate the praises of God in song." There are times when a person is not in the "mood" for singing and James recognizes that truth in this verse. David also recognizes it in Psalms 137:2-4. Solomon likewise had the thought in mind when he spoke of the inappropriateness of the man "that singeth songs to an heavy heart" (Proverbs 25:20). James 5:14. The word sick is from AS-THENEO, which Thayer defines at this place, "To be feeble, sick." Robinson defines it, "A sick person, the sick." It is the word that is used in the Greek text at Luke 7:10; John 4:46 John 11:3; Acts 9:37 and other similar passages. From the above information we are sure the word in our passage has the regular sense of bodily disease, and not a figurative or spiritual condition as some teach. This verse should be regarded in the same light as Mark 16:17-18 :1 Corinthians chapters 12, 13, 14; Ephesians 4:8-13; Hebrews 2:3-4 and all other passages dealing with the subject of spiritual gifts. In the early years of the church the Lord granted miraculous demonstrations to confirm the truth that had been preached while the New Testament was being completed. Among those miracles was that of healing the sick and since elders (or pastors, Ephesians 4:11) were among those receiving such gifts, it is reasonable that they should be called in such a case. The use of oil does not signify anything contrary to these remarks, for Jesus sometimes used material articles in connection with His miraculous healing, such as clay in the case of the blind man in John 9:6-7. Just why such things were done in connection with the miracles we are not told and we need not speculate as to why. James 5:15. Prayer of faith means miraculous faith which was one of the spiritual gifts discussed in the preceding paragraph (1 Corinthians 12:9). The forgiveness of sins is mentioned in addition to the healing of sickness. This shows that sickness is not spiritual for that would be the same as guilt of sins. It would be meaningless to speak of healing spiritual sickness or a condition of sin and then add that the man's sins also would be forgiven. That would be equivalent to saying the Lord would heal a man of his sins (would forgive him) and would also forgive his sins. It would not alter the discussion to say that the sins were what caused the man to be sick, for that would still leave the truth that it refers to sickness of the body. James 5:16. Confess your faults does not mean merely to confess that we have faults, but the faults themselves are to be acknowledged. One to another denotes that we are to confess the faults that we have committed against another; we are to confess such faults to him. Sins which are known to God only need only be con fessed to Him. That ye may be healed. This is said in direct connection with the mention of faults, hence we know the last word is used figuratively or concerning a spiritua) cure. No man can do another man's praying for him, but both can pray together for the forgiveness of the one at fault. Effectual means active or practical, and it is used to indicate a man who not only prays to God but who also makes it his business to serve Him. The prayers of such a man will be regarded by the Lord. James 5:17-18. The account of this event with Elias (Elijah in the Old Testament) is in 1 Kings 17:1-7 1 Kings 18:41-46. The prophet did not perform the feat merely to demonstrate his miraculous power, for such kinds of evidence were not necessary at that time. The connection shows that Ahab was a wicked king of Israel, and the Lord saw fit to punish him with a dearth by withholding the rain. The prayer of Elijah is not recorded, but he was a righteous man and realized that the wicked king would not be brought to repentance but by some severe judgment. Accordingly, when he prayed to the Lord on the subject his prayer was accepted as just and the chastisement was sent on the king and his country. It was therefore a miracle granted because of the righteousness of the request. Yet even at such a time, had he not been a righteous man his prayer would not have availed any, to say nothing about its availing much. Subject to like passions means he was only a human being, yet because of his good life his prayer was heard, since that was yet in the days of special providence. James 5:19. To err from the truth means to wander to one side according to the comments at chapter 1:16. To convert such a person means to induce him to turn and reenter the pathway of truth, since the word convert literally means to reverse a direction. James 5:20. A sinner is any person who is doing wrong, whether he be a man of the world or an erring disciple. No man can repent for another but he may be able to persuade the guilty one to repent. If he succeeds he will save a soul from death because the one in error was going the way that leads to spiritual death. Hide is from KALUPTO. and both Thayer and Robinson explain it to mean that by reason of the repentance of the erring one, the Lord will overlook and not punish the one who had gone astray. This act of the Lord's mercy would be equivalent to hiding the sins because they would not be brought up to judgment afterward.