Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of James 4:4

Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

4. Ye adulterers and adulteresses ] The better MSS. give ye adulteresses only. The use of the feminine alone in this connexion, where the persons referred to are primarily men, is at first startling. It has a partial parallel in our Lord’s words “ an evil and adulterous generation ” (Mat 12:39), but it finds its best explanation in the thought, not without its bearing on what follows, that the soul’s unfaithfulness towards God is like that of a wife towards her husband. It is as though St James said “ Ye adulterous souls.” There is, it may be, in the use of such a term, a touch of indignant scorn not unlike that in Homer, , ‘ . “Women, not men of Acha” ( Il. ii. 235), or Virgil’s “O vere Phrygi, neque enim Phryges” ( n. ix. 617). In this subserviency to pleasures, St James sees that which, though united with crimes of violence, is yet essentially effeminate.

the friendship of the world is enmity with God? ] Once more we have a distinct echo from the Sermon of the Mount (Mat 6:24; Luk 16:13). Here, also, as in chap. Jas 1:8, stress is laid on the fact that the neutrality of a divided allegiance is impossible. In that warfare, therefore, we must choose our side. We take it, even if we think that we do not choose it.

whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world ] Literally, Whosoever wishes to be a friend. The inference is not a mere repetition, but lays stress on the fact that the mere wish and inclination to be on one side involves, ipso facto, antagonism to the other.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Ye adulterers and adulteresses – These words are frequently used to denote those who are faithless towards God, and are frequently applied to those who forsake God for idols, Hos 3:1; Isa 57:3, Isa 57:7; Ezek. 16; 23. It is not necessary to suppose that the apostle meant that those to whom he wrote were literally guilty of the sins here referred to; but he rather refers to those who were unfaithful to their covenant with God by neglecting their duty to him, and yielding themselves to the indulgence of their own lusts and passions. The idea is, You have in effect broken your marriage covenant with God by loving the world more than him; and, by the indulgence of your carnal inclinations, you have violated those obligations to self-mortification and self-denial to which you were bound by your religious engagements. To convince them of the evil of this, the apostle shows them what was the true nature of that friendship of the world which they sought. It may be remarked here, that no terms could have been found which would have shown more decidedly the nature of the sin of forgetting the covenant vows of religion for the pleasures of the world, than those which the apostle uses here. It is a deeper crime to be unfaithful to God than to any created being; and it will yet be seen that even the violation of the marriage contract, great as is the sin, is a slight offence compared with unfaithfulness toward God.

Know ye not that the friendship of the world – Compare 1Jo 2:15. The term world here is to be understood not of the physical world as God made it, for we could not well speak of the friendship of that, but of the community, or people, called the world, in contradistinction from the people of God. Compare Joh 12:31; 1Co 1:20; 1Co 3:19; Gal 4:3; Col 2:8. The friendship of the world ( philia tou kosmou) is the love of that world; of the maxims which govern it, the principles which reign there, the ends that are sought, the amusements and gratifications which characterize it as distinguished from the church of God. It consists in setting our hearts on those things; in conforming to them; in making them the object of our pursuit with the same spirit with which they are sought by those who make no pretensions to religion. See the notes at Rom 12:2.

Is enmity with God – Is in fact hostility against God, since that world is arrayed against him. It neither obeys his laws, submits to his claims, nor seeks to honor him. To love that world is, therefore, to be arrayed against God; and the spirit which would lead us to this is, in fact, a spirit of hostility to God.

Whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world – Whoever he may be, whether in the church or out of it. The fact of being a member of the church makes no difference in this respect, for it is as easy to be a friend of the world in the church as out of it. The phrase whosoever will ( boulethe) implies purpose, intention, design. It supposes that the heart is set on it; or that there is a deliberate purpose to seek the friendship of the world. It refers to that strong desire which often exists, even among professing Christians, to secure the friendship of the world; to copy its fashions and vanities; to enjoy its pleasures; and to share its pastimes and its friendships. Wherever there is a manifested purpose to find our chosen friends and associates there rather than among Christians; wherever there is a greater desire to enjoy the smiles and approbation of the world than there is to enjoy the approbation of God and the blessings of a good conscience; and wherever there is more conscious pain because we have failed to win the applause of the world, or have offended its votaries, and have sunk ourselves in its estimation, than there is because we have neglected our duty to our Saviour, and have lost the enjoyment of religion, there is the clearest proof that the heart wills or desires to be the friend of the world.

Is the enemy of God – This is a most solemn declaration, and one of fearful import in its bearing on many who are members of the church. It settles the point that anyone, no matter what his professions, who is characteristically a friend of the world, cannot be a true Christian. In regard to the meaning of this important verse, then, it may be remarked:

(1) That there is a sense in which the love of this world, or of the physical universe, is not wrong. That kind of love for it as the work of God, which perceives the evidence of his wisdom and goodness and power in the various objects of beauty, usefulness, and grandeur, spread around us, is not evil. The world as such – the physical structure of the earth, of the mountains, forests flowers, seas, lakes, and vales – is full of illustrations of the divine character, and it cannot be wrong to contemplate those things with interest, or with warm affection toward their Creator.

(2) When that world, however, becomes our portion; when we study it only as a matter of science, without looking through nature up to natures God; when we seek the wealth which it has to confer, or endeavor to appropriate as our supreme portion its lands, its minerals, its fruits; when we are satisfied with what it yields, and when in the possession or pursuit of these things, our thoughts never rise to God; and when we partake of the spirit which rules in the hearts of those who avowedly seek this world as their portion, though we profess religion, then the love of the world becomes evil, and comes in direct conflict with the spirit of true religion.

(3) The statement in this verse is, therefore, one of most fearful import for many professors of religion. There are many in the church who, so far as human judgment can go, are characteristically lovers of the world. This is shown:

(a) by their conformity to it in all in which the world is distinguished from the church as such;

(b) in their seeking the friendship of the world, or their finding their friends there rather than among Christians;

(c) in preferring the amusements of the world to the scenes where spiritually-minded Christians find their chief happiness;

(d) in pursuing the same pleasures that the people of the world do, with the same expense, the same extravagance, the same luxury;

(e) in making their worldly interests the great object of living, and everything else subordinate to that.

This spirit exists in all cases where no worldly interest is sacrificed for religion; where everything that religion peculiarly requires is sacrificed for the world. If this be so, then there are many professing Christians who are the enemies of God. See the notes at Phi 3:18. They have never known what is true friendship for him, and by their lives they show that they can be ranked only among his foes. It becomes every professing Christian, therefore, to examine himself with the deepest earnestness to determine whether he is characteristically a friend of the world or of God; whether he is living for this life only, or is animated by the high and pure principles of those who are the friends of God. The great Searcher of hearts cannot be deceived, and soon our appropriate place will be assigned us, and our final Judge will determine to which class of the two great divisions of the human family we belong – to those who are the friends of the world, or to those who are the friends of God.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Jam 4:4

The friendship of the world is enmity with God

The friendship of the world enmity with God

I.

WHAT WE ARE TO UNDERSTAND BY THE FRIENDSHIP OF THE WORLD.

1. In what sense the word world is to be taken

(1) The world is often put to signify the wicked men of the world, whether unbelievers or believers, of evil and profligate lives (1Co 11:32).

(2) It is sometimes put to signify the vicious actions and customs of the Rom 12:2; Jam 1:27; Tit 2:12; 2Pe 2:20).

(3) It is likewise used to signify the things of the world and the enjoyment of them, viz., the riches, honours, and pleasures of it, and, in one word, ever)thing belonging to it which men are apt to be pleased with Mat 16:26; Gal 6:14). It is this that is chiefly intended here.

2. What degree of friendship with the things of the world is here condemned.

(1) When we love them more than we do God, our Saviour, religion, and our souls, or indeed with any degree of nearness or equality to them.

(2) When we love them more (though vastly short of God, our Saviour, our souls, our religion, and the spiritual rewards of it, if such a thing could possibly be supposed) than they in themselves really deserve to be beloved, and for other ends and purposes than God has designed them for; when we love them as our own, as bringing mighty delights with them, as being certain, permanent, durable goods.

II. SOME MARKS OR SIGNS BY WHICH WE MAY CERTAINLY KNOW WHETHER WE ARE SUCH FRIENDS OF THE WORLD AS ST. JAMES CONDEMNS.

If, therefore, we find our thoughts and affections chiefly taken up with the things of this world; if the main bent of all our studies and endeavours tends this way; if for the sake of these things we attempt such difficulties, run such hazards, as we would not for the sake of anything else whatsoever, not even for Gods and our own souls sake, venture upon; if our hearts are rather set upon making ourselves or our children rich and great than wise and good; if we suffer ourselves to give way in the cause of God and religion, and let this mans greatness and the other mans wealth, this secular inconvenience and that consideration of worldly gain, keep us from doing our duty or frighten us from opposing wickedness–if this, or anything like this, be our case, there is no room left to dispute what principle we are governed by, but the world, which so plainly shows its authority over us, must have us.

III. FOR WHAT REASONS SUCH A FRIENDSHIP OF THE WORLD MUST NEEDS BE ENMITY WITH GOD.

1. You cannot but see how unreasonable, ill-proportioned, and unjust a love this is. It robs God; prefers the creature to the Creator, shadows to substances, &c. It reflects upon Gods honour and disparages His wisdom by perverting the designs of it.

2. You cannot but see how vastly it is below the nature and dignity of man, who was made and is fitted for much nobler enjoyments.

3. You cannot but see how directly contrary and repugnant this is to the very nature and design of the Christian religion; to the example of our blessed Saviour, who declared both in word and deed that He was not of the world; to our own constant professions of being subjects of a kingdom that is not of this world; to the great end of our Lords coming, which was to save us from this evil world, to chase us out of it, and to make us a peculiar people to Himself, that should not mind earthly things; to His most plain and frequent commands, &c.

4. You cannot but see how plainly this tends to wear away and utterly extirpate all sense and regard of God and religion out of our minds. (Wm. Dawes, D. D.)

Worldliness

1. Worldliness in Christians is spiritual adultery. It dissolves the spiritual marriage between God and the soul. To let the world share with God is an evil, but to prefer the world before God is an impiety.

2. Women have special need to take heed of worldly pleasures and lusts: You adulterers and adulteresses.

3. To seek the friendship of the world is the ready way to be Gods enemy. God and the world are contrary – tie is all good, and the world lieth in wickedness; and they command contrary things. The world saith, Slack no opportunity of gain and pleasure; if you will be so peevish as to stand nicely upon conscience, you will do nothing but draw trouble upon yourselves. Now, God saith, Deny yourself; take up your cross; renounce the world. Well, now, you see the enmity between God and the world.

(1) Think of it seriously when you are about to mingle with earthly comforts and delights, and can neglect God for a little carnal conveniency and satisfaction; this is to be an enemy to God, and can I make good my part against Him? He is almighty, and can crush you (Eze 22:14). And He is a terrible enemy when He whetteth His glittering sword Deu 32:41). Nay, if none of all this were to be feared, the very estrangement from God is punishment enough to itself.

(2) Learn how odious worldliness is; it is direct enmity to God, because it is carried on under sly pretences. Of all sins this seemeth most plausible. (T. Manton.)

The world or God

Man is a creature perpetually balancing himself between the impulses of hate and love. In the affections of the soul no man liveth to himself. We must go beyond ourselves for information, for inspiration, for enjoyment. Likes occasion dislikes, and between these two poles all mankind dwell. When desire is normal it centres in God, and the soul comes into harmony with the universe,. When we love the Creator supremely, we must receive delight from every part of the creation in the degree its Lord designed. The love of God is inclusive of the love of all that is good. Instead of narrowing, it expands infinitely our capacity of happiness. It awakens the dullest soul to a consciousness of the beautiful and the sublime in nature. It sanctions with the loftiest motives the pursuit of knowledge, it pronounces a blessing even on those lesser gifts which minister to the gratification of bodily appetite. All these contribute to his pleasure whose chief delight is in the Maker of all. Godliness has not only the promise of the world that now is, it has whatever is excellent in that world. Lovely as this earth may appear to the believer, his controlling impulse is not love of the world, but love of God. If, on the other hand, our desires turn away from the great Father, they must rest on something He has made. It may be a person, it may be wealth, art, pleasure, fame; in any case the result is the same. We have wrecked the universal order; we have assailed the symmetry and splendour of the cosmos. We have turned things upside down. We have put the less in the place of the greater. We have deified the material and dethroned the eternal. Such an affection is in its essence exclusive and intolerant. We may love God and enjoy all else, but the converse of the proposition is never true; the friendship of the world is enmity with God. We all must love; the only question is, Shall our affections ennoble, bless, glorify the soul? or shall they isolate, degrade, blast it for ever? Shall this world or shall the Almighty demand our highest regard? In our senses we can make but one response. Our real difficulty is with the perilous fascination that is an attribute of carnality. He who sets his heart on things temporal, who rests his chief happiness here, who feels he would give up everything rather than the pleasures of sense, loves the world and hates God. In particular, we ought not to put an extravagant estimate on things of the earth. The chief danger of living to a moral intelligence lies in unconsciously magnifying the importance of temporalities. We cannot see how we can get along without these imposing advantages. Health lies piled up around us. Success flits like a vision ahead. We easily come to believe that life devoid of these is not worth the living. It is always natural to exaggerate the worth of agencies that we have found efficient. It is too often taken for granted that with each stroke of fortune there is an increase of happiness, with each promotion in office an increment of comfort, with each addition to the income a further escape from care. There are millions who believe in all sincerity that if they can only get along in the world pleasure is assured, reputation will come as a matter of course, popularity will drop like ripe fruit, honour rise like a growing plant; even the service of God will be rendered easier and more effective. Whether such attain their purposes or not, their desires have overflowed the banks and threaten destruction. The world is toned out of all reason and justice. God is forgotten, even despised, in the comparison. We must guard against immoderate exertion to obtain worldly good. It is folly for one to shatter health to gather gold. It is miserable infatuation for one to destroy his mind to retain a place of endless perplexities. Above all, it is appalling unwisdom for one to fill his soul with remorse that he may cram his safe with securities. Whoever takes or would take success on such terms is as one giving dollars in exchange for pennies, as one trading off white, flashing, flawless diamonds for pebbles by the roadside. To what shall we compare his foolishness? Like the toys that amuse children for an hour and are then flung aside spoiled, broken, insipid, joyless, such are most of the ambitions of men. Too often we resemble those who should erect conservatories to raise one flower, or support great stables to speed a horse for a few seconds, or exhibit a prodigal hospitality to secure a single influential friend, or collect costly pictures to afford entertainment for an hour, or circumnavigate the earth to supply matter for a few conversations, or run for Congress to be noticed in the papers, or import extravagant dresses for a three-line description in a fashion journal. In the name of all that is rational, why this mighty labour for so mean a prize? Why this incessant, immense, incredible work that is done under the sun, which, though a man may labour to seek it out, he shall not be able? Beware of overrating the value of temporal good. There are some things money cannot buy. In all the shops of earth you will find no counter over which money may be exchanged for bodily health, or mental capacity, or peace of soul, or lost time, or neglected opportunities. After all the praise of all the ages, what can this dearly-prized gold buy but a bed to sleep in, a suit to wear, a plateful to eat? We are not to deplore unreasonably its loss. The world is rapidly slipping from us, or we are steadily, swiftly fading from it. No matter how much we have here, we cannot retain it long. Think of yourself, shorn of wealth, deprived of friends, failing in health, what would you have left? If we do not stand ever ready to sacrifice money for the relief of suffering, for the purposes of benevolence, we love it more than God. If, when bankruptcy comes, life sinks into sullenness, envy, bitterness, we loved luxury more than the Lord of all. If death alarms, if the only consolation is the throwing back a lingering, despairing look on pleasures for ever past; if the principal torment is the anticipation of a mysterious future, then, too, the friendship of the world has wrought the enmity of God. Never was friendship more injudicious, never was hostility more unjust. No man can exhibit greater folly than he who, to please and enjoy this fading earth, forgets, affronts, defies the Lord of heaven. The world is insufficient, unsubstantial, deceptive, evanescent. God is infinite, omnipotent, eternal, able to bestow on man fulness of knowledge and perfection of happiness, granting us in His light to see light, and bidding us draw with joy out of the wells of salvation. What shall it profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his own soul? Every voice in the universe calls upon us to direct love aright. Seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all the world we should have will be added. Make the contrary choice, and the only issue can be disaster, defeat, and the horror of a great darkness. Who will die for ever for the friendship of this poor world? (S. S. Roche.)

Worldly friendship enmity to God

I. WHAT IS IMPLIED IN BEING A FRIEND OF THE WORLD. To be a friend of the world, we should be inclined to think, at first view, would be rather estimable than otherwise. Ought not every Christian to be a friend to his fellow-man? Should we not cultivate dispositions of love, benevolence, and kindness towards all? Yes. But to be a friend of the world, in the sense of the text, is totally different from this. It implies–

1. Love. If you love the world, you are, in the sight of God, the friends of the world. Sinners love those who, like themselves, are destitute of the grace of God in the heart.

2. Association. Friends consort together; they are frequently found in each others company; not merely because duty leads them these, or business calls them, but because inclination draws them towards one another.

3. Conformity. Friends conform to each other. There is a mutual forbearance with each others inclinations, rules, and customs.

4. Assimilation. Friends resemble each other in the selection of those things most likely to contribute to their comfort and happiness.

II. CONFIRM THE STATEMENT MADE IN THE TEXT: he is the enemy of God.

1. This is an awful fact; and in illustration of it, we remark, that such a man is–

(1) An enemy to the law of God. Nothing can more fully prove an individual to be an enemy, than his systematic attempts to set at nought those precepts and injunctions which he is aware that it is his duty as well as his privilege to obey (Rom 12:2; 1Th 5:22; Exo 23:2).

(2) An enemy to the grace of God. He refuses to yield to the striving of the Holy Spirit, and strengthens the principles of depravity in his nature, and plunges still deeper into the abyss of sin and guilt.

(3) An enemy to the will of God. He is continually endeavouring to accomplish his own gratification in those things which the Judge of all the earth has prohibited.

(4) An enemy to the cause of God. By this is meant the work which Jehovah is carrying on throughout the world for the salvation of all mankind; the means which He has adopted, and the plans which He has set forth, for the rescue of immortal souls; thus bringing them from the galling yoke of Satan into the liberty and privileges of the gospel.

(5) An enemy to the people of God. It is gratifying to the wicked to throw obstacles in their path to the kingdom of heaven; and, if possible, to turn them altogether out of the way of salvation.

2. What is implied in being an enemy of God.

(1) The character is at once dishonourable and disgraceful. Such a person is at variance with all goodness, excellence, and truth; all that angels admire, extol, and love; all that excites joy, triumph, and endless gratitude in the breast of redeemed spirits, who circle His throne rejoicing.

(2) The enemy of God is guilty of the foulest ingratitude. Is not the Lord Jehovah our best friend, constantly loading us with benefits?

(3) The enemy of God is miserable. The deepest despair of the lost soul arises from being for ever excluded from God; and though the wicked experience not the anguish of the damned, it is because their probationary state is not yet terminated, and they are still in a world where mercy triumphs, and where vengeance is not speedily executed. (R. Treffry.)

The worlds friends, and the friends of God

The question sounds harsh on the ears, and wounds the feelings of many who hear it. And yet it comes from that same blessed One who tells us, God so loved the world, &c. It must be love, the perfect love in its free outflowing, the love which seeks and works out the whole good of its objects, Divine love itself, which appeals to our own conscience: Know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? A question of this form must require an affirmative reply; and the next words supply it. But do our heart and conscience give that expected answer? First, what is this world, which a friend of God may not love? We are sure it cannot be simply the fair creation which Himself pronounced to be very good. And we are equally sure it cannot be simply the social relationships in which we stand. The bonds of family life, the ties of friendship, the claims of human society, springing from His fatherly love, are redeemed in Jesus Christ, are sanctified by His Spirit, and are constantly upheld by His Word and providence. If in any sense these human relationships come under the language of the text, it must be in some faulty and perverse reference in which we have learned to regard them. Now, this false view of things about us is noticed in the expressions used in this chapter. The lusts that war in your members Ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. And the strong, and, as we should say, the opprobious name used in this text, points to the same false view and false use of the objects and relationships by which we are surrounded. St. John, in his first Epistle, speaks in very similar language (1Jn 2:15-16).

1. The lust of the flesh; when our ruling motive in the use of these things is to gratify the appetites and passions of the body, not to supply its necessities, not to keep it in health, and to fit it for its proper work. And not only bodily passions or desires. When we remember how the flesh is opposed to the spirit in the New Testament, we see that the word includes in it very much at least of the evil which St. Paul ascribes to the soul–the strong active desires of our nature so far as they are corrupt.

2. Again; the world in us is partly the lust of the eye. It may be asked why this one of the bodily senses is singled out for separate mention. And, if the answer is sought in our own self-questionings, the question is wisely asked, and will find its answer more and more constantly. For who can estimate the power of the eye to receive pure and healthy impressions of truth and love, of gentleness and meekness, of self-denying simplicity, and of heaven-born purity?

3. Once more; the world in us is partly the pride of life–the pride of this worlds existence, as the heart fastens upon outward show of visible and tangible objects, wealth, respect and homage from without, reputation, or whatever else it may be, as far as these exalt oneself above another, and consequently in some sense distinguish and separate men by these outward distinctions. This world-worship may assume an unselfish character. The process may be pushed forward for others, not for ourselves. But still it is a world which no friend of God may love, whether in himself or in another. So St. Johns description is realised not only within us, but without us, in the outward world itself. Are there not many objects around us, and many arrangements of things whose very purpose and almost only effect is to foster those sinful propensities; schemes carefully devised for this very end; some in a more refined manner; some more coarsely; the former only the falser for their apparent refinement; the latter repulsive at first sight or embrace, gradually habituating the body and the soul to the very coarseness of their vice? But view these arrangements and fashions of things in their most refined outward form; shed over them the lustre which the most refined art can supply; give them the outline of beauty, the harmony of colour and of sound, sweetness of melody, gracefulness and life of graceful movement, the charm of sympathy in pleasure, and the responsive enjoyment of friendship or of love. And is it to feed any one of these three, the desire of the flesh, the desire of the eye, and the pride of life? Or, in St. Jamess words, do you ask for them that you may consume them on your own desires? Then what have you done? You have taken fragments of Gods beautiful world, elements of His beautiful order; you have misshaped and miscombined them, though in forms beautifully false; you have expelled Him from the work of your own skill and taste; and you have made a world, the friendship of which is ruin to yourself and enmity with Him. But we must go a step further in testing the true and the forbidden use of human art. Let us take the case where the purpose is an intellectual gratification. When form and colour and sound are results of pure and simple intellectual taste, and occasions of pure and simple intellectual enjoyment, is this a world of which we may be friends? The question almost answers itself! If we make a world of art for ourselves, or a world of intelligent thought and speculation, or accept the creation of some other more accomplished than ourselves, is it really a new world? or is it truly and honestly a part of Gods world or Gods order? Where is His place in it? Is He acknowledged or expelled? Nay, is He, after all, the centre and life of that world? Do all its parts and all its subordinate order point directly and tend to Him? I do not ask if we are at every moment consciously realising His presence in it. But does it tend to bring us to Him, and to reveal Him to us? This right tendency may be more or less direct or indirect. But it must exist, it must be an essential element, in true intellectual exercise. But what of the more common enjoyment of natural beauty, enjoyment which is open even to uninstructed and uncultivated minds? Here, too, is the same distinction. Men speak of looking up from nature to natures God. It may be a true expression: it may be only a mask. The passive enjoyment of natural beauty is not looking up to God at all: it is personal gratification, perhaps of the body, perhaps of the soul. This passive enjoyment, when rightly used and controlled and directed, may be the first step of a real ascent from nature to natures God. But who and what is the God to whom we thus ascend? Is He infinite greatness, and skill immeasurable by us, acting in ways so various and so beautiful that we are lost in the contemplation? Is He untold goodness whose love to His creatures shine through every one of the natural beauties which we admire and love? And is this all? I fear our friendship of this world is enmity with God. The blind sense of immeasurable greatness leads only to idolatry, to worship of visible or invisible creatures, or of the thoughts of our own hearts. The blind sense of untold goodness takes away the thought of sin, the consciousness of warfare against God, and wraps us up in weak and godless sentiment. Our God in such case is at the very best some ancient Father of gods and men, or some Hindoo abstraction of the Supreme; or even, perhaps, the deification of some form of natural beauty, or some image of our own hearts. It may seem that we have dwelt too much on the negative side of this great Christian principle. But, surely, the direct positive principle has not been wanting. Our safety is this. The Word of God abideth in us. That Word of God is Jesus Christ Himself; Jesus Christ revealing Himself, revealing the Father, working by His Spirit. Enthrone Him in your heart. Present yourself to Him a Jiving sacrifice, body, soul, and spirit, and you are safe. For you will find Him everywhere, in the world without, in the world within. Friendship and love, art and science and nature, all will discover Him when once you have found Him in yourself, and will bind you to Him more and more closely. And He will shed upon them the pure and gentle light of His own love, which will save you from the false friendship of the world, will cheer you under all its disappointments and deceits, and lead you through this world to another world, where all objects of Jove and friendship are pure as tie is pure, and Himself is visibly enthroned above them all. (J. F. Fenn, M. A.)

