Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of James 5:6
Ye have condemned [and] killed the just; [and] he doth not resist you.
6. Ye have condemned and killed the just ] The words have been very generally understood as referring to the death of Christ, and on this view, the words “he doth not resist you” have been interpreted as meaning, “He no longer checks you in your career of guilt; He leaves you alone (comp. Hos 4:17) to fill up the measure of your sin.” St James, it has been inferred, uses the term “the Just One” as Stephen had done (Act 7:52), as pointing emphatically to “Jesus Christ the righteous” (1Jn 2:1). Fuller consideration, however, shews that such a meaning could hardly have come within the horizon of St James’s thoughts. (1) That single evil act of priests, and scribes, and the multitude of Jerusalem, could hardly have been thus spoken of in an Epistle addressed to the Twelve Tribes of the dispersion, without a more distinct indication of what was referred to. To see in them, as some have done, the statement that the Jews, wherever they were found, were guilty of that crime, as accepting and approving it, or as committing sins which made such an atonement necessary, is to read into them a non-natural meaning. (2) The whole context leads us to see in the words, a generic evil, a class sin, characteristic, like those of the previous verse, of the rich and powerful everywhere. (3) The meaning thus given to “he doth not resist you” seems, to say the least, strained and unnatural, especially as coming so soon after the teaching (ch. Jas 4:6) which had declared that “God does resist the proud.” (4) The true meaning of both clauses is found, it is believed, in taking “the just” as the representative of a class, probably of the class of those, who as disciples of Christ the Just One, were reproducing His pattern of righteousness. Such an one, like his Master, and like Stephen, St James adds, takes as his law (note the change of tense from past to present) the rule of not resisting. He submits patiently, certain that in the end he will be more than conqueror. It is not without interest to note that that title was afterwards applied to St James himself (Euseb. Hist. ii. 23). The name Justus, which appears three times in the New Testament (Act 1:23; Act 18:7; Col 4:11), was obviously the Latin equivalent of this epithet, and it probably answered to the Chasidim or Assideans ( 1Ma 2:42 ; 1Ma 7:13 , 2Ma 14:6 ) of an earlier stage of Jewish religious history. It is as if a follower of George Fox had addressed the judges and clergy of Charles II.’s reign, and said to them, “Ye persecuted the Friend, and he does not resist you.” (5) It is in favour of this interpretation that it presents a striking parallel to a passage in the “Wisdom of Solomon,” with which this Epistle has so many affinities. There too the writer speaks of the wealthy and voluptuous as laying snares for “the just” who is also “poor,” who calls himself “the servant of the Lord,” and boasts of God as his Father ( Wis 2:12-16 ). Comp. also the description of the ultimate triumph of the just man in. Wis 5:1-5 .
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Ye have condemned and killed the just – ton dikaion – the just one, or the just man – for the word used is in the singular number. This may either refer to the condemnation and crucifixion of Christ – meaning that their conduct towards his people had been similar to the treatment of the Saviour, and was in fact a condemnation and crucifixion of him afresh; or, that by their rejection of him in order to live in sin, they in fact condemned him and his religion; or, that they had condemned and killed the just man – meaning that they had persecuted those who were Christians; or, that by their harsh treatment of others in withholding what was due to them, they had deprived them of the means of subsistence, and had, as it were, killed the righteous. Probably the true meaning is, that it was one of their characteristics that they had been guilty of wrong towards good men. Whether it refers, however, to any particular act of violence, or to such a course as would wear out their lives by a system of oppression, injustice, and fraud, cannot now be determined.
And he doth not resist you – Some have supposed that this refers to God, meaning that he did not oppose them; that is, that he bore with them patiently while they did it. Others suppose that it should be read a question – and doth he not resist you? meaning that God would oppose them, and punish them for their acts of oppression and wrong. But probably the true reference is to the just man whom they condemned and killed; meaning that they were so powerful that all attempts to resist them would be vain, and that the injured and oppressed could do nothing but submit patiently to their acts of injustice and violence. The sense may be either that they could not oppose them – the rich men being so powerful, and they who were oppressed so feeble; or that they bore their wrongs with meekness, and did not attempt it. The sins, therefore, condemned in these verses Jam 5:1-6, and for which it is said the divine vengeance would come upon those referred to, are these four:
(1)That of hoarding up money when it was unnecessary for their real support and comfort, and when they might do so much good with it, (compare Mat 6:19😉
(2)That of keeping back the wages which was due to those who cultivated their fields; that is, keeping back what would be a fair compensation for their toil – applicable alike to hired men and to slaves;
(3)That of giving themselves up to a life of ease, luxury, and sensual; indulgence; and,
(4)That of wronging and oppressing good and just men – men, perhaps in humble life, who were unable to vindicate their rights, and who had none to undertake their cause; men who were too feeble to offer successful resistance, or who were restrained by their principles from attempting it.
