James

2:1-13

4. A sermon on partiality, 2:1-13

Favoritism forbidden

Moving from his introductory sayings/instructions, James now presents what is virtually a sermon. He confronts a particular problem within the Christian fellowship, the problem is "status serving" - favoritism. We are easily attracted toward the successful, wealthy and beautiful people of this world. Yet for James, such partiality is something quite evil. James' message is quite simple, "the profession of Christian faith is inconsistent, indeed incompatible, with an attitude toward other men that discriminates against some and in favour of others", Laws.

It is worth noting how James in this sermon, and in the two that follow, presents a leading admonition in the opening verse which serves to identify the topic of the sermon. Here it is "favoritism". Although the sermon functions as a whole, v13 looks very much like an attached saying with the usual tenuous links, here gar, "for", and the word "judge". None-the-less, as Dibelius notes, it is quite "appropriate".

In the opening verse we strike a problem with translation. The generally accepted approach is to translate the verse as an exhortation - "Don't show favoritism", as NIV. Such a translation sets the tone of the passage and certainly is in line with the point James is making. Yet, it is possible to take another tack. The RV margin translates the verse as a question expecting a negative answer; "do you, in accepting persons, hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory?" The thrust of the verse is still the same, although now the implication is that to show favoritism in relationships because of status, wealth, etc... is to express non standing with Christ. A person who shows partiality in relationships, on the ground of status (ie. being a respecter of persons), is by definition not a follower of Christ. So, taking the line of the second possible translation, we would end up with a much stronger statement. It is not just an exhortation to show no partiality, but a question asking whether the showing of partiality in itself, implies that one does not "hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ." This possible interpretation fits well with v12-13. "My brothers and sisters, do you with your acts of favoritism really believe in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ?", NRSV. Of course, if a question, the point is not to definitively deny a person's faith, but rather to prod them to recognize that faith and favoritism are inconsistant.

mh .... ecete (ecw) pres. imp. "-" - do not have. With the negative the command is probably to cease an ongoing action - habitual partiality. "Brothers, you cannot at one time believe (have the faith) in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ and be a snob", Barclay.

thn pistin tou kuriou "faith in [our glorious] Lord" - the faith of the Lord [of us]. As is usual, and particularly with the phrase "faith of Lord / Christ / Jesus", there is ongoing debate as to the function of the genitive. It is usually understood as an objective genitive, our faith/belief/trust in the Lord Jesus Christ. Yet, there is much to support a subjective or possessive interpretation, the faith/faithfulness of Christ (his sacrifice on our behalf). This "faith" we "have" for ourselves / "take" to ourselves. James' point would then be that we can't take to ourselves Christ's work on our behalf and "connect that with", en, "partiality".

thV doxhV gen. "glorious [Lord Jesus Christ]" - of glory. The genitive is probably descriptive of (qualifies) the full title, "Lord Jesus Christ", as NIV. There are other possibilities: i] it modifies "faith" = "the glorious faith of our Lord Jesus Christ"; ii] it modifies "our" = "our glory"; iii] it modifies "Lord" = "faith in Jesus Christ, our glorified Lord", NJB, cf. TEV. iv] in apposition to "Lord Jesus Christ" = "our Lord Jesus Christ, the glory (who is the glory)", Moffatt, and less likely, "who reigns in glory", REB. "Our glorious Lord Jesus Christ", Barclay, etc.

en proswpolhmyiaiV ecete "show favoritism" - in, with (in connection with) partiality, discrimination, as of making unjust distinctions between people by treating one person better than another*. "Treat some people better than others", CEV.

gar + subj. "-" - for [if]. In combination with "if", forming gives the sense "for instance", REB.

ean + subj. "suppose" - if [enters]. Introducing a conditional clause, 3rd class, where the condition stated in the protasis will possibly become a reality, "if, as may be the case, ..... then ...." The apodosis is v4. "For If a man with gold rings and in fine clothing comes into your assembly ......... [then] v4, have you not made distinctions .....", NRSV.

anhr (hr droV) "a man" - It is reasonable to drop the sex, "a person", NRSV, and it is reasonable to emphasize the contrast established by James with the "poor man", so "a rich person", CEV.

sunagwghn (h) "meeting" - synagogue. Best to use the term for a Christian meeting place, so "church", "worship service", "meeting", Barclay, "assembly", NAB.

lampra/ adj. "fine [clothing]" - shining, bright. Possibly in the sense of "clean", but also in the sense of "bright", as of cloth woven with gold thread.