Friendship with the world

I. THE WORLD, THE FRIENDSHIP OF WHICH IS COURTED BY TREACHEROUS AND LUKEWARM CHRISTIANS.

II. THE MANNER IN WHICH THAT UNSANCTIFIED FRIENDSHIP WITH THE WORLD WHICH IS CONDEMNED IN THE TEXT MANIFESTS ITSELF. And here we must guard, both on the right hand and on the left. To keep ourselves unspotted from the world we are not to go out of the world. Let it be also understood that this friendship with the world is not to be avoided by surliness of manners; not by indifference to the good opinion of the world itself. We are to please all men; only we are to remember to do it for their good to edification. The culpable courting of the worlds friendship here condemned manifests itself–

1. In being unwilling to encounter reproach and difficulty for Christs sake.

2. In hiding our opinions, and suffering men to go on in error and spiritual danger, that we may keep up their society.

3. In preferring some interest, some honour, to adherence to conscience.

4. In such obsequiousness to the worlds maxims and principles as to lead to at least doubtful compliances,

III. THE AGGRAVATION OF THE CRIME CHARGED. Here these friendships with the world which betray Christ are marked by two opprobrious characters.

1. Spiritual adultery. This implies abnegation of God.

2. Enmity to God. The Bible becomes dull; prayer becomes irksome; and final apostasy is often the sad consequence of worldly compliances.

IV. THAT MOST EXCELLENT WAY WHICH THE APOSTLES DENUNCIATION SUGGESTS. He would have us decide. The benefits of decision are numerous and great.

1. It is ordinarily attended with less difficulty than a vacillating and hesitating habit.

2. It is a noble object to aspire to fidelity to God.

3. There is an interesting reciprocation. If we are Gods people, He is our God; and we have everything to expect from Him.

4. The real pleasure which decision opens are many and great. The conscience is at rest; we have unbounded confidence towards God; and the unclouded prospect of heaven is opened before us.

5. The comforting sense of acting according to our real circumstances as responsible dying men, men who are to be judged. (R. Watson.)

The contrariety betwixt the world and God

1. In the repugnancy of their natures. God is by His nature, pure, holy, undefiled, without contagion of sin, and without permission of any evil; but the world is altogether wicked, defiled with sin, full of all contagion, and deadly poison of iniquity.

2. As their natures are contrary, so are their precepts contrary. God commandeth mercy, liberality, pity, compassion; the world persuadeth cruelty, covetousness, hardness of heart, violence. God commandeth holiness to be fruitful in all good works, to His glory, and to increase therein to ripeness, and a full measure in Jesus Christ. But the world moveth us to filthy conversation, to defile ourselves with carnal lusts and all ungodliness.

3. As their precepts are contrary, so are the qualities of them which love the one and the other contrary. The lovers of God must be led by the Spirit of God, and bring forth the fruits thereof, as love, joy, peace, long suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance, but the servants and lovers of the world are possessed with cruelty, mercilessness, wrath. The lovers of God are pure, unrebukable, blameless before Him in love, serving Him in spirit and in truth, but the servants of the world are corrupt, deceitful from the womb, defiled with sin, flattering God with their mouth, and dissembling with Him in their double tongue.

4. Finally, the very love itself is in quality contrary. For the love of God is pure, chaste, holy, spiritual, but the love of the world is impure, unclean, profane, and sensual; wherefore no man can love God and the world. (R. Turnbull.)

The friendship of the world–enmity with God

Are we Gods people? Let us then realise the closeness and sacredness of our relation to Him. He will not allow any other being or object to share along with Him the throne of the heart, but resents every attempt and suggestion of the kind. And forget not that the world is a foreign and hostile power. Friendship with it is enmity with Him. The two are irreconcilable. Many try to please both, and fancy themselves successful. But they are grievously mistaken, for every step in its direction carries them so far away from Him, and all submission to the one is rebellion against the other. Let Christians beware of its influence, for it is stealthy and deceitful. The best defence and preservative is to have the heart filled to overflowing with the love of God–so shall the evil spirit not find the house empty, but full, and be unableto effect an entrance. Are some of you not Gods people? See how you may be admitted into His friendship; yea, how you may have Him, your Maker, as your husband. Surely it were a blessed thing to be thus united to one so great and gracious–one who can supply our every want, and deliver us from every evil–one who can be infinitely more to us than the nearest and dearest of earthly relatives, His grace alone can draw us into and fix us in this state of spiritual wedlock. And how are any made its subjects? It is only in the way of being abased, emptied of our own self-sufficiency, divested of all fancied merit, and laid at the feet of Jesus. (John Adam.)

Drawn to the world

A weeping-willow stood by the side of a pond, and, in the direction of that pond, it hung out its pensive-looking branches. An attempt was made to give a different direction to these branches. The attempt was useless: where the water lay, thither the boughs would turn. However, an expedient presented itself. A large pond was dug on the other side of the tree; and, as soon as the greater quantity of water was found there, the tree, of its own accord, bent its branches in that direction. What a clear illustration of the laws which govern the human heart! It turns to the water–the poisoned waters of sin perhaps, but the only streams with which it is acquainted. (New Cyclopaedia of Illustrations.)

Dark heavenward

When the moon shines brightest towards the earth, it is dark heavenward; and on the contrary, when it appears not, it is nearest the sun and clearest toward heaven. (Archbishop Leighton.)

The world

The world! the world! tis all title page! theres no contents. The world! it all depends on a foolish fancy! The world! it is all deceit and lies. The world! it is all vexation–in getting, in keeping, in losing it; and whether we get or lose, we are still dissatisfied. The world! a very little cross will destroy all its comforts. The world! tis only a tedious repetition of the same things. The world! will yield us no support or consolation when we most want it, namely, in the horrors of a guilty mind, and in the approaching terrors of death. The world! is unsuited to the powers, infinite passions, and immortal capacities of a soul. The world! is fickle, variable, and unstable as the wind; tis always fickle, always changeable, always unstable; there is no steadfastness in its honours, riches, pleasures; tis all a lie, all a lie for ever. The world I it never satisfies; we ever wish for change, whether we are high or low, rich or poor; we are always wishing for some new variety to cheat the imagination; the witchcraft of polluted pleasure decays in a moment, and dies. The world I its pleasures are exceedingly limited, and under most painful restraints, attended with bitter remorse, and followed with a horrible dread of bad consequences; the pleasures of impurity are mixed up with cursed disgusts and self-loathings, and have most dreadful damps and twinges of mind when the momentary witchcraft of pleasure is gone for ever. (J. Ryland.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 4. Ye adulterers and adulteresses] The Jews, because of their covenant with God, are represented as being espoused to him; and hence their idolatry, and their iniquity in general, are represented under the notion of adultery. And although they had not since the Babylonish captivity been guilty of idolatry; according to the letter; yet what is intended by idolatry, having their hearts estranged from God, and seeking their portion in this life and out of God, is that of which the Jews were then notoriously guilty. And I rather think that it is in this sense especially that St. James uses the words. “Lo! they that are far from thee shall perish; thou hast destroyed all them that go a whoring from thee.” But perhaps something more than spiritual adultery is intended. See Jas 4:9.

The friendship of the world] The world was their god; here they committed their spiritual adultery; and they cultivated this friendship in order that they might gain this end.

The word , adulteresses, is wanting in the Syriac, Coptic, AEthiopic, Armenian, Vulgate, and one copy of the Itala.

Whosoever-will be a friend of the world] How strange it is that people professing Christianity can suppose that with a worldly spirit, worldly companions, and their lives governed by worldly maxims, they can be in the favour of God, or ever get to the kingdom of heaven! When the world gets into the Church, the Church becomes a painted sepulchre; its spiritual vitality being extinct.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

Ye adulterers and adulteresses; he means adulterers and adulteresses in a spiritual sense, i.e. worldly-minded Christians, who being, by profession, married to the Lord, yet gave up those affections to the things of the world which were due to God only. The like expression is used, Mat 12:39; 16:4.

Know ye not; ye ought to know, and cannot but know.

That the friendship of the world; inordinate affection to the world, addictedness or devotedness to the things or men of the world.

Is enmity with God; alienates the sole from God, and God from it, 1Jo 2:15.

Whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world; if it be the purpose and resolution of a mans heart to get in with the world, though perhaps he cannot obtain its favour; he courts it, though it be coy to him.

Is the enemy of God; exerciseth hostility against God, by adhering to an interest so contrary to him.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

4. The oldest manuscripts omit”adulterers and,” and read simply, “Ye adulteresses.”God is the rightful husband; the men of the world are regardedcollectively as one adulteress, and individually asadulteresses.

the worldin so far asthe men of it and their motives and acts are aliens to God, forexample, its selfish “lusts” (Jas4:3), and covetous and ambitious “wars and fightings”(Jas 4:1).

enmitynot merely”inimical”; a state of enmity, and that enmity itself.Compare 1Jo 2:15, “love .. . the world . . . the love of the Father.”

whosoever . . . will beTheGreek is emphatic, “shall be resolved to be.”Whether he succeed or not, if his wish be to be the friend ofthe world, he renders himself, becomes (so the Greekfor “is”) by the very fact, “the enemy of God.”Contrast “Abraham the friend of God.”

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

Ye adulterers and adulteresses,…. Not who were literally such, but in a figurative and metaphorical sense: as he is an adulterer that removes his affections from his own wife, and sets them upon another woman; and she is an adulteress that loves not her husband, but places her love upon another man; so such men and women are adulterers and adulteresses, who, instead of loving God, whom they ought to love with all their hearts and souls, set their affections upon the world, and the things of it: the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Ethiopic versions, leave out the word “adulteresses”: these the apostle addresses in the following manner;

know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? that an immoderate love for the good things of the world, and a prevailing desire after the evil things of it, and a delight in the company and conversation of the men of the world, and a conformity to, and compliance with, the sinful manners and customs of the world, are so many declarations of war with God, and acts of hostility upon him; and show the enmity of the mind against him, and must be highly displeasing to him, and resented by him:

whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God; whoever is in league with the one must be an enemy to the other; God and mammon cannot be loved and served by the same persons, at the same time; the one will be loved, and the other hated; the one will be attended to, and the other neglected: this may be known both from reason and from Scripture, particularly from Mt 6:24.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Ye adulteresses (). (ye adulterers) is spurious (Syrian text only). The feminine form here is a common late word from the masculine . It is not clear whether the word is to be taken literally here as in Ro 7:3, or figuratively for all unfaithful followers of Christ (like an unfaithful bride), as in 2Cor 11:1; Eph 5:24-28 (the Bride of Christ). Either view makes sense in this context, probably the literal view being more in harmony with the language of verses 2f. In that case James may include more than Christians in his view, though Paul talks plainly to church members about unchastity (Eph 5:3-5).

Enmity with God ( ). Objective genitive with (predicate and so without article), old word from , enemy (Ro 5:10), with (below and Ro 8:7).

Whosoever therefore would be ( ). Indefinite relative clause with and modal and the first aorist passive (deponent) subjunctive of , to will (purpose).

A friend of the world ( ). Predicate nominative with infinitive agreeing with . See 2:23 for (friend of God).

Maketh himself (). Present passive (not middle) indicative as in 3:6, “is constituted,” “is rendered.”

An enemy of God ( ). Predicate nominative and anarthrous and objective genitive ().

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

Ye adulterers [] All the best texts omit.

Adulteresses [] . The feminine term is the general designation of all whom James here rebukes. The apostate members of the church are figuratively regarded as unfaithful spouses; according to the common Old Testament figure, in which God is the bridegroom or husband to whom his people are wedded. See Jeremiah 3; Hosea 2, 3, 4; Isa 54:5; Isa 61:4, 5. Also, Mt 12:39; 2Co 11:2; Rev 19:7; Rev 21:9. Will be [ ] . More correctly, as Rev., would be. Lit., may have been minded to be.

Is the enemy [] . Thereby constitutes himself. Rev., maketh himself. See on ch. Jas 3:6.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

1) Playing friendship (Gr. philia) with the world, the present order of things, marks one as a spiritual adulteress (Gr. Moichalides) in which state he is at enmity with God. Joh 15:19; Joh 17:14; Gal 1:4.

2) One who wills, purposes, or designs to be a friend of the world, James asserts, constitutes himself as an enemy of God, (1Jn 2:15; 1Jn 2:17). Note, it is possible to be a child of God and an enemy to Him at the same time.

WORLDLINESS

All the water in the world,

However hard it tried,

Could never sink a ship

Unless it got inside.

All the evil in the world,

The wickedness and sin,

Can never sink the soul’s craft

Unless it gets inside.

A GUIDE

Anything that dims my vision of Christ or takes away my taste for Bible study or cramps my prayer life or makes Christian work difficult is wrong for me, and I must, as a Christian, turn away from it. This simple rule may help you find a safe path for your feet along lifes road.

– J. Wilbur Chapman

REASON FOR ALARM

Thomas Guthrie used to say: If you find yourself loving any pleasure better than your prayers, any book better than the Bible, any house better than the house of God, any table better than the Lord’s table, any person better than Christ, any indulgence better than the hope of Heaven – take alarm.

– Selected

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

4 Ye adulterers. I connect this verse with the foregoing verses: for he calls them adulterers, as I think, metaphorically; for they corrupted themselves with the vanities of this world, and alienated themselves from God; as though he had said, that they had become degenerated, or were become bastards. We know how frequent, in Holy Scripture, is that marriage mentioned which God forms with us. He would have us, then, to be like a chaste virgin, as Paul says, (2Co 11:2.) This chastity is violated and corrupted by all impure affections towards the world. James, then, does not without reason compare the love of the world to adultery.

They, then, who take his words literally, do not sufficiently observe the context: for he goes on still to speak against the lusts of men, which lead away those entangled with the world from God, as it follows, —

The friendship of the world. He calls it the friendship of the world when men surrender themselves to the corruptions of the world, and become slaves to them. For such and so great is the disagreement between the world and God, that as much as any one inclines to the world, so much he alienates himself from God. Hence the Scripture bids us often to renounce the world, if we wish to serve God.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

DEDICATION TO GOD ALONE IS THE ONLY ANSWER

Text 4:48a

Jas. 4:4.

Ye adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? Whosoever therefore would be a friend of the world, maketh himself an enemy of God.

Jas. 4:5.

Or think ye that the Scripture speaketh in vain? Doth the Spirit which he made to dwell in us long unto envying?

Jas. 4:6.

But he giveth more grace. Wherefore the Scripture saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace to the humble.

Jas. 4:7.

Be subject therefore unto God: but resist the devil and he will flee from you.

Jas. 4:8.

Draw nigh unto God and he will draw night unto you.

Queries

293.

Do you think the term adulteresses refers to people who commit the physical sin of adultery, or is this used in a figurative sense?

294.

Assuming that the term adulteresses refers to spiritual adultery, are there any other cases in the Scripture where the term is used to your knowledge to refer to spiritual adultery of those who are married to God?

295.

Why do you think adulteresses is used in the feminine case here?

296.

Why do you think the King James translators wanted to add the masculine adulterers to the phrase? (It is not in the original Greek).

297. Try in this verse to identify the adulteress, the person the adulteress in married to, and the person with whom the adultery is committed. (They are all referred to in Jas. 4:4!)

298.

What does the term enmity suggest to you?

299.

Do you think the adultery described in Jas. 4:4 is a very common thing?

300.

The World refers to what? (Dont just say world, but name what it probably refers to . . . rocks and trees; money; people; a certain kind of people, or what?)

301.

Is friendliness with the unsaved forbidden in Jas. 4:4? What can friendship of the world mean?

302.

When does the Spirit take up His dwelling within us? (9 Jas. 4:5)

303.

For what, do you think, the Spirit in us longs?

304.

Do you think envy, or jealousy, is too strong a word to refer to the Spirit?

305.

Can envy be a good thing? If so, under what circumstances?

306.

Who gives the grace, God the Father or the Holy Spirit? Does it really make any difference. Why so or why not?

307.

He gives more grace . . . more than what?

308.

How is the proud in Jas. 4:6 related to Jas. 4:4?

309.

The term the Scripture in Jas. 4:6 is not in the original. The subject is not stated. Can you think of anything else that might possibly be the subject other than the Scripture?

310.

Humility suggests that something is to be surrendered, given up. What?

311.

Who are the humble of Jas. 4:6?

312.

Grace is an unmerited favor. What is the favor bestowed in Jas. 4:6?

313.

In Jas. 4:7, therefore refers back to what?

314.

Note how being subject and resisting are opposite actions.

315.

The action of the devil when he is resisted is clearly stated. But what is the action of God. (Jas. 4:7) when a person is subject to Him?

316.

Love begets love, and obviously drawing nigh begets drawing nigh in Jas. 4:8. What might be implied if we resist God?

317.

Why do you think we wish to classify Jas. 4:8 a with Jas. 4:7 in this section?

Paraphrases

A. Jas. 4:4.

You who break the marriage vows to God by embracing the world, dont you know better than this? Your affection for the pleasures of this life have made you so hostile to God you have made yourself to become His enemy.

5.

Or perhaps you simply think the Word of God does not mean what it says! The Spirit that lives inside us longs for our affection even to the point of jealous envy.

6.

But the Spirit gives us a greater measure of undeserved blessing in order that we might yet accomplish His will. To this end it says, God arranges Himself against the proud but gives unmerited favor to the humble.

7.

Therefore set yourself under Gods authority and align yourself against Satan, and he will run away from you.

8.

Come close to God and He will come close to you.

B.*Jas. 4:4.

You are like an unfaithful wife who loves her husbands enemies. Dont you realize that making friends with Gods enemiesthe evil pleasures of this worldmakes God your enemy? I say it again, that if your aim is to enjoy the evil pleasure of the unsaved world, you cannot also be a friend of God.

5.

Or what do you think the Scriptures mean when they say that the Holy Spirit, Whom God has placed within us, watches over us with tender jealousy?

6.

But He gives us strength to stand against all such evil longings. As the Scriptures say, God gives strength to the humble but sets Himself against the proud and haughty.

7.

So give yourselves humbly to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you.

8.

And when you draw close to God, God will draw close to you.

Summary

Your adultery with the world leaves Gods Spirit yearning for you, so submit yourselves to God, your husband, and resist the devil.

Comment

Universally, adultery is a particularly obnoxious sin. Because of the devils deception and because of sensuous pleasures involved, the obnoxiousness is not always apparent to the participants at the moment of involvement. But to those sinned against, the very thought is repellant. A mans most prized possession is his wife, and a wifes most precious possession is her husband. Adultery is the sin that contaminates the preciousness of that possession. A jealousy is provoked, but not as much as jealousy of what is, but a jealousy of what was. A singleness of devotion and a giving of ones self to only the mate is one of the prized rights of marriage. He or she who has lost this single devotion of the mate and has shared their mates body with another has been deeply hurt over a terrible loss. And that which was lost cannot be returned in its former singleness and purity. The knowledge of the inability to return to the purity of the former state is part of the irreparable loss.

It is God who has given man this most precious of all human relations . . . marriage. From the very beginning of man, He ordained that a particularly godlike kind of person would be a one-woman man and a one-man woman, and Till death do us part is engrained into the entire framework of marriage from the beginning. So emphatically is the sin described in the New Testament that Paul has stated by the Spirit of God Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolators, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with men . . . shall inherit the kingdom of God. (1Co. 6:9-10).

It is recognized that he or she who commits this sin may repent and return to a wholesome relationship with God even as they may repent of any sin. It is the continued practice of any sin that makes a proper relationship with God impossible. And this is just the point of spiritual adultery!
As terrible as physical adultery is, there is an adultery more terrible yet! This is spiritual adultery. Of course, he who continues in physical adultery is also committing spiritual adultery. And what is this spiritual adultery?
Every Christian is a member of the body of Christ. When we obeyed the Lord in full surrender through baptism, He added us to His body, the church. This church body is also called the bride of Christ, for whom Christ will one day come and receive unto Himself. After a discussion of the relationship of husband and wife, in which the Spirit speaks of a pure love, being holy and without blemish, He says, For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh. This mystery is great: but 1 speak in regard of Christ and the church. So we, the members that make up the bride of Christ, are presented to Him a glorious church, not having spot or blemish. (See Eph. 5:22-33).

To embrace the world, with its sensuous pleasures and carnal appetites being put ahead of devotion to Christ, is spiritual adultery. To love anything or anyone ahead of God is spiritual adultery. The prophet Hoseas unblushing faithfulness and continued love for a harlot wife is so vividly described that it appears repulsive (and was obviously intended to so appear), and even shocks ones moral sense. And through the prophets situation, the lesson from Jehovah went forth to Israel, who had for generations been committing spiritual adultery. The love of Jehovah for his bride is magnificent beyond understanding, and the indifferent adultery of Israel is worthy of all abhorrence. If the message through Hosea could not shock Israel to repent of her spiritual adultery, surely nothing could.
And so it is the Holy Spirit speaks through the same message. The ones who are married to God have embraced the world as their first love, and have thus committed adultery. In this friendship with the world they have made themselves an enemy of God an a friend of His enemy. The Holy Spirit that dwells within the Christian yearns and longs for that saints devotion as the bride of Christ.
Loving the world more than loving Christ is a sin so common with Christians that it would seem few know the terrible adultery involved. Yet James says, Ye adulteresses, dont you know better than this? The very nature of sin is to so deceive the sinner that he soon is unable to tell right from wrong. The longer the sin is embraced, the denser is the veil drawn over the eyes of understanding.
For this reason there is a desperate earnestness in admonishing the saint to give up sin and wrong-doing. This is evident in the Spirits endeavor to warn the Christian before he embraces sin too long to again see and recognize the truth. Twenty-one of the Twenty-seven New Testament books are addressed to Christians and filled with pleas to shun the embrace of the world and to cling steadfastly to Christ Jesus.
The saint, too, should feel the same desperate circumstances when a brother becomes engaged in spiritual adultery. To love the pleasures of this life James calls friendship of the world. This perpetual adultery breaks the heart of God and soon passes the point of toleration of the Christian involved. The Christian who refuses to repent soon finds his love for ungodly things of this life has changed himself into an enemy of God. He actually has a hostility toward God that keeps growing to the point of hatred. This is the meaning of enmity with God. Thus one who once loved God can, through continued sin, become a God-hater and an enemy of God.
This continued spiritual adultery is not a sin that is done accidentally, but a life that is lived deliberately and continually. Willful choice is clearly implied by the usage of the word would. Whosoever would be a friend of the world maketh himself an enemy of God. The point is, whosoever would wish to be; or would desire and intend to be . . .

It might even be implied from this section that the desire to be a friend of the world could be in the heart without doing the deeds of sin; and still the person could become an enemy of God because of the adultery in his heart. Thus, a person who names the name of Christ, yet spends his hours and his hearts devotion in longing and lusting for the sensuousness and rottenness of this life could develop a hearty hostility toward God that would lead him to be Gods enemy. This inner hatred for God might not be evident to the saints of the church, until one day it breaks forth in an act of such hatred toward godliness and such embracing of worldliness that the entire brotherhood is shocked by the sudden fall.

It might appear that overnight the person has changed from a devoted saint to a devoted sinner. Hes not in his right mind, he must be insane, would be typical remarks. In shocked disbelief, the saints who observe such a one might tremble at the possibility of a sudden fall that appears to completely transform the character in an instant. The warnings of the Spirit, however, indicate that the fall is not sudden, but began with a desire in the heart that was fed and nurtured to the point of making oneself an enemy of God.
Or think ye that the Scripture speaketh in vain? There is a problem in this portion. What Scripture is speaking in vain? A single passage? A quote that follows? If this is so, then that which follows should be a Scriptural quote: The Spirit which he made to dwell in us doth long unto envying. The difficulty is that the particular sentence is used nowhere else in the Bible! Such versions as the Revised Standard that use this sentence as a direct quote are unable to refer the reader to the passage quoted!
The more acceptable reading would be to understand that all the Scripture is speaking in vain. It is foreign to the tone and teaching of all revelation that a man could be a friend of Gods enemy and a friend of God at the same time. This lesson is evident in every account of sinful man from the beginning. From Cain and Abel through all the Patriarchs; from the beginning to the end of the children of Israel; within the Lords own apostles, the lesson is clear: a man cannot serve both God and the devil. He must hate the one or despise the other. If he is not for the Lord, he is against Him.