It is needless to say that there are multitudes of such persons now on the earth, and that they have the same reason to dread the divine vengeance which the same class had in the time of the apostle James.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 6. Ye have condemned and killed the just; and he doth not resist you.] Several by , the just one, understand Jesus Christ, who is so called, Ac 3:14; Ac 7:52; Ac 22:14; but the structure of the sentence, and the connection in which it stands, seem to require that we should consider this as applying to the just or righteous in general, who were persecuted and murdered by those oppressive rich men; and their death was the consequence of their dragging them before the judgment seats, Jas 2:6, where, having no influence, and none to plead their cause, they were unjustly condemned and executed.
And he doth not resist you. – In this, as in , the just, there is an enallege of the singular for the plural number. And in the word , he doth not resist, the idea is included of defence in a court of justice. These poor righteous people had none to plead their cause; and if they had it would have been useless, as their oppressors had all power and all influence, and those who sat on these judgment seats were lost to all sense of justice and right. Some think that he doth not resist you should be referred to GOD; as if he had said, God permits you to go on in this way at present, but he will shortly awake to judgment, and destroy you as enemies of truth and righteousness.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Ye have condemned and killed; i.e. procured by your wealth and power the passing unrighteous sentences, and thereby the destruction of the just.
The just; indefinitely and collectively, the just for any just man, viz. such as were innocent and just in comparison of their persecutors.
And he doth not resist you; this notes not only the patience of such in bearing injuries, but their weakness, and being destitute of human help against their adversaries power.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
6. Ye have condemned . . . thejustThe Greek aorist expresses, “Ye are accustomedto condemn . . . the just.” Their condemnation of Christ, “theJust,” is foremost in James’ mind. But all the innocent bloodshed, and to be shed, is included, the Holy Spirit comprehendingJames himself, called “the Just,” who was slain in atumult. See my Introduction. Thisgives a peculiar appropriateness to the expression in this verse, thesame “as the righteous (just) man” (Jas5:16). The justice or righteousness of Jesus and His people iswhat peculiarly provoked the ungodly great men of the world.
he doth not resist youThevery patience of the Just one is abused by the wicked as an incentiveto boldness in violent persecution, as if they may do as they pleasewith impunity. God doth “resist the proud” (Jas4:6); but Jesus as man, “as a sheep is dumb before theshearers, so He opened not His mouth”: so His people are meekunder persecution. The day will come when God will resist (literally,”set Himself in array against”) His foes and theirs.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Ye have condemned and killed the just,…. Meaning not Christ, the Just One, as some have thought; whom the Jewish sanhedrim condemned as guilty of death, and got the sentence passed upon him, and him to be crucified by Pontius Pilate, on the day of slaughter, at the time of the passover, as some connect the last clause of the preceding verse with this; since the apostle is not writing to the Jerusalem Jews, nor to unbelievers, but to professors of religion; though he might say they did it, because their nation did it: but rather this is to be understood of the poor saints, who were just, through the imputation of Christ’s righteousness to them, and lived soberly, righteously, and godly, and were harmless and inoffensive in their conversation: who were evil spoken of, censured, and judged, and condemned in a rash and uncharitable manner by their brethren; or were drawn to the judgment seats by the rich, who obtained a judicial process against them, and procured a sentence of condemnation to pass upon them unrighteously; and who killed them, by taking away their good names from them, and by withholding from them their supplies of life, the fruit of their own labour, whereby their lives were embittered and made miserable:
and he doth not resist you; it being neither in his power, nor in his inclination; but takes it patiently, quietly submits, and makes no opposition: or God does not resist you, as yet; he will do it shortly.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Ye have condemned (). First aorist active indicative of , old verb (from , condemnation, Ac 25:15). The rich controlled the courts of justice.
