Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of James 2:7
Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called?
7. Do not they blaspheme that worthy name ] Better, Do not they revile that noble Name? The pronoun is again emphatic, Is it not they that revile? The two senses of the Greek verb, the reviling which has man for its object, and the blasphemy, in its modern sense, which is directed against God, are in this instance so closely mingled that it is difficult to say which predominates. Men reviled Christ as a deceiver, and in so doing were, not knowing what they did, blaspheming the Son of God. The Name can be none other than that of Jesus as the Christ, and the epithet attached to it, “which is given you, or called upon you,” is best explained as referring to the name of Christian, which was beginning to spread from Antioch into Palestine (Act 11:26). Where it had not yet found its way, it was probable enough that the disciples of Jesus would be known by the name out of which “Christian” sprang, as , “Christ’s people,” “Christ’s followers.” The description reminds us of the account St Paul gives of his work in compelling the saints to “blaspheme” (Act 26:11). The persecution in which he thus took part was instigated, it will be remembered, by the Sadducean priests, who formed a wealthy aristocracy, rather than by the more cautious Pharisees, who adopted the policy of Gamaliel (Act 5:17; Act 5:34).
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Do they not blaspheme that worthy name? – This is another argument to show that the rich had no special claim to the honor which they were disposed to show them. The worthy name here referred to is, doubtless, the name of the Saviour. The thing here affirmed would, of course, accompany persecution. They who persecuted Christians, would revile the name which they bore. This has always occurred. But besides this, it is no improbable supposition that many of those who were not disposed to engage in open persecution, would revile the name of Christ, by speaking contemptuously of him and his religion. This has been sufficiently common in every age of the world, to make the description here not improper. And yet nothing has been more remarkable than the very thing adverted to here by James, that notwithstanding this, many who profess to be Christians have been more disposed to treat even such persons with respect and attention than they have their own brethren, if they were poor; that they have cultivated the favor, sought the friendship, desired the smiles, aped the manners, and coveted the society of such persons, rather than the friendship and the favor of their poorer Christian brethren. Even though they are known to despise religion in their hearts, and not to be sparing of their words of reproach and scorn towards Christianity; though they are known to be blasphemers, and to have the most thorough contempt for serious, spiritual religion, yet there is many a professing Christian who would prefer to be at a party given by such persons than at a prayer-meeting where their poorer brethren are assembled; who would rather be known by the world to be the associates and friends of such persons, than of those humble believers who can make no boast of rank or wealth, and who are looked down upon with contempt by the great and the gay.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 7. Blaspheme that worthy name] They took every occasion to asperse the Christian name and the Christian faith, and have been, from the beginning to the present day, famous for their blasphemies against Christ and his religion. It is evident that these were Jews of whom St. James speaks; no Christians in these early times could have acted the part here mentioned.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Do not they blaspheme? If the rich here spoken of were Christians, then they may be said to blaspheme Christs name, when by their wicked carriage they caused it to be blasphemed by others, unbelievers, among whom they were, Rom 2:24; Tit 2:5, &c.; 1Ti 6:1; but if rich unbelievers be here meant, the rich men of those times being generally great enemies to Christianity; he would from thence show how mean a consideration riches were, to incline the professors of religion to such partiality as he taxeth them for.
That worthy name; or, good or honourable (as good place, Jam 2:3, for honourable) name of Christ; they blaspheme what they should adore.
By the which ye are called; or, which is called upon you, either, which was called upon over you, when you were baptized into it; or rather it is a Hebrew phrase, and, implies no more than (as we read it) their being called by it, as children are after their fathers, and wives after their husbands, Gen 48:16; Isa 4:1; for so Gods people are called by his name, Deu 28:10 Eph 3:15.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
7. “Is it not they thatblaspheme?” c. as in Jas 2:6[ALFORD]. Rich heathenmust here chiefly be meant for none others would directly blasphemethe name of Christ. Only indirectly rich Christians can bemeant, who, by their inconsistency, caused His name to beblasphemed; so Eze 36:21;Eze 36:22; Rom 2:24.Besides, there were few rich Jewish Christians at Jerusalem (Ro15:26). They who dishonor God’s name by wilful and habitual sin,”take (or bear) the Lord’s name in vain” (comparePro 30:9; Exo 20:7).