The last portion of verse five is more difficult yet. Whether or not it is a quote, it is still difficult to determine exactly what is said. Some of the difficulties in this portion bring up these considerations: Is it a question, or a statement? Who does the yearning? If it is God, or the Holy Spirit that longs, does He, or does He not, long unto envy?
The Revised Standard seems to indicate that God longs jealously over mans spirit which He made to dwell in man. The American Standard seems to indicate that the spirit of man which God made to dwell in man longs to the point of envy. (If so, he longs for and is envious of what?) The King James, like the American Standard, makes the sentence a direct quote. The Revised Standard does not make the sentence a direct quote, but makes it a question. (If the reader is not confused yet, let him look up a few more translations for himself!)
The clearer and most compatible rendering (to this writer) would be to say, Or do you think that the Scripture (as a whole) speaks to no profit? The (Holy) Spirit which God made to dwell in us longs (for us) to (the point of) envy.

The preference for the above exposition rests upon the phrase which He made to dwell in us. The gift of the Spirit is promised to those who are baptized into Christ (Act. 2:38). The Christians body becomes the temple of the Holy Spirit which he has from God and which dwells in him. (1Co. 6:19). The saint has the down payment of the Holy Spirit in his heart. (2Co. 1:22). Since this is one of the major teachings of the New Testament, it seems most natural to understand that it is the Holy Spirit that God made to dwell in us, and He longs for our alienated affections even to the point of envy.

This longing and yearning of the Spirit (or God, if you prefer) for the adulterous saints affection is heart-breaking. In this longing we hear Jesus weeping over adulterous Jerusalem; and if we look closely, we will see His fresh tears to-day as countless members of His bride break His heart afresh. Oh, if we could only realize His love and understand His mercy. How we need to hear the groanings by which the Spirit makes intercession for us. The grace upon grace by which we live should break our hearts. Because He first loved us, we can now love Him with His kind of love. And we can love Him to the point of full surrenderto the point of keeping His commandments.
But He (whoever was doing the longing in the previous verse) giveth more grace. This giving of grace comes from the Holy Spirit of verse five (or the Father), but certainly not from mans spirit. This reinforces the argument that it is not mans spirit in verse five that is longing. It is man that needs this grace because his adultery has caused the Spirits longing. It is a greater grace (marginal reading) that this man needs, as if shown by his sin.
But what is this grace that is given? Grace is usually thought of as an unmerited favor of forgiveness. Justification and forgiveness are truly the greatest graces of all, but certainly not the only graces. Every good gift is from God, and is an unmerited favor. Having done all, I have earned nothing of His gifts. This grace is more likely the attributes necessary to be an overcomer. When a man returns back home to the Spirit that yearns for him, and yields himself in full surrender, then the Spirit favors that man with strength and help in living the surrendered life. He would never have the strength otherwise.

Because of this (it) saith, probably refers to the Scripture; but here, unlike verse five, is a definite quote from Pro. 3:34, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace to the humble. If it is the Scripture that does the saying, then the subject immediately follows the verb. (The Greek verb is actually impersonal, with no subject: it says).

James use of the Proverbs quotation showing God (Jehovah) to be the author of grace is a direct implication of the deity of the Holy Spirit. This is true if the Holy Spirit is the author of the grace in 6a and the longing in Jas. 4:5. This is what should be expected when the unity of the Spirit and the Father are considered along with many scriptural implications concerning the deity of the Spirit.

The meaning of the proverbs quotation is that the proud man centers his life in himself and the gratification of his senses. He makes himself an enemy of God, so God resists him, or arranges Himself against him.
On the other side, the humble man is one who denies himself, and he is more likely to take up the cross and follow Christ. God gives him grace that he might do just this. It is this humble man that responds to the yearning of the Spirit, so the grace is given to him that his response might be complete.

There is a very interesting relationship between the subjection and the resisting in Jas. 4:6 b and 7. God sets Himself against those who set themselves against His authority. Pride and stubbornness make a man arrange himself against the authority of God; and like similar poles on a magnet, our repulsive action toward either God or the devil will likewise draw repulsion in return. Thus, when man is proud in resisting God, then God resists the proud; when man resists the devil, then the devil flees from man.

The opposite action is also clearly pictured: when man gives himself in subjection to God (is humble), then God gives grace. When man gives himself in subjection to the devil, then he is in turn devoured by the devil as by a roaring lion. Jas. 4:8 clearly pictures the mutual attraction between God and man: Draw nigh to God and He will draw nigh to you.

James makes it quite clear that God has allowed man to be master of his own destiny. Mans choice of heaven or hell rests on mans choice of God or the devil. The amazing thing about the entire system of grace is that God allows man to choose heaven and Gods love even though man has earned the devils destiny. The grace of God gives man the opportunity. The will and choice of man is the key. Man must choose to be with God, so God forces no man into heaven.

Gods active participation in the redemption of man is clearly set forth many places in the Scripture. God calls, God loves, God gives grace, God saves. Although Gods sacrifice and Gods call are universal, the application of that salvation offered is limited by mans own choice. Choose ye this day whom ye will serve is the plea double emphasized in the New Testament. This is the emphasis of James. James, however, is making very clear the principle that the choice of man is not manifest in a passive, non-participating faith. A wishful thought and a vague yearning for God in the man who continually surrenders his life and action to the devil does not constitute a choice for God. We draw nigh with our active life, and we cleanse our hands with a repentant and pure life.

Spiritual Adultery

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(4) Ye adulterers and adulteresses.The phrase may seem to flow naturally after the former ones, but the Received text, from which our version was made, is wrong. It should be, ye adulteresses! as accusing those who have broken their marriage vow to God. The sense is familiar to us from many passages in the Old Testament, in which God speaks of Israel in a similar manner, e.g., Psa. 73:27; Isa. 54:5; Jer. 2:2; Ezekiel 16 passim; Eze. 23:37-43; Hos. 2:2. Again in the New Testament: Mat. 12:39; Mat. 16:4; Mar. 8:38; Rev. 2:20-22; Rev. 17:1; Rev. 17:5; Rev. 17:15, &c.; St. Pauls description of the church (2Co. 11:2), espoused as a chaste virgin to Christ; and comp. 2Pe. 2:14, specially the margin. God is the Lord and husband of every soul that is His; and in her revolt from Him, and love for sin, her acts are those of an adulterous woman.

Know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God?i.e., the state of being an enemy to God, not one of simpler enmity with Him. There cannot be a passive condition to the faith of Christ: he that is not with Me is against Me (Mat. 12:30). Renunciation of the world, in the Christian promise, is not forsaking it when tired and clogged with its delights, but the earliest severance from it; to break this vow, or not to have made it, is to belong to the foes of God, and not merely to be out of covenant with Him. The forces of good and evil divide the land so sharply that there is no debatable ground, nor even halting-place between. And if God be just, so also is He jealous (Exo. 20:5).

Let us not weakly slide into the treason:
Yielding another what we owe to Him.

Whosoever therefore will be (or, wills to be) a friend of the world is the enemy of God.The choice is open; here is no iron fate, no dread necessity: but the wrong determination of the soul constitutes it henceforth as an ally of Satan. Woe unto you, when all men speak well of you (Luk. 6:26), for the world, as our Lord has taught us, must love its own (Joh. 15:19). And the sooner the soldier of Christ learns to expect its animosity, the better will he give himself up to the battle. (Comp. Mat. 6:24; Luk. 16:13.)

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

4. Adulterers is probably a spurious reading prefixed to adulteresses, which is alone genuine. We also prefer Tischendorf’s punctuation, which would read, “that you may expend it in your lusts, ye adulteresses.” Israel is often termed in the Old Testament the spouse of Jehovah, and apostate Israel is pronounced an adulteress. Said Isaiah, (Isa 54:5,) “Thy Maker is thine husband:” and Jeremiah, (Jer 2:2,) “I remember the love of thine espousals.” Said Ezekiel, (Eze 16:32,) “But as a wife that committeth adultery.” Our Lord pronounced the Jews an “adulterous generation.” (Mat 12:29; Mat 16:4; Mar 8:38.) In all probability the copyist, not perceiving this figurative sense, thought that adulterers should be added in order to include both sexes in the charge of literal adultery.

Know ye not Parallel with think ye, do ye think, in next verse, with an or between the two. These two parallel questions start, first, the antithesis between the friendship of the world and the friendship of God; and, second, the contrast made by God against envy and the proud in favour of the humble. This drift of the thought is important as key to the difficulty found by commentators in the interpretation of Jas 4:5. Friendship (rather, love) of the world What is meant by world when it is thus condemned in lump? Not merely the secular business of the world, or human society, or the State, or the organic system of human things as such. The existence of such things is right. To say otherwise is to introduce a most disastrous and demoralizing monasticism. And this organic structure of human things is largely at the present age fused over with Christian influences. The living world of our present Christendom is not as bad as the world of the apostolic age.

Enmity with God For he who loves the world as ruled by Satan is at war with God and his kingdom.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘You adulteresses. Do you not know that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? Whoever therefore would be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.’

Thus they are also like adulteresses craving what will satisfy their thirst for pleasure. For adulteresses as a vivid metaphor see Mat 12:39, and the vivid pictures in Ezekiel 16. They have turned from God Who gives to all men liberally, and are looking to the world for their pleasure. And they like what they see in the world, and so they concentrate their attention on it. The world is their friend, and they crave after it like a woman craves for a man and will do anything to get him, and they fail to realise that such things and such attitudes put them at loggerheads with God. For what the world is after is not what God is after. All that is in the world, the desires of the flesh, the desires of the mind, and the search to be ‘someone’, is not of the Father but is of the world (1Jn 2:16). Thus each one who makes himself a friend of the world, and its aims and ambitions, also thereby makes himself an enemy of God. The point is that we cannot always choose the environment in which we find ourselves, but we can always choose what we will set our hearts on, and James makes clear that to choose the way that the world chooses is to take up a position of opposition towards God. There is no question of having both God and the world. We cannot serve both God and Mammon (Mat 6:24).

‘You adulteresses.’ The lack of ‘adulterers’ (later introduced by copyists), confirms that this is mainly metaphorical, for James was no doubt familiar with Jesus’ similar use of the term (Mat 12:39). It goes along with the strong language about wars which was intended to cover all belligerence, and killing which was to include killing in the mind. Nevertheless Paul also gives the impression of ‘silly women’ connected with the church who indulged their passions with wayward preachers (2Ti 3:6), and James may have known of such cases. However, we must certainly see his term as going wider than that, for this is a general letter. The change from the male to the female sinner is deliberate in order to bring out that not all the fault lies with the men. While the women may not ‘go to war’ so much, they are equally likely to be ‘friends of worldliness’. But in the end both men and women are involved throughout.

‘A friend of the world.’ This is in stark contrast with Abraham who was the friend of God (Jas 2:23). All must choose whom they will serve. Abraham had his eyes on God. These ‘adulteresses’ have their eyes on the world. The question, therefore, for us is, Where are our eyes fixed?

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Jam 4:4. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, Great wickedness, and especially idolatry, among the Jews, is often represented as adultery. What follows in this verse shews, that by adultery St. James meant spiritual idolatry, or a love of the world more than of God. See Mat 6:24; Mat 12:30. Luk 12:15; Luk 12:59. The word signifies properly is adjudged; and there is a considerable emphasis in the expression: “It is declared and adjudged beyond controversy, that he is an enemy of God.”

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Jas 4:4 . ] The Rec. has not only the most important authorities against it, but is also easily explained, because the term was taken in its literal sense, which is expressly done by Augusti, Jachmann, and Winer. The context, however, proves that the literal meaning is not here to be retained. If the idea is used in a figurative sense, according to the view which prevails in Psa 73:27 (Isa 57:3 ff.; Eze 23:27 ), Hos 2:2 ; Hos 2:4 , and other passages of the O. T. (comp. also Mat 12:39 ; Mat 16:4 ; as also 2Co 11:2 ; Rev 2:22 ), and as the context requires, then every reason for a distinction of sex ceases. Theile, Lange, Brckner have therefore correctly declared for the reading . Theile’s opinion: non minus recte singuli homines scorta dicuntur, quam totum genus atque universa aliqua gens scortum, is so far inappropriate, as the expression used “of individuals in the church of God is certainly singular” (Wieseler); it is here to be referred not to individuals, but to the churches to whom James writes (not “the Jewish factions into which Judaism was sundered,” Lange); so also Brckner. These, according to the conduct described by James, had fallen away from God, and therefore James, full of moral indignation, addresses them with these certainly severe words.

, ] points the readers to their own conduct.

] By expositors understand either worldly goods (Pott, Gebser, Hottinger, Schneckenburger, Theile, Wiesinger) or worldly desires (Didymus, Laurentius), or both of these together (de Wette, Stier); and by , the inclination of the heart diverted toward worldly things. But it is more correct to take in the same sense as in chap. Jas 1:27 (see explanation of that passage), and to understand of reciprocal friendship; yet so that active conduct toward the world here predominates. The Christian who aims at worldly glory conforms himself (contrary to the admonition in Rom 12:2 ) to the world, attaching himself to its pursuits, and is thus inclined to it with his heart, his endeavour at the same time being to be esteemed and not despised by the world. The explanation of Piscator: amicitia cum impiis, is in essentials correct. The term ( . . in N. T.) does not suit the usual explanation. [194]

] expresses as a reciprocal relation; yet here also the active reference predominates, on account of which most expositors explain it directly by (Rom 8:7 ), although Pott gives also the explanation: ad ejusmodi agendi rationem nos abripit, quae Deo displicet, nosque privat amore divino. Lachmann, following the translation of the Vulgate: inimica , has adopted the reading , by which, however, the peculiar force which consists in the opposition of the two substantives is removed.

From the judgment here expressed concerning the , James infers the sentiment that follows: , therefore.

. . .] By the usual explanation of . , and of the corresponding , is at all events disconcerting. Whilst some expositors urge that by it designed and conscious intention is designated (Baumgarten), and others oppose it to the actual deed, [195] and find the idea expressed that even the simple inclination to the love of the world (de Wette: “whosoever has perchance willed to love the world”) effects , [196] Schneckenburger, on the contrary, says: verbi cave premas vim. With each of these explanations the expression retains something strange, which also is not removed by distinguishing, with Lange, the “formal” and the “material intention,” and understanding only of the latter. But it is different as soon as is considered not as an aggregate of things but of persons, since then , as above remarked, consists in a reciprocity. The meaning is: Whosoever, although a Christian, giving himself up to the pursuits of the world, will live in friendship with it, and thus will be not despised but esteemed and loved by it, has directed to it his wish ( ) [197] he (thereby) is constituted an enemy of God; ] is likewise used in the sense of reciprocal relation, although here the passive meaning predominates.

] has here the same meaning as in chap. Jas 3:6 (so also Lange); it is generally rendered incorrectly = ; inaccurately by Theile = fit, sistitur; by Schneckenburger = stands there as; by Bouman = constituitur divino in judicio.

[194] According to Lange, the friendship with the world consisted “in the chiliastic desire of the enjoyment of a worldly glory which was only coloured with hierarchical piety.”

[195] Laurentius states this opposition in the most definite terms: non si tantum est inimicus Dei, qui est ipso opere amicus mundi, sed etiam ille, qui cum non possit, vult tamen et sic voluntate implet, quod ipso opere non potest.

[196] Similarly also Wiesinger: “James brings under the same judgment not only the decided and expressed love to the world, but even the inclination to step into such a relation to the world.”

[197] In essentials Estius correctly says: Terribilis valde sententia adversus cos qui suas actiones et studia componunt ad gratiam humanam. Hoc enim vere est esse amicum hujus seculi.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

VIII. SIXTH ADMONITION

EXHORTATION TO REPENTANCE ADDRESSED TO THE JEWISH CHRISTIANS AND THE JEWS IN REFERENCE TO THEIR BEING ON THE WAY TO APOSTASY. THEY ARE ADDRESSED AS (RELIGIOUS) ADULTERERS AND ADULTERESSES, AS APOSTATES. THEIR FRIENDSHIP OF THE WORLD, WHICH IS THE CAUSE OF THEIR IMPENDING APOSTASY, THEY WERE TO ACKNOWLEDGE AS ENMITY OF GOD, TO REPENT OF IT AND TO RETURN FROM THEIR WORLDLY RUNNING AND WANDERING TO THE QUIETNESS OF A CONDUCT MARKED BY HUMILITY AND RESIGNATION TO THE DIVINE WILL

Jam 4:4-17

4Ye adulterers4 and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world5 is enmity with God6 whosoever7 therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy8 of 5God. Do ye think that the Scripture saith in vain,9 The spirit that dwelleth in us lusteth to envy? 6But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble. 7Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist10 the devil, and he will flee from you. 8Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye doubleminded. 9Be afflicted, and mourn, and11 weep: let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to heaviness. 10Humble yourselves in the sight of the12 Lord, and he shall lift you up. 11Speak not evil one of another, brethren. He that speaketh evil of his brother, and13 judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth the law: but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a Judges 12 There is one lawgiver,14 who is able to save and to destroy: who art thou15 that judgest another?16 13Go to now, ye that say, To day or17 to morrow we will go18 into such a city, and continue19 there20 a year,21 and buy and sell, and get gain: 14Whereas ye know not what22 shall be on the morrow. For what is your life?23 It Isaiah 24 even a vapour, that appeareth for a little time, and25 then vanisheth away. 15For that ye ought to say, If the Lord will,26 we shall live,27 and do this, or that. 16But now ye rejoice28 in your boastings: all29 such rejoicing is evil. 17Therefore to him that knoweth to do30 good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Analysis:Reproach of the impending apostasy, Jam 5:4.Exhortation to a better and higher aim, Jam 4:5-6.The characteristics of their conversion to God on theocratic fundamental ideas (the new allegiance of the people of God, their purification, penitential mourning, and humiliation according to their situation) Jam 4:7-10.Renovation of their conduct towards the brethren, Jam 4:11-12.Dissuasion from their restless, gain-seeking and self-willed wandering through the world in consideration of the approaching storm of judgment Jam 4:13-15.Reproof of their false security and forewarning of their conscience, Jam 4:16-17.

Reproach of the impending apostasy.

Jam 4:4. Ye adulteresses, know ye not.The fact, that the majority of commentators are in favour of the Text. Rec. the authorities to the contrary notwithstanding, and that they consequently read; ye adulterers and adulteresses, is rightly accounted for by Huther, who says that it arises from their taking the term in a literal sense, which is expressly done by Augusti, Lachmann and Winer. But we can hardly conceive any thing more extravagant than to suppose that James would brand all Jewish Christians as literal adulterers and adulteresses. It is however in perfect keeping with the symbolical language of the Old Testament that James here describes the Judaistic bias to apostasy from the living God of revelation, Psa 73:27; Isa 57:3; Eze 23:27; Hosea; Mat 12:39; Mat 16:4; 2Co 11:2; Rev 2:22. The wonder is that t this passage has not led commentators to learn the symbolical character of the whole Epistle, and more particularly the symbolical character of the rich in James 2 and James 5. The only suprising part of this exposition is the occurrence of the feminine adulteresses, a term which Theile considers to be not altogether fitting, which Wiesinger calls singular as applied to individuals, while Huther remarks that the term should be referred to Churches. Besides it is noteworthy that symbolical adultery according to the usage of the Old Testament and according to the figure itself is feminine inasmuch as it describes the apostasy of the Lords bride. To this must be added that the Apostle is not addressing now the Jewish Christian Churches in particular, but Judaism in general, such as, in the preceding section, he saw it sundered into the most diverse factions. The Plural probably denotes this disruption, not only the several synagogues but also the several factions.

Know ye not.From your theocratical calling to the covenant with God as opposed to the ungodly world, and from your teaching and knowledge.

That the friendship of the world:That is befriending and alliance with an ungodly world (Jam 1:27; cf. 1Jn 2:15), not merely inclination to wordly goods (Theile and al.), nor worldly desires (Laurentius), nor both of these together (de Wette). The world is personified in this antithesis; it is idolatry depicted as a whole, the vanity of mankind deifying itself and deified (i.e., ungodliness showing itself in its propensity for the impersonal) connected with the whole visible world frustrated by it. The Judaistic friendship for the world, which must be taken chiefly in an active sense, consisted just in the chiliastic desire of enjoying a worldly glory which at the best was only dyed hierarchically pious (in sensual enjoyment, honour and dominion cf. Matthew 4). It is to be noticed that this vain worldliness concealed itself under the garb of a pious fleeing from the world (the hatred of heathenism, even of Gentile-christian, pretended uncleanness).

Is enmity of God.Here also the predominant active sense must be held fast on which account the majority of commentators interpret it straightway by (Rom 8:7) Huther. Lachmann following the inimica of the Vulgate, has even adopted the reading [which, however, is also the reading of the Cod. Sin.M.], which greatly weakens the weight of the idea.

Whoever therefore shall be minded to be a friend of the world.Inference drawn from what precedes. . The difficulty which has been found in this expression, because it seems to involve an intentional choice of evil, is set aside if we distinguish between a formal and a material intention. The Apostle certainly could not suppose his readers to have the formal intention of surrendering to the world. But it was very different with the material intention of taking a direction in worldliness which involved the friendship of the world. But this was precisely the case with the rebellious chiliasm of the Jews, even with the worldly-mindedness of Judaistic Christians. And in this sense the term certainly lays stress both on the conscious intention (Baumgarten) and on the antithesis of their doing which had already become a reality. Whosoever is devoted to the world, although as yet only in his heart (not, as Wiesinger, who for the present is only inclined that way), has stood up as the enemy of God, because our attitude to God is determined by the attitude of our heart. The Lord looketh at the heart. Huthers laying stress on the construction that the world must be taken here as an aggregate of persons, because then consists in a reciprocity, seems to be an expedient beside the mark. That the world is represented as an aggregate of persons stands to reason; but the question is whether the persons are to be honoured as persons or dishonoured as impersonal things as a means of selfishness. However he rightly observes that here as in Jam 3:6, must not be weakened, but denotes he takes the attitude. We render he stands up, or appears, because this brings out the as yet inward character of his attitude. [On the whole is constituted seems to be the best rendering of the term in English; it does not touch the inward or the outward attitude in particular but involves either and this seems really to be the Apostles meaning. It is immaterial whether the mans purpose be latent, uttered in words or manifest in deeds, in any case he is constituted an enemy of God.M.].

Exhortation to a better and higher aim, Jam 4:5-6.