Ye have killed the righteous one ( ). First aorist active indicative of (Jas 2:11; Jas 4:2). “The righteous one” ( ) is the generic use of the singular with article for the class. There is probably no direct reference to one individual, though it does picture well the death of Christ and also the coming death of James himself, who was called the Just (Eus. H.E. ii. 23). Stephen (Ac 7:52) directly accuses the Sanhedrin with being betrayers and murderers ( ) of the righteous one ( ).
He doth not resist you ( ). It is possible to treat this as a question. Present middle indicative of , for which see Jas 4:6. Without a question the unresisting end of the victim ( ) is pictured. With a question (, expecting an affirmative answer) God or Lord is the subject, with the final judgment in view. There is no way to decide definitely.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
1) The wicked rich often control the courts of justice, so that they kill and condemn the righteous, Mic 6:8.
2) In the Christian spirit of our Lord, the poor had endured this evil treatment of the rich wicked and had not resisted, thus the more severe judgement was one day to be upon the wicked. Mat 5:39.
3) God’s creatures can not be abused, except He be abused. To cheat, steal from, or abuse one of God’s creatures is to cheat, steal from or abuse God. Such He abhors and condemns, Amo 2:6; Amo 8:4-6.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
6 Ye have condemned. Here follows another kind of inhumanity, that the rich by their power oppressed and destroyed the poor and weak. He says by a metaphor that the just were condemned and killed; for when they did not kill them by their own hand, or condemn them as judges, they yet employed the authority which they had to do wrong, they corrupted judgments, and contrived various arts to destroy the innocent, that is, really to condemn and kill them. (139)
By adding that the just did not resist them, he intimates that the audacity of the rich was greater; because those whom they oppressed were without any protection. He, however, reminds them that the more ready and prompt would be the vengeance of God, when the poor have no protection from men. But though the just did not resist, because he ought to have patiently endured wrongs, I yet think that their weakness is at the same time referred to, that is he did not resist, because he was unprotected and without any help from men.
(139) Many have thought that what is referred to here is the condemnation of our Savior by the Jewish nation, especially as he is called ὁ δίκαιος, “the just one.” This is true, but the Christian is also called too, in 1Pe 4:18. James very frequently individualizes the faithful, using the singular for the plural number. The whole context proves that he speaks here of the poor faithful who suffered injustice from the rich, professing the same faith. Besides, the death of Christ is not ascribed to the rich, but to the elders and chief priests.
The two first verbs, being aorists, may be rendered in the present tense, especially as the last verb is in that tense. For in the very next verse, the 7, the aorist is so used. We may then give this version, —
6. “Ye condemn, ye kill the righteous; he sets himself not in array against you.”
Probably the aorist is used, as it expresses what was done habitually, or a continued act, like the future tense often in Hebrew. The preceding verse, the 5, where all the verbs are aorists, would be better rendered in the same way, “Ye live in pleasure,” etc.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(6) Ye have condemned and killed the just.Better thus: Ye condemned, ye slew the justas in the speech of Peter (Act. 3:14-15), or that of Stephen (Act. 7:52). Such a reference, however, has been disallowed by some commentators, as conveying too harsh an accusation against the whole Jewish people; and besides, it being unfair to forget that St. James was writing to Christian Jews, as well as to the anti-Christian. But, in a manner, all wrong and oppression tend towards the murder of the Just One, as every falsehood (see Note on Jas. 3:13) is an attack on the Truth. And far beyond this, in the present case our Lord is rightly to be considered the victim of the Jews. His blood is on them and on their children (Mat. 27:25); they filled up the measure of their fathers (Mat. 23:32), that the blood of all the righteous might come upon them, from Abel to Zacharias (Mat. 23:35): the one crowning sin made them guilty of all. And not only is this backward participation true, but there is a forward one as well. Christ Himself was persecuted by Saul in the afflictions of His servants (Act. 9:4-5), and so onward ever till the martyr-roll be full.
It is of strange significance that in this verseye condemned, ye slew the justJames the Just prophetically described his own murderers. The last words, moreover, of the Scripture, simply record the behaviour of himself, as of every real witness for Christ: He doth not resist. No: the servant of the Lord must not strive (2Ti. 2:24) even in death; and by such meekness and resignation is best seen the likeness to the divine Master, Who was brought as a lamb to the slaughter (Isa. 53:7). Comp. Wis. 2:10-20 for a striking parallel, on the oppression of the righteous, which would not inaptly describe the just man, the Son of God.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
6. The just True pre-eminently of their condemning and killing the just One, Jesus; and afterwards Stephen, and, finally, St. James himself.