that worthy namewhichis “good before the Lord’s saints” (Psa 52:9;Psa 54:6); which ye pray may be”hallowed” (Mt 6:9),and “by which ye are called,” literally, “which wasinvoked” or, “called upon by you” (compare Gen 48:16;Isa 4:1, Margin; Ac15:17), so that at your baptism “into the name”(so the Greek, Mt 28:19)of Christ, ye became Christ’s people (1Co3:23).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Ver. 7 Do they not blaspheme that worthy name,…. Of Christ, or Christians;
by the which ye are called? and which, as before, may design either unbelieving rich men, whether among Jews, or Gentiles, who blasphemed and cursed the name of Christ, and compelled others to do so likewise; or such who professed the Christian religion, who by their supercilious and disdainful treatment of their poor brethren, and by their dragging of them to the tribunals of the Heathens, and distressing them with vexatious law suits there, caused the name of Christ, after which they were called Christians, to be blasphemed and evil spoken of, among the Gentiles.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Blaspheme (). Present active indicative of common verb (from , speaking evil, or and ), as in Lu 22:65.
The honourable name ( ). “The beautiful name.”
By the which ye were called ( ‘ ). “The one called upon you” (first aorist passive articular participle of , to put a name upon, to give a surname to, as Ac 10:18). What name is that? Almost certainly the name of Christ as we see it in Acts 11:26; Acts 26:28; 1Pet 4:14; 1Pet 4:16. It was blasphemy to speak against Christ as some Jews and Gentiles were doing (Acts 13:45; Acts 18:6; Acts 26:11; 1Cor 12:3; 1Tim 1:13). Cf. Ac 15:17.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
They [] . Emphatic. “Is it not they who blaspheme ?” Worthy [] . Rev., better, because stronger, honorable. By this epithet the disgracefulness of the blasphemy is emphasized.
By the which ye are called [ ] . Lit., which is called upon you; the name of Christ, invoked in baptism. The phrase is an Old – Testament one. See Deu 28:10, where the Septuagint reads that the name of the Lord has been called upon thee. Also, 2Ch 7:14; Isa 4:1. Compare Act 14:17.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) James adds rhetorically once again, with strong emphasis, a reprimand against a Christian’s misbehavior in showing partiality toward, a visitor – in this, he asks, does not the rich, “gold-fingered,” brilliant dress-wearing-person, blaspheme, speak evil of the good name by which you are called, Christian? Do they not ridicule, castigate or scorn your name -the name which you bear? This evidently referred to the term Christian, Act 11:26; Act 26:28; 1Pe 4:14; 1Pe 4:16.
2) Why should any Christian or Christian group show favoritism toward the very people who have treated them with contempt, while treating lightly the poor who may never have hurt them? Mat 7:12; Mat 5:7.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
7 Worthy, or good name. I doubt not but that he refers here to the name of God and of Christ. And he says, by, or, on, the which ye are called; not in prayer, as Scripture is wont sometimes to speak, but by profession; as the name of a father, in Gen 48:16, is said to be called on his offspring, and in Isa 4:1, the name of a husband is called on the wife. It is, then, the same as though he had said, “The good name in which ye glory, or which ye deem it an honor to be called by; but if they proudly calumniate the glory of God, how unworthy are they of being honored by Christians!”
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(7) Do not they blaspheme . . .To blaspheme is to hurt with the tongue, and includes all manner of evil speech; but a more exclusive use of the word is with regard to things divine, and particularly the unpardonable sin against the Holy Ghost (Mat. 12:31). A moments reflection will show, unhappily, that this is alluded to in the text.
That worthy name by the which ye are called?Better, that good, that glorious Name which was invoiced (or, called) over youviz., at baptism. Into the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (Mat. 28:19) had all been baptised who were thus addressed; but most probably the Second Person of the Trinity is referred to here. And it was the scorn and contempt visited upon His Name, which changed the mere abuse and ribaldry into a perilous likeness to the deadliest sin. Most commentators thus restrict the Name here to that of Christ. If their view be correct, the blasphemy would probably be linked with that epithet of Christianthen so dishonourablecoined, we are told, first in Antioch (Act. 11:26). But there were far more insulting terms found for the poor and struggling believerNazarene, Atheist, and even worse.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
7. That worthy name Christ.
Called This probably alludes (as do 1Pe 4:14 and 1Pe 4:16) to the name Christian, and indicates a time in which the name, starting from Antioch, had become general throughout the tribes.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Do they not blaspheme the honourable name by which you are called?’