Jam 4:5. Or do ye fancy that the Scripture saith in vain.This passage is one of the most difficult in the New Testament; we must therefore refer the reader to the Commentaries for a full discussion of the question (see Schneckenburger, Beitrge, p. James 193: Huther, Wiesinger, etc.). We have first to set aside the really desperate expositions which aim at improving the text (see Huthers note p. 166) and then the connection of with what goes before. The Scripture saith against envy (du Mont), or: Think ye that the Scripture speaks in vain and enviously ( adverbially, Gebser)? But in that case ought to precede . We consider the exposition of Beza, Grotius and al.: The spirit of man has a natural bias to envy as underrated by Huther. In that case the words have to be connected with what the Scripture says of the envy of Cain, and similar passages. But that exposition is inadmissible, for 1. The spirit is described as having taken up its abode in us and consequently distinguished from ourselves, 2. . . . would be without a subject. The first difficulty, indeed, would be obviated if we could take in the sense of according to Wisd, 2, 24.= . Huther undervalues the similar exposition of Semler ad. Jam 5:7, saying, because of its strangeness we make room for Semlers note on this passage: Jacobus, Paulus, Petrus, Judas uno quasi ore id confirmant, opus esse, ut Romanis et sic (!) Deo se subjiciant and further on: , qui per vos suscitat adversus magistratum romanum. But the want of a subject to deters us from adopting this exposition somewhat as follows: even the Holy Scripture testifies that there has come among us a spirit which excites that envy which is the specific attribute of that love of the world which causes the wars and fightings described above (see the book of Jonah). Less tenable is the exposition which makes the spirit to denote the Divine Spirit but takes the respective words interrogatively, as follows, num ad invidiam proclivis est Spiritus Sanctus? minime (so Gabler and similarly Bede, Calvin and al.). Where the citation from Holy Writ introduces the subject, we hardly expect an interrogative sentence. The interpretation of de Wette, Huther and al. is at present urged more than any other. Huther: Or do ye think that the Scripture speaks in vain? (No) the Spirit, that has taken His abode in us, enviously desires us, but gives (so much the) more grace; therefore He saith, etc.The parentheses abundantly show how very forced is this interpretation, which is also advocated by Schneckenburger and al. Our objections to it are as follows: 1. The anthropomorphism that the Spirit of God loves us even unto envy is too strong. The reference to , the jealousy of God in the conjugal relation He sustains to His people, is allowable but is not , which is uniformly mentioned in Holy Scripture as a source of evil. To this must be added 2. The postulated supplements and the defective antithesis but He gives so much the more grace, etc. But this mode of expression at first sight grows even more dark, if we understand with Wiesinger as the object of the human spirit, supplying as the subject: Divine Love enviously desires the object of its Love, that is, the human spirit from God (i.e., aus Gott=emanating from GodM.], which turns either to God or to the world. If we bear in mind that had been named immediately before, the envious loving remains in the first place, and then appears as a loving which is only directed to the Spirit. This applies also to the similar interpretation of Theile, who supplies however instead of . However, even if we wished to retain the interpretation of Wiesinger or Huther we should be obliged to go back to the passage Exo 20:5. The jealousy of God would be expressed in His visiting the iniquity of idolatry (=adultery) on the children of the third and fourth generation, and the antithesis but showing mercy unto thousands, etc., would be adequately expressed in . With reference to the citation in question, we have the following conjectures which we give in brief from Huther: Gen 6:8; Gen 6:5 (Grotius), Gen 8:21 (Erasmus, Beza, etc.), Num 11:29 (Witsius), Deu 5:9 (Schneckenburger), Deu 32:21 (Heisen), Psa 119:20 (Clericus), Pro 21:10 (Michaelis), Son 8:6 (Coccejus), Wisdom of Son 6:12 (Wettstein). Others again have gessed at passages from the New Testament, at some lost passage in the prophets, at a passage in the Apocryphal book called the Testament of the twelve Patriarchs or at a collective statement of different passages of Holy Scripture. Huther denies the fact of a citation altogether and believes the reference to be to a statement of James and that adverts either to the idea immediately preceding or to the citation introduced with in Jam 5:6 : , etc. After all the interpretations given, that of Luther (Gomarus, Bengel and al.) still continues to possess much weight, viz., the spirit lusteth against hatred=invidia, (cf. Gal 5:17); in favour of which may be produced the following passages: Psa 37:1, etc.; Psa 5:34, etc.; Psa 73:3, etc. Huther can hardly dispute successfully that in point of language may be equivalent to and that may be taken in the sense of . But we still want the subject for . . . and we are driven to recognize it in itself. Then it is the Divine Spirit in believers on the one hand, mediating in them a longing going beyond the love of the world (Rom 8:23-26), and on the other also a grace which is beyond all longing, praying and understanding (1Co 2:9; Eph. 3:22). We therefore construe the passage with reference to Psa 37:1 and Psa 73:3 as follows: over against and opposed to envy (which is really at the bottom of your worldliness and is the very soul of your wars, fightings and insurrections) the Spirit who took abode among us, utters a higher longing ( emphatic), and not in vain; for the self-same Spirit mediates also the grace which goes even beyond our longing in Him. The Jews in consequence of the envy of their worldliness became unbelieving with-respect to Christianity (Act 13:45; Act 22:22), and rebellious toward the Romans; but the spirit which lived and acted in the true theocrats from Abel to Asaph (Psalms 73) and from him and the prophets to the Christians, coming in contact with it [envy?M.] was longing beyond it and its objects for the immortal. And as envy shows itself in the proud whom God opposes, so that longing shows itself in the humble to whom He gives grace. We therefore give our sense of this passage by way of paraphrase. The friendship of the world of which envy is really the soul, and the friendship of God, of which the longing of the Spirit is really the soul are incompatibles and inimically opposed to each other. This may be proved from Scripture. For as to our relation to God it says not without reason that the strong longing of the Divine Spirit, who took up His abode in us (who united with our spirit, is the spirit of prayer, of our yearning for heavenly riches; while as the Spirit of Divine consolation and peace He mediates for us a grace which is even greater than our longing), bids defiance to and is opposed to envy which is the truest form of the spirit of the world. But as to the relation of God to ourselves, the Scripture saith: God resists the haughty and proud who are at one with the spirit of envy, while He gives grace to the humble who are at one with the poor in spirit. On the meaning of =in relation or in proportion to, or against, in opposition to cf. the Lexica. The sentence, more clearly defined, would read thus: .The Comparative greater (more) grace must consequently not be referred to the antithesis: what the friendship of the world does give (Bede, Gebser and al.), or eo majorem, quo longius recesseris ab invidia (Bengel), or according to an obscure thought: as compared with the case that the did not take place (Wiesinger, de Wette, Huther).

[Without reconsidering this bewildering conflict of opinions, the view which seems to harmonize best with the context and the line of James argument, is to take as the object, and understanding the Holy Spirit, to supply as the subject and to render adverbially. The (Holy) Spirit that He (God) planted in us, jealously desireth [us]. The expression is highly figurative and alludes to the conjugal relation between God and the soul of believers. The Spirit of God implanted in us, jealously desireth us, jealously desires us to break entirely with the world and to be wholly consecrated and devoted to God. Any temporizing with the world would be spiritual adultery.Then as to the citation from Scripture referred to we hold with many commentators that James gives the general sense of Scripture without specifying a particular passage. Alford takes the same view.M.].

Jam 4:6. This greater grace is the greater measure of the comforting and satisfying Spirit as related to the longing Spirit. , that is the same Scripture, not . [But why not refer to the Holy Spirit? He speaks in us and in the Holy ScripturesM.]. is very apposite: just as the Scripture speaks of our relation to God, so it speaks of Gods relation to us. The passage in question is Pro 3:34 LXX., which has however instead of . [The same variation occurs in 1Pe 5:5.M.]. (not exactly equivalent to the in Rom 12:16) are the same as the rich in Jam 5:1 etc. or in the Sermon on the Mount, Luk 6:24 etc. In like manner the represent the poor, the lowly, the wretched in a symbolical sense, so much comforted in the Old Testament, or the poor in spirit, the suffering, the meek and the merciful of the Sermon on the Mount.

The characteristics of conversion to God required of the readers of the Epistle, or theocratic fundamental ideas.The new allegiance of the people of God. Their approach, purification, penitential mourning and humiliation according to their situation. Jam 4:7-10.

Jam 4:7. Subject yourselves therefore to God.Now follows a series of theocratic ideas in the process of the New Testament fulfilment or completion, which significantly reflect in consecutive order the several moments of Jewish conversion; a circumstance which seems to be not sufficiently noticed by Exegesis. Subject yourselves to God; become once more His real subjects, as the people of God, in opposition to your leaning to apostasy. This is the first and the whole, an exhortation not exclusively addressed to the decided . Calvin emphasizes the circumstance that the reference is not to obedience to God in general, but to submissio in particular. Semler indeed maintained that they were exhorted ut Romanis se subjiciant, et sic Deo, but it is rather the reverse; they were first to subject themselves to God and then in consequence of it, to the power appointed to rule them. Their submission to the rule of the living God was moreover to exhibit itself in their humbly getting reconciled to the new order of things, the change of Judaism into Christianity, the unity of Jews and Gentiles in Christianity and the existing rule of pagan Rome.

But resist the devil.Not only because he is the enemy of God and the prince of this world, by the attractions of which they suffer themselves to be enticed, but especially because he is the demon of self-boasting and envy, who assumes the garb of an angel of light, and desires then by representing that his temptation to sedition is a call from God, Jam 1:13.Being only half-decided and doubting make the tempter bold and strong, while resolute courage in God and resistance unmask him in his impotence; for real courage and real power come from God; the power of Satan is a lying phantom-power (Matthew 4). It is only in the self-temptation of man that the temptation of Satan can become efficient. [Huther quotes Hermas, Pastor, 2, 12. , , , .M.].

Draw nigh to God.The allegiance of the people of God is followed by their drawing near to Him. or in relation to God is a specifically theocratical idea. Exo 20:21; Exo 24:2; Lev 16:1; Eze 40:46; cf. Isa 29:13; Heb 7:19; hence the expression Korban, that which is consecrated or offered to God. Here drawing near is used in the N. T. real sense=convert yourselves. The particular although not the exclusive reference to prayer.

And He will draw nigh to you.The antithesis Resist the devil and he shall flee from you corresponds to the antithesis Draw nigh to God and He will draw nigh to you. (See 2Ch 15:2; Isa 57:15; Zec 1:3).

Jam 4:8. Cleanse the hands, ye sinners.The first specifically theocratic act. The expression refers to the Levitical purifications, the negative part of Levitical repentance, separateness from the world. The prophets did already apply this symbolical purification to ethical purification or rather interpret it ethically according to its profound import. See Isa 1:15-16; Psa 18:21; Psa 24:4; He that hath clean hands and a pure heart. The hands are the organ and symbol of ethical actions. To cleanse the hands signifies therefore to repent (Pott), to become separate from evil works, especially from lovelessness and wrong. This summons does not begin the summons to conversion (Huther), for it is already implied in the words Subject yourselves to God, which branch out into two moments, the negative to resist the devil, and the positive to draw nigh to God. This approach to God, in its turn, branches out into purification and sanctification in the narrow sense.

Consecrate your hearts.The real consecration of our life to God consists in the consecration of the heart, in its surrender to God (Psa 51:12; Psa 51:18-19; Pro 23:26; Jer 31:33; 1Pe 3:15 etc.). The words ye sinners relate to the cleansing of the hands, the words ye double-minded to the consecration of the heart. The term probably alludes more particularly to the unchastity of the heart, as the source of religious adultery. Wavering and unchastity are here alike, so are on the other hand simplicity or decision and chastity.They are sinners in a particular sense according to theocratic ideas, as far as they are about to excommunicate themselves by their evil actions (Jam 2:3), to burden themselves with the ban of the real congregation of God (publicans and: sinners=those who are liable to the discipline of the synagogue); but the reason lies in this double-mindedness, their wavering (Jam 1:7-8), l their mischievous halting between God and the world, between Christianity and apostasy. Calvins note is almost superfluous: non duo hominum genera designat, sed eosdem vocat peccatores et duplices ammo. It is evident from Jam 4:6; Jam 4:8 that this exhortation to their own self-activity presupposes the grace of God as the source of strength.

Jam 4:9. Feel miserable and mourn.Hardly limited to the mourning which introduces and accompanies the repentance of individuals; the type is found in the Old Testament extraordinary acts of penitence which in situations of uncommon offences and peril were performed to complete the ordinary acts of penitence, viz. purifications and consecrations or offerings, Exo 33:4; Jdg 2:4; Jdg 21:2; 1Sa 7:6 etc.The verb ( . in N. T.; the adjective form in Rom 7:24; Rev 3:17; the noun Rom 3:16; Jam 5:1), denotes primarily to go outwardly through hard work, to endure hardship or distress, then the inward sense of misery on account of outward or inward wretchedness. Grotius and Roman Catholic theologians apply it without reason to castigations. Jewish fasting and other castigations as symbols of penitential sorrow are indeed the type, but Christian penitential sorrow must not be changed back into legal symbolism.

Mourn and weep.See Neh 8:9; Mar 16:10; Luk 6:25; Rev 18:15; Rev 18:19. The putting on of mourning-apparel or sitting in sackcloth and ashes (Grotius) can only be the type of the Gospel requirement of inward mourning (2Co 7:10).

Let your laughter be turned.Isa 65:13; Luk 6:25. James passes from the outward manifestation (-) to the inward state (). Huther., casting down of the eyes, literally and figuratively. Hence shame and humiliation, ., Luk 18:13.

Jam 4:10. Humble yourselves before the Lord.The fundamental idea of the leadings of the Old Testament and the O. T. fundamental rule of piety and of the promises attached to it; it has met its fulfilment in the humiliation and exaltation of Christ and must be realized in the life of believers (Rom 6:4; Job 5:11; Eze 21:26; Mat 23:12; Luk 14:11; 1Pe 5:6; cf. Sir 2:17). As this humbling must be realized inwardly in the bowing of repentance before God ( ), and outwardly in the patient enduring of the humiliating state of servitude and lowliness ( , 1. pet. Jam 5:6) appointed by Him, so the exaltation also should begin with the inward consciousness of the exaltation, liberty and glory of the Divine Sonship [i. e. the state of being the children of God in Christ=Gotteskindschaft; , adoptionM.] and come to its outward consummation in the future glory, of which we have however some antepast here on earth. does not exactly signify Christ (Grotius), nor as opposed to Christ (Huther and al.). James wants to see the living God of revelation recognized in Christ.

Renovation of their conduct towards the brethren. Jam 4:11-12.

Jam 4:11. Do not calumniate one another, brethren.Huther thinks that this exhortation, couched in a milder form than the preceding and exhibiting a contrast in the address, being opposed to , , , intimates that James now addresses, at least primarily, another class of persons, namely those who by the worldly ways of the former felt induced to do those things against which he exhorts them. But Wiesinger takes a more correct view as the transition: The connection is as follows: if they thus humble themselves before God, they must not deny humility in the judgment they pass on their brethren. He therefore exhorts them to put away imaginary superiority to others in judging them, which is really an arrogant usurping of the judicial functions of God. The end corresponds to the beginning. Worldly pride the source of strife, humble submission to God the end thereof. He adds however he refers particularly to the oppressed. But really there is no reason to see here already a distinct transition from one class to another. Slander and judging were the very soul of their fanatical doings in relation to their brethren. In Jam 3:1 also he addresses the brethren, although the sequel contains the severest kind of reprimand. found here and 1Pe 2:12; 1Pe 3:16. It denotes not only slandering (backbiting, Luther) but also evil contradiction, retorting.

He that calumniateth or judgeth his brother.The Participles and are stronger than the indicative: he, whose characteristic consists in that he calumniates his brother. Huther thinks that while always includes =to condemn, the reverse holds not good. This would make the former the stronger expression, but we consider the latter to be so. passes from a loveless and therefore from a hateful judging of ones neighbour to a similar condemnation of him. Wiesinger says indeed that the context affords not the slightest occasion to think here of quarrels among Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians, but the spirit of the whole Epistle constrains us to think of it, although the word shows that the primary reference here is to the internal divisions of Judaism. James probably alludes more particularly to the expressions and accusations which the Jews as Judaists and unfree Jewish Christians were wont to bring against the believing and more believing Jews. This seems to follow from the sequel He that calumniateth, etc., calumniateth the law. Schneckenburger rightly observes that the epithet brother given to the slandered persons emphasizes the peculiarly reprehensible character of calumny. But the sequel shows that the Apostle, by the use of this word, still aims at something more. designates here, as in Jam 1:25; Jam 2:9, etc., the Old Testament law in its New Testament fulfilment. Hence the idea of Huther is right that slandering and condemning ones brother is really slandering and condemning the law itself, viewed as the law of the Christian life and more particularly as the law of love, for such conduct amounts to rejecting it as an unjust law; but the Apostles idea seems to be more comprehensive, viz., the condemnation of ones brother from the standpoint of fanatical motives is a condemnation of the essential according to its inmost evangelical import and especially as to its tendency of saving and not condemning. Thus the condemnation of ones brother in all cases is not only without the law and contrary to the law, but it falls also upon the law itself. This was perfectly clear in the case where the Jews judged the Christians; they judged the whole revelation (Joh 5:45-46); but in the opposite case also, i. e., that is where Christians judged the Jews, judgment was passed on the heart-point of the law, viz.: the promise of grace. De Wette, who sees in the respective expression only a figurative, pointed speech indicating the disregard of the law, dilutes the idea. Surely Grotius, Baumgarten, Hottinger are not altogether wrong (as Huther thinks) in understanding as the Christian doctrine and perceiving here the idea that whosoever burdens his neighbour with arbitrary commandments, pronounces upon the deficiency of the Christian doctrine and in so far sets himself up as its judge. For this is just the manner of those who condemn; occupying a false standpoint, in particular that of illiberal legalism, they set themselves up as judges over the word of revelation, which judges no man uncharitably and is unwilling that any man should be absolutely condemned and least of all he, who has taken his standpoint in that very word.

But if thou judgest the law, i. e., if thou settest thyself up condemningly over it.

Thou art not a doer of the law.Although thou boastest, to be zealous and jealous of it to the highest degree.

But a judge. The question is does this mean 1, a judge who from another standpoint judges and condemns the law itself, that is a God-hostile adversary of the law, an out and out anomist [, without law, a lawless man.M.], which would require us to supply the Genitive after (so Neander, Wiesinger and al.), or 2, does denote absolutely the judge who administers the law in judging men? This interpretation is opposed by Huther to the former, with the remark that the former makes this sentence and the one preceding it tautological, that it dilutes the antithesis of doer and judge and that the sequel adverts not to a judging of the law but to a judging of men. As to tautology, it does not belong to the first interpretation, because we have then the climax, not doers but condemners of the law. The antithesis observer and despiser of the law is surely much stronger than that of doer and guardian of the law. Lastly the idea condemner of the law is substantiated with what goes before. But the relation is such that the anti-judge is also always pseudo-judge just as anti-Christ is also always Pseudo-Christ.

Jam 4:12. One is the Lawgiver and Judge.He is One, which is emphatic, not only as contrasted with all men, of whom this is not true, but also in the unity of the Lawgiver and the Judge (Morus), which does not suffer to rise a contradiction between the spirit of the law and the spirit of the judgment such as it ought to exist if the judging of the Judaists were authorized. Now His power to judge has developed itself in the first place as the power to save or to render blessed and in the second as the power to destroy or to damn. The sequel therefore is not a further predicate: He is able to save, etc. (Luther), but states the characteristic, He, who is able. This intimates at least that the Judge is the God of the Gospel, who saves or damns men according to their belief or unbelief, Mar 16:16.He manifests Himself in fact as this and thus establishes His exclusive prerogative to judge. Bengel: Nostrum non est judicare, prsertim cum exequi non possimus.

But who art thou.Impotent before that judicial majesty and power of God, moreover as a sinner guilty of the judgment and in want of grace (see Rom 14:4).

That judgest.Really who makest judging thy business: , with the Article to which Schneckenburger calls attention. But this word evidently serves to introduce the sequel, according to which a great judgment is impending on these judges.

Dissuasion from their restless, gain-seeking and self-willed wandering through the world in consideration of the approaching storm of judgment. Jam 4:13-15.

Jam 4:13. Well then, ye that say.Huther, who is supported by many predecessors (Oecumenius, Bede, Sender, Pott, Hottinger and al.), thinks that James now addresses no longer members of the Christian Church, but the rich; viz., rich Jews, according to the forementioned explanation of the term rich. Gebser and al. contradict this view; Wiesinger holds that James addresses simply a particular class of his readers. But the Apostles address really avoids every definite outward classification. His Epistle is addressed to the twelve tribes by the hands of the Jewish Christian, i. e., primarily to these with the intent that they should use the Epistle for missionary purposes among their brethren. But as James looks upon Judaism as a solidary31 guilt and perverseness attaching to the whole people, although mostly to the unbelieving Jews, so all his exhortations and warnings are addressed through the Jewish Christians to all Jews. Still so that the centre of gravity in his address is continually progressing from the Jewish Christians to the Jews. With respect to this section of the Epistle, while it still describes a gain-loving, trafficking Jewish wandering through the world, of which the Jewish Christians as well as the Jews might readily become guilty, at least to some extent, yet it is evidently the transition to the subsequent prophetical lamentation over the rich, i. e., over the hardened part of the Jewish people, especially their leaders, and is consequently addressed more particulary to the Jews.The interjection (here and James 5; not found elsewhere in the New Testament), according to Theile=age audite, refers doubtless to the announcement of the judgment, which comes out quite clear in Jam 5:1, but is here darkly and menacingly alluded to. James is anxious to communicate to his readers his sorrowful forebodings of the judgment impending on his people. Grotius renders: jam ego ad vos, de Wette construes it as calling upon them to lay aside the respective fault, Huther as preparing for the in Jam 4:5.

Ye that say. , ye that are in the habit of using such presumptuous and worldly language.

To-day and to-morrow.See Appar. Crit. (according to Theile) certainly expresses greater confidence than. ; the plan the journey of the restless traders. Wiesinger understands and to-morrow of the different plans of journey of different persons, Huther thinks that it fixed the precise duration of the intended journey. But Jam 5:14 shows that to-morrow is also added for the purpose of resenting the false security of the project. To-morrow denotes therefore the undefined future subsequent to to-day, not only a second day; for at that time a two days journey did not take one very far.

We will journey; we shall journey, uttered with false, prophetical assurance.

To such and such a city.A demonstrative pronoun instead of the name of the city, with the collateral idea that the goal is now one city, now another. [I have adopted the rendering this city, because such and such, this or that is a sense in which is not used; at least the best Lexica do not give it, and I agree with Alford, that Winer p. 174, who refers to Plutarch. Sympos. I. 61 for this image of = , does not make his point, and that all that is necessary, is to suppose that expresses in general terms the city then present to the mind of the speaker.M.].

And will work there one year. with a definition of time may denote primarily ones stay at a place; but it probably intimates also that the respective time is spent (Act 15:33; Act 20:3 etc.). But we take the verb work in the sense of working in the conduct of business. The definition one year again denotes not only the false security of the calculation, but also their restless, unsteady habits; then, they think, we move on or return.

And do business [and trafficM.]. The hastily following and the hastily following future are also pictorial expressions descriptive of their immoderate false security. Bengel: Polysyndeton exprimit libidinem animi securi. Huther assents to Kerns note: Traffic is introduced only by way of example as characterizing mans doing calculated only with reference to earthly life and as contrasted with the life in God. But it is doubtless an example illustrating the secular aspect of the chief tendency of the Judaism of that time as it already began to develop itself; and the Apostle with a prophets glance evidently, describes beforehand the fundamental trait of the diabolically excited world-liness of his people, as it afterwards became more and more developed.

Jam 4:14. Yes, ye that know not [whereas ye know not E. V. much more correct and idiomatic than Langes renderingM.]. , properly, ye that are of such a kind. [Alford: =ut quibelonging, as ye do, to a class which.M.].

What will be to-morrow.Pro 3:28; Pro 27:1. The general idea that carnal security is here met by ignorance of the future and the transitoriness of life (Huther) has here also a prophetico-historical bearing. Hence not only: Ye know not, as mortal men, whether you are still alive to-morrow, but also ye have no presentiment of what the next future has in reserve for you with our people. It is to be remembered that these words were written by an aged Apostle a few years before that great catastrophe, which brought the greatest misery and death on many thousand people not only at Jerusalem (and James considered Jerusalem and Judea to belong also to the dispersion of the twelve tribes in the enlarged sense of the term), but previously also in many cities of the Roman Empire (Csarea, Scythopolis, Ascalon, Damascus, Alexandria; Josephus, de bello Judges 2, 18, 1-8😉 20, 2.

For what is your life?Of what sort, . It is not only fleeting and perishable physically, but as the spiritual life of the nation also it is affected with deadly disease and a deadly destiny.

A vapor, forsooth, ye are.Better For ye are a vapor.M.]. On see Appar. Crit. The reading is manifestly a stronger expression than , applied to their life. They themselves are thereby described as a vapor, as it is also said of the Jam 1:10 that he shall pass away as the flower of grass. Huther. Does denote vapor of fire (smoke, as in Act 2:19 in connection with ) or vapor of water, that is, a misty formation, or is there no definite reference designed? We feel inclined to take the former view; 1, on account of the familiar reference to Act 2:19; Joe 3:1-5; Joel 2, on account of the reference to fire in Jam 5:3; James 3, on account of the greater volatility of the vapor of smoke as compared with the vapor of water which in the shape of cloudy formation is apt to last longer and in reality does not vanish if it dissolves into rain. But the real tertium comparationis is certainly the volatility of vapor, presenting an affinity with the volatility of the shadow in Job 8:9; Psa 102:12; Psa 144:4. But in the last passage the figure also contains the idea of a breath and Psa 102:4 the figure of smoke. Our passage is probably more nearly related to the one named last.

And then (again).Laying the emphasis on , appearing in splendid extension, say like an illuminated cloud, might be rendered even: it not only decreases but even vanishes. But as objection may be raised to such an emphasis, Huthers explanation of is sufficient as it appeared so it vanished. Thus Israel as a nation, was soon to vanish from the rank of nations.

Jam 4:15. Instead of that ye ought to say.These words connect with Jam 5:13, but the parenthesis Jam 5:14 has the import of a prolonged characterizing address.