Doth not The continuous present, implying that the martyr is ever non-resistant.
The character of the rich men of St. James’s age may be understood by the following description from a chapter on “The Decline of the Roman Empire,” by the historian Bancroft, in his “Miscellanies:”
“The aristocracy owned the soil and its cultivators. The vast capacity for accumulation which the laws of society secure to capital in a greater degree than to personal exertion, displays itself nowhere so clearly as in slave-holding States, where the labouring class is but a portion of the capital of the opulent. As wealth consists chiefly in land and slaves, the rates of interest are, from universally operative causes always comparatively high, making the difficulty of advancing with borrowed capital proportionably great. The small landholder finds himself unable to compete with those who are possessed of whole cohorts of bondmen; his slaves, his lands, rapidly pass, in consequence of his debts, into the hands of the more opulent. The large plantations are constantly swallowing up the smaller ones; and land and slaves come to be engrossed by the few. Before Caesar passed the Rubicon this condition existed in the extreme in the Roman State. The rural indigent crept into the walls of Rome. A free labourer was hardly known. The large proprietors of slaves not only tilled their immense plantations, but also indulged their avarice in training their slaves to every species of labour, and letting them out, as horses from a livery stable, for the performance of every conceivable species of work. Four or five hundred men were not an uncommon number in one family; fifteen or twenty thousand sometimes belonged to one master. The immense wealth of Crassus consisted chiefly in lands and slaves: on the number of his slaves we hardly dare hazard a conjecture. Of joiners and masons he had over five hundred. Nor was this the whole evil. The nobles, having impoverished their lands, became usurers, and had their agents dispersed over all the provinces. The censor, Cato, closed his career by recommending usury as more productive than agriculture; and such was the prodigality of the Roman planters, that, to indulge their fondness for luxury, many of them mortgaged their estates to the moneylenders. Thus the lands of Italy, at best in the hands of a few proprietors, became virtually vested in a still smaller number of usurers. No man’s house, no man’s person, was secure.
“The captives in war were sold at auction. Cicero, during the little campaign in which he was commander, sold men enough to produce, at half price, about half a million of dollars.
“The second mode of supplying the slave market was by commerce; and this supply was so uniform and abundant that the price of an ordinary labourer hardly varied for centuries. The reason is obvious; where the slave merchant gets his cargoes from kidnappers the first cost is inconsiderable. The great centres of this traffic were in the countries bordering on the Euxine; and Scythians were often stolen. Caravans penetrated the deserts of Africa, and made regular hunts for slaves. Blacks were highly valued; they were rare, and, therefore, both male and female negroes were favourite articles of luxury among the opulent Romans. At one period Delos was most remarkable as the emporium for slaves. It had its harbours, chains, prisons, every thing so amply arranged to favour a brisk traffic that ten thousand slaves could change hands and be shipped in a single day, an operation which would have required thirty-three or thirty-four ships of the size of the vessel in which Paul the apostle was wrecked. There was hardly a port in the Roman empire, convenient for kidnapping foreigners, in which the slave trade was not prosecuted. In most heathen countries, also, men would sell their own children into bondage. The English continued to do so even after the introduction of Christianity. In modern times, when men incurred debts, they have mortgaged their own bodies; the ancients mortgaged their sons and daughters.
“It is a calumny to charge the devastation of Italy upon the barbarians. The large Roman plantations, tilled by slave labour, were its ruin. The careless system impoverished the soil, and wore out even the rich fields of Campania. Large districts were left waste; others had been turned into pastures, and grazing substituted for tillage. When Alaric led the Goths into Italy he could not sustain his army in the beautiful but deserted territory. Slavery had destroyed the democracy, had destroyed the aristocracy, had destroyed the empire.”
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘You have condemned, you have killed the righteous one.
He is not resisting (or ‘opposing’) you.’