Indeed, he can go further. It is the rich and the powerful who more than any others bring the name of Jesus into disrepute. And they openly blaspheme (use abusive and scurrilous language) against His Name, insulting His Name in public, treating it with contempt, that Name ‘by which His people are called’ (whether as Messiah-nists, or as Christ-ians (1Pe 4:14; 1Pe 4:16; cf. Act 26:28), or as Jesus’ people, or whatever). But in the end to be ‘called by His Name’ was to be set aside as precious and under His care (see Amos 12:9, and compare Jer 14:9). There may be the thought here that Jesus Name was called over them when they were baptised after coming to repentance.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Jam 2:7. Worthy Honourable.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Jas 2:7 . The description of the conduct of the rich is still continued; they not only do violence to Christians, but they even revile the holy name of Christ. Do they not (even) blaspheme that fair name which has been called upon you? The pronoun is put here as in Jas 2:6 ; incorrectly Theile = hi potissimum.
The expression ] is borrowed from the O. T., where it often occurs, and in the sense that one becomes the property of him whose name is called upon him; particularly it is said of Israel that the name of God was called upon them; see Deu 28:10 (where instead of the dative is put); 2Ch 7:14 ; Jer 14:9 ; Jer 15:16 ; Amo 9:12 ; see also Gen 48:16 ; Isa 4:1 . Accordingly, by the name which is called upon Christians is not meant the Christian name (Hensler: nomen fratrum et sororum), also not the name , but the name of Him only to whom they as Christians belong the name of Christ (de Wette, Wiesinger, Bouman, Lange, and others); from which, however, it does not follow (as Wiesinger correctly observes) that James here alludes to the name .
By the addition of the attribute the shamefulness of is still more strongly marked.
In support of the hypothesis that the rich are Christians, many expositors (also Brckner and Wiesinger) here arbitrarily explain of indirect blasphemy, i.e. of such as takes place not by words, but by works; but is never thus used in the Holy Scriptures; not one of the passages which Wiesinger cites proves that for which he adduces them; always denotes blasphemy by word. [119]
This word also proves that the rich who are not Christians are here meant (thus also Lange, who, however, will understand particularly the Judaists); which is also evident, because James otherwise would rather have written instead of . .
By the thought in this verse James indicates that Christians, by showing partiality to the rich, not only acted foolishly, but were guilty of a violation of the respect due to the name of Christ.
[119] Were it here asserted that the blaspheming of the name of God or of Christ was occasioned by the wicked works of Jews or Christians, this would be indicated not by the active verb, but by the passive with ; see Rom 2:24 ; Tit 2:5 ; 2Pe 2:2 ; Isa 52:5 . Moreover, even then blasphemy (namely, of the Gentiles) could only be expressed by words.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
7 Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called?