If the Lord will, we shall live.See Appar. Crit. According to the less authenticated reading of the Text Rec. ( ), adopted by the majority of commentators, is generally connected with the protasis. Luther: If the Lord will and we live, we shall do this or that; Erasmus, Calvin, de Wette. The second then denotes the apodosis. Here the protasis is divided into two hypothetical ideas: if the Lord will and if we live. Grotius and al take the whole somewhat differently: if the Lord will that we live, then the rest also will follow, then we shall do this or that; but this really runs into the construction of Luther. Most impracticable is Bornemanns construction, who adopting the Text Rec., makes the apodosis in the sense: let us make our livelihood. The better sense also favours the more critically sustained reading. Not only our doing depends on the will of the Lord, but also, first of all, life itself. Hence if the Lord will, we shall live and then do this or that (Wiesinger, Huther.) [I prefer the reading and render If the Lord will, we shall both live and shall do this or that, for it is evident that the hypothesis controls both our living and doing. Our life is dependent on the will of God and our doing depends on our living. Cf. Winer, p. 301.M.].

Reproof of their false security and forewarning of their conscience, Jam 4:16-17.

Jam 4:16. But now ye boast yourselves in.But now, i.e. instead of their thinking and speaking. Instead of it ye boast yourselves etc., according to the preliminary allusion, Jam 5:15.

In your illusions. denotes vaunting or bragging regarded in the light of illusion or deception.But here we must lay more stress on the objective, vain, arrogant self-exaltation than on the boasting. The clause: ye boast in your boastings (de Wette), is rather tautological. Boasting being a joyous testifying of the ground of confidence, the sense is as follows: ye boast in a ground of peace, consisting in those vain illusions or castles in the air, which from their nature are multiform. Huther remarks that denotes not the object but the ground of their boasting; but in this boasting the ground is really made the object.

All boasting of such kind.That is, grounded on haughtiness and self-illusion; whereas both James and Paul know a holy boasting (Jam 1:9that is glorying) grounded on the most opposite qualities, not on self-exaltation in forgetfulness of God and departing from God but on self-abasement in reliance on God and resignation to God.

Jam 4:17. To him now who knoweth to do good.This is not only a moral sentence used for the purpose of warning the readers but the concluding forewarning addressed to the Judaists, followed by the announcement of the judgments upon those who still persevere in their obduracy; the great turning-point in the Apostles argument like our Lords last address to the Jews Joh 12:35 (Matthew 23), or that of Paul, Act 28:23 etc. And first we have to note that the main stress lies not on , as the sum-total of good, because this would require the Article (so Wiesinger), but on with which . . . must be connected. He therefore who, although he knows better, omits the good and moreover the doing of good which he knows to do, to him it is reckoned as sin. The reference here, however, is not primarily, that a single sin of omission is also sin, but the whole attitude of an impenitent religious knowledge, the whole self-contradiction of a hypocritical and unfruitful orthodoxism is here described as a wholesale sin of omission. As sin, according to Rom 1:21 began with a great central sin of omission, so it is also sealed with the great, all-embracing sin of omission of impenitence. But this proposition contains also the common doctrine of the single sin of omission. Now concerning this knowledge of good the question arises (according to Huther) whether James refers to the knowledge he had imparted to his readers by his exhortations (Estius), especially by the last (Grotius, de Wette and al.); or whether this knowledge describes one already existing in his readers, as Huther assumes, observing; the uncertainty of human life is something so palpable that those who notwithstanding talk in their audacity as if it did not exist, as if their life were not dependent on God and contrary to their own knowledge do not that which is seemly but that which is unseemly and therefore is is so much the more sin unto them. We consider this antithesis as confusing. It is surely assumed that the readers of the Epistle knew from the Old Testament the rudiments of doing good and that in this knowledge the Gospel had raised them to the full consciousness of the highest degree of doing good; but it is assumed with equal certainty that this word of the whole Epistle, as a final word of exhortation is to them matter of the greatest and most decisive importance. The word should therefore be taken as a final word with reference to their better knowledge of evangelical behaviour in general and not merely as reminding them of their previous knowledge of their dependence on God. We have still to ask what is sin to one who knows and doeth not? The knowledge by itself, or that knowledge as connected with not doing? The former would be more piquant and would mean something like this: to such an one even his Jewish prerogatives turn to ruin (Romans 10). The Gospel proclaimed to him first, becomes to him a savor of death unto death. However we must distinguish sin from the judgment of sin, hence the reference cannot be to the better knowledge by itself but to the contradiction between knowing and not doing, which runs thrugh the whole Epistle as the object of the Apostles controversy. This contradiction becomes sin to the perfect which is reckoned to or reserved for him i.e. unto judgment. This great forewarning introduces the subsequent passage of the judgment. It is noteworthy that James seems to foresee with assurance that the greater part or the mass of Israel would grow obdurate contrary to a better knowledge or with an evil consciousness against doing the truth of the Gospel and that all the Judaistic corruptions of his Christian readers, which he assails, are also connected with such a conscious perverseness in general and in the whole, although not with reference to every individual in every individual case, and although the solidarity of the judgment is suspended in the case of believing Jews.

[The real point of this saying is hardly brought out in Langes note and not touched at all under Doctrinal and Ethical and Homiletical and Practical. The reference is not to sins of omission, but to sinning against light and knowledge, to doing evil the knowledge of good notwithstanding. Jam 5:17 is the opposite of , and the persons, whom James addressed knew well enough that they ought to do good, but they separated their knowledge from their practice and did evil. This verse (Jam 4:17) contains a sharp rebuke, if not a sarcastic reflection on their inconsistencies.M.]

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. One of the most important life-questions of Christian ethics is undoubtedly that of the Christians relation to the world which surrounds him. In answering it James again fully agrees with our Lord (cf. Mat 6:24), and with Paul the Apostle (cf. Rom 12:2; 1Co 7:29-31; 2Co 6:14-18). He wants Christians neither to conform to the world nor entirely to separate themselves from it, but he insists so much the more on their being distinguished from the world and on their showing that they are governed by a very different principle and a much loftier spirit than the friends of the world. If this is omitted and on the contrary that friendship of the world is sought, which is incompatible with a harmonious and independent development of the Christian life, it must surely lead to the result, that God and His service are ultimately abandoned. The impossibility of uniting God and the world in the heart of a Christian belongs to the nature of the case; cf. Mat 12:30. The world demands that we should love ourselves, God requires us to love Him; the world wants self-exaltation, God abasement and humility. The friend of the world and the friend of God are diametrically opposed to each other in principle, inclination and aim. Moreover how can there exist a lasting communion among things that cannot be reconciled? Here applies the saying in Mat 16:26; Luk 10:38-42.

2. James as well as the other writers of the New Testament receive the as the highest authority.

3. No sin is more loathsome in the sight of God than pride. We have only to realize for a moment the light in which a holy God cannot but regard a guilty sinner in order to understand that self-exaltation is not only wicked but almost ridiculous before Him. Thus far we may say that parcere victis et debellare superbos is the fundamental law of the Divine government both under the Old Testament and under the New. Then countless examples taken from history prove also the truth of the saying, which is constantly heard in the Gospel. Cf. Mat 18:4; Luk 18:14; 1Pe 5:5.

4. What James says here (Jam 4:7) of the devil is at once a supplement to his doctrine of the origin of sin (Jam 1:14-15) and a corrective of those who are wont to dilute the last mentioned passage after the manner of the Pelagians.

5. In writing Draw near to God and He will draw near to you James by no means wants to deny that the grace of God is prevenient and free and to teach that the sinner, for his part, must first turn to God, before God is able in grace to turn to him. This would conflict with the nature of the case and also with 1Jn 4:19. But he is here addressing Christians, whom God had already approached before (cf. Isa 65:1), but who, by their transgressions, had for a time departed from God and had first to return before they could again enjoy His grace and communion. It is once for all impossible to merit the favour of God by conversion and equally impossible personally to experience it without such a genuine conversion. Now all temporizing [indecision, half-work, German HalbtheitM.], all discord between the outward and the inward life is fundamentally incompatible with such a genuine conversion. Cf. Luk 11:38-41.

6. True joy is the child of sorrow for sin. Man has therefore his choice here on earth between short grief to be followed hereafter by constant joy and short joy to be followed hereafter by eternal grief. Cf. Mat 5:3-4; Luk 6:21; 2Co 7:10.

7. Nothing is more sad and pernicious than that Christians also in their intercourse with each other yield themselves so often to loveless calumny and forget the words of the Lord Jesus, Mat 7:1-6. In this connection attention should be called to rash contradiction and hasty judging which are often the effects of ignorance or disgraceful passion; to censoriousness which contrary to mens own better conviction magnifies the faults of their neighbour and overlooks his good parts, in direct opposition to the Apostolic precept, 1Co 13:4-7; to calumny, slander, tale-bearing, back-biting, etc., on which vices Reinhards System of Christian Morality, 4th ed. I. p. 681693 deserves to be consulted. [Also Jeremy Taylors Sermons,The Good and Evil TongueSlander and FlatteryThe Duties of the Tongue.M.]. He justly observes that partial and passionate reviewers are not unfrequently guilty of these vices to an eminent degree. Compare also Bayles Dissertations sur les libelles difamatoires, in Vol. IV. of his Dictionnaire, and the capital sketch of an accomplished calumniator in Gellerts Moralische Vorlesungen, p. 647 etc. It is self-evident how ill all this accords with the duties of Christian brotherly love. Cf. 1Co 4:5; Eph 4:25; Col 3:13.

8. The law protects our neighbour by the precept of brotherly love; he who notwithstanding injuriously assails him, violates the protecting law itself, sets himself above the law and makes choice of that part of the law he means to observe or not to observe; but in doing so, he ceases to be a doer of the law. von Gerlach.

9. The Christian must also show in his daily life that he is influenced in all things by the sense of dependence which is the real foundation of the religious and moral life. James in concert with Solomon (Pro 27:1), with our Lord Himself (Mat 6:34) and with the Epistle to the Hebrews (Heb 6:3) urges this upon his readers. Many a sinful action would remain undone, many a hasty step would not be taken, if the words If the Lord will and we live were not only on the lips but in the hearts of men. Compare the treatise of Morus, de homine submittente se Deo, in Opusculis, II p. 123. sqq.

10. There is not a more extensive region of sin than that on which James allows us to cast a solitary glance (Jam 4:17), the region of sins of omission, and again none in which not a few exhibit less concern. How many are perfectly satisfied if in their opinion they have not done any thing in thought, in word or in deed, which conflicts with the love of God and of our neighbour, although they have never accused themselves of that which unconsciously or designedly they omitted to do! Many secretly object to such simple and self-evident exhortations as those in Jam 4:13-16, that they have known it all a long time without considering that knowing without doing is altogether inexcusable, cf. Joh 3:17.The omission of good is the commission of evil. In this manner we actually may become thieves and murderers; e.g., the priest and the Levite who passed by the unfortunate sufferer, offended by omitting to observe the sixth commandment. This omission of good is also connected with slackness in doing good; gradually men become more and remiss in doing until at last all love of and longing for good leaves them and this is the death of which we must be on our guard. Beware, therefore, of procrastination! By deferring a thing we ought to do from day to day, we come to lessen its importance and soon forget it altogether. Such negligences disclose to us the slothfulness of our heart, a most dangerous and critical state of disease. Viedebandt.

[Jam 4:12. Sanderson: The words of St. James assert that there is but one Lawgivernot one selected out of many, nor one above all the rest, but one exclusively; that is, one, and but one alone, who is able to save and destroy. What was usually applied to the prerogatives of Kings, may be justly said of the conscience of every man, that it is subject to none but God, and knows no superior upon earth. Memorable is the observation of the Emperor Maximilian, To offer to domineer over the conscience, is to assault the citadel of heaven. That man is a plunderer of the Divine Glory, and an invader of the authority that belongs to God, whosoever he be, that claims a right over the consciences of men, or usurps upon them. Let the popes of Rome, and the train of canonists, Jesuits and sycophants, that flatter and fawn upon them, clear themselves, if they can, of this sacrilege; and let such as submit their consciences to the power of any creature, which only ought to be subject to God, be careful lest by transferring the honour of that service that belongs to God, to any creature upon earth, they make a god of that creature, and so, in effect become guilty of idolatry.

From this first conclusion thus proved, follows this remarkable inference, that the proper rule of the conscience is that which God, the Supreme Lawgiver, has prescribed to it; and besides that, there is no other that ought to be admitted.

Yet this hinders not, that there may be other lawgivers of an inferior order, who by authority derived to them from the Supreme power, may have a just right to make laws, and consequently to bind the conscience to obedience. We do not say that God has committed to the Magistrate a power to oblige the consciences of his people by laws, but rather (to speak with more care and propriety) that God has given to the magistrate a jurisdiction to make laws, which by virtue alone of the Divine authority, do oblige the consciences of the subject; for properly speaking, the Magistrate does not oblige the conscience to obey the law, but God obliges the conscience to obey the magistrate.M.].

[Jam 4:17. Wordsworth: This conclusion of St James is added as the summing up of the argument, in the same manner as the aphorism with which St. Paul closes his reasonings concerning a doubting conscience, where he says, Whatsoever is not of faith, is sin, that is, whenever a man does anything without being persuaded in his mind that he may lawfully do it, he is guilty of sin. Rom 14:23.

St. James appears to have his eye here on this statement of St. Paul.
St. James adds to it another maxim of general import, viz., that whensoever a man omits to do anything which he is persuaded in his own mind that he ought to do, he is guilty of sin.

Thus these two Apostolic verdicts, delivered in a similar manner, constitute two fundamental rules of human action, as to what men are bound to forbear doing, and as to what they are bound to do.

Those persons whom St. Paul addressed, were tempted to do many things, which they did not, in their consciences, approve; and the Apostle warns them, that if they do any thing against their conscience, they commit sin.
They to whom St. James wrote, were vainglorious of their religious knowledge; but they were not careful to show forth their religious knowledge by religious practice; and the Apostle teaches them that their knowledge will only increase their guilt, unless they do what they know to be right.

Hence, while it is sin to shun knowledge, and there is some sin of ignorance (cf. Augustine 6, 661), and it is a sin to shut the ears to instruction; and it is a duty to get knowledge, to increase in knowledge, to abound in knowledge, we must beware not to rest in knowledge. We must add to our knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness, charity. Without these knowledge is unprofitable; nay, will only increase our condemnation. See Sanderson 3, p. 232234. Cf. Luk 12:47; Joh 9:41; Joh 15:22; and see the woes pronounced on Chorazin and Capernaum, Mat 11:21.M.].

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

Friendship with the world, enmity of God.The Christians relation to the world which sursounds him.On spiritual adultery, cf. Hos 2:1-19.The Scripture should never utter a single word in vain to the Christian, cf. Joh 10:35 b.The Spirit that dwells in Christians is decidedly opposed to every manifestation of hatred and envy.God is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think (understand), Eph 3:20.God resisteth the proud but giveth grace to the humble: 1. This is not otherwise according to the voice of history and experience; 2. It cannot be otherwise, if we consider the relation of God and the sinner; 3. It shall not be otherwise if God is to be glorified and the sinner preserved; 4. It will never be otherwise and the sinner had therefore better lay it to heart.(Jam 4:6-7). How God stands to the humble Christian and how the humble Christian stands to his God.The necessity of a constantly renewed conversion towards God after every new aberration.The greatest demand of the Christian life: draw near to God, and its greatest consolation: He will draw nigh to you.The insignificance of clean hands without a clean heart; the inward and the outward must be indissolubly united in conversion.The beginning of conversion, the end of every sinful joy.If we did not remain so far from God, God also would not remain so far from us.The commandment of inward purification can never be fulfilled without prayer, Psa 5:12.(Jam 4:10-11). The Christian life a union of humility and love. He who truly knows and humbles himself before God will neither have the desire nor the courage to judge his brother uncharitably.Sinning against our brother is also sinning against God.Slander in religious associations and Christian circles: 1, The traces, 2, the sources, 3, the fruits of this vice.He that speaks evil of others injures thereby 1, the brother whom he calumniates, 2, the neighbour who listens to him, 3, but most of all himself.The Christian indeed is called to be a doer of the word but not in order to be a judge of the law.The relation in which God stands to the transgressor of the commandment of love: 1, as the Lawgiver, 2, as the only Lawgiver, 3, as the only Lawgiver who is able to save and to destroy.(Jam 4:13, etc.). On our dependence on God even in the actions of our daily life.Difference between the Christian-minded and the worldly-minded merchant.Christian and unchristian travelling. Our ignorance of the future, 1, the alarm it occasions, 2, the benefit it works.What is your life? Different answers to this question from the standpoint 1, of experience, 2, of faith.Life a vapor which is to ascend fragrant as incense.How much cause have we not only to think but also to say: If the Lord will and we live! 1. Reasons for this frame of mind: a. death or want of ability prevent not seldom the execution of our best plans; b. the plans of others often conflict with ours or ours with theirs and both neutralize one another; c. we are often deprived of the opportunity or the desire to carry out our plans, but all under the guidance of God. 2. Fruits of this frame of mind: it will a. make us careful in laying, b. thankful for the success, c. submissive and satisfied with the frustration of our most cherished plans and desires.Memento mori, cf. Ps. 90. and 103.The problem of life must never be considered apart from its direct connection with death.Lawful and unlawful glorying on the Christian standpoint.The great chasm between knowing, willing and doing.The greatness of seemingly little sins of omission.He that knoweth to do good, etc. Extended application of this rule to the field of Christian philanthrophy and of Missions among the heathen.

Starke: Luther:Envious men are not the temples of the Holy Ghost, Jam 3:14-15; 2Ti 1:7.The proud instead of the honour, after which they run, receive shame and dishonour, Mat 25:33.The more of humility, the more of grace; if in valleys some hollows are deeper than others, the water collects in them, Luk 5:8.Humility of heart is the most certain way not only to the love of our fellow-men but also to honour from God Himself. Luk 14:11.

Hedinger:The enemy is not conquered by sleep. Take the sword of the Spirit, the helmet of hope, the shield of faith, then thou art equipped for the contest, Eph 6:11.Nothing unclean is able to combine with God, the most pure Being, Isa 1:16.Humility the surest road to constant exaltation, Mat 23:12.To speak evil of our brother does more harm than is generally thought; as many words, so many wounds are struck in the conscience, Psa 52:4; Psa 140:12.

Nova Bibl. Tub.:A pious man always guards his tongue lest it judge his neighbour and defame him, Rom 14:13.

Luther:God gave us His law, not that we should censure it, but keep it. Deu 7:11.

Starke:Human legislators are able to render those, who obey their commandments, to some extent happy, but they can neither save them nor themselves; God is able to do both perfectlyThe Apostle does not absolutely disallow commerce, he only blames those who are so covetous that they forget God in their business and think that every thing depends on their cunning, chasing and running, and do not remember that they cannot do any thing without the grace of God. Trading and chaffering has been peculiar to the Jews before and after the birth of Christ, especially to those who have lived out of Canaan, their country. For because they had no landed property among foreign nations, they were compelled to make their living by trade, which is the case now, if only it were done as it ought to be done.

Nova Bibl. Tub.:O wretched man that layest out such great plans, dost thou not know that to-morrow God may require thy soul at thy hands? Luk 12:19-20.

Langii op.:Nothing is more common than that the healthiest bodies of any age are all of a sudden attacked by divers diseases, Job 14:2.

Hedinger:The will of God is the sole rule of Christians in all matters relating to the body or the soul, as in the case of Christ and Paul, Joh 4:34; 1Co 4:19; Act 21:13-14.The will of God permits also evil but turns it to the welfare of His children, Gen 1:20.An evil cause and a stubborn mind full of self-glorying go generally together, Jam 3:14; Rom 1:30.

Langii op.:Ignorance is no excuse in cases where knowledge might have been had; but if a man knows better and yet is unfaithful and disobedient, he only aggravates his guilt accordingly, Luk 12:47-48.

(Jam 4:11) Stier:I must judge in my heart in order to preserve myself from evil and to retain only what is good; I owe it in love to my brother to censure and exhort him in order to make him better and to prosper his soul. But this is altogether different from haughty, angry rebuking and scolding when I converse with some one about his sin; but the worst of all, and that which uniformly begets still greater discord, is the, alas, nowhere uncommon although thoroughly concealed vice of backbiting, which Luther in his Catechism has wisely ranged under the eighth commnadment. People discourse without vocation or duty, from sheer wantonness with a hateful temper of ones supposed sin to another; speak evil of their brother behind his back, as a false brother, instead of saying it sincerely to his face Thus acted the heathen in the Apostolic age towards the Christians, wantonely refused to see their good works and preferred to backbite them as evil doers (1Pe 2:12) Thus still act nowadays baptized heathen towards the godly, saying of them and burdening them with all manner of evil falsely. If this is done also among those who pretend to be brethren, verily the Holy Spirit strongly testifies against it and rather teaches Christians for their part not to deal thus with the children of the world. Where such backbiting takes place there is never a good conscience or a courageous answer to the questions: would I say this of him, if he were present? why do I not first tell him? Why and for what purpose do I now speak of it?There is neither obedience of duty nor intent of love; here speaks and judges ones own presumptuous, haughty mind, hence it runs so soon into judging falsely or even, if the matter were really so, into condemning, into damning judgment, which is at any rate absolutely forbidden.

(Jam 4:17). We are unprofitable servants before the Most Highest; that is certain, for all profitableness comes only from Him; but it is just because He makes us profitable that we are bound to do whatever is commanded us, to be diligent in doing good, as we know it, according to the will of God. James puts this lastly in the place of every self-willed doing of this or that. If we suffer ourselves to be found in good works aspiring for eternal life, then our earthly life verily has become more than a vapor, which vanishes away, then it is the seed-time of the great harvest of true gain.

Jakobi: (Jam 4:15):If the Lord will and I live. There are indeed not a few Christians who take the precept of our text literally and think that they are sinning if in speaking of the future, they do not every time employ such a pious addition. But if faith here borders almost on superstition even in many otherwise enlightened Christians, is it not true that this momentous saying If the Lord will and I live sinks down into a mere conventionalism, if we carry it on our lips on every trifling occasion? and is it not to be feared that that which we should always utter only with a profound and most living sense of our impotence and the omnipotence of God, degenerates into a mere, blind habit? Let us apply also in this, respect the mighty saying of St, Paul: The kingdom of God is not in word, but la power, 1Co 4:20.

Neander:If the Lord will and we live. It is evident that James in. saying this did not insist upon it, that we should always express such a condition in words. Such expressions might easily degenerate into mere forms and those Churches, in virtue of their whole tendency, were apt to turn every thing into a mere form. James, as we have already seen, is fond of naming the specific instead of the general thought, and instead of expressing, the general thought of the uncertainty and dependence of our whole earthly life, makes use of language calculated to indicate the general thought by its application to a specific case.

Heubner.: (Jam 4:15):James will appear to some as a pietist, but just from, what he says we may know what genuine, sincere piety is. He is truly pious, whose piety interpenetrates also his whole heart, his whole life and his whole doing. To carry on even his earthly affairs with God characterizes the Christian: with God is his motto in every thing, Col 3:17.The spirit of enterprise without religion is always pride.

Lisco: (Jam 4:7-10):All our doing is at the same time the work of God.(Jam 4:11-17) The danger of pride: 1, It misleads us to judge others uncharitably (Jam 4:11-12); 2, it seduces us to trust over much in our own strength (Jam 4:13-17).The unchristian element in the conduct of temporal affairs.

Porubszky: (Jam 4:4-6):Worldly and spiritual.(Jam 4:6-7) Be subject to God.(Jam 4:7-8) The greatest task of human willing.(Jam 4:8-10) Three steps to genuine repentance: 1, grief; 2, faith; 3, work,(Jam 4:11-12). Our judgment of others condemns ourselves.(Jam 4:17-17). Of assurance in our worldly affairs.

Weineck: (Jam 4:13-15):In what Christian families may find comfort in the retrospect of a departing year.

Wolf: (Jam 4:13-16):Man may become the destroyer but not the architect of his happiness.

[Whitby: Jam 4:11 :The great, exception which both, the unbelieving Jews and the Judaizing Christians among them had against the believing Gentiles was this they observed not their feasts or Sabbaths and that they were not circumcised, whence they concluded they differed little from the heathens. This was the thing for which the Christian fathers did contend, against them; viz. that the ancient patriarchs of old were acceptable to God, and consequently the Christians, and especially the converted Gentiles, might be acceptable to God without the observation of these feasts and Sabbaths or of circumcision.

Jam 4:15. It was a rule of. Ben Syra (Buxt. Flor. p. 4) Let no man say he will do any thing, unless he first, say, If the Lord will: who also adds, that one died before night, for refusing to add this. And when Alcibiades had said to Socrates, I will do so if you will, Socrates (Plat. Alcib. 1, in fine) tells him he ought to have said, , if God will. Not that we are obliged always to say thus (Rom 15:28), but only still to own our dependence upon Divine Providence.M.].