‘The Righteous One’ is a New Testament term for Jesus. See Act 3:14; Act 7:52; Act 22:14. That does not, however, mean that we are to see this as a sudden direct reference to Jesus, although there certainly appears to be a good case for suggesting that Jesus is in mind, for James is probably recalling Peter’s sermon in which he cried out to the people in the Temple, ‘You denied the Holy and Righteous One —and killed the Author of Life’ (Act 3:14-15). Compare also Stephen’s words, ‘the Righteous One Whom you have now betrayed and murdered’ (Act 7:52). James’ words are very similar, ‘You have killed the Righteous One’. What we should rather see here therefore is God’s people depicted in terms of being one with the Righteous One. The rich and powerful had killed the Righteous One, and now they had killed His people, thus ‘killing’ Him again (compare Act 9:4). And the people, like the Messiah Himself, did not resist them. They did not think in terms of violent retaliation, but like their Master received it as from God. The phrase ‘he is not resisting you’ is a striking climax to the whole poem, bringing out the continual savage behaviour and false attitude of the rich, in stark contrast with the unresisting contentment of the poor. It took away any justification for their behaviour. It was a true picture of the churches’ response to persecution, intended to shame those who were responsible. And their very non-resistance emphasises the deserving of the rich to receive their deserts. Like their Master the righteous had said, ‘Father, forgive them for they know not what they do.’ It was God Himself Who had determined the rich men’s destiny.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Jam 5:6. Ye have condemned and killed the Just; By , the Just, some understand our Lord Jesus Christ, who is so termed, Act 3:14 and in other places. Him the Jews murdered, and he did not resist them; and they did it at the timeof a great festival, when their hearts were elevated with high living and jollity; for which crime particularly wrath was now swiftly coming upon them. All these things maybe alledged in favour of that interpretation;but I scarce think, says Benson, that the apostle did here refer to the crucifixion of our Lord: for it was chiefly the Jerusalem Jews, and not they of the dispersions, who were his murderers; and how often is the singular number put for the plural?I should therefore choose to interpret this text of any of the Christians put to death by means of the Jews, who were dispersed among the nations. Our Saviour prophesied that his disciples should meet with such treatment; and St. Paul confessed that, while he was a Jew, he had persecuted some of the Christians to death. Some of the Jews likewise of the dispersions were the occasion of stoning St. Paul himself, till they thought he had been dead. It may possibly be some confirmation that by the Just is meant, not our Lord, but his disciples; that in ch. Jam 2:6 rich men are represented as then continuing to oppress the Christians by their power, and as dragging them before the heathen tribunals to condemn them: and none were more forward to do this than the unbelieving Jews. Michaelis supports the common interpretation by supposing the relative , who, to be understood;who doth not resist you. His reasons are, first, That it was usual with the Hebrews, and much more with the Arabs, to omit the pronoun relative; which, among the Europeans, is particularly common with the English. Secondly, It was the greatest reproach to kill the innocent, who did not so muchasresist. And then, from commending the Just Man, who had patiently resigned his life, the apostle proceeds torecommend patience to the surviving Christians, from the consideration of all that he had said, Jam 5:1-6.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Jas 5:6 . The third sin, the persecution of the just , by which the ungodliness of their disposition is most strongly indicated. By is not meant Christ (Oecumenius, [226] Bede, Grotius, Lange), for, on the one hand, there is nothing in the context to indicate this, and, on the other hand, the present , is opposed to it; also, if this were the case, the perfect must be put instead of the aorist, as here only one deed is mentioned, not, as before, a repetition of deeds. Wiesinger, in an unsatisfactory manner, explains by the innocent. Not merely the unjust conduct of the founded on covetousness is here intended to be described, but the reason of persecution is implied in the expression itself; comp. Wisd. of Son 2:12-17 ; as also 1Jn 3:12 . The singular is to be taken collectively, and the expression absolutely, as in Jas 5:16 . Several expositors assume that the verbs , , are not meant in their literal sense; but evidently without reason. shows that here primarily judges are meant; yet the accusers, if these are to be distinguished from them, are not to be considered as excluded, since their accusation points to nothing else than to a sentence of condemnation. [227] The asyndeton sharpens the climax, which is contained in the addition of the second verb to the first. Bouman directs attention to the paronomasia between and .
] opposes the calm patience of the just to the violence of the wicked: he doth not resist (comp. Act 18:6 ; Rom 13:4 ; Jas 4:6 ). Schneckenburger: . sine copula et pronomine ponderose additur. The present is explained from the fact that in what goes before not a single instance, but the continued conduct of the rich is described, and opposed to this is placed the similarly continued conduct of the . Lange, by the reference of to Christ, misinterprets the force of the present, arbitrarily attributing to the verb the meaning: “He stands no longer in your way; He does not stop you (in the way of death); He suffers you to fill up your measure.”