There are textual variants regarding the instructions to the poor man. Either, one of two commands, or possibly giving the poor man a choice. The NIV is one of two commands, while NJB gives a choice. "You can either stand or sit on the floor."

"if" - Repeated apodosis of the conditional sentence begun in v2, represented by subjunctive verbs "show special attention", "say" and "say".

epibleyhte (epiblepw) aor. subj. "you show special attention" - you look attentively at, direct you attention to. "Show more respect to", TEV.

kalwV adv. "[here's a] good [seat for you]" - good, well. Possibly meaning "please sit here", but more likely modifying seat, it's a "good" seat, as NIV. "Sit here, this is a good place", Goodspeed, "best seat", CEV.

uJpo to uJpopodiaon mou "by my feet" - under the footstool of mine. The sense is probably just "sit on the floor", CEV.

ou "[have you] not" - The negative in his question expects a positive answer.

diekriqhte (diakrinw) aor. pas/mid. "have you [not] discriminated" - do you [not] judge, make distinctions, evaluate. Usually taken as middle voice, "judge between", "make distinctions", in the sense of discriminating in a negative way, so NIV. If a passive voice, then the sense is "having doubts", meaning torn between different actions; "do you not see that you are inconsistent and judge by false standards", NEB.

en eJautoiV "among yourselves" - in your own. Possibly "among yourselves", "among your members", REB, which fits with "discriminated", but more naturally "in yourself", "in your own minds", Moffatt.

ponhrwn adj. gen. "with evil [thoughts]" - of evil. The genitive is adjectival, descriptive (quality). Not that they judge the evil in others, but that they are "evilly motivated / evil-minded judges", Davids.

akousate (akouw) aor. imp. "listen" - hear. The "listen my dear brothers" signals that the illustration is over and James now moves into development and application of the issue of partiality; "For do notice my brethren", Phillips.

exelexato (eklegomai) aor. "chosen" - [did not God] choose [those who are poor?]. This phrase seems to imply that God actually calls out the poor of this world to be his children. If we hold that God chooses (chosen, selected, preferred) those whom he will save, then this is how we should interpret the verse. Yet, it's probably better to regard that God has chosen the weak and ineffective family of Abraham to be the channel of his blessings to all mankind. The foolishness and weakness of this people has tended to attract a response from those who are the dispossessed of our world. It is they who tend to respond to the gospel and become members of God's called out, chosen people. That is, individuals, of their own volition, choose to be members of God's set-apart down-trodden people, but those who so choose tend to be from the working class.

tw/ kosmw/ (oV) dat. "in the eyes of the world" - in/by/for the world. Variant readings exist trying to make sense of this phrase, eg. the preposition "in" is added to give the phrase a local (place) sense. In another reading "the world" is genitive instead of dative, "of the world" = origin or possession; "the poor of the world." The dative may be locative, referring to place, "in the world", NRSV; it may be a dative of interest - advantage (commodi), ie. "for the benefit of the world." It may be a dative of reference, "with reference/respect to this world's resources." Yet, it is probably a dative of feeling (ethical), "the poor to this world" = "the poor as far as this world is concerned." Most commentators and translations opt for this sense, although define it as either a dative of interest (Adamson, Davids) or reference/respect (Johnson, ....). Like beauty, Greek grammar is all in the eyes of the beholder! "Poor in the view of the world", Davids.

en pistei (iV ewV) "in faith" - The preposition may indicate a dative of interest/advantage implying that the poor possess an abundance of faith, but this is unlikely; "God has given a lot of faith to the poor", CEV. A dative of reference/respect may be indicated; although poor, in regard to their faith, they are rich, "rich in the sphere of faith", Davids. Possibly we again have a dative of feeling (ethical); they are rich as far as faith is concerned, ie. in the judgment of the divine realm of faith, as compared to the judgment of the world. "Rich in the realm of faith", TH.

thV basileiaV (a) gen. "[inherit] the kingdom" - [heirs] of the kingdom. The genitive is adjectival, descriptive (attributive, quality), defining what they are heirs of. Israel's inheritance was the Abrahamic promise = a kingdom. "He also promised them a share in his kingdom", CEV.

ephggeilato (epagnellomai) aor. "he promised" - The NIV treats the aorist literally, but an English perfect seems appropriate, "he has promised", NRSV.