[Jam 4:17. . Menander says: It is manifest folly to know what we ought to do and not do it.M.].

[Macknight:Jam 4:8. This and other exhortations of the like kind found in Scripture imply, that in matters of religion and virtue men must coperate with the grace of God by their own earnest endeavours.M.].

[Pyle: Jam 4:11. As to you, dear brethren, who are already converted to Christianity, be sure to avoid that pernicious custom of slander and rash censure. Remember, that whoever hastily and unjustly condemns another man, reflects upon religion itself, sets up for a judge and makes himself wiser than the Divine Law. And such an one must not pretend to be a true disciple of that law, while he sets himself above it.M.].

[Jam 4:17. Now this, or any other crime, must be greater in a Christian than in any other man; because he, by the clear revelation of the Gospel, has or ought to have better notions of his duty, and a Stronger sense of his religious obligations.M.].

[Burkitt: Jam 4:17. Let us learn hence, that to sin against light and knowledge, is a very heinous aggravation of sin, because the knowledge of our duty lays us under the greatest obligation to do it; and that the greater advantages and opportunities any man has of knowing his duty, and the more knowledge he sins against in not doing it, the greater is his sin, and the more grievous will be his condemnation.M.].

[Jam 4:4. There is a sense in which a man may be a friend of the world and yet remain the friend of God, and this seeming paradox is the duty of very Christian and more especially of the minister of Christ. He must be the worlds true friend by telling the world its faults, exposing its corrupt maxims in a spirit of tender love and solicitude by preaching the truth of the everlasting Gospel and endeavouring to gain the world to Jesus Christ.]

Jam 4:8. The Father, in the parable, running to meet the returning prodigal, a Divine illustration of the words Draw nigh to God and He will draw nigh to yon.Outward lustrations are not sufficient, the heart must be purified as well. , literally make chaste your hearts alludes to their spiritual adultery (Jam 4:4), and the whole clause may be applied to baptized Christians whose hearts are in the world.

Jam 4:13. Debarim Rabba, 9. p. 261.1 we read as follows: Our rabbis tell us a story, which happened in the days of Rabbi Simeon the son of Chelpatha. He was present at the circumcision of a child and stayed with his, father to the entertainment. The father brought out wine for his guests, that was seven years old, saying, With this wine will I continue for a long time to celebrate the birth of my new-born son. They continued supper till midnight. At that time, Rabbi Simeon arose and went out, that he might return to the city in which he dwelt. On the way he saw the angel of death walking up and down. He said to him, Who art thou ? He answered, I am the messenger of God. The rabbi said, Why wanderest thou about thus? He answered, I slay those persons who say, We will do this or that and think not how soon death may overpower them: that man with whom thou hast supped, and who said, to his guests,With this wine will I continue for a long time to celebrate the birth of my new-born son, behold the end of his days is at hand, for he shall die within thirty days.

Jam 4:16. Clarke cites from an old English work The godly mans picture drawn by a Scripture pencil the words: Some of those who despise religion say, Thank God we are not of this holy number ! They who thank God for their unholiness, had best go ring the bells for joy that they shall never see God.

Jam 4:13, The same author cites the following from Saadys Gulistan: I knew a merchant who used to travel with a hundred camels laden with merchandise and who had forty slaves in his employ. This person took me one day to his warehouse and entertained me a long time with conversation good for nothing. I have, said he, such a partner in Turquestan, such and such property in India, a bond for so much cash in such a province, a security for such another sum. Then, changing, the subject, he said, I purpose to settle in Alexandria, because the air of that city is salubrious. Correcting himself, he said, No, I will not go to Alexandria; the African Sea (the Mediterranean) is too dangerous. But I will make another voyage and after that I will retire into some quiet corner of the world, and give up mercantile life. I asked him, what voyage he intended to make? He answered, I intend to take brimstone to Persia and China, where I am informed it brings a good price; from China I shall take porcelain to Greece; from Greece I shall take gold tissue to India; from India I shall carry steel to Haleb (Aleppo); from Haleb I shall carry glass to Yemen (Arabia Felix); and from Yemen I shall carry printed goods to Persia. This accomplished, I shall bid farewell to mercantile life, which requires so many troublesome journeys and spend the rest of my life in a store. He said so much on this subject, till at last he wearied himself with talking: then turning to me, he said, I entreat thee Saady, to relate to me something of what thou hast seen and heard in thy, travels. I answered Hast thou never heard what a traveller said, who fell from his camel in the desert of Yoor? Two things only can fill the eye of a covetous mancontentment or the earth that is cast on him when laid in his grave.M.].

Compare also on

Jam 4:8. Bp. Hall. The duty of drawing nigh to God. Works, 4:746.

Bp. Smalridge. Of double-mindedness. 4 Sermons. Sermons, 349.

Jam 4:10. Robert hall, Humility before God. Notes of Sermons. Works, 4:312.

Jam 4:11. Barrow. Against detraction. Works, 1:523.

Sydney Smith. On Slander. Sermons, 257.

Chalmers. The guilt of calumny, Posth, Works, 6:12.

Jam 4:12. BP. Sanderson. Prlectiones.

Footnotes:

[4]Jam 4:4. A. B. Sin. etc. Vulg., Bede, Lachmann, Tischendorf and other translations read only . preceding it in G. K. etc. originated probably in the O. T. symbolical sense having been abandoned and the literal sense adopted.

[5]Jam 4:4. Cod. Sin. inserts after .

[6]Jam 4:4. Cod. Sin. reads for of Rec. and al.

[7]Jam 4:4. B. Cod. Sin. read for .M.]

[8] Jam 4:4. Cod. Sin. has for .M.]

Jam 4:4. Lange: Ye [adulterers and] adulteresses know ye not that the friendship of the world is the enmity of God? Whosoever therefore willeth to be a friend of the world, standeth up as an enemy of God.

Jam 4:4. [Ye adulteresses. is enmity of God? shall be minded (Alford) to be a friend of the world, is constituted an enemy of God.M.]

[9] Jam 4:5 A. B. Sin. Lachmann, Wiesinger read for G. K. etc.

Lange: Or do ye suppose The spirit that made His abode in us, as opposed to envy, longeth upward?
[Or do ye fancy The spirit that He planted in us, jealously desireth? (So de Wette, and after him Alford).M.]

Jam 4:6. Lange: Still greater however [than is the longing], He giveth grace: wherefore it [the Scripture] saith

[But He giveth greater grace: wherefore He saith, God is opposed to the proud but giveth grace to the humble.M.]

[10] Jam 4:7. A. B. Sin. Vulg. etc. insert after the verb. is omitted probably in order to give to the sentence a more independent form.

Jam 4:7. Lange: Subject yourselves But resist

Jam 4:7. [Submit yourselves. But resist the devil and he shall flee from you.M.]

Jam 4:8. Lange: Cleanse the hands, ye sinners, and consecrate [make chaste unto God] the hearts, ye double-minded.

Jam 4:8. [Purify your hands , and make chaste your hearts.M.]

[11] Jam 4:9. [ A. and Cod. Sin. omit before .M.]

Jam 4:9. Lange: Feel miserable and mourn and weep! Let your laughter turn itself into lamentation and your joy into dejectedness.

Jam 4:9. [Be wretched and mourn and weep , and your joy into humiliation.

Jam 4:9. [Alford: The old English noun downcast, now obsolete as a noun, is the exact equivalent of and ought to be resuscitated.M.]

[12] Jam 4:10. [ Cod. Sin. inserts after .M.]

Jam 4:10. The omission of does not affect the translation. [A. B. K. etc. Cod. Sin. omit it.M.]

Jam 4:10. Lange: before the Lord, and He will exalt you.

Jam 4:10. [Be humbled, therefore, before and He shall exalt you.M.]

[13] Jam 4:11. A. B. K. Sin. etc. Tischendorf read for [Rec. etc.M.]

Jam 4:11. Lange: Do not calumniate [decry] one another, brethren. He that calumniateth or judgeth his brother, calumniateth the law and judgeth the law.

Jam 4:11. [Do not speak against one another, brethren; he that speaketh against a brother or judgeth his brother, speaketh against. M.]

[14]Jam 4:12. omitted by Rec. [with K. L. etc.M.], is inserted in A. B, many minuscules, almost all the versions, Tischend. Lachm. also Cod. Sin.

[15]Jam 4:12. [A. B. K. L. many minusc. Cod. Sin. Vulg. Syr. Copt. al. insert after , a reading by all means to be retained on account of the strong emphasis But thou (almost contemptuous), who art thou?M.]

[16] Jam 4:12. A. B. Cod. Sin. and many minuscules fix the readings and against those of Rec. , and .

Jam 4:12. [K. adds (see Ps. 36:23) M.]

Jam 4:12. Lange: One is the Lawgiver and Judge, He, who is able But who art thou, thou that judgest [art judging] thy neighbour? [ But thou, who art thou that judgest thy neighbour?M.]

[17]Jam 4:13. A. G. I. etc. Tischendorf [Cod. Sin. Alford.M.] read , which is also more authentic and important than .

[18]Jam 4:13. Lachmann and Tischendorf following B. etc., several miuusc. Vulg:, read the Future for the Subjunctive of Rec. In point of matter more suitable. A. has first two Subjunctives then two Indicates. [So Cod. Sin.M.]

[19]Jam 4:13. [ A. B. Alford . K. L. Subjunctive.M.]

[20]Jam 4:13. [ A. omits .M.]

[21] Jam 4:13. B. and Lachmann omit , but the omission is not decisive.

Jam 4:13. Lange: Well then, ye that say: to-day and to-morrow we will journey to such and such a city, and will work there one year, and do business and make gain.

Jam 4:13. [Go to now to-day and to-morrow we will set forth to this city and will spend there one year and will traffic [de Wette, Van Ess, Allioli etc. Alford] and get gain.M.]

[22]Jam 4:14. The Plural (A. Lachmann) is in every case more telling than (G. I.) Tischendorf.

[23]Jam 4:14. Lachmann, following A. Vulg. etc. omits after , which makes the expression more difficult, but also more lively. [But A. Cod. Sin. Vulg. Copt. omit not only but .M.]

[24]Jam 4:14. is fixed by A. B. I. etc.

[25] Jam 4:14. A. B. etc. read for [Rec. Vulg. th. Bede put before : Cod. Sin. agrees with A. is accordingly the most authentic reading.M.]

Jam 4:14. Lange: Yes ye that know not [understand not] what will be to-morrow [the great tempests of judgment].

Jam 4:14. For what [of what kind] is your life? A vapour, forsooth, ye are, which appeareth for a little while, and then vanisheth [again].

Jam 4:14. [Whereas ye know not the things of to-morrow: for of what sort (Alford) is your life? For ye are a vapour which appeareth for a little while, then vanishing as it came.M.]

[26]Jam 4:15. [B. reads .M.]

[27] Jam 4:15. A. B. Cod. Sin. read and . So Lachmann, Tischendorf [and Alford. K. L. al. have the Subjunctive.M.]

Jam 4:15. Lange: Instead of that you ought to say

Jam 4:15. [Instead of which ye we shall both live and do this or that.M.]

[28]Jam 4:16. [Cod. Sin. has for .M.]

[29] Jam 4:16. [Cod. Sin. has for .M.]

Jam 4:16. Lange: But now ye boast yourselves in your [vain] illusions, all boasting of such kind is evil.

Jam 4:16. [But now ye glory in your vain-boastings: all such glorying is wicked.M.]

[30] Jam 4:17. (A.) reads for .M.]

Jam 4:17. Lange: To him now who knoweth., to him it will turn to sin.

Jam 4:17. [So that to him who. , to him it is sin.M.]

[31]Trench says: Solidarity, a word which we owe to the French Communists, and which signifies a community in gain and loss, in honour and dishonour, a being, so to speak, all in the same bottom, is so convenient that it will be in vain to struggle against.M.

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

DISCOURSE: 2370
FRIENDSHIP OF THE WORLD IS ENMITY WITH GOD

Jam 4:4. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

THERE is a boldness of speech, which not only comports well with the character of Gods ambassadors, but is necessary to the faithful discharge of the ministerial office. To those who are unused to the figurative language of Scripture, the address of St. James to the professors of Christianity may appear coarse and severe. But the truth he delivered, needed to be strongly insisted on even in the apostolic age; so much did the practice of the Church fall short of the knowledge which was at that time generally diffused. As to the appellation which he gave the worldly temporizing Christians, it could not fail of being understood in its proper sense; because all knew that God called himself the husband of the Church; and consequently, that the violation of the peoples engagements to him justly entitled them to the name by which they were addressed.
To the Christians of this age the doctrine of the text should be very fully opened. It is indeed far from being calculated to please men: but we proceed to the consideration of it, in the hope that the word shall not go forth in vain.
We shall endeavour to shew,

I.

What we are to understand by the friendship of the world

[The world must be understood in its largest sense, as comprehending not only the people, but also the pleasures, riches, and honours of the world [Note: 1Jn 2:15-16.]. To draw the precise limits of that which is here called the friendship of the world, is not so easy. Nevertheless we may ascertain this with as much accuracy as is necessary on the present occasion.

If we love any one person above all others, and strive to please him habitually, not only in common with others, but even in direct opposition to them, we certainly must be acknowledged to have a considerable degree of friendship for him. Let us inquire then,

1.

Which do we love more, the world, or God?

2.

Which do we strive to please when their commands are irreconcileable with each other?

If conscience testify that the world have in these respects a decided preference, we are, beyond all doubt, the friends of the world.]

II.

In what respects it is enmity with God

[This may seem a strong expression; but it does not exceed the truth. For the friendship of the world is, in fact, a denial of Gods excellency, since it declares that the world is a better portion than he It is a contempt of his authority, seeing that when he says, My son, give me thy heart, it makes us reply with Pharaoh, Who is the Lord, that I should serve him? I know not the Lord, neither will I obey his voice It is also a violation of our most solemn engagements with him. He is our Husband; and we bound ourselves to him in baptism to renounce the world, the flesh, and the devil, and to be his, even his only. But by receiving the world to our bosom, we suffer that to invade his property, and, as the text intimates, are guilty of spiritual adultery Moreover it is (as far as our influence extends) a banishing of the very remembrance of him from the earth. God himself testifies respecting the friends of the world, that he is not in all their thoughts: and it is certain that, while they can converse readily on every worldly subject, they like not to hear or speak of his name: and if there were not a few who stand forth as his witnesses upon earth, his very name would soon be blotted out of our remembrance

If the friends of the world would view their conduct in this light, they would see an extreme malignity in the practices which they now maintain and justify: and they would tremble at the thought of being found enemies to him, who, as omniscient, sees; as holy, hates; as just, condemns; and, as almighty, will punish, such daring impiety.]

III.

The state of those who cultivate it

[Nothing can be more express than the declaration of the text: they are enemies of God. Whether they intend it or not, whether they think of it or not, they are enemies of God. However sober, modest, kind, generous, and amiable they may be in their deportment, they still are enemies of God. Exalt their characters ever so highly, so that they shall appear in the most enviable light, you must bring them down at last with this melancholy exception, but they are enemies of God [Note: 2Ki 5:1.]

Nor is this a matter that admits of doubt. St. James even appealed to the very persons whom he was condemning, and made them judges in their own cause; Know ye not this? can ye doubt of it one moment? does not the Scripture fully declare it? does not experience universally attest it?
But there is an emphasis in the text that marks this truth in the strongest manner. As an avowed desire to compass the death of the king is treason, though that wish should never be accomplished; so the determining to maintain friendship with the world, when God commands us to come out from it and be separate, is treason against the King of kings: the very willing to side in this manner with the world, constitutes [Note: .] us enemies of God.]

Address
1.

The friends of the world

[It is to be feared that even in a Christian assembly the doctrine of the text will be called in question; and that many, whose conduct in other respects is unexceptionable, impute no blame to themselves for their attachment to the world. Yea, so ignorant of their duty are the generality of Christians, that instead of saying, Know ye not, we must rather say to them, Know ye that the friendship of the world is enemity with God? For, alas! few in this day seem to know it, or even to suspect it: and their reply to us would be, No, I neither know it, nor believe it; nor shall any thing that you can say persuade me to receive a sentiment so unreasonable, and so contrary to common sense. But, brethren, so it is, whether ye know it or not. Let none therefore deceive themselves, or attempt to unite the friendship of the world with friendship with God; for that is impossible, as our Lord has plainly told us: Ye cannot serve God and mammon.]

2.

The friends of God

[It is a great mercy to be delivered from the love of this present world. But we may mistake our experience with respect to this. Age, sickness, poverty, disappointment, and other trials may render us apparently indifferent to the world, while yet, under other circumstances, our old attachment to it would revive. Let us take care therefore that, as an evidence of our friendship with God, our delight in him proportionally increase. This must of necessity accompany our deadness to the world. As one scale descends, the other must rise. We must guard also against a relapse; for the world is ever soliciting a place in our affections; and if we be not on our guard, we shall, like Demas, forsake the path of self-denial for the more enchanting one of earthliness and self-indulgence [Note: 2Ti 4:10.].]

Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)

4 Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

Ver. 4. Ye adulterers and adulteresses ] You that have your hearts full of harlotry, that go a whoring from God after the creature, that mind only earthly things, Phi 3:19 , and woo this Mundus immundus, this Propudium, this vile strumpet the world, that lays forth her two breasts of profit and pleasure, and ensnareth many; for the which she must be burnt, as a whore, by the fire of the last day.

Know ye not ] Worldlings care not to know anything more than how to get, &c., their wits serve them not for better things; they cannot skill of these Scripture matters; they are brutishly ignorant of God and his will, of themselves and their duties.

Is enmity with God ] That such both hate God, and, interchangeably, are hated of God.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

4 .] Ye adulteresses (the occurrence of the fem. only is rightly explained by Theile: “A fm. nec vero a masc. facta denominatio suppeditari poterat ipsa imagine. Ea quum Deum sistat maritum , homines fminam , non minus recte singuli homines scorta dicentur, quam totum genus atque universa aliqua gens scortum .” Nor is De Wette’s protest needed that only das Volk im Ganzen, only the entire people, is thus called: nor Huther’s consequent modification of Theile, that St. James is addressing Churches here. For God is the Lord and husband of every soul that is His, as much as of every church; and the indignant of the Apostle is just as applicable to every one who forsakes his or her God, as to an apostate church. This is one of those cases where the testimony of our ancient MSS. is so valuable, in restoring to us the nervous and pregnant rebuke of the original), know ye not that the friendship of the world ( here, precisely as in ch. Jas 1:27 , men, and men’s interests and ambitions and employments, in so far as they are without God. So that we must not understand merely worldly goods , as Schneckenburger, Theile, al., nor merely worldly desires (Didymus, Laurentius), nor both of these together (De Wette), to neither of which will properly fit) is enmity (‘the state of being an enemy:’ not , “inimica,” as vulg., which destroys the parallelism and force) of God (the man who is taken out of the world by Christ, cannot again become a friend and companion of worldly men and their schemes for self, without passing into enmity with God, of whose family he was a reconciled member. God and the world stand opposed to one another: so that a man cannot join the one without deserting the other. This is further stated in what follows)? whoever therefore (particular consequence on the general axiom just stated, carried however further, into all approach to, and not merely the completion of, the outward state) shall be minded (no stress on : it is a mere statement of fact as to the man who becomes a friend of the world, and therefore, in so doing, sets his mind and thought and wish that way. So that we need not say with Laurentius, “Non is tantum est inimicus Dei, qui est ipso opere amicus mundi, sed etiam ille qui cum non possit, vult tamen.” But he is so far right, that the Apostle certainly means to say, He that would be a friend of the world, must make up his mind to be God’s enemy) to be a friend of the world, is (thereby, by the proceeding in the direction indicated by that ) constituted (as above, ref.; not merely “is,” or ‘becomes:’ ‘becomes ipso facto,’ ‘then and there,’ is rather the meaning of ) an enemy of God .

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Jas 4:4 . : the weight of evidence is strongly in favour of this reading as against . The depraved state of morals to which the whole section bears witness must in part at least have been due to the wickedness and co-operation of the women, so that there is nothing strange in their being specifically mentioned in connection with that form of sin with which they would be more particularly associated. : what seems to be in the mind of the writer is Joh 15:18 ff. , , , : “is constituted”; cf. the Vulgate constituitur .

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Ye adulterers and. The texts omit.

adulteresses. Compare Mat 12:39. Jer 3:9. Eze 16; Eze 23. Hos 2; &c.

know. App-132.

friendship. Greek. philia. Only here.

world. App-129.

enmity. Greek. echthra. See Rom 8:7.

God. App-98.

will. App-102.

is = is constituted, or constitutes himself, as in Jam 3:6.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

4.] Ye adulteresses (the occurrence of the fem. only is rightly explained by Theile: A fm. nec vero a masc. facta denominatio suppeditari poterat ipsa imagine. Ea quum Deum sistat maritum, homines fminam, non minus recte singuli homines scorta dicentur, quam totum genus atque universa aliqua gens scortum. Nor is De Wettes protest needed that only das Volk im Ganzen, only the entire people, is thus called: nor Huthers consequent modification of Theile, that St. James is addressing Churches here. For God is the Lord and husband of every soul that is His, as much as of every church; and the indignant of the Apostle is just as applicable to every one who forsakes his or her God, as to an apostate church. This is one of those cases where the testimony of our ancient MSS. is so valuable, in restoring to us the nervous and pregnant rebuke of the original), know ye not that the friendship of the world ( here, precisely as in ch. Jam 1:27, men, and mens interests and ambitions and employments, in so far as they are without God. So that we must not understand merely worldly goods, as Schneckenburger, Theile, al., nor merely worldly desires (Didymus, Laurentius), nor both of these together (De Wette), to neither of which will properly fit) is enmity (the state of being an enemy: not , inimica, as vulg., which destroys the parallelism and force) of God (the man who is taken out of the world by Christ, cannot again become a friend and companion of worldly men and their schemes for self, without passing into enmity with God, of whose family he was a reconciled member. God and the world stand opposed to one another: so that a man cannot join the one without deserting the other. This is further stated in what follows)? whoever therefore (particular consequence on the general axiom just stated, carried however further, into all approach to, and not merely the completion of, the outward state) shall be minded (no stress on : it is a mere statement of fact as to the man who becomes a friend of the world, and therefore, in so doing, sets his mind and thought and wish that way. So that we need not say with Laurentius, Non is tantum est inimicus Dei, qui est ipso opere amicus mundi, sed etiam ille qui cum non possit, vult tamen. But he is so far right, that the Apostle certainly means to say, He that would be a friend of the world, must make up his mind to be Gods enemy) to be a friend of the world, is (thereby, by the proceeding in the direction indicated by that ) constituted (as above, ref.; not merely is, or becomes: becomes ipso facto, then and there, is rather the meaning of ) an enemy of God.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Jam 4:4. , ye adulterers and adulteresses) Men and women are involved in such a war, and break the promise which they have made to God.- , the friendship of this world) The way of the world is pleasure, Jam 4:3.-, enmity) 1Jn 2:15. (the adjective, hostile) is the reading of Steph. . Lat. I have passed this by, as it injures the sense: for and (hatred and friendship) are opposed to each other.[50]- , whosoever therefore) In this second clause, something is added over and above to the former sentence, by the introduction of the words , shall wish, and , becomes.-, an enemy) who will obtain nothing by prayer.-) a middle verb, that is, renders himself.

[50] Lachm. with Vulg. accents it , inimical. But Tisch., with G and many versions, .-E.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Jas 4:4-6

GOD VERSUS THE WORLD

Jas 4:4-6

4 Ye adulteresses,-(Moichalides, feminine form of moichoi, adulterers.) It would appear that the reference to “adulteresses” here is to be regarded as a figurative one, as the word “kill” is similarly used in verse 2. It is unaccountable that James would omit reference to the men involved and direct his condemnation to the women only, if the reference is to be taken literally. The figure of marriage, to indicate the relationship of men to God, is of frequent usage in the Scriptures; and the Old Testament abounds with references to Israel as the wife of Jehovah (Psalms 73; Isaiah 57; Ezekiel 23; Hosea 3.) In the New Testament, Christians are represented as married to the Lord. “Or are ye ignorant, brethren, (for I speak to men who know the law), that the law hath dominion over a man for so long time as he liveth? For the woman that hath a husband is bound by law to the husband while he liveth; but if the husband die, she is discharged from the law of the husband. . . . Wherefore, my brethren, ye also were made dead to the law through the body of Christ; that ye should be joined to another, even to him who was raised from the dead, that we might bring forth fruit unto God.” (Rom 7:1-4.)