It is unnecessary to supply in thought or ; also is not to be converted into (Pott). For the correct construction there is no reason, with Bentley, for conjecturing instead of , or, with Benson, to take the sentence as interrogative, and to supply . The object of the addition of the clause is not so much the more strongly to mark the violent conduct of the rich, as rather by implication to point to the proximity of the vengeance of God, who interests Himself in the suffering just, as is definitely asserted in the previous verses. With this verse are to be compared, besides the already cited passage in Wis 2:12-17 , particularly Amo 2:6-7 ; Amo 5:12 ( ), Amo 8:4 , which testify for the correctness of the explanation here given.
[226] Oecumenius, indeed, says: , . . ., ; but he thinks that James likewise understands by this: ; and he closes with the remark: .
[227] Wiesinger correctly observes that is here not to be explained according to Sir 31:21 : ; but he maintains without reason that the death of the just is not to be considered as the direct design of the , but only as the result of their oppressions. Also de Wette thinks that the killing is not to be understood literally, but of extreme violence, deprivation of liberty, and the like. This interpretation is, however, occasioned by the assumption that the rich are Christians.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
6 Ye have condemned and killed the just; and he doth not resist you.
Ver. 6. Ye have condemned and killed ] Take it either properly, or metaphorically of usurers and extortioners, that not only rob, but ravish the poor that are fallen into their nets,Psa 10:9Psa 10:9 , that is, their bonds, debts, mortgages, as Chrysostom interpreteth it; there is neither equity nor mercy to be had at their hands; hence they are called meneaters, cannibals, &c. One saith there is more justice to be found in hell than here among men; for in hell no innocent person is oppressed.
And he doth not resist you ] Meekness of spirit commonly draws on injuries and indignities from unreasonable men. A crow will stand upon a sheep’s back, pulling off wool from her side, she dare not do so to a wolf or a mastiff. a Veterem ferendo iniuriam invitas novam. Bearing old wrongs encourages new ones.
a A large, powerful dog with a large head, drooping ears and pendulous lips, valuable as a watch-dog. D
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
6 .] Third class of sins: condemning the innocent . Ye condemned, ye murdered the just man (these words are probably spoken generally, the singular being collective. , not merely ; it is his justice itself which provokes the enmity and cruelty of the . It has been usual to refer these words to the condemnation and execution of Christ. So c., , , . , , , . . So Bed [15] , at some length; Grot., al. But there is surely nothing in the context to indicate this, further than that such a particular case may be included in the general charge, as its most notorious example. I cannot see, with Huther, how the present makes against this: for anyhow we must suppose a change of sense before the present can be introduced: and then it may as well be a description of Christ’s patient endurance, or of His present long-suffering, as of the present meekness of the (generic) . But I prefer the latter, and with it the other reference throughout): he (the ; Bentley more ingeniously than happily conjectured , as an emendation for ) doth not resist you (the behaviour of the just under your persecutions is ever that of meekness and submission. “ sine copula et pronomine ponderose additur.” Schneckenb.).
[15] Bede, the Venerable , 731; Bedegr, a Greek MS. cited by Bede, nearly identical with Cod. “E,” mentioned in this edn only when it differs from E.
This last clause serves as a note of transition to what follows. So Herder remarks, as cited by Wiesinger: “And thus we have as it were standing before us the slain and unresisting righteous man, when lo the curtain falls: Be patient, brethren, wait!” See, on the whole sense, Amo 2:6-7 ; Amo 5:12 ; and the description in Wis 2:6-20 .
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Jas 5:6 . , : this expresses what must often have taken place; the prophetical books often refer to like things; there is no reason for regarding this as some specific case of judicial murder. Cf. Amo 2:6-7 ; Amo 5:12 ; Wis 2:10 ff. The antithesis between the (“righteous”) and (“wicked”) is a commonplace in Jewish theology. : the statement of fact here, instead of the interrogative as read by some authorities, is more natural, and more in accordance with the prophetical style which is so characteristic of this whole passage. This picture of patient acquiescence in ill-treatment is really a very vivid touch, for it shows, on the one hand, that the down-trodden realised the futility of resistance; on the other, that their hopes were centred on the time to come.