Ver. 7. Do not they blaspheme ] That is, cause to be blasphemed, as Rom 2:24 ; 1Ti 1:20 . Marcellinus, a heathen historian, taxeth the Christians of his times for their dissensions, biting and devouring one another, till they were even consumed one of another. Am. Mar. ii. 2. A sad thing that a heathen should see such hellish miscarriages among Christ’s followers.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
7 .] Is it not they that (on , see above) blaspheme (actually and literally, in words, it being, as we have maintained throughout, ungodly and heathens who are pointed at. Those who maintain them to be Christian rich men, would understand , to disgrace by their lives: but apart from other objections, Huther has remarked well, that when the verb is thus used, it is ordinarily in the passive with , see Rom 2:24 ; Tit 2:5 ; 2Pe 2:2 ; Isa 52:5 , not as a direct active governing a case, which is far more naturally taken in its literal sense) the goodly name which was called on you (i. e. which when you were admitted into Christ’s Church by baptism was made yours, so that you are called , 1Co 3:23 (not necessarily : no particular form of the appropriation of the name is alluded to, but only the fact of the name being called over them. The appellation may or may not have been in use at this time, for aught that this shews). The name is of course that of Christ : not that of “God,” as Storr and Schulthess, nor that of “brethren,” as some. On the phrase , see, besides reff., Deu 28:10 ; 2Ch 7:14 ; Isa 4:1 ; also Gen 48:16 )? So that if ye thus dishonour the poor in comparison with the rich, you are, 1. contravening the standard of honour which God sets up in His dealings: 2. opposing your own interest: 3. helping to blaspheme the name of Christ.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Jas 2:7 . : for the force of the word cf. Sir 3:16 , (the Greek is certainly wrong here, the Hebrew has , “he that despiseth”) . Cf. Rom 2:24 , (Isa 52:5 ); the word in the N.T. is sometimes general in its application, of evil speaking with regard to men (in the Apoc. of Peter the phrase, occurs twice, 7, 13); at other times, specifically with reference to God or our Lord. : the name here (especially in view of ) must be “Jesus” (Saviour), for the Jews would not be likely to have blasphemed the name of “Christ” (Messiah); in Act 4:10-12 it is also the name of “Jesus,” concerning which St. Peter says: Neither is there any other name under heaven, that is given among men, wherein we must be saved . . . . is a Hebraism, in Amo 9:12 we have: which the R.V. renders (incorrectly): “which are called by my name,” it should be: “Over whom my name was called,” as rendered by the Septuagint, excepting that it repeats itself unnecessarily, . The Peshit, too, has, so that the R.V. rendering here is incorrect, though the margin has “which was called upon you”. The idea which the phrase expresses is very ancient; a possession was known by the name of the possessor (originally always a god), this was the name which was pronounced over, or concerning, the land; in the same way, a slave was known under the name of his master, it was the name under whose protection he stood. And so also different peoples were ranged under the names of special gods; this usage was the same among the Israelites, who stood under the protection of Jahwe the name and the bearer were of course not differentiated. This, too, is the meaning here; it does not mean the name that they bore, or were called by, but the name under whose protection they stood, and to which they belonged Parallel to it was the marking of cattle to denote ownership. (See, in reference to what has been said, Deu 28:10 ; 2Sa 12:28 ; Jer 7:10 ). In the passage before us there is not necessarily any reference to Baptism, though it is extremely probable that this is so; Mayor quotes Hermas, Sim . ix. 16, (baptism) . . Resch ( op cit . p. 193) quotes a very interesting passage from Agathangelus, chap. 73, in which these words occur: , . In the passage before us, the omission of all mention of the name, which would have come in very naturally, betrays Jewish usage; as Taylor truly remarks ( Pirqe Aboth. , p. 66): “A feeling of reverence leads the Jews to avoid, as far as possible, all mention of the Names of God. This feeling is manifested in their post-canonical literature, even with regard to less sacred, and not incommunicable Divine names. In the Talmud and Midrash, and (with the exception of the Prayer Books) in the Rabbinic writings generally, it is the custom to abstain from using the Biblical names of God, excepting in citations from the Bible ; and even when Elohim is necessarily brought in, it is often intentionally misspelt ” It should be noted that this phrase only occurs once elsewhere in the N.T., and there in a quotation from the O.T., quoted by St. James in Act 15:17 .
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
that = the.
worthy = honourable. Greek. kalos. See Rom 12:17.
name. See Act 2:38; Act 15:26.