Thayer, the Greek Lexicographer, says of the word, “As the intimate alliance of God with the people of Isarel was likened to a marriage, those who relapse into idolatry are said to commit adultery or play the harlot (Ezek. 15:16; 23: 43); hence 1noichalis is figuratively equivalent to faithless to God, unclean, apostate. (Jas 4:4.)” Paul uses this same figure in his reference to the church in its relationship to Christ: “Wives, be in subjection unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, being himself the saviour of the body. But as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives also be to their husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself up for it: that he might sanctify it, having cleansed it by the washing of water with the word, that he might present the church to himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. Even so ought husbands also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his own wife loveth himself: for no man ever hated his own flesh; but nourisbeth and cherisheth it, even as Christ also the church ; because we are members of his body. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife ; and the two sha11 become one flesh. This mystery is great : but I speak in regard of Christ and of the church.” (Eph 5:22-32.)

A woman who is an adulteress is unfaithful to her husband: hence the disciples who exhibit friendship for the world demonstrate unfaithfulness to God and are, therefore. figuratively guilty of adultery. The writer evidently used the feminine form of the word in order to impress upon his readers the fact that Christians are espoused to the Lord, and thus are in the relationship of a wife to him. Such indeed Paul affirms in 2Co 11:2 : “For I am jealous over you with a godly jealousy; for I espoused you to one husband, that I might present you as a pure virgin to Christ.” That the American Standard Translators regarded moichalides (adulteresses) to be figuratively used in this instance is evident from the marginal reading, “That is, who break your marriage vow to God.”

know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God ?— “Know ye not,” ( ouk oidate) is an appeal to their sense of reflection. The ordinary sense of perception should have led them logically and unerringly to the conclusion that one cannot be a friend of the world and of God at the same time. So foreign are the characteristics of the one to the other that there can never be harmony or concourse between them. Is one a friend of the world? He is then an enemy of God. Friendship with both is impossible. That this fact, so obvious to the discerning, is obscured in the minds of multitudes of people today, evidences the benumbing effect of sin, and demonstrates the fact that men, by their indulgence therein, lose their sense of values, and become unable to reason in that realm correctly. Proper discernment is essential to noble living, and is frequently enjoined in the sacred writings. “But solid food is for fullgrown men, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern good and evil.” (Heb 5:14.) “And this I pray, that your love may abound yet more and more in knowledge and all discernment, so that ye may approve the things that are e.wellent; that ye may be sincere and void of offence unto the day of Christ.” (Php 1:9.) Individuals whose sense of sin is blunted, frequently insist that they see no harm in participation in worldly matters; and, it is likely that they do not. But, neither does a blind man see the sun which, in all its brilliance, apparently moves along the vaulted sky; but, this does not mean that because such a one is unable to see it, the sun is not there! It is sad when people persist in the practice of sin; more tragic still when they lose, through such participation, their ability to distinguish between right and wrong, and are without any sense of moral values.

There is significance in the fact that James uses the verb oida which means to know by reflection, instead of the common word ginosko, to know by observation. Proper discernment of sin does not require participation therein; one may know its character and fruit by reflection. It is not necessary to imbibe poison in order to know its devastating effect; nor does one have to take potions of human philosophy to know the deadly character thereof. We have only to reflect on the sad cases of those formerly among us who have succumbed to its fatal effects and are Jost to the cause of Christ, to realize that the same tragic results may follow from our participation.

That which James would have his readers avoid is “the friendship of the world.” The Greek phrase is he philia tou kosmou; and the love indicated here is warm, emotional, selfish. Those thus described are in love with the world; on it they have set their affections; and in it they find their chief delight. The word philia also denotes common interests. Two men, for example, find the same hobby interesting and exciting; this interest in a common matter creates between them a common interest, and they thus become fast friends. Thus, a friend of the world is one whose interests are worldly and who, therefore, loves the world. This disposition is straitly forbidden to all who would be acceptable to God. John warned: “Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the vainglory of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof_ : but he that doeth the will of God abideth forever.” (1Jn 2:15-17.) The world hates those who are not of it (1Jn 3:13), its domain is that of Satan (1Jn 4:4), and his spirit permeates it (1Jn 5:19).

The word “world” (kosmos) in our text is variously used in the New Testament to denote the material universe; the external framework in which we live ; the earth and, in a moral and ethical way, those who are alienated from God because their hearts are centered in things below, and not in things above. (Col 3:14.) It is in this latter sense that it is used here, and repeatedly elsewhere in the Scriptures. Jesus used it in this sense when he said, “The world cannot hate you; but me it hateth, because I testify of it, that its works are evil.” (Joh 7:7.) In this sense, the word appears in John’s writings more than one hundred times. It is made to stand for, and to represent, all that is opposed to God in a spiritual and moral sense.

Obviously, the word “world” does not; as used here, embrace the visible creation which is the handiwork of God (Psalms 19 : lff) and which bears in its structure irresistible evidence of God’s goodness, greatness and glory. We are not forbidden to appreciate, and entertain regard for those features of the earth which commend themselves to the eye, and which evoke appreciation such as forest, river, sea and mountain; the word indicates an order which has Satan as its chief ruler (Joh 14:30), which lies in the power of that evil one (1Jn 5:19), and which, with all of its lust, must eventually pass away (1Jn 2:17). It is the order of evil, as opposed to the realm of good over which Christ reigns, that we are not to love, to have no fellowship with, but vigorously to oppose and expose! (Eph 5:19.)

The friendship of the world “is enmity with God,” ( echthra tou theou), is a state of enmity, hostility, war with God, inasmuch as those in love with the world have, by this very fact, arrayed themselves against God. But for the friendship which these to whom James wrote entertained for the world, there would not have been the strife, factions, and wars among them; it was because of their inordinate love of the material that they were in conflict with the spiritual. It is ever thus. Those whose chief delight is in the participation of things of the world, and who seek to obtain more and more oE the material affairs of the world in order the more to indulge therein, find themselves in conflict with others similarly motivated with consequent strife and war. To live in such fashion is to be in violation of the marriage vow each takes with God in becoming a Christian; those who consort with the world thus evidence their unfaithfulness to God. To further the figure, it is impossible to be brides of Christ and of the world at the same time Jesus said, “No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.” (Mat 6:24.) It is no credit to men that they have often sought to maintain friendly relations with God and the world; and, frequently in the past, and perhaps in the present, crimes of greed have been, and are being, committed, and a portion of the ill-gotten goods then piously tendered to God, as if this “gift” justified such action. “Nevertheless even of the rulers many believed on him: but because of the Pharisees they did not confess it, lest they should be put out of the synagogue : for they loved the glory that is of men more than the glory that is of God.” (Joh 12:41-42.)

Whosoever therefore would be a friend of the world—A conclusion drawn from the preceding premises. “Whosoever,” is comprehensive of the whole. Anybody, everybody, all of us are embraced. To be a friend of the world, or to attempt such friendship, is to cast oneself in the role of an enemy of God. The phrase, “would be,” is highly significant. It is translated from the word boulethei, first aorist passive subjunctive of boulomai, to purpose, to will. This evidences for us the fact that one need not actually participate in the things of the world in order to be worldly ; the purpose, the will, the desire to do so (whether realized or not), constitutes worldliness in the eyes of God. It hence follows that worldliness is a state of mind as well as a manner of life, and is so regarded by the Lord. It is quite possible that people may, from various considerations, refrain from a life of worldly activity; but, if the desire, the wiU, the inclination is there, such are worldly. The aorist tense, point action, indicates that the will to be worldly is a definite act influencing the after life. How may we know when one is a friend of the world?

While it is impossible to probe the hearts of others and to know the innermost motives which influence them, it is nevertheless true that the friends of the world are easily recognized by their dispositions and acts. One is an obvious lover of the world who finds greater delight in the association of worldly people than with those who are followers of the Christ; who experiences greater pleasure in frequenting those places which are sinful and secular, rather than the assemblies of the saints; and, who promotes those things which are of the world in lavish fashion, while giving a bare pittance of his means into the service of the Lord. To be thus engrossed in the ways of the world, however pious such may at times appear, is to exhibit a worldly disposition, and to fall under the condemnation of the Lord. Those who take their stand for the world, in this very act take their stand against God! When the world is permitted to come into the heart, God is thereby crowded out.

maketh himself an enemy of God.—The phrase, “maketh himself,” in the American Standard Version, and simply “is” in the King James’ Version, is from the Greek kathistatai, likely the middle voice of the verb, present tense, indicative mood, thus signifying that such a one constitutes himself the enemy of God. That is, by his once-for-all decision to fix his affection on the things of the world, he makes himself an enemy ( echthros, an adversary) of God. One does not have to declare war against God to make oneself an enemy of deity. To consort with God’s enemies, to lend aid and comfort thereto. is sufficient to put oneself into a state of alienation from him. Thus is made clear James’ teaching in this entire section of the Epistle. The people are styled “adulteresses,” because they were consorting with the world-an act of unfaithfulness to God-and hence in violation of their marriage vow which they took when they became his followers. It is vitally important, in the light of these sobering facts, for all of us to search our hearts and properly evaluate our motives to determine whether we are disloyal to God by any undue affection for the things of the world. If there is any trace of such affection, we should speedily purge ourselves of every semblance thereof, and henceforth enthrone the Lord Jesus Christ there. We shall have no difficulty in ascertaining the status of our hearts. Every discerning person knows whether the church or the world claims his chief interest; and can, with ease, determine on which his heart is fixed. How horrible for one who professes to be a follower of Christ actually to be an enemy of God! For all such a day of destruction awaits. Not infrequently men deliberately abandon him for the evil one. “Demas forsook me, having loved this present world.” (2Ti 4:10.) How shall we avoid the destiny which shall inevitably come upon all such? “If then ye were raised together with Christ, seek the things that are above where Christ is, seated on the right hand of God. Set your affections on the things that are above, not on the things that are upon the earth. For ye died, and your life is hid with Christ in God. When Christ, who is our life, shall be manifested, then shall ye also with him be manifested in glory!” We are “raised” with him when we come forth from the baptismal waters to walk “in newness of life.” (Rom 6:1-4.) If we live faithfully the remnant of our days upon the earth, we shall indeed be manifested (made known) as his, and also to be revealed with him “in glory.” For such a marvelous anticipation we can indeed well afford to labor and to wait.

5 Or think ye that the Scripture speaketh in vain?—The phrase, “Or think ye,” (he dokeite), means “does it seem to you . . . ?” “Are you of the opinion of . . . ?” “Do you suppose. . . ?” “Vain,” in the text, from the Greek word kenos, signifies that which is empty, valueless, void of significance; hence, the import of the passage is, “Do you suppose that what the Scripture says about friendship of the world being enmity toward God is meaningless and void of significance?” What scripture?

The word graphe (scripture), in the text, occurs more than fifty times in the New Testament; and, unless this is an exception, it always refers to the books of the Old Testament. (Mat 21:42; Mat 22:29; Mat 26:54; Mat 26:56; Joh 2:22; Joh 5:39; Joh 7:38; Joh 7:42.) Yet, there is no specific passage in the Old Testament which verbally asserts that which James affirms. There are statements which resemble it, and which mean much the same things as his statement; and, it is highly probable that the writer refers to one of these; or, indeed. to all of them, in principle. In which case, the meaning would be: “Do you suppose that the general teaching of the scripture is without significance in this matter?” (Gen 6:3-7 : Exo 20:5; Deu 32:1-21; Job 5:12; Ecc 4:4; Pro 27:4.) Thus understood, and properly so, the difficulty which many expositors have seen in this passage vanishes. James’ question, in effect, is : “Are you disposed to think lightly of the teaching of the word of God in this matter, and to regard it as an insignificant thing? Are you of the opinion that the words of scripture are idle threats and empty warnings?” The sacred writers have straitly forbidden the worship of idols (Deu 5:20; 1Sa 7:3), and have condemned all participation with those of the world who would, by their teaching and practice, seduce you. Do you imagine these warnings to be no more than empty utterances?” The Old Testament taught this principle by example also; and the history of the Israelite nation is an impressive lesson in the folly and tragedy of participation in things of the world.

Personality attributed to the Scripture is not unusual in the New Testament. “The scripture speaketh…” is a familiar phrase. Compare Gal 3:8; Jas 2:23.

Among those to whom James wrote were many Jewish Christians. These people, raised to respect the Jaw and the prophets from earliest childhood, would regard this appeal to the highest authority they had formerly recognized with great respect. It is significant that Jam es, himself inspired, appealed to the Scripture in support of his affinnation. All truth is one, and always harmonizes. This was not an unusual practice of New Testament writers. (Gal 3:8 ; Rom 8:36; Heb 8:5.) The Holy Spirit, who directed the writing of both Old and New Testaments, did not contradict himself in either. We deplore the disposition current in some circles today to regard the Old Testament as an inferior document, and as containing sentiments which “sanctifed common sense” cannot fully endorse. James did not need any particular passage to illustrate the doctrine he was led to teach by the Spirit which motivated his pen. The principle to which he alludes is taught repeatedly in both Testaments. The statement was by him doubtless put in question form for emphasis, signifying, “The scripture does not speak in vain when it declares that the friendship of the world is enmity with God.” Some, among his readers doubtless felt that this affirmation was a bit overdrawn; and were thus disposed to excuse some participation in the world and in worldly things on the ground that minor activity in this area was not spiritually unhealthy. James would have them know that his affirmation is in harmony with the tenor of teaching through Scripture.

Doth the spirit which he made to dwell in us long unto envying?—There is, perhaps, no more difficult passage in the Epistle. There are problems involving (a) the text; (b) the translation; (c) the punctuation; (d) the meaning. Those interested in a detailed discussion of the more critical aspects of the passage will need to consult a variety of sources, to obtain any real and substantial aid thereon, such is beyond the confines of a single volume commentary. We shall limit our efforts to the exposition of the meaning of the passage.

The statement is rhetorical, and in question iorm for emphasis. “Doth the Spirit which he made to dwell in us long unto envying,” means, “The Spirit which he made to dwell in us long unto envying.” These questions arise, (1) What is the Spirit to which reference is made? (2) What is meant by the phrase, “Which he made to dwell in us?” How does the Spirit, “which he made to dwell” in us, “long unto envying?” Why does the Spirit thus long unto envying? Answers to these questions will enable us to gain a clear concept of the passage in its entirety.

What is the “spirit” to which James refers: The Holy Spirit, or the human spirit? The American Standard Translators believed it to be the Holy Spirit, and thus capitalized the word in the text; the King James Translators thought it referred to the human spirit, hence used the lower case “s.” The Greek is pneutna (spirit), and inasmuch as there is no capitalization, as we follow today, in the Greek texts, this problem cannot be solved by an appeal thereto, and the answer must be sought in an examination of the passage itself. We shall, therefore, decide this question later.

What is meant by the phrase, “Which he made to dwell in us?” “He,” is of course, God; “us,” refers to Christians in general; ”to dwell,” means to abide, live, have one’s abode; thus, the significance of the statement is that God caused to live within u;, that which he earlier designates as the pneuma, the spirit.

How does the pneuma (spirit) which he made to dwell in us, “long unto envying?” To answer his question, another must be raised and answered. what is meant by the statement “long unto envying?” The Greek is pros phthonon epipothei, literally, “to envy yearns.” The King James Translators rendered the phrase, “lusteth to envy,” and, in the margin. for envy put “enviously.” The American Standard Translation has these marginal readings: “The Spirit which he made to dwell in us he yearneth for even unto jealous envy.” “That Spirit which he made to dwell in us yearneth for us even unto jealous envy.” Whether the passage be rendered, “The spirit which dwells in us to envy yearns,” or “The spirit which he made to dwell in us to envy yearns,” depends on a variation in manuscript reading, and sheds little light on the significance of the passage itself. Whatever the correct MMS reading, the passage alludes to a spirit, a spirit which dwells in us, a spirit which to envy yearns. How the spirit “to envy yearns” must be determined by the meaning of “to envy,” and “yearns.” The phrase, “to envy,” signifies to be covetous, to be influenced by a selfish desire for what others have–a passion which drives men to the gravest of crimes in order to obtain that which they yearn for. “Yearns,” means to look upon with desire. Thus, the pharse, “to envy years,” means to covet with great desire.

Why does the spirit, which is in us, covet with great desire? Men in the flesh, and motivated by fleshly inclinations are often prone to look with envious hearts upon those who enjoy greater prosperity than they possess; and covetously to desire the possessions of others. This disposition often leads them to hate their fellows, to attempt to obtain from them, by what ever means necessary, those things upon which they have fixed their hearts. Often people are exceedingly jealous of the possessions and attainments of others, and they desire to acquire that which others have, though they have no right thereto. Whether they are successful in this effort or not, their hearts are filled with envy, jealousy, covetousness. Such seems to have been the condition characteristic of many of those to whom James wrote. This disposition led to the commission of the crimes enumerated in the earlier part of the chapter. (Verses 1-4.) The writer had emphasized the sinfulness of all such; had shown that the general teaching of the Scripture forbids friendship with. the world, and charged that the spirit which God placed in them was exercising itself to envy. We thus regard the passage to be declarative and not interrogative; the “spirit” (which to envy yearns) to be the human spirit, and not the Holy Spirit; the words, envy and yearns to be taken in their ordinary sense, and thus believe the passage to teach: “The spirit which is in you is a covetous and envious one.” We must reject the view of most denominational expositors that the spirit here designated is the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Godhead, and that God or the Holy Spirit is enviously jealous of us, for whatever reason, on the ground that it is incredible to us that the writer would affirm of deity that which he had earlier so severely condemned in men. If, as indeed it is, that envy and jealousy are wrong in man, we cannot believe that James intended to assert that such are characteristic of God.

It is to this passage that all advocates of the theory of a personal indwelling of the Holy Spirit (in the church and out of it) appeal in an effort to sustain the view that the Holy Spirit actually and literally dwells in Christians. We have seen (1) a more reasonable view of this passage in that the pneuma (spirit) is the human spirit, and not the divine one. (2) We shall now show that the conclusion deduced from it, and other passages, that there is a personal, actual, literal presence of the Spirit in man, is equally unsound. It is not surprising that such a view is advocated by those who believe in a direct operation of the Holy Spirit-independent of, and apart from the word of truth-upon the heart of the sinner; it is, however, amazing that there are those who subscribe to the doctrine of the all-sufficiency of the Scripture in conversion and edification would so do. Ten years ago, in our commentary on the Epistles of Peter, John and Jude, we penned the following comments on this matter, and we would not change one sentiment thereon today: ” ‘Hereby we know that we abide in him and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit. And we have beheld and bear witness that the Father hath sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.’ (1Jn 4:13-14.) As a token by which we may know that we abide in him and he in us, he has given us ‘his Spirit,’- the Holy Spirit. But how does the presence of the Spirit in us supply evidence of such an abiding presence? The first frnit of the Spirit is love: ‘But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, meekness, self-control … .’ (Gal 5:22-23.) How may we know that the Spirt dwells in our heart? Because we love God and one another! Why does this love dwell in us? ‘And hope putteth not to shame; because the love of God hath been shed abroad in our hearts through the Holy Spirit which was given unto us.’ (Rom 5:5.) . . . ‘We thus learn that the Spirit has been given; that through this divine person love has been shed abroad in our hearts. But how is the Spirit given to us? Paul inquired of the Galatians: ‘This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?’ (Gal 3:2.) This is a rhetorical question, put in this manner for emphasis. The meaning is, ‘Ye did not receive the Spirit by the works of the law ; ye received the Spirit by the hearing (marginal reading, message) of faith.’ How does faith come? ‘So then belief (faith) cometh of hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.’ (Rom 10:17.) Paul’s affirmation is, therefore, that the Galatians received the Spirit through hearing the word or message of faith-that is, the gospel. The word of truth-the gospel-is the instrument by which the Spirit exercises his influence on both saint and sinner. Thus, as one receives the truth into his heart and allows it to motivate his life he is, to this extent, motivated and influenced by the Spirit, and enjoys his abiding presence. This is, of course, not to be interpreted as meaning that the Holy Spirit is the word of truth; the Holy Spirit uses the word of truth as the medium by which he influences; and his influence is limited to this medium. The Spirit prompts love for others through the instruction which he has given in the Scriptures.

The Epistles of John are filled with instruction touching the duty of children of God to love one another, as indeed, much of the New Testament. If it is the Spirit, independent of the word of truth, which produces such love, why was such instruction given? Why, indeed, is there teaching on any theme if all faithfu] children of God, then and now, possess a measure of the Spirit from which they derive (independently) such instruction? The question is not, Do children of God possess the Spirit? this, the verse before us and numerous others (e.g., Rom 8:9; Gal 4:6), affirm. Neither is it, Are children of God influenced by the Spirit today? This, too, the Scriptures abundantly assert. The question is the manner or mode of such indwelling, and not the fact of it, which we raise. This Paul settles in the rhetorical question alluded to above. The only impact of the Spirit on the heart of either alien or Christian is by means of the word of truth. Unfortunately, some brethren, while denying the direct operation of the Holy Spirit on the alien sinner, contend for just such an immediate and direct operation on the Christian following his baptism. The only difference between the positions is the time when the operation occurs. The denominational world contends for a direct operation on the sinner in order to his conversion; those who hold to the view of a personaJ and immediate in dwelling of the Spirit in the Christian, maintain that the operation of the Spirit is immediately following conversion. The one is as untenable as the other, and both wrong. The Spirit dwells in the heart of the Christian; the Father and Son, likewise; with reference to the latter, it would be absurd to contend that this indwelling is literal, actual, in their own persons. But, because the denominational idea of a mysterious, incomprehensible, intangible being as the Holy Spirit is alleged to be has been adopted in some circles, brethren have allowed themselves to fall into such an error respecting the Holy Spirit.” (A Commentary On The Epistles of Peter, John and Jude, pp. 299-301, by Guy N. Woods, published by the Gospel Advocate Company, Nashville, Tennessee, 1954.)

“And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the spirit which he gave us.” This verse declares, (1) God abides in us ; (2) we have knowledge of his abiding presence; (3) we possess this knowledge by the Spirit which he has given. It should be observed that it is not the manner of entrance nor the mode of the Spirit’s dwelling which is here referred to, but the fact of it. The Spirit assures of approval by motivating its possessor to do those things which enable the Father and the Son to abide in us. IE it be asked how the Spirit does this, the answer is, Through the word of God, the only motivating force in immediate contact with the individual. Neither here nor elsewhere do the Scriptures teach a direct operation of the Holy Spirit, either before or after conversion. It is as erroneous to assume an irrunediate impact of the Spirit on the Christian’s heart as it is to argue similarly with reference to such impact on the sinner’s heart. The fact of the Spirit’s indwelling is often affirmed in the sacred writings. The manner or mode of such is an entirely different question. The two are not always distinguished; and the result is, a prepossession for some theory thereon creeps easily into our exegesis and colors our explanation, if we are not careful. The fact that the Scriptures assert that the Spirit dwells in the Christian does not justify the conclusion that this indwelling is personal, immediate, and apart from the word of God. Christ is in us (Col 1:25); From this we do not infer that in some mysterious, incomprehensible way he has, in his own person, taken up an abode in us. Why should we fall into a similar error with reference to the third person of the Godhead-the Holy Spirit? (Ibid, p. 286.)

6 But he giveth more grace.—(Meidona de didosin charin, “moreover, he gives greater grace.”) The antecedent of “he” ie.; God, the one who makes the spirit (created it) to dwell within us. God gives greater grace. Why does he give us grace, and why is it described as greater grace? It is as if those to whom he penned the preceding passage had said, “You have correctly described our situation; and, it is very true that we are disposed to be lustful and envious, but this disposition is in our innermost parts, being exercised by our spirits. Is it not then our situation hopeless and helpless?” James’ answer is, “No. Granting that such is your situation, there is no compelling reason for you to yield to such desires, because there is grace to assist you, sufficient grace to meet your needs, grace greater than the temptations which pull you down.” This statement is reminiscent of that in Rom 5:20 : “And the law came in besides, that the trespass might abound ; but where sin abounded, grace did abound much exceedingly : that, as sin reigned in death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life, through Jesus Christ our Lord.” Or, as the King James’ Translation has it, “Where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.” Grace always outdistances the need, and is sufficient for whatever situation it is supplied. There is a contrast implied between envy and grace. Envy possesses the heart of weak and vascillating men; God’s grace is ever available to assist them in triumphing over their temptations. It is not without much significance (and the thought should cheer our hearts) that the verb “giveth,” (didosin) is in a construction in the Greek text which suggests continuous action. God keeps on giving grace to help us resist the allurements of Satan all of our lives! And, the verb itself etymologically denotes a gift that is freely bestowed. God graciously, continuously and abundantly bestows upon us grace greater than any need we may possess. If God requires of us complete surrender of the world and its evil affairs, he rewards us with a superabundance of the riches of grace involving matters which the world could never possibly provide.