With the whole of this section cf. the words in The first book of Clement, which is called The Testament of our Lord Jesus Christ , 12: “The harvest is come, that the guilty may be reaped and the Judge appear suddenly and confront them with their works”.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
just. App-191. Compare Mat 12:7; Mat 27:19. Act 3:14.
not. App-105. This is the Figure of speech Asyndeton. App-6. The two ands should be omitted.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
6.] Third class of sins: condemning the innocent. Ye condemned, ye murdered the just man (these words are probably spoken generally, the singular being collective. , not merely ; it is his justice itself which provokes the enmity and cruelty of the . It has been usual to refer these words to the condemnation and execution of Christ. So c., , , . , , , . . So Bed[15], at some length; Grot., al. But there is surely nothing in the context to indicate this, further than that such a particular case may be included in the general charge, as its most notorious example. I cannot see, with Huther, how the present makes against this: for anyhow we must suppose a change of sense before the present can be introduced: and then it may as well be a description of Christs patient endurance, or of His present long-suffering, as of the present meekness of the (generic) . But I prefer the latter, and with it the other reference throughout): he (the ; Bentley more ingeniously than happily conjectured , as an emendation for ) doth not resist you (the behaviour of the just under your persecutions is ever that of meekness and submission. sine copula et pronomine ponderose additur. Schneckenb.).
[15] Bede, the Venerable, 731; Bedegr, a Greek MS. cited by Bede, nearly identical with Cod. E, mentioned in this edn only when it differs from E.
This last clause serves as a note of transition to what follows. So Herder remarks, as cited by Wiesinger: And thus we have as it were standing before us the slain and unresisting righteous man, when lo the curtain falls: Be patient, brethren, wait! See, on the whole sense, Amo 2:6-7; Amo 5:12; and the description in Wis 2:6-20.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Jam 5:6. , , ye have condemned, ye have killed) The omission of the conjunction expresses haste.[68] Compare again App. Crit. Ed. ii. I feel grateful to Baumgarten; for while he brings forward no reading more worthy of remark, as omitted by me, he remarkably confirms the fulness of my choice.- , the Just) A distributive meaning in the singular number is admissible, denoting any just person, as the wicked get each into their power; but especially Christ Himself, the Just One, Act 3:14, who was slain by Jews and Gentiles; and afterwards James, the writer of this Epistle, who was surnamed by the Hebrews the Just, whose slaughter is here divinely foretold. The present tense is suitable, He doth not resist you; by which clause, following as it does without a conjunction, it is likewise intimated that by the very patience of the Just One the wicked goad themselves to slaughter. Comp. Wis 2:10-20.
[68] Cod. Amiat. of Vulg. puts an et before non resistit.-E.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
have: Jam 2:6, Mat 21:38, Mat 23:34, Mat 23:35, Mat 27:20, Mat 27:24, Mat 27:25, Joh 16:2, Joh 16:3, Act 2:22, Act 2:23, Act 3:14, Act 3:15, Act 4:10-12, Act 7:52, Act 13:27, Act 13:28, Act 22:14, 1Th 2:15, 1Th 2:16
and he: Isa 53:7, Mat 5:39, Mat 26:53, Mat 26:54, Luk 22:51-53, Joh 19:9-11, Act 8:32, 1Pe 2:22, 1Pe 2:23
Reciprocal: Psa 94:21 – condemn Pro 17:15 – that justifieth Isa 5:23 – take Isa 29:21 – and turn Amo 5:12 – they afflict Amo 8:4 – swallow Mat 12:7 – condemned Mat 21:39 – slew Mat 26:66 – He Mar 10:33 – condemn 1Pe 3:18 – the just
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Jas 5:6. This verse might seem to be a break into the line of thought but it is not. The poor people who had been imposed upon were not receiving their just dues, and they would naturally feel disturbed over the seeming neglect of the Lord. James mentions the fact of the condemnation and slaying of the Just One, meaning Christ, that even He did not resist. (See Isa 53:7 and Act 8:32.)
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Jas 5:6. The third sin is the oppression or persecution of the righteous. Ye have condemned and killed the just, or the just onethe just man, as the word just is in the singular. These words have been usually referred to the condemnation and execution of our Lord by the Jews.[1] He is pre-eminently the Just One; and this appears from the Acts of the Apostles to be a common appellation of our Lord in the primitive Church, and perhaps also of the Messiah among the Jews. His murder is ever represented as the crowning sin of the Jewish nation. Thus St. Peter accuses the Jews of having denied the Holy One and the Just and of killing the Prince of life (Act 3:14); and with the same crime does the martyr Stephen charge his accusers: Your fathers have slain them which showed before of the coming of the Just One, of whom ye have now been the betrayers and murderers (Act 7:52). And so also Justin Martyr says: Ye have killed the Just One, and before Him the prophets. But there is nothing in the context to indicate this, and the words which follow, He doth not resist you, are adverse to this meaning: they cannot refer to the non-resistance of Christ, as the verb is not in the past, but in the present tense. Some, indeed, suppose that the words denote God doth not resist you: that, as a punishment for their crime in killing Christ, God withdrew from them His Spirit; His Spirit no longer strove with them. But such a meaning is far-fetched. Others read it as a question: And doth He, that is, God, not resist you? We prefer the other interpretation, that by the just one is meant just men in general, an individual being taken to represent the class. Christ was the most flagrant, but not the only example of their killing the just. Stephen fell a prey to the fury of the Jews, and many more whose names are unrecorded; and the writer of this Epistle, who also was called the Just, was afterwards an instance of the fact here stated, Ye have condemned and killed the just one.
[1] So Lange, Basset, Dean Scott
and he, that is, Christ, if the expression, the Just One, is restricted to Him, though the present tense of the verb is somewhat opposed to this meaning; or the just man, used generally.
doth not resist you, referring either to the patience with which Christ endured His sufferings, or to the patience of just men in general. There is here a tacit reference to the vengeance of God, who adopts the cause of the just.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
By the just, may be understood Jesus Christ, that just One whom the nation of the Jews condemned and killed; and also such of his members, orthodox Christians, who the judaizing Christians persecuted. By their condemning the just, understand how they proceeded against them under a pretence and colour of law; before they would actually kill, they pretended legally to condemn.
Learn then, that God takes notice not only of the open violences offered to his people, but also of all the injuries done unto them under the form of a legal procedure; it is a mighty provocation when public authority, which is the defense of innocency, is made the pretense of oppression.
It follows, ye have killed the just: This is added to let us know that oppression will preceed as far as death. Wickedness knoweth no bounds; good men are oft-times arraigned, condemned, and killed; they fall a sacrifice to the rage of their persecutors and oppressors.
It is added, He doth not resist you; which if applied to Christ, points at his meekness; he was slain without resistance: he came to suffer, therefore would not resist. If applied to the suffering Christians, it points at their weakness and inability to make resistance, as well as at their meekness and patience under sufferings: Ye have condemned and killed the just, and he doth not resist you.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Verse 6
Condemned and killed; that is, deprived them of the means of subsistence by their injustice and oppression.–The just; the innocent,–those who had never injured them.–He doth not resist you; being helpless and defenceless in his poverty.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
The oppression of the rich extends to putting to death those who stand in their way even though these people resist the rich righteously. As in Jas 4:2, James may have been using "put to death" hyperbolically. Many Christians have experienced persecution from people who are trying to guard their own financial security (e.g., Act 8:18-24; Act 19:23-28). However if day laborers do not get their wages daily, they can die.
". . . for day laborers it was very serious not to find work or not to be paid. For this reason James personifies the salary, seeing it as the very blood of the exploited workers crying out pitifully. The case was the same for the peasants. The peasants die because they pour out their strength in their work, but the fruit of their work does not come back to them. They cannot regain their strength because the rich withhold their salaries. Therefore James accuses the rich of condemning and killing the just (Jas 5:6)." [Note: Elsa Tamez, The Scandalous Message of James: Faith Without Works is Dead, p. 20.]
These are strong words of warning. James evidently believed that his readers were erring in this area of their lives and needed a severe shock. The Jews’ gift for making money and their interest in this pursuit needed control. We need this warning too since modern culture values money very highly.
As with Jas 1:10, there is a question about whether James was referring to rich Christians or rich unbelievers in this pericope. Here as there I tend to think that James was probably referring to rich Christians. He seems to be addressing his readers rather than "speaking rhetorically, formally addressing non-Christians in Jas 1:10 as well as . . . in Jas 5:1-6, but saying this really for the benefit of his Christian readers, who were suffering at the hands of rich persecutors." [Note: Stulac, p. 199.]