toiV agapwsin (agapaw) pres. part. dat. "those who love" - [which he promised] to the ones who love [him]. The participle functions as a substantive. Dative of interest - advantage.

de "but" - adversative.

uJmeiV "you" - emphatic. "You, on the other hand", NJB.

htimasate (atimazw) aor. "have insulted" - dishonored, humiliated, despised, shown contempt toward. Assuming that James has in mind no specific act of discrimination toward a particular poor person or group, the aorist is best translated as an English present tense and "the poor" as a general group. "But you humiliate the poor", Goodspeed.

ouc "is it not" - not. The negation introduces a question expecting a negative answer. Although a single sentence in Greek, the NIV breaks the sentence up into two questions. "Is it not the rich who lord it over you and drag you into court?", Moffatt.

katadunasteuousin (katadunasteuw) pres. "who are exploiting [you]" - oppress, exercise power over. "Treat you as tyrants treat their slaves", Barclay.

krithria (on) "court" - [to] judgment-seat. Possibly the religious courts operating within the local synagogue is intended here.

autoi "they" - emphatic.

blasqhmousin (blasqhmew) pres. "who are slandering" - [they] blaspheme, slander, abuse, speak evil of.

kalon adj. "[the] noble [name of him]" - [the] good [name]. "The excellent name", NRSV.

to epiklhqen (epikalew) aor. pas. part. "[to] whom [you] belong" - having been named [over/upon you]. The participle is adjectival, "the good name which has been named over you". In the sense of give a name to someone and therefore identify possession of. The name "invoked over you", NRSV, is obviously "the glorious Lord Jesus Christ", 2:1. It is this name under which we are claimed by God. "The honorable name by which God has claimed you", REB.

ei + ind. "if" - Conditional clause, 1st class, where the condition stated in the protasis is a reality. "If, as is the case, .... then ......"

mentoi "really" - This conjunction is either affirmative, "indeed / really / verily", as NIV, or adversative (probably more concessive), "however", cf. NAB. It is likely that v8 is being contrasted with v9 so an affirmative sense seems best; "if you really fulfill ......... if however you practice favoritism.....", Johnson. "

basilikon adj. "royal [law]" - Possibly "royal" in that this law derives from God (from a king, so "the Law of the Great [Heavenly] King", Wesley), or "sovereign" in that it is authoritative, REB, or the first and most important law, "supreme", NJB. Some commentators suggest lex regina, "the Law of the kingdom", ie. the law that governs the kingdom. It would seem that the law is as quoted, Lev.19:18, although some argue that "the royal law" is the Ten Commandments, of which duty to neighbor is summarized in the quote "love your neighbor ....". The fact that "law" is anarthrous (without an article) supports the argument that "the royal law" is the whole law. "You will be doing the right thing if you obey the law of the Kingdom", TEV.

ton plhsion "neighbor" - the near one. An adverb used as a substantive. For a Jew, "the neighbor" is a fellow Jew, including Jews of the dispersion, even a syncretized Jew - a Samaritan (so Jesus). The proper Christian equivalent is "brother", a fellow believer (even of another denomination!).

de "but" - but, and, now. "However", Johnson.

ei + ind. "if" - A second conditional clause, 1st class, contrasting the first in v8.

proswpolhmpteite (proswpolhmptew) pres. ind. "you show favoritism" - show partiality, discriminate. Hapax legomenon - once only use in NT. "If you treat some people better than others", CEV.

tou nomou (oV) "the law" - Which law? Is James referring to "the law of love", or God's law in general, or the Torah? The kingdom call for love, for compassion, summarizes all neighborly law, but probably James has in mind the whole law of God, the totality God's ethical directions in both the Old and New Testaments.

parabatai (hV ou) "lawbreakers" - transgressors, offenders. Referring to rebellion against God's law, literally: "breaking the fence of the Torah."

oJstiV + subj. "whoever [keeps]" - whoever. The particle an is missing and would normally stand in front of the subjunctive to properly form this relative conditional clause, "whoever obeys the whole law", Moffatt.

oJlon ton nomon "the whole law" - Again, we are unsure what law James is referring to. Certainly the law of love, summarizing the law toward neighbor, remains a possibility, but the totality of God's ethical instruction is probably best.

ptaish/ (ptaiw) aor. subj. "stumbles" - trips, slips, falls. "But fails to keep it in one particular part", Barclay.

eJni "[at just] one point" - [in] one. Presumably in the sense of breaking one element of the law, eg. discrimination.

pantwn enocoV "guilty of breaking all of it" - subject, liable, guilty of all. The sense is presumably that a person who has broken one element of the law is liable to the penalty for breaking the law as a whole. That is, a person who discriminates against a brother is liable to the penalty for breaking the package of God's law. "Remember that a man who keeps the whole law, but for a single exception, is none the less a lawbreaker", Phillips.

gar "for" - Expressing cause/reason, indicating that this sentence serves to explain why it is that a person who breaks one of God's commandments is guilty of breaking the law as a whole.

mh moiceush/V (moiceuw) aor. subj. "do not commit adultery" - Hortatory subjunctive, as with "do not murder."

ei + ind. "if" - Possibly concessive, "although", but more likely introducing a conditional clause 1st class where the stated condition is a reality, "even if", TEV. If we don't break one command, but break another, we "have become a lawbreaker."

parabathV (hV ou) "a lawbreaker" - a transgressor [of law]. "You have become a breaker of God's whole law", Phillips.

ouJtwV "-" - thus, so. Introducing a concluding exhortation that sums up James' instruction on this matter. "In such a way / with this in mind", Davids.

mellonteV (mellw) pres. part. "those who are going [to be judged]" - being about [to be judged]. The NIV takes the participle as a substantive, as do most translators, "those destined to be judged", Cassirer. The "being about" is not taken in the sense of "near", but rather of "will definitely come." "Act as men who are going to be judged", Barclay.

krinesqai (krinw) pres. inf. "to be judged" - The infinitive is complementary, completing the sense of "being about".

dia + gen. "by" - through, by means of. "According to the law of liberty."

nomou eleuqeriaV (a) "the law that gives freedom" - the law of freedom. The genitive is obviously adjectival, descriptive; the law is a vehicle of liberation. It is difficult to describe the totality of God's law, in particular neighbor law, as liberating. Yet, it is possible to describe the consequences of compliance as liberating, although compliance itself is not always liberating. Clearly, compliance as a means of escaping judgment cannot be intended, unless James is speaking of compliance in and through Christ. Given the context of this phrase in 1:25, it is possible that James is saying nothing more than that compliance with God's ethical guidelines is a very liberating experience and thus it is possible to describe the law as God's "perfect/flawless and liberating law." On the other hand, it can be argued that the descriptive "of freedom/liberty" for the law is prompted by the link between justice and mercy, an idea drawn out in v13. Divine judgment under the law is not without mercy and thus it is possible to describe the law as a "liberating law." "The law that sets us free", TEV, etc. goes a touch too far and can be misleading. "The law that treats men as free", Goodspeed, Williams, is an interesting translation, but it doesn't work in 1:25. "The law of liberty" possibly means "the law of the gospel", or "the law of Christ", in the sense of either "the law of love" or "the law of grace", although this is spiritualizing a simple concept. All three possibilities have a long history in the world of Biblical interpretation. See Adamson for his law / grace argument - "the law of ordinances / the law of liberty", although it seems unlikely that James is into Pauline theology here. "God's liberating law."

gar "because" - for. Serving to draw a conclusion from the argument so far. As already noted, James has possibly just attached this conjunction to an independent saying to attach it to his sermon.

tw/ mh poihsanti (poiew) aor. part. "to anyone who has not been [merciful]" - to the one not having shown [mercy]. The participle functions as a substantive. The perfect law may be summarized by the command to love, but its application is guided by mercy (which is probably why it is described as "the law of freedom", see above). If mercy is the guiding feature of the law of liberty, then to claim this feature for ourselves while living without mercy, serves only to deny our claim. As is always the case with Biblical law for those living under grace, the issue is orientation. It is hard to claim we live under grace while constantly being anything but gracious. In the context, discriminating against the poor illustrates a life that is not merciful.

katakaucatai (katakaucaomai) pres. "[mercy] triumphs over [judgment]" - boasts against, exalts over ..... wins out over. Functioning as the verb of a contrastive statement, so may be introduced by "yet" or "but". A positive declaration concludes the argument, although the existence of numerous variant readings indicates that the sense is anything but clear. The "judgment" probably represents the critical, unaccepting, discrimination against the poor practiced by some in the congregation, which practice should be smothered by the showing of "mercy", compassion, acceptance. "Boast of triumphant compassion with others", Bultman.

James Introduction

lectionarystudies.com