by the which, &c. = which is called upon (App-104.) you. called. See Act 2:21.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
7.] Is it not they that (on , see above) blaspheme (actually and literally, in words, it being, as we have maintained throughout, ungodly and heathens who are pointed at. Those who maintain them to be Christian rich men, would understand , to disgrace by their lives: but apart from other objections, Huther has remarked well, that when the verb is thus used, it is ordinarily in the passive with ,-see Rom 2:24; Tit 2:5; 2Pe 2:2; Isa 52:5,-not as a direct active governing a case, which is far more naturally taken in its literal sense) the goodly name which was called on you (i. e. which when you were admitted into Christs Church by baptism was made yours, so that you are called , 1Co 3:23 (not necessarily : no particular form of the appropriation of the name is alluded to, but only the fact of the name being called over them. The appellation may or may not have been in use at this time, for aught that this shews). The name is of course that of Christ: not that of God, as Storr and Schulthess, nor that of brethren, as some. On the phrase , see, besides reff., Deu 28:10; 2Ch 7:14; Isa 4:1; also Gen 48:16)? So that if ye thus dishonour the poor in comparison with the rich, you are, 1. contravening the standard of honour which God sets up in His dealings: 2. opposing your own interest: 3. helping to blaspheme the name of Christ.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Jam 2:7. , blaspheme) Pro 30:9. The apostle is speaking chiefly of rich heathens. Comp. 1Pe 4:14; 1Pe 2:12. For there were not many rich men among the Jews, at any rate at Jerusalem.- , the good name) , the name of God, to be praised above all things, , since it is good, and His good name.- , which is invoked over you) from which ye are called the people of God. There is a similar expression, Gen 48:16; Isa 4:1.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
blaspheme: Psa 73:7-9, Mat 12:24, Mat 27:63, Luk 22:64, Luk 22:65, Act 26:11, 1Ti 1:13, Rev 13:5, Rev 13:6
worthy: Psa 111:9, Son 1:3, Isa 7:14, Isa 9:6, Isa 9:7, Jer 23:6, Mat 1:23, Act 4:12, Phi 2:9-11, Rev 19:13, Rev 19:16
by: Isa 65:15, Act 11:26, Eph 3:15
Reciprocal: Lev 24:16 – blasphemeth Job 32:9 – Great Isa 43:7 – called Eze 22:27 – princes Hab 1:4 – for Act 18:6 – they Col 3:8 – blasphemy Jam 3:6 – a world Rev 2:13 – my name
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Jas 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.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Jas 2:7. Do not they blaspheme. The pronoun is emphatic: Is it not they who blaspheme. The allusion may be to the attempts of the unbelieving Jews to compel believers to blaspheme the name of Christ. Thus it is said of Saul, that he punished them oft in every synagogue, and compelled them to blaspheme (Act 26:11). But it is better to refer it to the blasphemous utterances of the Jews themselves. Thus Justin Martyr tells us, that the Jews were accustomed to blaspheme Christ in their synagogues. Those who suppose that the rich men here mentioned are Christians, think that it refers to the disgrace brought upon Christianity by their ungodly practices: that they blasphemed Christ in their lives. But such a meaning is less natural and appropriate.
that worthy, goodly, or noble namenot the name of God, or that of brethren, but the name of Christ. It does not, however, follow from this that believers were at this early period called Christians. It is a goodly name, for Christ is the Lord of glory, the Founder of Christianity, the Messiah promised to their fathers.
by the which you are called? or rather, which was invoked upon you, namely at your baptism, when baptized into the name of Christ. The allusion is to the name of God being put upon the children of Israel to distinguish them as His property. They shall put my name upon the children of Israel (Num 6:27). So the name of Christ was put upon believers to signify that they belonged to Him.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Verse 7
That worthy name; the name of Christ.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called?
Back to the rich. It is the rich that blaspheme the name of Christ. How, might be a worthy consideration.
a. Many verbally, outwardly blaspheming Christ in their everyday language.
b. They tend not to worry about the poor. They often take advantage of the poor thus taking advantage of Christ’s chosen.
c. They often pollute the celebration of His birth by commercializing it.
d. They seldom look to the welfare of the poor, fatherless, and widows.
e. By ridiculing your faith.
f. By making fun of things religious, as the media has done for many years.
Fuente: Mr. D’s Notes on Selected New Testament Books by Stanley Derickson
2:7 Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are {e} called?
(e) Literally, “which is called upon of you”.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
The rich not only typically oppose Christians, they also typically speak against Christ. This was true in James’ world as it is in ours. It is inconsistent to give special honor to those who despise the Lord whom believers love and serve. To blaspheme or slander (Gr. blasphemeo) means to mock deliberately or to speak contemptuously of God. Perhaps those who were blaspheming Christ’s name were unbelieving Jews (cf. Act 13:45). [Note: Mayor, p. 88.]