Wherefore the scripture saith,—(Dio legei, literally, “Wherefore it saith … “) The subject of the Greek verb is understood, and must be supplied. The Translators thought the pronoun refers to the Scripture, and thus rendered it; others have thought that the proper name, God, should be supplied, with the rendering, “Wherefore God said. . .. ” Whichever rendering is right, the meaning of the entire statement is the same. The conjunction dio, translated “wherefore,” means “for the reason,” “because of this,” “on this account,” and denotes the condition on which God will bestow the greater grace mentioned previously. Again, to support his own premise with a quotation regarded as entirely authoritative by his readers, James cites a passage from Old Testament Scripture.

God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace to the humble.—This is a quotation from Pro 3:34, and from the Septuagint Translation thereof, a rendering of the Old Testament Scripture from Hebrew into Greek, done about three-hundred years before Christ came to the earth, and the Greek translation of Scripture which our Lord and the apostles and other sacred writers used. This passage, in our Old Testament today, reads, “Surely, he scoffeth at the scoffers; but he giveth grace unto the lowly.” (Pro 3:34.) The clause, “God resisteth the proud,” is, in the Greek text, ho theos huperephanois antitassetai, literally God against the proud sets himself in battle array. “Resisteth,” is from antitasso, a military term which means to set in battle array; and, “proud,” from the preposition huper, and the verb phainomai, literally to show oneself above others. God is said to fight against those who elevate themselves in this fashion. The humble have God on their side; the haughty are by him opposed. It will be noted that the word translated “resisteth,” in this passage is antitassetai, from anti, against, and tasso, to place; “the proud” from huper, above, and phainomai, to show. The prepositions, anti, and huper, are quite significant here. God is against those who conceitedly show themselves above others. God accepts the challenge and arrays himself in battle against them.

God “giveth grace to the humble,” (tapeinois de didosin charin, “Moreover, to the humble, God keeps on giving grace.”) Thus, by additional scripture is the affirmation of the inspired writer in the preceding passage established. “The humble,” ( tapeinois) are those who are lowly in spirit; these are the recipients of the “grace” (favor) which God freely and continuously bestows. God is thus the giver and his children are the receivers of the grace (unmerited favor) which is given to meet our needs. We should be impressed with the fact, and deeply grateful that, even in this world, he gives us far more than we are required to give up, and then adds to this eternal life in the next world: “Peter began to say unto him, Lo, we have left all, and have followed thee. Jesus said, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sister, or mother, or father, or children or lands, for my sake, and for the gospel’s sake, but he shall receive a hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions ; and in the world to come eternal life.” (Mar 10:28-30).

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

world

“kosmos” = world-system. 2Pe 1:4; Joh 7:7 (See Scofield “Rev 13:8”)

Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes

adulterers: Psa 50:18, Psa 73:27, Isa 57:3, Jer 9:2, Hos 3:1, Mat 12:39, Mat 16:4

the friendship: Joh 7:7, Joh 15:19, Joh 15:23, Joh 17:14, 1Jo 2:15, 1Jo 2:16

enmity: Gen 3:15, Rom 8:7

whosoever: Gal 1:10

is the: Psa 21:8, Luk 19:27, Joh 15:23, Joh 15:24, Rom 5:10

Reciprocal: Exo 20:5 – of them Exo 20:14 – General Num 15:39 – go a whoring Jos 10:4 – we may 2Ch 19:2 – hate the Lord Job 16:18 – let my cry Son 5:16 – friend Jer 5:7 – they then Jer 13:27 – thine adulteries Jer 23:10 – full Hos 7:4 – are all Hos 10:2 – Their heart is divided Mat 6:24 – serve Mat 13:27 – whence Mar 8:38 – adulterous Mar 10:23 – How Luk 6:26 – when Luk 16:13 – servant Joh 6:26 – Ye seek Joh 8:23 – ye are of Joh 15:18 – General Joh 17:11 – but Act 16:20 – do Rom 2:22 – adultery Rom 6:3 – Know Rom 12:2 – be not 1Co 3:16 – Know 2Co 6:14 – unequally 2Co 13:5 – Know Gal 1:4 – from Eph 2:2 – walked according Eph 4:18 – alienated Col 1:21 – sometime Col 2:20 – living Jam 1:27 – to keep 1Jo 3:13 – if 1Jo 5:19 – and the

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

Jas 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 Mat 12:30.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Jas 4:4. Ye adulterers and adulteresses. The best manuscripts read only ye adulteresses, a reading more suitable to the metaphor employed. This appellation might be taken literally, it we referred it to the unbelieving Jews; but, as referring to the Jewish Christians, it can only be understood in a metaphorical sense. It is spiritual adultery to which St. James here alludes. He here adopts the language of an Old Testament prophet. By the prophets God is represented as the Husband of His people, and sin, especially the sin of idolatry, as unfaithfulness to Him. Nor is this metaphor confined to the Old Testament. Our Lord, on two occasions at least, calls the Jews an adulterous generation (Mat 12:39; Mar 8:38); and St. Peter speaks of wicked Christians as having eyes full of adultery (2Pe 2:14). The believer is considered as married to the Lord (Rom 7:4); and the world is Gods rival, that which seduces our affections from Him. St. James, in using this strong and startling epithet, gives vent to his moral indignation. He is filled with holy anger on account of the contentions that prevailed among them.

know ye not that the friendship of the world. This is not to be restricted to the indulgence of sinful lusts, or to an eager pursuit after the carnal pleasures of the world; out by this is meant an over-attachment to worldly objects, an eager craving after the riches or influence of the world; in short, worldliness, worldly desires without any thought of God, a preference of the world to Him.

is enmity with God. God and the world here stand opposed to each other as rivals: so that we cannot love the one without rejecting the otherYe cannot serve God and mammon (Mat 6:24). The more the world occupies our hearts, the less room there is in them for God, and the more forgetful are we of the world to come.

whosoever therefore will be: literally, whosoever wishes to behas chosen the world as his portion.

the friend of the worldresolves to cultivate its friendship and favour as his chief goodis, or rather, constitutes himself, sets himself up as, the enemy of God.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

It is spiritual, not corporal adultery, which these words take notice of: the inordinate love of this world is called spiritual adultery; because it draws away the love of the soul from God, and dissolves the spiritual marriage between God and the soul; Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world, which stands in competition with, and indisposes you from the doing of God’s will, is enmity with God? and that whosoever will be thus a friend of the world, is the enemy of God? To love the world as God’s competitor, is enmity to God, and he is God’s enemy that loveth it predominantly. Learn we to love every creature with a creature love: for God reckons we love him not at all, if we love him not above all.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Jas 4:4. Ye adulterers and adulteresses Who have broken your faith with God, your rightful spouse. Thus many understand these expressions, because God himself represented his relation to the Jews as his people under the idea of a marriage, and because the prophets, in conformity to that idea, represented the idolatry of the Jews as adultery. But inasmuch as gross idolatry was a sin from which the Jews had long been entirely free, and whereas to adultery, and other sins of the flesh, they were exceedingly addicted, it seems more probable that these appellations are to be understood literally. Know ye not that the friendship of the world The desire of the flesh, the desire of the eye, and the pride of life, yielded to, to gain the favour of carnal and worldly men; or a conformity to such in their sinful courses, in order to gain their friendship; is enmity with God Is an evident proof thereof? see Mat 6:24; Mat 12:30. Whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world Makes it his business to comply with and gratify worldly men, thereby constitutes himself an enemy of God And takes part with his adversaries.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Verse 4

Ye adulterers and adulteresses. These terms seem to be used in this case, as indeed they often are in the Scriptures, in a figurative sense, to denote those who are not true to the worship and service of God, but, while they profess to love and serve their Maker, have their hearts really set upon the world.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

This is speaking to spiritual adultery of believers – they are turning against God for their own pleasure. James applies this and states clearly that if you are a friend of the world you are the enemy of God.

Now, that isn’t a place I would like to find myself in – being the enemy of God.

Being a friend of the world would be bad enough for the spiritual Christian, but the added consequence is even worse.

What might be a sign of being a friend of the world?

a. Going to the world’s entertainment whether in the theater or at home on the television.

b. Going to the places that the world loves to go – bars, clubs, wild parties etc.

c. Doing what the world likes to do – parties, provocative clothes, and provocative life style.

d. Talking like the world – swearing, all the fad language twists, or inappropriate topics.

e. Taking any of the above, calling them Christian and doing them because they are “Christian.”

f. Having a world mind-set – being focused on what is going on here, when we ought to be focused on getting there.

g. Using worldly thinking (humanism, isms, etc.) in a Christian context to reach improper conclusions and actions.

Fuente: Mr. D’s Notes on Selected New Testament Books by Stanley Derickson

4:4 {3} Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

(3) Another reason why such unbridled lusts and pleasures are utterly to be condemned, that is, because he who gives himself to the world divorces himself from God, and breaks the band of that holy and spiritual marriage.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

3. The nature of the choice 4:4-5

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

The real issue is whom will I love, God or the world?

"In the simplest sense of the word, the world is each man’s natural environment, that into which he enters at birth, and from which he departs in death. It is the immediate present, the seen and temporal, of which our senses bear witness, in contrast to the unseen and eternal . . ." [Note: Mayor, p. 225.]

The world urges us to love ourselves, to put our pleasures before God’s pleasures. If we agree with that idea, we are unfaithful as the Lord’s spiritual brides. We have deliberately chosen to follow the world’s philosophy rather than God’s will. We cannot be on friendly terms with God if we follow the world’s philosophy (Mat 6:24). The world wants us to exclude God from all aspects of life. God wants us to include Him in all of life because He is in all of life, and without Him we can do nothing (Joh 15:5).

". . . no man who makes worldly success his aim can be also a friend of God" [Note: Ibid., p. 140.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Chapter 19

THE SEDUCTIONS OF THE WORLD AND THE JEALOUSY OF THE DIVINE LOVE.

Jam 4:4-6

THE Revisers are certainly right in rejecting, without even mention in the margin, the reading, “Ye adulterers and adulteresses.” The difficulty of the revised reading pleads strongly in its favor, and the evidence of MSS. and versions is absolutely decisive. The interpolation of the masculine was doubtless made by those who supposed that the term of reproach was to be understood literally, and who thought it inexplicable that St. James should confine his rebuke to female offenders.

But the context shows that the term is not to be understood literally. It is not a special kind of sensuality, but greed and worldliness generally, that the writer is condemning. It is one of the characteristics of the letter that being addressed to Jewish, and not Gentile converts, and occasionally to Jews whether Christians or not, it says very little about the sins of the flesh; and “adulteresses” here is no exception. The word is used in its common Old Testament sense of spiritual adultery-unfaithfulness to Jehovah regarded as the Husband of His people. “They that are far from Thee shall perish: Thou hast destroyed all them that go a-whoring from Thee.” {Psa 73:27} “Thus will I make thy lewdness to cease from thee, and thy whoredom brought from the land of Egypt”. {Eze 23:27} “Plead with your mother, plead; for she is not My wife, neither am I her Husband.” {Hos 2:2} The fifty-seventh chapter of Isaiah contains a terrible working out of this simile; and indeed the Old Testament is full of it. Our Lord is probably reproducing it when he speaks of the Jews of His own time as an “adulterous and sinful generation”. {Mat 12:39; Mat 16:4; Mar 8:38} And we find it again in the Apocalypse. {Rev 2:22}

But why does St. James use the feminine? Had he accused his readers of adultery, or called them an adulterous generation, the meaning would have been clear enough. What is the exact meaning of “Ye adulteresses”?

St. James wishes to bring home to those whom he is addressing that not only the Christian Church as a whole, or the chosen people as a whole, is espoused to God, but that each individual soul stands to Him in the relation of a wife to her husband. It is not merely the case that they belong to a generation which in the main has been guilty of unfaithfulness, and that in this guilt they share; but each of them, taken one by one, has in his or her own person committed this sin against the Divine Spouse. The sex of the person does not affect the relationship: any soul that has been wedded to God, and has then transferred its affection and allegiance to other beings, is an unfaithful wife. St. James, with characteristic simplicity, directness, and force, indicates this fact by the stern address, “Ye adulteresses.”

“Know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God?” He implies that they might know this, and that they can scarcely help doing so; it is so obvious that to love His opponent is to be unfaithful and hostile to Him. At the beginning of the section St. James had asked whence came the miserable condition in which his readers were found; and he replied that it came from their own desires, which they tried to gratify by intrigue and violence, instead of resorting to prayer; or else from the carnal aims by which they turned their prayers into sin. Here he puts the same fact in a somewhat different way. This vehement pursuit of their own pleasures, in word, and deed, and even in prayer-what is it but a desertion of God for Mammon, a sacrifice of the love of God to the friendship (such as it is) of the world? It is a base yielding to seductions which ought to have no attractiveness, for they involve the unfaithfulness of a wife and the treason of a subject. There can be no true and loyal affection for God while some other than God is loved, and not loved for His sake. If a woman “shall put away her husband, and marry another, she committeth adultery”; {Mar 11:12} and if a soul shall put away its God, and marry another, it committeth adultery. A wife who cultivates friendship with one who is trying to seduce her becomes the enemy of her husband; and every Christian and Jew ought to know “that the friendship of the world is enmity with God.”

St. John tells us (and the words are probably not his, but Christs) that “God loved the world”. {Joh 3:16} He also charges us not to love the 1Jn 2:15. And here St. James tells us that to be friends with the world is to be the enemy of God. It is obvious that “the world” which God loves-is not identical with “the world” which we are told not to love. “World” () is a term which has various meanings in Scripture, and we shall go seriously astray if we do not carefully distinguish them. Sometimes it means the whole universe in its order and beauty; as when St. Paul says, “For the invisible things of Him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made.” {Rom 1:20} Sometimes it means this planet, the earth; as when the

Evil One showed to Jesus “all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of” Mat 4:8. Again, it means the inhabitants of the earth; as when Christ is said to “take away the sin of the world”. {Joh 1:2; 1Jn 4:14} Lastly, it means those who are alienated from God-unbelievers, faithless Jews and Christians, and especially the great heathen organization of Rome. {Joh 8:23; Joh 12:31} Thus a word which originally signified the natural order and beauty of creation comes to signify the unnatural disorder and hideousness of creatures who have rebelled against their Creator. The world which the Father loves is the whole race of mankind, His creatures and His children. The world which we are not to love is that which prevents us from loving Him in return, His rival and His enemy. It is from this world that the truly religious man keeps himself unspotted. {Jam 1:25} Sinful men, with their sinful lusts, keeping up a settled attitude of disloyalty and hostility to God, and handing this on as a living tradition, are what St. Paul, and St. James, and St. John mean by “the world.”

This world has the devil for its ruler. {Joh 14:30} It lies wholly in the power of the Evil One. {1Jn 5:19} It cannot hate Christs enemies, for the very reason that it hates Him. {Joh 7:7} And for the same reason it hates all those whom He has chosen out of its midst. {Joh 15:18-19} Just as there is a Spirit of God, which leads us into all the truth, so there is a “spirit of the world,” which leads to just the opposite. {1Co 2:12} This world, with its lusts, is passing away, {1Jn 2:17} and its very sorrow worketh death. {2Co 7:10} “The world is human nature, sacrificing the spiritual to the material, the future to the present, the unseen and the eternal to that which touches the senses and which perishes with time. The world is a mighty flood of thoughts, feelings, principles of action, conventional prejudices, dislikes, attachments, which have been gathering around it, human life for ages, impregnating impelling it, molding it, degrading it. Of the millions of millions of human beings who have lived, nearly every one probably has contributed something, his own little addition, to the great tradition of materialized life which St. [James] calls the world. Every one, too, must have received something from it. According to his circumstances the same man acts upon the world, or in turn is acted on by it. And the world at different times wears different forms. Sometimes it is a solid compact mass, an organization of pronounced ungodliness. Sometimes it is a subtle, thin, hardly suspected influence, a power altogether airy and impalpable, which yet does most powerfully penetrate, inform, and shape human life.”

There is no sin in a passionate love of the ordered beauty and harmony of the universe, as exhibited either in this planet or in the countless bodies which people the immensity of space; no sin in devoting the energies of a lifetime to finding out all that can be known about the laws and conditions of nature in all its complex manifestations. Science is no forbidden ground to Gods servants, for all truth is Gods truth, and to learn it is a revelation of Himself. If only it be studied as His creature, it may be admired and loved without any disloyalty to Him.

Still less is there any sin in “the enthusiasm of humanity,” in a passionate zeal for the amelioration of the whole human race. A consuming love for ones fellow-men is so far from involving enmity to God that it is impossible to have any genuine love of God without it. “He that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen cannot love God whom he hath not seen.” {1Jn 4:20} The love of the world which St. James condemns is a passion which more than anything else renders a love of mankind impossible. Its temper is selfishness, and the principle of its action is the conviction that every human being is actuated by purely selfish motives. It has no belief in motives of which it has no experience either in itself or in those among whom it habitually moves. Next to a cultivation of the love of God, a cultivation of the love of man is the best remedy for the deadly paralysis of the heart which is the inevitable consequence of choosing to be a friend of the world. This choice is a very important element in the matter. It is lost in the Authorized Version, but is rightly restored by the Revisers. “Whosoever, therefore, would be ( ) a friend of the world maketh himself () an enemy of God.” It is useless for him to plead that he has no wish to be hostile to God. He has of his own free will adopted a condition of life which of necessity involves hostility to Him. And he has full opportunity of knowing this; for although the world may try to deceive him by confusing the issue, God does not. The world may assure him that there is no need of any choice: he has no need to abandon God; it is quite easy to serve God, and yet remain on excellent terms with the world. But God declares that the choice must be made, and that it is absolute and exclusive. “And now, Israel, what doth the Lord thy God require of thee, but to fear the Lord thy God, to walk in all His ways, and to love Him, and to serve the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul, to keep the commandments of the Lord, and His statutes, which I command thee this day for thy good?” {Deu 10:12-13; comp. Deu 6:5 and Deu 30:6} The next two verses are a passage of known difficulty, the most difficult in this Epistle, and one of the most difficult in the whole of the New Testament. In the intensity of his detestation of the evil against which he is inveighing, St. James has used condensed expressions which can be understood in a variety of ways, and it is scarcely possible to decide which of the three or four possible meanings is the one intended. But the question has been obscured by the suggestion of explanations which are not tenable. The choice lies between those which are given in the margin of the Revised Version and the one before us in the text; for we may safely discard all those which depend upon the reading “dwelleth in us” () and we must stand by the reading “made to dwell in us” (). The questions which cannot be answered with certainty are these:

1. Are two Scriptures quoted, or only one? and if two are quoted, where is the first of them to be found?

2. Who is it that “longeth” or “lusteth”? is it God, or the Holy Spirit, or our own human spirit?

3. What is it that is longed for by God or the Spirit? Let us take these three questions in order.

1. The words which follow “Think ye that the Scripture speaketh in vain?” do not occur in the Old Testament, although the sense of them may be found piecemeal in a variety of passages. Therefore, either the words are not a quotation at all, or they are from some book no longer extant, or they are a condensation Of several utterances in the Old Testament. The first of these suppositions seems to be the best, but neither of the others can be set aside as improbable. We may paraphrase, therefore, the first part of the passage thus:-

“Ye unfaithful spouses of Jehovah! know ye not that to be friendly with the world is to be at enmity with Him? Or do ye think that what the Scripture says about faithlessness to God is idly spoken?” But as regards this first question we must be content to remain in great uncertainty.

2. Who is it that “longeth” or “lusteth” (). To decide whether “longeth” or “lusteth” is the right translation will help us to decide this second point, and it will also help us to decide whether the sentence is interrogative or not. Is this word of desiring used here in the good sense of longing or yearning, or in the bad sense of lusting? The word occurs frequently in the New Testament, and in every one of these passages it is used in a good sense. {Rom 1:11; 2Co 5:2; 2Co 9:14; Php 1:8; Php 2:26; 1Th 3:10; 2Ti 1:4; 1Pe 2:2} Nor is this the whole case. Substantives and adjectives

2. which are closely cognate with it are fairly common, and these are all used in a good sense. {Rom 15:23; 2Co 7:7; 2Co 7:11; Php 4:1} We may therefore set aside the interpretations of the sentence which require the rendering “lusteth,” whether the statement that mans spirit lusteth enviously, or the question, Doth the Divine Spirit in us lust enviously? The word here expresses the mighty and affectionate longing of the Divine love. And it is the Spirit which God made to dwell in us which longeth over us with a jealous longing. If we make the sentence mean that God longeth, then we are compelled to take the Spirit which He made to dwell in us as that for which He longs; God has a jealous longing for His own Spirit implanted in us. But this does not yield very good sense; we decide, therefore, for the rendering, “Even unto jealousy doth the Spirit which He made to dwell in us yearn over us.” “Even unto jealousy”; these words stand first, with great emphasis. No friendship with the world or any alien object can be tolerated.

3. The third question has been solved by the answer to the second. That which is yearned for by the Spirit implanted in us is ourselves. The meaning is not that God longs for mans spirit (the human spirit would hardly be spoken of as that which God made to dwell in us), or that He longs for the Holy Spirit in us (a meaning which would be very hard to explain), but that His Holy Spirit yearns for us with a jealous yearning. God is a jealous God, and the Divine love is a jealous love; it brooks no rival. And When His Spirit takes up its abode in us it cannot rest until it possesses us wholly, to the exclusion of all alien affections.

At one of the conferences between the Northern and the Southern States of America during the war of 1861-1865 the representatives of the Southern States stated what cession of territory they were prepared to make, provided that the independence of the portion that was not ceded to the Federal Government was secured. More and more attractive offers were made, the portions to be ceded being increased, and those to be retained in a state of independence being proportionately diminished. All the offers were met by a steadfast refusal. At last President Lincoln placed his hand on the map so as to cover all the Southern States, and in these emphatic words delivered his ultimatum: “Gentlemen, this Government must have the whole.” The constitution of the United States was at an end if any part, however small, was allowed to become independent of the rest. It was a vital principle, which did not admit of exceptions or degrees. It must be kept in its entirety, or it was not kept at all.

Just such is the claim which God, by the working of His Spirit, makes upon ourselves. He cannot share us with the world, however much we may offer to Him, and however little to His rival. If a rival is admitted at all, our relation to Him is violated and we have become unfaithful. His government must have the whole.

Do these terms seem to be harsh? They are not really so, for the more we surrender, the more He bestows. We give up the world, and that appears to us to be a great sacrifice. “But He giveth more grace.” Even in this world He gives far more than we give up, and adds a crown of life in the world to Jam 1:12. “Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or mother, or father, or children, or lands, for My sake, and for the Gospels sake, but he shall receive a hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life”. {Mar 10:29-30} “God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace to the humble.” Those who persist in making friends with the world, in seeking its advantages, in adopting its standards, in accepting its praise, God resists. By choosing to throw in their lot with His enemy they have made themselves His enemies, and He cannot but withstand them. But to those who humbly submit their wills to His, who give up the world, with its gifts and its promises, and are willing to be despised by it in order to keep themselves unspotted from it, He gives grace-grace to cling closer to Him, in spite of the attractions of the world; a gift which, unlike the gifts of the world, never loses its savor.

Was St. James acquainted with the “Magnificat”? May not he, the Lords brother, have sometimes heard the Mother of the Lord recite it? The passage before us is almost like an echo of some of its words: “His mercy is unto generations and generations of them that fear Him. He hath showed strength with His arm; He hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their heart. He hath put down princes from their thrones, and hath exalted them of low degree. The hungry He hath filled with good things; and the rich He hath sent empty away.” At any rate the “Magnificat” and St. James teach the same lesson as the Book of Proverbs and St. Peter, who, like St. James, quotes it, {1Pe 5:5} that God resists and puts down those who choose to unite themselves with the world in preference to Him, and gives more and more graces and blessings to all who by faith in Him and His Christ have overcome the world. It is only by faith that we can overcome. A conviction that the things which are seen are the most important and pressing, if not the only realities, is sure to betray us into a state of captivity in which the power to work for God, and even the desire to serve Him, will become less and less. We have willed to place ourselves under the worlds spell, and Such influence as we possess tells not for God, but against Him. But a belief that the chief and noblest realities are unseen enables a man to preserve an attitude of independence and indifference towards things which, even if they are substantial advantages, belong to this world only. He knows how insignificant all that this life has to offer is, compared with the immeasurable joys and woes of the life to come, and he cannot be guilty of the folly of sacrificing a certain and eternal future to a brief and uncertain present. The God in whom he believes is far more to him than the world which he sees and feels. “This is the victory which hath overcome the world, even his faith.”

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary