# commentaries

text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 12:18'>Heb 12:18</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For you have not come to a mountain that might be touched, and that burned with fire, and to blackness and darkness and tempest</em>- The new covenant means that we are not under the old covenant. We are not as Israel standing nervously before the mount Sinai as the covenant was given. The language of darkness, blackness and fire is all used elsewhere of condemnation at the last day. This was what the old covenant would lead to for sinful man. But the awesomeness of the scene there, however, looked forward to the even greater awesomeness of the things to which we stand related. The blood of Christ is as palpable as fire, and as real and actually demanding as words booming from Sinai. The mount "might be touched"- but on pain of death (<em><a href='B:20 19:12'>Exo 19:12</a></em>), and :20 implies that some did touch it and die.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 12:19'>Heb 12:19</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And the sound of a trumpet, and the voice of words which they that heard them begged that no more words should be spoken to them</em>- The trumpet sound will be associated with the Lord's return and the summons to meet Him in judgment. But we can come boldly, knowing we are covered in His righteousness, not fearing our own sins and disobedience, knowing all sin has been dealt with. Israel there sensed their weakness and tendency to disobedience; they begged that the words of command would no longer be spoken to them, for they feared their own tendency to disobedience. This fear of sin and disobedience is not to be felt under the new covenant; instead we eagerly seek for progressive relationship with God through the revelation of His word to us, without fear of our spiritual inadequacy.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 12:20'>Heb 12:20</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For they could not endure that which was commanded- If even a beast touch the mountain, it shall be stoned</em>- Israel were disobedient even to the peripheral command not to touch the mountain; let alone to the actual content of the covenant. The old covenant therefore propelled men away from God rather than towards Him.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 12:21'>Heb 12:21</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And so fearful was the appearance that Moses said: I am exceedingly afraid and trembling</em>- Again there is the implication that Moses was not to be read as the acme of spirituality which Judaism presented him as. He himself sensed his own moral weakness as he climbed the mountain which would lead to death for any other being, human or animal, who touched it. There is no direct record of Moses saying what he here says; Paul may have been inspired to share this with us for the first time. But he reasons as if Moses' words were already recorded and known. We read in <em><a href='B:20 19:16'>Exo 19:16</a></em> that the people trembled; perhaps we are to understand that Moses as one of them, the sinful mass, trembled likewise, and said so before God. He as a sinner received the old covenant, trembling at his sense of moral failure. The contrast is thereby heightened with how the Lord Jesus, without sin, although also one of us, mediated the new covenant.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 12:22'>Heb 12:22</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:70 5:19-20'>Jdg 5:19-20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 4:26'>Gal 4:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 2:19'>Eph 2:19</a></em>.</p><p><em>But you have come to association with mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable hosts of angels</em>- Paul was writing to the Jerusalem Christians who were tempted to return to the temple cult on mount Zion. He is seeking to persuade them that the true Zion and Jerusalem is "heavenly", the community of true believers in the new covenant is a city waiting to come down from Heaven to earth as it were as spoken of in Revelation. But "the Jerusalem that now is" remained in bondage (Galatians 4). The new covenant is associated with hosts of Angels, just as the old covenant was, but as explained in Hebrews 1, they are under the control of the Lord Jesus and work for the guidance of those in the new covenant and not in the old.</p>


text:
<h4><em><a href='B:650 12:23'>Heb 12:23</a></em>&nbsp;<em>To the general assembly and church of the firstborns, who are enrolled in heaven; and to God the judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect</em>- Just as :1 says we are surrounded by the great cloud of witnesses of former believers who died in faith, so we are associated with the heavenly church. There is no conscious survival of death, no immortal soul that goes to heaven after death. But through the Spirit, God is at work maturing or perfecting the spirits, the personalities, of His people; and on death, they continue to live on in His memory, as it were. Their names are in the book of life, "enrolled in heaven", and they have already been judged by God "the judge of all" His people, as being acceptable. If we abide in Christ, we can be confident of salvation should the Lord return now or we die. We are therefore associated with the community of God's true Israel, those who shall live eternally. We are all saved because of being effectively "in Christ", the firstborn (see on :16 concerning the birthright or right of being the firstborn). Only the firstborn was saved at the Passover. We are the church of firstborns, a paradox as it stands written. For there can be only one firstborn. A whole community can’t be “firstborns”. But we are, through being in Christ. We are the new priesthood; and the priests gave their lives to God in recognition of the fact that He had saved the lives of the firstborn at the Passover and Red Sea deliverance (<em><a href='B:40 3:12'>Num 3:12</a></em>). Our deliverance from the world at baptism was our Red Sea. We have been saved. Those firstborns represent us, the ecclesia of firstborns (<em><a href='B:650 12:23'>Heb 12:23</a></em> Gk:). We are now being led towards that glorious Kingdom, when by rights we ought to be lying dead in that dark Egyptian night. The wonder of it all demands that like the Levites, we give our lives&nbsp;<em>back&nbsp;</em>to God, in service towards His children.</h4><p>We are come&nbsp;<em>now&nbsp;</em>“to God the judge of all” (<em><a href='B:650 12:23'>Heb 12:23</a></em>); God is&nbsp;<em>now&nbsp;</em>enthroned as judge (<em><a href='B:230 93:2'>Psa 93:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 5:34'>Mat 5:34</a></em> “the heaven&nbsp;<em>is&nbsp;</em>God’s throne”). We are now inescapably in God’s presence (<em><a href='B:230 139:2'>Psa 139:2</a></em>); and ‘God’s presence’ is a phrase used about the final judgment in <em><a href='B:600 1:9'>2Th 1:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:720 1:24'>Jud 1:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 14:10'>Rev 14:10</a></em>. Hence “God is now the judge: he putteth down one and setteth up another” (<em><a href='B:230 75:7'>Psa 75:7</a></em>) – all of which He will also due at the last day (<em><a href='B:490 14:10'>Luk 14:10</a></em>). So “The day of the Lord is coming, but it is even now” (<em><a href='B:400 7:4'>Mic 7:4</a></em> Heb:). God isn’t passive to human behaviour- right now “To every matter there is a time and a judgment (LXX&nbsp;<em>krisis</em>)” (<em><a href='B:250 8:6'>Ecc 8:6</a></em> RVmg:). He perceives our actions right now as critically important. And this should highlight to us the crucial importance of life and right living today.</p><p>Israel’s exodus from Egypt on Passover night was a type of our exodus from the world at the second coming (<em><a href='B:490 12:35-36'>Luk 12:35-36</a></em> = <em><a href='B:20 12:11'>Exo 12:11</a></em>). The firstborns represent us, the ecclesia of firstborns (<em><a href='B:650 12:23'>Heb 12:23</a></em> Gk:). Perhaps 90% of the firstborns failed to be delivered because they murmured (see on <em><a href='B:530 10:10'>1Co 10:10</a></em>), they allowed themselves to be distracted from the fundamental basis of their redemption: the blood of the lamb. What percentage will it be for the new Israel?</p><p>It's also possible that the "spirits" are the guardian Angels of the righteous (see on <em><a href='B:340 5:23'>Dan 5:23</a></em>). We are associated with the hosts of Angels (:22). These Angels enrolled the names of the responsible at the beginning of the world, but they are capable of removal from the book. It is as if God informed the Angels of all those they would be dealing with during human history, and they subsequently have kept a record of the works of each of them as they guide them through life:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 12:24'>Heb 12:24</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel</em>- Moses mediated the old covenant, shaking with fear because of his moral weakness; whereas the Lord Jesus mediates the new covenant in an ongoing sense to all who believe, confident in His moral perfection. The blood of Abel spoke, crying out for vengeance from the ground (<em><a href='B:10 4:10'>Gen 4:10</a></em>); but the Lord's blood is not so much a cry for vengeance as of victory and vengeance achieved. It is "the blood of sprinkling" in that blood sprinkling was used to sanctify priests and equipment for service in the tabernacle. It has been a repeated theme of Paul that the whole wonderful path of salvation is so that we might serve with the Lord Jesus in the Holiest, working for others to the Father's glory. And yet the blood of sprinkling recalls that sprinkled on the day of atonement upon the mercy seat.</p><p>The blood of Christ speaks a message, better than that of Abel. As we examine ourselves before His cross, reconstructing in our own minds the physicalities of His time of dying, we hear a voice from Him. It is a voice that shakes heaven and earth (<em><a href='B:650 12:24'>Heb 12:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 12:26'>Heb 12:26</a></em>). This is after the pattern of how the commanding voice of Yahweh was heard above the blood sprinkled on “the atonement cover of the ark of the Testimony” (<em><a href='B:40 7:89'>Num 7:89</a></em> NIV). It shows forth, as a voice, God’s righteousness (<em><a href='B:520 3:25-26'>Rom 3:25-26</a></em> RV). The ark was made of shittim wood- from a root meaning ‘to flog, scourge or pierce’, all replete with reference to the cross. And it was there on that wooden box that Yahweh was declared in the blood sprinkled upon it. Note how there is an association between the blood of atonement and the throne of judgment in <em><a href='B:100 6:2'>2Sa 6:2</a></em> and <em><a href='B:290 37:16'>Isa 37:16</a></em>, as if we see a foretaste of our judgment in the way we respond to the Lord’s outpoured blood for us. The Lord Jesus in His time of death is the “propitiation", or rather ‘the place of propitiation’ for our sins, the blood-sprinkled mercy seat. “There I will meet with thee, and I will commune with thee from above the mercy-seat::. of all things which I will give thee in commandment" (<em><a href='B:20 25:20-22'>Exo 25:20-22</a></em>). The blood of Christ is therefore to be associated with the commanding voice of God, such is the imperative within it. <em><a href='B:730 19:13'>Rev 19:13</a></em> draws a connection between Christ’s title as “the word of God” and the fact His clothing is characterised by the blood of His cross. <em><a href='B:230 40:9'>Psa 40:9</a></em> describes how the Lord Jesus accomplished God’s will as the ultimate sacrifice, through the death of the cross. That death is foretold by the Lord, in the prophetic perfect, as ‘preaching righteousness to the great congregation’ LXX&nbsp;<em>ekklesia</em>. In living out the dying of the man Christ Jesus in our daily lives, we are making the witness of Christ.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 12:25'>Heb 12:25</a></em>&nbsp;<em>See you do not reject him that speaks. For if they did not escape when they rejected Him that warned them on earth, much more shall not we escape if we turn away from him that warns from heaven</em>- The One who speaks "warned" is not a good translation; the Greek means literally to preach or speak is the Lord Jesus, personified as His blood in :24. The same word translated "reject" is that used in :19 of Israel rejecting the word of the old covenant. They rejected God's word because they feared the massing up of commandments to obey. They totally missed the point of relationship with God on the basis of His word. And the same fear of God's demands was to be seen in the Hebrews of the first century turning away from the voice of the cross of Christ. He there is indeed a voice speaking to us, demanding much of us- not in terms of obedience to legislation and commandments, but in asking us to believe that because of His work there, we shall surely be saved, our sins are no longer a barrier between God and us; and the joy and confidence arising from this should lead us to a life of total response and commitment. To turn away from the voice of the cross, as the Hebrews were doing, means there can be no escape, no place to run, at judgment day:&nbsp; The Lord had used the same word in saying that the Jews would have no way to "escape" condemnation (<em><a href='B:470 23:33'>Mat 23:33</a></em>). The same word is also used in each of the accounts of the Olivet prophecy of how the Christians would "escape" from Jerusalem; it was those who remained dedicated to the temple who did not escape and were destroyed in AD70.</p><p>The events of the crucifixion are an epitome of who the Lord most essentially was and is. His soul was made ‘sin’ in that He “poured out His soul unto death" (<em><a href='B:290 53:12'>Isa 53:12</a></em>). The Hebrew for “poured out" also means to make naked, to stretch out. The Lord bared His soul, who He essentially was, was displayed there for all to see; the wine was His blood which was Him, in the sense that the cross is who the son of God essentially was and is and shall ever be. “This is Jesus" was and is the title over the cross. There, for our redemption, He died (<em><a href='B:650 9:15'>Heb 9:15</a></em>), He gave us&nbsp;<em>Himself</em>&nbsp;(<em><a href='B:610 2:6'>1Ti 2:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:630 2:14'>Tit 2:14</a></em>), His life (<em><a href='B:470 20:28'>Mat 20:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:480 10:45'>Mar 10:45</a></em>), His blood (<em><a href='B:670 1:18-19'>1Pe 1:18-19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 1:7'>Eph 1:7</a></em>). His death, His life, His blood, these are all essentially&nbsp;<em>Himself</em>. The blood of Jesus speaks to us as if&nbsp;<em>He personally</em>&nbsp;speaks to us; He is personified as His blood (<em><a href='B:650 12:24-25'>Heb 12:24-25</a></em>). This is the preaching (Gk. the word) of the cross. Paul makes the connection between the voice of Christ’s blood and the earthquake that shook all things at the time of the Old Covenant's inauguration. The voice of that blood can shake&nbsp;<em>all things</em>&nbsp;with the exception of the Kingdom, which cannot be shaken. This is the power of the cross. Human words, platform speaking, magazine articles- all these are so limited, although our communal life is inevitably built around them. See on <em><a href='B:500 6:51'>Joh 6:51</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 9:20'>Heb 9:20</a></em>.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 12:26'>Heb 12:26</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Whose voice then shook the earth, but now He has promised, saying: Yet once more will I make to tremble not the earth only, but also heaven</em>- The voice of the cross is far stronger than the voice associated with the old covenant, which was so powerful it caused an earthquake which shook Sinai (<em><a href='B:20 19:18'>Exo 19:18</a></em>). The voice of the cross made and makes all of heaven and earth to shake. The quotation from <em><a href='B:440 2:6'>Hag 2:6</a></em> speaks of the destruction of the Jerusalem temple and its rebuilding in the Messianic Kingdom. But the restoration did not work out as it potentially could have done. The temple was not rebuilt according to the specifications of Ezekiel 40-48, and most of the Jews preferred to remain in Babylon. But the essence of the restoration prophecies comes true in the Kingdom of the Lord Jesus and His work. The implication is that the past destruction of the Jerusalem temple was the first shaking of the earth; but a shaking of the whole planet was coming, and the only thing left would be the Kingdom of God, that which cannot be shaken and destroyed, in the language of the image prophecy of <em><a href='B:340 2:44'>Dan 2:44</a></em>. The language of 'shaking' connects with the Lord's prediction of the shaking of the heavens as a prelude to the destruction of the temple and His return in glory (<em><a href='B:490 21:26'>Luk 21:26</a></em> s:w:).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 12:27'>Heb 12:27</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And further: Yet once more, signifies the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that have been made, that those things which are not shaken may remain</em>- The things made and visible were those of the Jerusalem temple cult. These too were to be shaken and destroyed; the only unshakeable things which remain are those of the Kingdom of God. As noted on <em><a href='B:650 11:1'>Heb 11:1</a></em>, the things that are made, that are visible, referred to the immediately visible things of the temple cult; the eye of faith saw beyond them to the city which has foundations, the Kingdom of God to come on earth. "Yet once more" was being understood by Paul to mean that as the first temple was destroyed, so the temple which stood in the first century would also be destroyed as Haggai's prophecy had its fulfilment. But in the final fulfilment of these things, absolutely all things shall be shaken and fall, just as Sinai shook and the temple was brought to nothing. The only permanent thing which shall remain will be the solid mountain of God's Kingdom on earth. But this shaking of all things is on account of the voice of the blood of Christ; it is His victory on the cross which would remove the temple cult, and on account of His life represented by His blood all things on earth would be shaken to nothing so that His eternal Kingdom can be established, the fulfilment of the new covenant promises to Abraham.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 12:28'>Heb 12:28</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Therefore, receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, let us have grace, whereby we may offer service well-pleasing to God with reverence and awe</em>- The receipt of the Kingdom is ongoing in this life. But the language of receiving a kingdom is appropriate to the king of the kingdom, rather than the subjects. The same words are used in the Lord's parable about Himself going to the "far country" of Heaven "to receive for himself a kingdom and to return" (<em><a href='B:490 19:12'>Luk 19:12</a></em>). Yet again, language personally relevant to the Lord Jesus alone is used about all who are in Him. We recall how in chapters 8-10 Paul has argued that because we are "in Christ", we are also with Him in the Holiest, in Heaven itself, doing the work of the High Priest. The rest of this verse goes on to use language appropriate to the priesthood; doing pleasing service to God with reverence. This priestly service is essentially service of others, for the glory of God. And we do this 'having grace', the idea being that we do so motivated by gratitude (see GNB "let us be grateful"). Our eternity is not in question; as explained earlier, we should be humbly but totally confident that if the Lord comes or we die, we shall surely be saved by grace. We are "in Christ", and so we are in that sense in process of receiving the Kingdom. Whilst works shall not save us, it is also true that if we believe this great salvation, we cannot be passive. We shall in reverence do priestly service in deep gratitude, but with the "awe" or fear that comes from realizing the eternal future which we may miss. There is a comment in the next verse :29 about the reality of condemnation for some; and this leads me to understand the fear / awe spoken of in :28 in that context.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 12:29'>Heb 12:29</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For our God is a consuming fire</em>- The allusion may still be to how the old covenant was associated not only with Sinai shaking but a consuming fire coming down upon it (<em><a href='B:20 19:18'>Exo 19:18</a></em>). Those who remained within the old covenant system were associated with this condemnation, because they simply could not be perfectly obedient to that covenant. By identifying with the temple cult, they would find in a literal sense that God consumed them in fire, for this was how many Jews perished within the temple in AD70. The same word is used of how the Lord at His return would "consume" the system which sat in the temple of God (<em><a href='B:600 2:4'>2Th 2:4</a></em>). The Hebrew Christians were being warned ahead of time that if they returned to the temple cult, they would meet their end in the fire which would consume that temple, just as the first temple had been burnt with fire.</p><p>The quotation is from <em><a href='B:50 4:24'>Deu 4:24</a></em> "For Yahweh your God is a consuming fire"; this was spoken in the context of 'forgetting the covenant of Yahweh' (<em><a href='B:50 4:23'>Deu 4:23</a></em>). This was in fact what the Hebrew Christians were doing; forsaking the new covenant for the old.</p><p><em><a href='B:290 33:14'>Isa 33:14</a></em> is being alluded to, which speaks of the sinners within the surrounded city of Jerusalem at Hezekiah's time: "The sinners in Zion are afraid. Trembling has seized the godless ones. Who among us can live with the devouring fire? Who among us can live with everlasting burning?". Note the reference to "trembling" too, which has also figured in this context in Hebrews 12. Zion, the temple mount and cult, was sinful and would suffer the condemnation of fire. Those who wanted to return to it were not being more righteous or obedient; they were sinning. Legalism, not trusting in the Lord's blood but in our own few works, is just that- sin.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 13:1'>Heb 13:1</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:490 12:42'>Luk 12:42</a></em>.</p><p><em>Let love of the believers continue</em>- The shift towards legalism and Judaism was associated with a decline in love. For as with legalistic churches today, belief in justification by works and ritual breeds a distrust and dislike of anyone who doesn't think the rituals are important for salvation and even actively discourages them. And it was of course hard to show love to uncircumcised Gentile believers if one believed that circumcision was essential to have covenant with God.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 13:2'>Heb 13:2</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:520 12:13'>Rom 12:13</a></em>.</p><p><em>Do not forget to show love to strangers; for thereby some have entertained angels unawares</em>- As noted on :1, the Hebrew Christians were prone to consider uncircumcised Gentile Christians as outside covenant relationship with God. The reference could also be to the itinerant spirit gifted prophets, cp. <em><a href='B:700 1:10'>2Jn 1:10</a></em>). Paul is appealing to the Hebrew understanding that all people had representative Angels. By refusing Gentile brethren, they were turning away Angels. The only Gentiles in Jerusalem would have been associated with the Romans or Arabs. If there were believers amongst them, it is understandable that orthodox Jewish Christians were tempted to refuse them hospitality (Gk:). But by doing so they were leaving Angels out on the street. For each believer had a representative Angel.</p><p>The allusion is clearly to Abraham entertaining the Angels unawares. If they were the true seed of Abraham, then they would be eager to have Gentiles, strangers, under their rooves and provide them with hospitality. As Peter reminds us, it was considered illegal for a Jew to come under the roof of a Gentile. So the Hebrew Christians needed encouragement to allow Gentiles into their homes, and to realize that by not doing so, they would be going against the spirit of Abraham. Perhaps he was motivated to receive strangers by reflecting on the promises to him, that all Gentiles would be blessed through his seed.</p><p>But there is also an allusion to Lot unknowingly entertaining Angels, on the eve of Sodom's destruction; and Isaiah had portrayed Jerusalem as Sodom, as does <em><a href='B:730 11:8'>Rev 11:8</a></em>. The hint was that they were living in the very last days or even moments before Jerusalem was to be destroyed; and they should be as Lot rather than the men of Sodom - Jerusalem.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 13:3'>Heb 13:3</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Remember those that are in bonds, as if you were bound with them; those that are ill treated, as being yourselves also in the body</em>- The Hebrews were tempted to return to Judaism because it saved them from persecution by the Roman and Jewish authorities. Judaism was a recognized religion within the empire, and adherents were free from army service. The Hebrew Christians were attracted by this, and were tempted to not identify with those who were imprisoned or persecuted.</p><p>If we are truly members of the one body, we will be affected by the sufferings of others in that body. The fact we are members of the one body of Jesus should exclude all self-centred feelings, in the sense that if one other part of the body suffers or rejoices, then we are to be affected by this. <em><a href='B:650 13:3'>Heb 13:3</a></em> tells us to "<em>remember</em>&nbsp;them that are in bonds, as bound with them, and them which suffer adversity, as being yourselves also in the body" (AV). We are to feel as if we are inside the body of our brethren. This is quite something. There is a purposeful ambiguity here. Whose body? The body of Jesus, or that of the suffering brother? Effectively, the one is the other. We can truly place ourselves in the place of others. The only other time the Greek word translated "remember" occurs is in <em><a href='B:650 2:3'>Heb 2:3</a></em>: "What is man that thou art&nbsp;<em>mindful</em>&nbsp;of him". Because of the almost senseless mindfulness of God for us down here on this speck of a planet, dust and water as we are… we must be inspired to likewise be mindful of our suffering brethren. "Those that are ill treated" is a Greek term found elsewhere only in <em><a href='B:650 11:37'>Heb 11:37</a></em>; the suffering Christians in Jerusalem were in direct connection with the faithful of old who had likewise suffered for their faith.</p>


text:
<h4><em><a href='B:650 13:4'>Heb 13:4</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Let marriage be held in respect among all, and let the marital bed be undefiled. For fornicators and adulterers God will judge</em>- I noted on <em><a href='B:650 12:16'>Heb 12:16</a></em> that sexual immorality was an issue amongst those wishing to return to Judaism; they felt liberated to misbehave in other areas of moral life if they were technically obedient to ritual. The allusion to Jerusalem as Sodom in :2 (see note there) is continued here; Judaism and the temple cult was actually sexually immoral and would face God's judgment for this. We have here a classic case of where legalism doesn't curb sinful behaviour but actually encourages us. The grip of grace will teach us to deny such lusts, whereas legalism encourages those lusts. There may also be a swipe at the tendency for some Jewish false teachers to deprecate marriage (<em><a href='B:610 4:3'>1Ti 4:3</a></em>); and we noted on Ephesians and 1 Corinthians 7 that the Judaists had encouraged the denial of marriage in order to indulge in sexual licence outside of it.</h4><p>The adulterers who would be judged were those within the ecclesia and responsible. This is matched by <em><a href='B:670 3:1-5'>1Pe 3:1-5</a></em> warning that the sisters were increasingly rebelling against their great prototypes of Eve and Sarah, unwittingly egged on by their unspiritual husbands. So many other New Testament passages imply a surge of marriage and sex related problems in the run up to AD70. The ecclesia of Israel was an adulterous generation; this was their main characteristic (<em><a href='B:470 16:4'>Mat 16:4</a></em>). Looking around our sisterhood and brotherhood today there can be no doubt about the reference of all this to our last days. Add to this the parallels with Sodom and the times of Noah in this respect too:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 13:5'>Heb 13:5</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:50 31:3'>Deu 31:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 1:5'>Jos 1:5</a></em>.</p><p><em>Be free from the love of money, content with such things as you have. For God Himself has said: I will in no way fail you, neither will I in any way forsake you</em>- This again must be understood in the context of the Hebrew Christians wanting to return to Judaism. The economic discrimination against Christians in Jerusalem would have been significant, and surely contributed to the dire poverty of the Jerusalem church which Paul had sought to address through the Jerusalem poor fund. The Pharisees were covetous and materialistic (<em><a href='B:490 16:14'>Luk 16:14</a></em>), and the Sadducees were famed for their love of money. The economic attractions of Judaism were to be resisted by faith that God would not fail to provide for His people. Paul demonstrates this by quoting the Father's words to Joshua-Jesus. So again we have a case of words specifically appropriate to the Lord Jesus being applied to all those who are in Him, just as the Lord's passage into the Holiest as supreme High Priest is applied to all in Him:&nbsp;</p><p><em><a href='B:650 13:5'>Heb 13:5</a></em> combines quotes from <em><a href='B:10 28:15'>Gen 28:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 1:5'>Jos 1:5</a></em> and <em><a href='B:50 31:16'>Deu 31:16</a></em>. <em><a href='B:650 13:5'>Heb 13:5</a></em> doesn’t quote any of them exactly, but mixes them together. See on <em><a href='B:520 11:26'>Rom 11:26</a></em>.</p><p>Those Old Testament promises are surely relevant to us: "Let your conversation be without covetousness; and be content with such things as ye have: for he hath said (to you, as well as Joshua), I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee" (<em><a href='B:650 13:5'>Heb 13:5</a></em> AV). Notice once again that the Old Testament scriptures are seen as alive and speaking directly to each of us in whatever generation. The message was that it isn't the actual possession of wealth that is condemned, but the way of life that seeks more than what we have been given. This is the real danger of materialism.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 13:6'>Heb 13:6</a></em>&nbsp;<em>So that with good courage we can say-&nbsp;</em>This is the word for "boldness" which is so characteristic of Hebrews; if as reasoned earlier we are bold before the very presence of God in the Holiest, we can be bold against all fears of human persecution.</p><p><em>The Lord is my helper. I will not fear. What shall man do to me?</em>- The quotation is from <em><a href='B:230 118:6'>Psa 118:6</a></em> "Yahweh is on my side, I will not be afraid; what can man do to me?". Just as Scripture speaks personally to us (see on :5), so we can put the words of scripture in our own mouths. The context is relevant to those who wanted to trust in the apparent strength of the temple cult to save them from persecution: "It is better to take refuge in Yahweh than to put confidence in man" (<em><a href='B:230 118:8'>Psa 118:8</a></em>). The Psalm is clearly Messianic, stating that "The stone which the builders rejected has become the head of the corner" (<em><a href='B:230 118:22'>Psa 118:22</a></em>). So again, words directly personally relevant to the Lord Jesus regarding His enemies in Jerusalem become just as directly relevant to all those "in Him" in Jerusalem.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 13:7'>Heb 13:7</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Remember those that had the rule over you, those who spoke to you the word of God</em>- The past tense "had" invites them to recall the earlies leaders in Jerusalem such as Peter and Stephen. If as noted in <em><a href='B:650 1:1'>Heb 1:1</a></em> Paul is speaking or writing Hebrews with his eye on Stephen, this takes on powerful relevance. The outcome of his life and faith was death at Paul's hands, but with the sure assurance of salvation. The basis of authority within the pastoral structure is that those who 'have the rule' are those who taught the Gospel to those over whom they have authority. Paul elsewhere uses family language to express the same truth; elders / fathers in the church family are those who brought us to spiritual life by teaching us the Gospel. This is the basis for eldership in the local church; such positions of authority cannot be attained by a vote or simply by default or age itself.</p><p><em>Consider the outcome of their life, and imitate their faith</em>- Elders are especially responsible. They can shut up, or open, the Kingdom to men. They watch “in behalf of” the souls of the ecclesia (<em><a href='B:650 13:17'>Heb 13:17</a></em> RV). Their very examples can influence the flock positively or negatively- for “like priest like people” is a Biblical idea. When the leaders “offered themselves willingly”, so did the people (<em><a href='B:70 5:2'>Jdg 5:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:70 5:9'>Jdg 5:9</a></em>).<br/>Respect must be earnt by elders, never demanded. Their way of life is the basis of their authority; in this sense, we have the choice whom to consider as our elders, whom we will respect and follow. Jesus taught as one who had authority, unlike the scribes (<em><a href='B:480 1:22'>Mar 1:22</a></em>). Yet the Scribes had authority in terms of their position, and yet they were not respected; and hence they couldn’t teach with authority as Jesus could.</p><p>In illiterate societies, or those with limited access to the Old Testament scrolls and the Gospel records, the direction in spiritual life was given by elders, by living examples. That is true today, but moreso in their early situation.</p><p>Amongst those tending towards returning to the temple cult, there was a tendency to despise those who had first taught them the Gospel and suffered at the hands of Judaism for doing so. This is also mentioned as a last days problem in <em><a href='B:670 5:5'>1Pe 5:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:680 2:10'>2Pe 2:10</a></em> etc:&nbsp; See on <em><a href='B:610 3:4'>1Ti 3:4</a></em>.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 13:8'>Heb 13:8</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and for ever</em>- "For ever" is literally 'for all ages'. There will be many "ages" to come, as there have doubtless been many "ages" of previous creations already (<em><a href='B:520 1:25'>Rom 1:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 9:5'>Rom 9:5</a></em>); but for our "age" alone was the only begotten Son of God given as a representative of&nbsp;<em>us</em>, the humans who live in this brief "age". God thus describes Himself as a first timer falling in love with His people; as a young marries a virgin, so God marries us (<em><a href='B:290 62:5'>Isa 62:5</a></em>); Israel were as the lines graven on a man's palm, with which he was born (<em><a href='B:290 49:16'>Isa 49:16</a></em>). Thus from absolute eternity, we were the great "all things" to Almighty God, the God of all, all past and future creations. &nbsp;</p><p>Past, present and future as stated here suggests Paul saw the three elements of the Yahweh Name supremely manifest in the Lord Jesus. Which is surely why ‘Jesus’ in the NT becomes the Name above every Name (<em><a href='B:570 2:9-10'>Phi 2:9-10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 1:21'>Eph 1:21</a></em>); for only ‘Yahweh’ was exalted above every other name (<em><a href='B:160 9:5'>Neh 9:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 148:13'>Psa 148:13</a></em>).</p><p>The Jesus of history is the Christ of faith. The&nbsp;<em>same&nbsp;</em>Jesus who went into Heaven will&nbsp;<em>so</em>&nbsp;come again&nbsp;<em>in like manner&nbsp;</em>&nbsp;(<em><a href='B:510 1:11'>Act 1:11</a></em>). The record three times says the same thing. The “like manner” in which the Lord will return doesn’t necessarily refer to the way He gradually ascended up in to the sky, in full view of the gazing disciples. He was to return in the “like manner” to what they had seen. Yet neither those disciples nor the majority of the Lord’s people will literally see Him descending through the clouds at His return- for they will be dead. But we will ‘see’ Him at His return “in like manner” as He was when on earth. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever. The Jesus who loved little children and wept over Jerusalem's self-righteous religious leaders, so desirous of their salvation, is the One who today mediates our prayers and tomorrow will confront us at judgment day. Perhaps the Lord called the disciples His “brethren” straight after His resurrection in order to emphasize that He, the resurrected Man and Son of God, was eager to renew His relationships with those He had known in the flesh. It’s as if He didn’t want them to think that somehow, everything had changed. Indeed, He stresses to them that their Father is His Father, and their God is His God (<em><a href='B:500 20:18'>Joh 20:18</a></em>). He appears to be alluding here to <em><a href='B:80 1:16'>Rth 1:16</a></em> LXX. Here, Ruth is urged to remain behind in Moab cp. Mary urging Jesus?, but she says she will come with her mother in law, even though she is of a different people, and “Your people shall be my people, and your God my God”. This allusion would therefore be saying: ‘OK I am of a different people to you now, but that doesn’t essentially affect our&nbsp;<em>relationship</em>; I so love you, I will always stick with you wherever, and my God is your God’:&nbsp;</p><p>Significantly, both Luke and John conclude their Gospels with the risen Lord walking along with the disciples, and them ‘following’ Him (<em><a href='B:500 21:20'>Joh 21:20</a></em>)- just as they had done during His ministry. His invitation to ‘Follow me’ (<em><a href='B:500 21:19'>Joh 21:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 21:22'>Joh 21:22</a></em>) is the very language He had used whilst He was still mortal (<em><a href='B:500 1:37'>Joh 1:37</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 1:43'>Joh 1:43</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 10:27'>Joh 10:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 12:26'>Joh 12:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:480 1:18'>Mar 1:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:480 2:14'>Mar 2:14</a></em>). The point being, that although He was now different, in another sense, He still related to them as He did when He was mortal, walking the lanes and streets of 1st century Palestine. Elsewhere I have pointed out that the fishing incident of John 21 is purposefully framed as a repetition of that recorded in Luke 5 - again, to show the continuity between the Jesus of yesterday and the Jesus of today. It’s as if in no way does He wish us to feel that His Divine Nature and glorified, exalted position somehow separates us from Him. When the Lord awoke, He would have immediately been aware of the carefully wrapped graveclothes and the anointing oil. He would have then realized the care shown to Him by His sisters. Some of the very first thoughts of the risen Lord were of His brethren. There was no gap between His mortal awareness of His brethren, and His feelings for them after resurrection.</p><p>The Lord will essentially be the same as the Gospels present Him when we see Him again. This is why Jesus even in His earthly life could be called " the Kingdom of God" , so close was the link between the man who walked Palestine and the One who will come again in glory. “They see the Kingdom of God come” (<em><a href='B:480 9:1'>Mar 9:1</a></em>) is paralleled by “They see the Son of man coming” (<em><a href='B:470 16:28'>Mat 16:28</a></em>). Indeed it would seem that the references in the Synoptic Gospels to the ‘coming’ of the Kingdom are interpreted in the rest of the New Testament as referring to the personal ‘coming’ of the Lord Jesus (e:g. <em><a href='B:530 16:22'>1Co 16:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 22:20'>Rev 22:20</a></em>). In that very context of referring to Himself as "the Kingdom of God", the Lord speaks of His return as 'the days of the Son of man'- the human Jesus. And yet He also speaks in that context of how after His death, men will long to see one of the days of the Son of Man, i:e. how He had been in His mortal life (<em><a href='B:490 17:20-26'>Luk 17:20-26</a></em>). As He was in His mortal days, so He will essentially be in the day of His final glory. It just isn't true that He came as a meek, gentle person, but will roar back as an angry lion. At His second coming, He will reveal " the wrath of the lamb" . Can you imagine an angry lamb? Yes, lambs can get angry. But it's a lamb-like anger. He came as the lamb for sinners slain, and yet He will still essentially be a lamb at His return. The Jesus who loved little children, sensitive to others weaknesses, desperate for their salvation, is the same one who will return to judge us. Even after His resurrection, in His present immortal nature, He thoughtfully cooked breakfast on the beach for His men (John 21; John 9, 12). And this is the Lord who will return to judge us. After His resurrection He was recognized by the Emmaus disciples in the way that He broke bread. The way He handled the loaf, His mannerisms, His way of speaking and choice of language, were evidently the same after His resurrection as before (<em><a href='B:490 24:30-31'>Luk 24:30-31</a></em>). The Lord is the same today as yesterday:&nbsp;</p><p>“The Kingdom of God” was a title used of Jesus. He ‘was’ the Kingdom because He lived the Kingdom life. Who He would be, was who He was in His life. At the prospect of being made “full of joy” at the resurrection, “therefore did my heart rejoice” (<em><a href='B:510 2:26'>Act 2:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 2:28'>Act 2:28</a></em>). His joy during His mortal life was related to the joy He now experiences in His immortal life. And this is just one of the many continuities between the moral and the immortal Jesus. Pause for a moment to reflect that the Lord’s resurrection is a pattern for our own. This is the whole meaning of baptism. “God has both raised the Lord and will raise us up through his power” (<em><a href='B:530 6:13-14'>1Co 6:13-14</a></em>). Yet there were evident continuities between the Jesus who lived mortal life, and the Jesus who rose again. His mannerisms, body language, turns of phrase, were so human- even after His resurrection. And so who we are now, as persons, is who we will eternally be. Because of the resurrection, our personalities in the sum of all their relationships and nuances,&nbsp;<em>have an eternal future</em>. But from whence do we acquire those nuances, body languages, etc? They arise partly from our parents, from our inter-relations with others etc; we are the sum of our relationships. And this is in fact a tremendous encouragement to us in our efforts for others; for the result of our parenting, our patient effort and grace towards others, will have an eternal effect upon others. Who we help them become is, in part, who they will eternally be. &nbsp;Job reflected that if a tree is cut down, it sprouts (Heb:&nbsp;<em>yaliph</em>) again as the same tree; and he believed that after his death he would likewise sprout again (<em>yaliph</em>) at the resurrection (<em><a href='B:220 14:7-9'>Job 14:7-9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:220 14:14-15'>Job 14:14-15</a></em>). There will be a continuity between who we were in mortal life, and who we will eternally be- just as there is between the pruned tree and the new tree which grows again out of its stump. All our obedience and response to God's word in this life is likened to building a foundation which will endure beyond the storm, representative as that is of judgment day at Christ's return (<em><a href='B:490 6:48'>Luk 6:48</a></em>). There is therefore a link between who we are now and who we will eternally be; we are building now the foundation for our eternity.</p><p>Who the Lord Jesus was is who He will be in the future; in the same way as who&nbsp;<em>we&nbsp;</em>are now, is who we will eternally be. For our spirit, our essential personality, will be&nbsp;<em>saved</em>&nbsp;in the day of the Lord Jesus (<em><a href='B:530 5:5'>1Co 5:5</a></em>). “Flesh and blood” will not inherit the Kingdom (<em><a href='B:530 15:50'>1Co 15:50</a></em>); and yet the risen, glorified Lord Jesus was “flesh and bones” (<em><a href='B:490 24:39'>Luk 24:39</a></em>). We will be who we essentially are today, but with Spirit instead of blood energizing us. It’s a challenging thought, as we consider the state of our “spirit”, the essential ‘me’ which will be preserved, having been stored in Heaven in the Father’s memory until the day when it is united with the new body which we will be given at resurrection. For in all things the Lord is our pattern; and we will in that day be given a body like unto His glorious body (<em><a href='B:570 3:21'>Phi 3:21</a></em>)- which is still describable as “flesh and bones” in appearance (<em><a href='B:490 24:39'>Luk 24:39</a></em>.</p><p>Note that whilst flesh and&nbsp;<em>blood</em>&nbsp;cannot inherit the Kingdom, the risen, immortal&nbsp;Lord Jesus described Himself as flesh and&nbsp;<em>bones</em>&nbsp;(<em><a href='B:490 24:39'>Luk 24:39</a></em>). In fact, we find that "flesh and bones" are often paralleled (<em><a href='B:10 2:23'>Gen 2:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:220 10:11'>Job 10:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:220 33:21'>Job 33:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 38:3'>Psa 38:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:240 14:30'>Pro 14:30</a></em>), and simply mean 'the person', or as the Lord put it on that occasion, "I myself". We ourselves will be in the Kingdom, with similar personalities we have now that's a very challenging thought of itself. "Flesh" doesn't necessarily have to refer, in every instance, to something condemned. Who we are now is who we will essentially be in the eternity of God's Kingdom. Let's not allow any idea that somehow our flesh / basic being is so awful that actually, the essential "I myself" will be dissolved beneath the wrath of God at the judgment. The Lord is " the saviour of the body" and will also save our " spirit" at the last day; so that we, albeit with spirit rather than blood energizing us, will live eternally. Understanding things this way enables us to perceive more forcefully the eternal importance of who we develop into as persons, right now. The Buddhist belief that we will ultimately not exist, that such 'Nirvana' is the most wonderful thing to hope for, appears at first hearing a strange 'hope' to be shared by millions of followers. But actually, it's the same essential psychology as that behind the idea that 'I' will not exist in the Kingdom of God, I will be given a new body, person and character. It's actually saying the same- I won't exist. And it's rooted in a terribly low self-image, a dis-ease with ourselves, a lack of acceptance of ourselves as the persons whom God made us and develops us into. Whilst of course our natures will be changed, so that we can be immortal, it is&nbsp;<em>we</em>&nbsp;who will be saved; our body will be resurrected, made new, and our spirit " saved" in that day, reunited with our renewed and immortal bodies. We have eternal life in the sense that who we are now, in spiritual terms, is who we will eternally be. Our spirit, the essential us, is in this sense immortal; it’s remembered with the Lord. In this sense, not even death itself, nor time itself, can separate us from the love of God which is in Christ (<em><a href='B:520 8:35-39'>Rom 8:35-39</a></em>). Just as we still love someone after they have died, remembering as they do who they were and still are to us, so it is with the love of God for the essential us. Hence <em><a href='B:670 3:4'>1Pe 3:4</a></em> speaks of how a “gentle and calm disposition” or spirit is in fact “imperishable” (NAB)- because that spirit of character will be eternally remembered. This is why personality and character, rather than physical works, are of such ultimate and paramount importance. How we speak now is in a way, how we will eternally speak- I think that's the idea of <em><a href='B:240 12:19'>Pro 12:19</a></em>: "The lip of truth shall be established for ever: but a lying tongue is but for a moment". Our "way" of life and being is how we will eternally be- and for me that solves the enigma of <em><a href='B:240 12:28'>Pro 12:28</a></em>: "In the way of righteousness is life; and in the pathway thereof there is no death". In Jeremiah 18, God likens Himself to a potter working with us the clay. We can resist how He wants us to be, and He can make us into something else::. we are soft clay until the 'firing'; and the day of firing is surely the day of judgment. The implication is that in this life we are soft clay; but the day of judgment will set us hard as the persons we have become, or have been made into, in this life.</p><h4>The continuity between the mortal, human Jesus and the exalted Lord of all which He became on His ascension is brought out quite artlessly in <em><a href='B:650 4:14'>Heb 4:14</a></em>: “Our great high priest, who has passed through the heavens”. The picture is of “this same Jesus”, the man on earth, passing through all heavens to ‘arrive’ at the throne of God Himself to mediate for us there. His ascension to Heaven was viewed physically like this by the disciples, and is expressed here in that kind of language of physical ascent, to bring home to us the continuity between the man Jesus on earth, and the exalted Lord now in Heaven itself. The same Jesus who once experienced temptation can thereby strengthen us in our temptations. We need to realize that nobody can be tempted by that which holds no appeal; the Lord Jesus must have seen and reflected upon sin as a possible course of action, even though He never took it. And for the same reason, several New Testament passages (e:g. <em><a href='B:610 2:5'>1Ti 2:5</a></em>) call the exalted Lord Jesus a “man”- even now. Let’s not see these passages merely as theological problems for Trinitarians. The wonder of it all is that Jesus after His glorification is still in some sense human. He as “the pioneer of our faith” shows us the path to glory, a glory that doesn’t involve us becoming somehow superhuman and unreal.</h4><p>And so the Man who walked dusty Galilee streets is the very same one, in essence, whom we will meet in judgment day. The ultimate question for each of us, is whether we will be accepted by Him. In the Gospels, we see the Son of man, Son of God, so acceptant of others, so patient with their weaknesses, passionately dying for our salvation. Will He turn as it were another face on us at the day of judgment, showing Himself suddenly and unpredictably to be someone else? Like people we know, who suddenly surprised us one day by showing a completely different aspect to their character? I believe He won’t. Because integrity and consistency of character, sharing His Father’s characteristic of not changing, is what He is essentially about. He won’t show another face then, that we’ve not seen now. The same basic Jesus, who so wished and wishes to eternally save us, will be the One whom we meet in the final day.</p><p>If we truly love the Lord, we will fantasize about our moment of meeting with Him. I suspect that His very appearance of ordinariness and evident human aspect will impress me in that first moment of meeting. Perhaps it will be that He appears to me in the midst of everyday life, when I’m desperately consumed with doing something, and interrupts me. And He’ll seem like an ordinary local person, speaking with the same accent, wearing normal clothes, just as He did after His resurrection. And then He’ll say with a very slight, cultured kind of smile: “Duncan, I’m Jesus…”. Who knows how it will be. But if you love Him, you’ll fantasize of that moment, as you love His appearing.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 13:9'>Heb 13:9</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Do not be carried away by various and strange teachings. For it is good that the heart be established by grace- not with food laws, which have not profited those who have been so occupied with them</em>- The Hebrews were indeed being carried away and back to Judaism. But if we have known grace, the certainty of salvation in Christ, looking forward 'boldly' to future eternity with Him, then our heart will be stable; the hope we have will be as an anchor of the soul. Our heart will be stable.</p><p>It's easy to assume that the arguments about "regulations about food" in the first century hinged about what&nbsp;<em>types</em>&nbsp;of food should be eaten, i:e. whether the Mosaic dietary laws should be observed or not. But the angst about "food" was more passionately about&nbsp;<em>with whom</em>&nbsp;you ate. Peter explains in <em><a href='B:510 11:3'>Act 11:3</a></em> how utterly radical it was for a Jew to eat with a Gentile. Bearing this in mind, the way Jew and Gentile Christians ate together at the Lord's supper would've been a breathtaking witness of unity to the watching world. And yet ultimately, Jew and Gentile parted company and the church divided, laying itself wide open to imbalance and every manner of practical and doctrinal corruption as a result. The problem was that the Jews understood 'eating together' as a sign of agreement, and a sign that you accepted those at your table as morally pure. The Lord's 'table manners' were of course purposefully the opposite of this approach. Justin Martyr (<em>Dialogue With Trypho</em>&nbsp;47:2-3) mentions how the Jewish Christians would only eat with Gentile Christians on the basis that the Gentiles firstly adopted a Jewish way of life. And this is the nub of the problem- demanding that those at your table are like you, seeing eating together as a sign that the other has accepted your positions about everything. The similarities with parts of the 21st century church are uncanny.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 13:10'>Heb 13:10</a></em>&nbsp;<em>We have an altar from which those who serve the tabernacle have no right to eat</em>- As noted on :9, the arguments about "food" were more about with whom one ate. In the same way as the Jews were connected with the altar by reason of eating what was upon it, so all who are connected with the Christ-altar (<em><a href='B:650 13:10'>Heb 13:10</a></em>) show this by eating of the memorial table. If we deny the breaking of bread to brethren, we are stating that they are outside covenant relationship with God, that they have no part in Israel. The argument here is not that the priests or Judaists were forbidden from breaking bread with Christians. Rather was it that they considered that they partook with the literal altar and thereby as it were fellowshipped the tabernacle system as a whole; they themselves denied themselves the right or Gk. authority to eat at any other altar. For Judaism was exclusive; if you were partakers of the Jerusalem temple altar, you were not allowed to partake of any other altar. And so they themselves declared that they had no authority to eat of the Christ altar. Return to the temple system was therefore a radical separation of themselves from fellowship with Christ, for Judaism had become so exclusive. Initially, Christianity could exist as a sect within Judaism, but Judaism soon began to exclude Christians, and the time came as the Lord predicted when Christians would be cast out of the synagogue system.</p><p>However as explained on :11, it is the day of atonement ritual which is in view; and those who kept the Mosaic laws had no right to eat of the sin offering whose blood brought atonement. But Christian worshippers do.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 13:11'>Heb 13:11</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For the bodies of those beasts whose blood is brought into the Holy Place by the high priest as an offering for sin, are burned outside of the camp</em>- The sin offering at the day of atonement, which is the situation in view throughout Hebrews, could not be eaten of by the priest nor worshippers. Its blood was important, but the body was burnt and not eaten. Yet Christians by going outside of the camp of Israel and the tabernacle system could eat of that ultimate sacrifice.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 13:12'>Heb 13:12</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Therefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people through his own blood, suffered outside of the gate</em>- The reference is to the day of atonement ritual. "The people" are no longer natural Israel but those who believe in His blood and are sanctified even in their consciences, cleansed from all sin. Bu "sanctify" is the word used by the LXX to describe the consecration of the priests to service of the body of Israel (<em><a href='B:20 28:41'>Exo 28:41</a></em>). If we reject the call to priesthood today, we reject the point of the Lord's saving suffering for us. The Lord's death was not within the temple system; it was outside the city gate.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 13:13'>Heb 13:13</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Let us therefore go to him outside the camp, bearing his reproach</em>- We recall Simon carrying the Lord's cross in the sad procession which went outside the camp of Jerusalem to Golgotha; and he becomes a type of us. See on <em><a href='B:470 27:32'>Mat 27:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 8:56'>Joh 8:56</a></em>.</p><p>When <em><a href='B:650 13:13'>Heb 13:13</a></em> speaks of&nbsp;<em>us</em>&nbsp;going forth outside the camp, perhaps there is a reference to Joshua who dwelt with Moses outside the camp- thus making Joshua symbolic of us all.<br/>We are to go forth unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach, his ‘having it cast in the teeth’ (Gk:; <em><a href='B:650 13:13'>Heb 13:13</a></em>):&nbsp;<em>We</em>&nbsp;may boldly say that we will&nbsp;<em>not</em>&nbsp;be fearful, as Joshua was, because God has addressed to&nbsp;<em>us</em>&nbsp;the very words which He did to Joshua: “I will never leave thee nor forsake thee” (<em><a href='B:650 13:5-6'>Heb 13:5-6</a></em>). In this especially, Joshua is our example.</p><p>The call to even now go to Him outside the camp speaks as if He is still there, outside the city gates, and we shoulder our crosses and His reproach as He walked the Via Dolorosa, and go out to be crucified next to Him, as we endure being fools for Christ’s sake in our worldly decisions. It's a rather strange idea, at first consideration. But His sufferings are ongoing. The cross is still there- wherever we go, and however far we fall away from Him. And the implication appears to be that the Hebrews had already returned within the camp of the temple system, and were being asked to come out from it, to Golgotha.</p><p>"Without the camp" is full of Old Testament allusion. The cross convicts of sin, for we are impelled by it to follow Christ in going forth “without the camp", following the path of the leper who had to go forth without the camp (<em><a href='B:30 13:46'>Lev 13:46</a></em>).</p><p>We’d sooner skip over the words of <em><a href='B:50 23:12-13'>Deu 23:12-13</a></em> than analyze them closely: “Thou shalt have a place also without the camp, whither thou shalt go forth abroad: and thou shalt have a paddle upon thy weapon; and it shall be, when thou wilt ease thyself abroad, thou shalt dig therewith”. Yet there can be no doubt that this is one of the source passages for the words of <em><a href='B:650 13:13'>Heb 13:13</a></em>: “Let us go forth therefore unto him (Jesus) without the camp, bearing his reproach”. When the Israelite soldier had a call of nature, he went forth “without the camp”, doubtless with a sense of sheepishness as he carried his spear-cum-spade with him. Everyone knew what he was doing. This commonplace incident is picked up by the Spirit and made relevant to the Jewish Christians going forth from the camp of Israel, carrying with them the obvious reproach of the cross of Christ:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 13:14'>Heb 13:14</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:560 2:19'>Eph 2:19</a></em>.</p><p><em>For we do not have here a permanent city, but we seek after one which is yet to come</em>- The exodus of people from Jerusalem to Golgotha was seen as symptomatic of how we as God's people, as Abraham, are ever on the move, looking for a permanence and stability that is yet ahead for us in literal terms (<em><a href='B:650 11:10'>Heb 11:10</a></em>). Jerusalem with its apparent solidity was not a permanent city, it was about to be destroyed. The Jerusalem yet to come is the community of believers whose memories / spirits are in God's memory, who shall in symbolic terms come from heaven to earth at the Lord' return. And the apparent solidity of secular life is likewise far from permanent.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 13:15'>Heb 13:15</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:670 2:5'>1Pe 2:5</a></em>.</p><p><em>Through him, therefore, let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God; that is, the fruit of lips which make confession to His Name</em>- Mosaic sacrifice could never be continual; the whole nature of the rituals precluded that. But with such a priest as the Lord Jesus, we can continually offer the sacrifice of praise, rather than animals. The praise is for the certainty of our salvation and for the certainty of our forgiveness; for "confession" can mean just that, confession of sin. Our praise is for the forgiveness of sin confessed, celebrated in the peace offering.</p><p>The peace offering was offered with unleavened cakes as was the Passover. The bitterness of sin was to be ever remembered, amidst the joy of peace with God. The description of the peace offering as “the sacrifice of thanksgiving" is alluded to in <em><a href='B:650 13:15'>Heb 13:15</a></em>: "Let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God"- praise and thanks for our spiritual peace with God, our forgiveness through His grace.</p><p>True sacrifice is praise of God; thus Abraham's willingness to offer Isaac was "praise" (<em><a href='B:10 22:5'>Gen 22:5</a></em>). Israel in their repentance "will account our lips as calves" (<em><a href='B:350 14:3'>Hos 14:3</a></em> LXX, RVmg:), i:e. as sacrifices. The "fruit of the lips" there was repentance. Which is why Paul says that we "make confession to his name" with the fruit of our lips (<em><a href='B:650 13:15'>Heb 13:15</a></em> RV). Continually we should offer this sacrifice of praise (<em><a href='B:650 13:15'>Heb 13:15</a></em>), the thankfulness that wells up from knowing we are forgiven, the joy born of regular, meaningful repentance. And we do this "by" or 'on account of' the sacrifice of Jesus for us, which enables this forgiveness and thereby repentance (<em><a href='B:650 13:12'>Heb 13:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 13:15'>Heb 13:15</a></em>). "Continually" in itself suggests that "praise" does not mean singing or musical expression. This "sacrifice of praise" is a quotation from <em><a href='B:300 33:11'>Jer 33:11</a></em>, which describes our offering "the sacrifice of praise::. for his mercy" at the beginning of the Kingdom. Praise will and does bring forth sacrifice / action. Yet " praise" here is the same Hebrew word translated " thanksgiving" ; and the sacrifice of thanksgiving was the peace offering, a commemoration of our free conscience and the peace of sin forgiven (<em><a href='B:30 7:12-15'>Lev 7:12-15</a></em>). If we seriously confess our sins and believe in forgiveness, we should be experiencing a foretaste of the praise we will be offering at the start of the Kingdom, as we embark upon eternity. Our offering of this sacrifice of praise will be "continual" if we continually maintain a good conscience through the confession of our sins. This is surely a high standard to have placed before us: to&nbsp;<em>continually</em>&nbsp;confess our sins, to&nbsp;<em>continually</em>&nbsp;receive God's mercy, and therefore to live&nbsp;<em>continually</em>&nbsp;in a spirit of grateful praise. The way David praises God so ecstatically for immutable things and principles (e:g. His character) is a great example in this (e:g. <em><a href='B:230 33:3-5'>Psa 33:3-5</a></em>); our tendency is to only seriously praise God when He resolves the unexpected crises of life.</p><p>The Name of God of itself elicits repentance. Faced with the wonder of who He is, we can’t be passive to it. We realize and are convicted of our sin by the very reality of who He is, was and shall be. <em><a href='B:650 13:15'>Heb 13:15</a></em> speaks of the fruit of our lips, giving confession to His Name. The “fruit of lips” in <em><a href='B:350 14:2'>Hos 14:2</a></em> RVmg. to which the writer alludes is clearly enough, in the context, the confession of sin. And the context in <em><a href='B:650 13:12'>Heb 13:12</a></em> is that Christ’s blood was shed to sanctify us. That declaration of the Name elicits a confession of sin, albeit in words of praise, to His Name. <em><a href='B:400 6:9'>Mic 6:9</a></em> has the same theme. When the Lord’s voice calls to the city demanding repentance, “the man of wisdom shall see perceive thy name”- i:e. repent. We come to know God's Name in practice through the cycles of sin-repentance-forgiveness by God which we all pass through. It is through this process that we come to know the very essence of God's Name. Thus <em><a href='B:290 43:25'>Isa 43:25</a></em> LXX: "I am '"I AM", who erases your iniquities". We come to know His Name, that it really&nbsp;<em>is</em>&nbsp;("I am") all about forgiveness and salvation of sinners. See on <em><a href='B:560 3:15'>Eph 3:15</a></em>.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 13:16'>Heb 13:16</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But do not forget to do good and to share, for with such sacrifices God is well pleased</em>- This was a prompt to remember the early days of the Jerusalem church, when the members shared their possessions. In the immediate context here we have been reminded of the Lord's sacrifice and our partaking in it. But there is to be a practical response to that, in sharing what we have rather than solely partaking in the sharing of the Lord Jesus.</p><p>The letter to the Hebrew Christians describes salvation and the Kingdom with the idea of inheritance. The believers had possessions (<em><a href='B:650 10:34'>Heb 10:34</a></em>), had been generous to others (<em><a href='B:650 6:10'>Heb 6:10</a></em>), and yet needed the exhortation to "not live for money; be content with what you have" (<em><a href='B:650 13:5'>Heb 13:5</a></em>) and to "share what you have with others" (<em><a href='B:650 13:16'>Heb 13:16</a></em>). We could surmise that this audience weren't unlike many of us today- not overly wealthy, but sorely tempted to be obsessed by possessions and material advantage. And to them, as to us, the writer emphasizes that salvation in Christ is the ultimate inheritance or possession (<em><a href='B:650 1:2'>Heb 1:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 1:4'>Heb 1:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 1:14'>Heb 1:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 6:12'>Heb 6:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 6:17'>Heb 6:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 9:15'>Heb 9:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 11:7'>Heb 11:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 12:17'>Heb 12:17</a></em>); this is the ultimate "profit" (<em><a href='B:650 13:17'>Heb 13:17</a></em>). Hence Esau was quoted as an example- he gave up his inheritance for the sake of a material meal (<em><a href='B:650 12:15-17'>Heb 12:15-17</a></em>). The&nbsp;<em>eternal&nbsp;</em>inheritance which is promised to us in the Gospel, rooted as it is in the promises to the Jewish fathers, should make us not seek for great material inheritance in this present world.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 13:17'>Heb 13:17</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Obey those who rule over you, and be submissive; for they watch out for your souls, as those who must give account. Let them do so with joy and not with grief, for that would be unprofitable for you</em>- Given the apostasy of the Jerusalem church and their lack of support for Paul and his positions, this was surely an attempt by Paul even from prison in Rome to yet ingratiate himself to the Jerusalem leadership.</p><p>Elders must give an account for their flock as a shepherd must for his sheep- implying that there will be a 'going through' with them of all in their care. The drunken steward was condemned because he failed to feed the rest of the household and beat them. If the capricious behaviour of the flock makes the shepherd watch out for them "with grief", with groaning and heaviness, then this is not profitable for us the sheep. For they will not shepherd us well if all the time they are grieved by our wayward behaviour and need to restrain all the time rather than lead forward.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 13:18'>Heb 13:18</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Pray for us. For we are persuaded that we have a good conscience, desiring to live honourably in all things</em>- The prayer was for Paul's from prison (:19). Paul's sense of injustice at his incarceration comes through so often, and again here. His conscience had been cleansed in Christ, as he had previously taught in this letter; he felt no guilt over his sins as they had truly been dealt with. A lesser faith in the Lord's sacrifice would have surely led him to consider his imprisonment as a just reward for the bad life he had previously lived, involving as it did torture and murder of civilians.</p><p>The argument seems to imply that the more they prayed, the sooner he would be released from prison. Thus prayer can hasten things, given certain preconditions are fulfilled. So it is in our experiences, and so it may be with the Lord’s return.<br/>It was accepted in Judaism, as well as in many other contemporary religions, that faithful saints e:g. the patriarchs, Moses, the prophets etc, in Judaism’s case could intercede for the people. Yet in the New Testament,&nbsp;<em>all</em>&nbsp;believers are urged to intercede for each other, even to the point of seeking to gain forgiveness for others’ sins (<em><a href='B:590 5:25'>1Th 5:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 13:18'>Heb 13:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 5:15'>Jas 5:15</a></em>). They were&nbsp;<em>all</em>&nbsp;to do this vital work. The radical nature of this can easily be overlooked by us, reading from this distance.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 13:19'>Heb 13:19</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And I exhort you the more exceedingly to do this, that I may be restored to you the sooner</em>- As noted on :18, Paul felt that the answer to his prayers depended upon how many others were praying for him. Revelation uses a similar idea in visualizing a situation where there is enough incense arising to trigger a response from Heaven. This in God's wisdom is how prayer operates, so that we share our situations with others and urge their prayers for us, and we too pray for others. This explains why we cannot be Christians in splendid isolation from others, but rather active communion and prayer for each other are a vital part of our collective lives.</p><p>I suggested in commentary on Acts that Paul was not warmly received by the Jerusalem church on his last visit there, and it would appear that his arrest and imprisonment there was partly due to Jewish Christian elements collaborating with the temple system. Yet Paul wishes to be restored to them; he intended after release from prison to return to see them in Jerusalem again. His fervour for their spiritual strength and holding on in faith is remarkable after such betrayals.</p>


text:
<h4><em><a href='B:650 13:20'>Heb 13:20</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Now the God of peace, who brought from the dead the great shepherd of the sheep, our Lord Jesus, through the blood of an eternal covenant</em>- The idea of "peace" speaks of peace between believers as well as with God; and this would be the context provided by :19, where as noted there, Paul has in view the restoration of his relationship with the Jerusalem church. God is the author of peace both with Him and within His people on account of the blood, resurrection and covenant relationship of the Lord Jesus. "<em>Our&nbsp;</em>Lord Jesus" is another attempt to demonstrate that they had in common a joint acceptance of Jesus as "Lord"; even though it would seem many amongst the Hebrew Christians were losing that sense of His exaltation. The references to the Lord's resurrection, His blood and the eternal new covenant pave the way for the desire in :21 that God would continue working within them. For it was the Lord's death and resurrection which brought into effect the new covenant for those in Him, with its promise of the blessing of being spiritually transformed within.</h4><p>"In the blood of an eternal covenant" (Gk:, through the power of the blood) is a hard phrase to understand if we isolate it from the rest of the verse. The GNB gives the best general sense: "God has raised from death our Lord Jesus, who is the Great Shepherd of the sheep as the result of his blood, by which the eternal covenant is sealed". The Lord's qualification as the supreme elder was on account of His death. The Abrahamic covenant is the new covenant of eternal inheritance (see on <em><a href='B:650 9:15'>Heb 9:15</a></em>), but this was sealed, brought into operation for us and guaranteed, by the Lord's death. The connection between the covenant and God's people as sheep, shepherded by God through Messiah, is made clearly throughout Ezekiel 34. The sheep of Israel shall be led by the shepherd into an eternal covenant. This is true of all the Lord's sheep today as it will be for natural Israel in the last days.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 13:21'>Heb 13:21</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Perfect you in every good thing to do His will; working in you that which is pleasing in His sight, through Jesus Christ. To whom be the glory for ever and ever. Amen</em>- We work God’s will, and He works in us (Gk:). There is a mutuality between God and man. The new covenant involves the blessing of the Spirit, preparing us, perfecting and maturing us, so that we might do God's will in practice. But all this is predicated upon the ongoing work of the Lord Jesus within us. It is the internal gift of the Spirit through which God works within us (<em><a href='B:560 3:20'>Eph 3:20</a></em>), and this is an outflow of the new covenant (:20). The "Amen" brings to a close the sermon we have transcripted here (see on :22); and the final appeal to glorify the Lord Jesus would be an appropriate end to breaking of bread sermon.</p>


text:
&nbsp;<p>and then expounded by the Rabbi and any others who would like to offer a "word of exhortation" (<em><a href='B:510 13:15'>Act 13:15</a></em>). <em><a href='B:510 13:15'>Act 13:15</a></em> is the only other place apart from <em><a href='B:650 13:22'>Heb 13:22</a></em> that "the word of exhortation" occurs. It is clearly a synagogue phrase. It is possible that "suffer the word of exhortation" was also a Synagogue phrase, said at the end of the 'exhortation' on the Sabbath. This suggests that the whole of Hebrews was a "word of exhortation" at a Sabbath breaking of bread (probably this was the day the Jewish ecclesias met in Jerusalem), being a commentary on the readings for that week (perhaps the Melchizedek passages and parts of the Law), constantly bringing the point around to the death of the Lord Jesus. In this, Hebrews is an ideal sermon: it continually comes around to the work of Christ.</p><p>Hebrews is also a series of quotations and allusions (over half the sermon is comprised of these), interspersed with commentary and brief practical exhortation (e:g. to disfellowship false teachers, <em><a href='B:650 12:15-16'>Heb 12:15-16</a></em>), all tied together around the theme of Christ's sacrifice and our response to it. Our sermons should be Bible based, after this same pattern. This is surely the way to construct sermons: re-reading verses from the chapters in the readings, commenting on them, bringing it all round to the work of Christ. A recurring theme of the Hebrews sermon is a reminding of the hearers of the reality of their future reward, made sure by Christ's work (<em><a href='B:650 4:9'>Heb 4:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 5:9'>Heb 5:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 6:10'>Heb 6:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 6:19'>Heb 6:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 9:28'>Heb 9:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 10:34'>Heb 10:34</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 11:40'>Heb 11:40</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 12:10'>Heb 12:10</a></em>). This should surely be a theme embedded in our sermons: the personal Hope of the Kingdom, made sure for us by the work of Christ.</p><p>So much in Hebrews is obviously relevant to the memorial meeting. The wine represents the blood of the new covenant. That new covenant is repeated in <em><a href='B:650 8:10-11'>Heb 8:10-11</a></em>; and the word "covenant" occurs 14 times, and the parallel "testament" 7 times. The blood of the covenant is explicitly referred to in <em><a href='B:650 7:22'>Heb 7:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 8:6'>Heb 8:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 9:1'>Heb 9:1</a></em> and <em><a href='B:650 13:20'>Heb 13:20</a></em>. <em><a href='B:650 12:24-26'>Heb 12:24-26</a></em> personifies that blood as a mighty voice speaking to us, manifesting the voice of God, capable of shaking Heaven and earth. This is truly the power of appeal behind a consideration of Christ's blood, as symbolised in the wine. There are 22 references to "blood", 4 to “body", 8 to "sacrifice" i:e. the body of the animal, and 9 to "offering", also a reference to the body of the animal. The breaking of bread is designed to remember the body and blood of our Lord's sacrifice. And this is exactly the theme of Hebrews. Yet at the same time as doing this, Paul was getting over his specific point to the Jerusalem ecclesia: the utter supremacy of Christ's sacrifice ought to obviate the need for any other theory of reconciliation to God. If only we could exhort like this: make the specific points we need to make under the umbrella of a&nbsp;<em>sustained</em>&nbsp;emphasis on the sacrifice of Christ.</p><p><em><a href='B:530 10:17'>1Co 10:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 10:21'>1Co 10:21</a></em> (probably an epistle known to the Jerusalem ecclesia) speaks of us being&nbsp;<em>partakers</em>&nbsp;of the one bread at the breaking of bread,&nbsp;<em>partaking</em>&nbsp;of the Lord's table there. The same word is used in <em><a href='B:650 3:14'>Heb 3:14</a></em> concerning being&nbsp;<em>partakers</em>&nbsp;of Christ, again suggesting that Hebrews was first spoken in a breaking of bread context. The same word occurs in <em><a href='B:650 12:8'>Heb 12:8</a></em>: we are&nbsp;<em>partakers</em>&nbsp;of Christ's sufferings. We are Christ's&nbsp;<em>partakers</em>&nbsp;(AV "fellows"; <em><a href='B:650 1:9'>Heb 1:9</a></em>); Christ&nbsp;<em>partakes</em>&nbsp;of our nature (<em><a href='B:650 2:14'>Heb 2:14</a></em>). Yet we are only ultimately&nbsp;<em>partakers</em>&nbsp;of Christ if we hold fast the beginning of our confidence (<em><a href='B:650 3:14'>Heb 3:14</a></em>). All these ideas are brought together in our&nbsp;<em>partaking</em>&nbsp;of the emblems of Christ at the memorial meeting. In them, Paul is reasoning, we should see our partaking of Christ's sufferings as a response to His partaking of our nature, and thereby our partaking of the promised reward, the "heavenly calling" (<em><a href='B:650 3:1'>Heb 3:1</a></em>).</p><p>Oral Style<br/>The references to "let us" do this or that are all so appropriate to a verbal sermon, encouraging the listeners to respond to the work of Christ. "We see Jesus" (<em><a href='B:650 2:9'>Heb 2:9</a></em>), "Consider::. Jesus" (<em><a href='B:650 3:1'>Heb 3:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 7:4'>Heb 7:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 12:3'>Heb 12:3</a></em>) would fit in well to the context of a sermon given with the emblems before the audience. "Concerning whom in our discourse::." (<em><a href='B:650 5:11'>Heb 5:11</a></em> Diaglott) would certainly fit in to an oral discourse. “And, so to say…" (<em><a href='B:650 7:9'>Heb 7:9</a></em> RV) is another example. Saying above, Sacrifice and offering…" (<em><a href='B:650 10:8'>Heb 10:8</a></em> RV) sounds as if a scroll is being read and quotation made from passages “above" in the scroll. "Of the things which we have&nbsp;<em>spoken&nbsp;</em>(RV we are saying) this is the sum" (<em><a href='B:650 8:1'>Heb 8:1</a></em>) is language more appropriate to a transcript of an address than to a written composition. "As I may so say" (<em><a href='B:650 7:9'>Heb 7:9</a></em>) is another such example. "One in a certain place::." (<em><a href='B:650 2:6'>Heb 2:6</a></em>) is an odd way to write in a formal letter. Yet it fits in if this is a transcript of a sermon; it's the sort of thing you would say verbally when you know your audience can't turn up the passage. The word of exhortation contained in Hebrews was in "few words" (<em><a href='B:650 13:22'>Heb 13:22</a></em>); but this is a bad translation. Strong defines it as meaning "a short time, for a little while" (2)- i:e. Paul is saying 'It won't take long in terms of time to hear this, but consider the points carefully'. Note that the RV speaks of “suffer the exhortation", unlike AV “the word of exhortation" (<em><a href='B:650 13:22'>Heb 13:22</a></em>). One almost gets the impression that Paul is speaking with great constraints on his time: "the cherubim::. of which we cannot now speak particularly::. what shall I more say? for the time is failing me, running out" (<em><a href='B:650 9:5'>Heb 9:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 11:32'>Heb 11:32</a></em> Gk:). These sort of comments would surely be irrelevant in a written letter. But as a transcript of a live sermon, they make perfect sense. M. R. Vincent in his&nbsp;<em>Word Studies Of The NT</em>&nbsp;observed in Hebrews "a rhythmical structure of sentences (with) sonorous compounds", as if what is written had first been spoken.</p><p>"Let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God" (<em><a href='B:650 13:15'>Heb 13:15</a></em>) would be appropriate to communal praise at a memorial meeting. Likewise "Let us draw near::. we draw nigh::. let us come boldly before the throne of grace" (<em><a href='B:650 4:16'>Heb 4:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 7:19'>Heb 7:19</a></em>) is appropriate to the congregation coming before God in collective and private prayer, culminating in the 'drawing nigh' of taking the emblems (cp. the idea of 'coming to God' in <em><a href='B:650 11:6'>Heb 11:6</a></em>). The emphasis on the power of Christ as a mediator (<em><a href='B:650 7:25'>Heb 7:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 9:24'>Heb 9:24</a></em>) would be appropriate in this context of rallying the congregation's faith in their prayers and confessions of sin. The encouragement to "exhort one another&nbsp;<em>daily</em>" (<em><a href='B:650 3:13'>Heb 3:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 10:25'>Heb 10:25</a></em>) takes on a special relevance if said at the breaking of bread; Paul would have been implying: 'Don't just listen to me exhorting you today, or a brother doing it once a week; you must&nbsp;<em>all</em>&nbsp;exhort each other, every day, not just on Shabbat'.</p><p>Self Examination<br/>There is another sustained theme in this sermon, in addition to all the stress on our Lord's sacrifice. It is the repeated warning as to the likelihood of apostasy (<em><a href='B:650 2:1-3'>Heb 2:1-3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 3:12'>Heb 3:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 4:1'>Heb 4:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 6:4-8'>Heb 6:4-8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 10:26-30'>Heb 10:26-30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 10:38'>Heb 10:38</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 12:15-17'>Heb 12:15-17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 12:25'>Heb 12:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 12:27'>Heb 12:27</a></em>) and the possibility of abusing the blood of Christ (<em><a href='B:650 10:26-30'>Heb 10:26-30</a></em>)- exactly after the pattern of <em><a href='B:530 11:26-30'>1Co 11:26-30</a></em>, which explicitly makes this warning in the context of the breaking of bread. “Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye again, oral style, shall he be thought worthy, who hath:::counted the blood of the covenant:::&nbsp; as unholy thing?" (<em><a href='B:650 11:29'>Heb 11:29</a></em>) is almost allusive to <em><a href='B:530 11:29'>1Co 11:29</a></em>, warning of drinking damnation to oneself through an incorrect attitude to the memorial cup. This kind of emphasis in a 45 minute sermon wouldn't go down well in a Western church. Yet the more we consider the wonder of the work of Christ, the more we will be driven to consider our own weakness, and the need to "hold fast" our connection with it. This is why we should examine ourselves at the breaking of bread (<em><a href='B:530 11:28'>1Co 11:28</a></em>). "Hold on" is another related theme (<em><a href='B:650 3:6'>Heb 3:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 3:14'>Heb 3:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 4:14'>Heb 4:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 10:23'>Heb 10:23</a></em>). And here and there we find brief, specific practical warnings which were doubtless especially relevant to the initial audience. It's amazing that Paul got so much in 45 minutes. Yet this is what is possible. Note that all the exhortations in Hebrews, the comfort, the warnings, are all an outcome of a consideration of first principles, especially relating to the atonement. Thus Paul turns the fact that Christ is our&nbsp;<em>representative</em>&nbsp;round to teach the need for unity amongst us whom He represents (<em><a href='B:650 2:11'>Heb 2:11</a></em>).</p><p>"Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief" (<em><a href='B:650 3:12'>Heb 3:12</a></em>) is very relevant to a call for self-examination in the presence of the emblems. "Let us" boldly ask for forgiveness (<em><a href='B:650 4:16'>Heb 4:16</a></em>) could be read in this context too. The reminder that Christ examines us, that we are naked and opened in His sight, would have encouraged them to be open with him in their self-examination (<em><a href='B:650 4:12'>Heb 4:12</a></em>). Paul reminds them of their initial conversion (<em><a href='B:650 3:6'>Heb 3:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 3:14'>Heb 3:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 6:11'>Heb 6:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 10:22'>Heb 10:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 10:32'>Heb 10:32</a></em>), in the same way as the Passover was intended to provoke national and personal self-examination, looking back to their spiritual beginnings at the Red Sea (cp. baptism). He encourages them with a reminder that Christ is such a powerful priest that He can really cleanse our conscience (<em><a href='B:650 9:14'>Heb 9:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 10:2'>Heb 10:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 10:22'>Heb 10:22</a></em>); the blood of the&nbsp;<em>new</em>&nbsp;covenant can destroy an evil conscience (<em><a href='B:650 10:22'>Heb 10:22</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:650 9:20'>Heb 9:20</a></em>). Therefore, Paul reasons, with this clear conscience, "let us draw near"- to the emblems, to the reality of our relationship with God. Again we see a marked emphasis on the need for self-examination at the breaking of bread.</p><p>Having created this background of self-examination, Paul is able to more easily hand out explicit rebuke; e:g. "You are dull of hearing" (<em><a href='B:650 5:11-14'>Heb 5:11-14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 12:5'>Heb 12:5</a></em>). Yet at the same time Paul expressed a very confident view of his audience; e:g. "We are persuaded better things of you" (<em><a href='B:650 6:9'>Heb 6:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 10:38-39'>Heb 10:38-39</a></em>). This is an important aspect of exhortation; to convey to the brethren and sisters the fact that we genuinely respect them as brethren and sisters in the Lord Jesus, with the sure Hope and possibility of salvation:&nbsp;<br/>There is an emphasis on the good works which a true understanding of the first principles should bring (<em><a href='B:650 4:11'>Heb 4:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 9:14'>Heb 9:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 10:24'>Heb 10:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 12:28'>Heb 12:28</a></em>). This is exactly in harmony with the idea presented above: that exposition of first principle doctrine is the basis for practical exposition. This emphasis on the need for works in response to the doctrines of the atonement could suggest that Paul expected the congregation to make resolves at the breaking of bread concerning their future behaviour. Maybe this is behind his appeal for them to appreciate that Christ offers our works to God as the priests did the sacrifices in the past (<em><a href='B:650 5:1'>Heb 5:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 8:3-4'>Heb 8:3-4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 9:9'>Heb 9:9</a></em>).</p><p>Personal Relevance<br/>The Hebrews sermon is shot through with internal connections; just as our preaching sessions should constantly refer back to each other. Paul is trying to get the brethren and sisters to see that if they respond to his exhortations as they should, they will be connected in spirit with the faithful heroes of the Old Testament; they will become connected with "the spirits of just men made perfect" (<em><a href='B:650 12:23'>Heb 12:23</a></em>). Thus Noah was moved with fear, Paul says (<em><a href='B:650 11:7'>Heb 11:7</a></em>), just as we should be (<em><a href='B:650 4:1'>Heb 4:1</a></em>); Sarah "judged him faithful who had promised" (<em><a href='B:650 11:11'>Heb 11:11</a></em>), just as we should (<em><a href='B:650 10:23'>Heb 10:23</a></em>); as Moses bore the reproach of Christ (<em><a href='B:650 11:26'>Heb 11:26</a></em>), so should we (<em><a href='B:650 13:13'>Heb 13:13</a></em>). The breaking of bread is the equivalent of the Passover under the Old Covenant; therefore <em><a href='B:650 11:28'>Heb 11:28</a></em> highlights how Moses kept the Passover in faith as to the power of the sprinkled blood of the lamb. The implication is that if we take the wine with a similar faith in Christ's blood, we will come become united with the spirit of Moses.</p><p>There are many of these inter-connections within Hebrews. Our "afflictions" (<em><a href='B:650 10:32'>Heb 10:32</a></em>) uses the same word translated " suffering" in the context of Christ's sufferings (<em><a href='B:650 2:9-10'>Heb 2:9-10</a></em>); we are to " endure" (<em><a href='B:650 10:32'>Heb 10:32</a></em>) as Christ " endured" the shame of the cross (<em><a href='B:650 12:2-3'>Heb 12:2-3</a></em> same word). Through these inter-connections, Paul is trying to make the sufferings of Christ relevant to them. We may never hope to achieve as much as Paul did in those 45 minutes. But the principles remain for us to try to copy. Therefore we should try not to offer unconnected comments on the readings, we should seek to tie them together under the umbrella of the work of the Lord Jesus, we should relate His sufferings to those of our brethren and sisters, we should seek to inspire them with the fact that they are fellowshipping the hope of the faithful recorded in the Bible records.</p><p>A Pattern For Us<br/>The sermon to the Hebrews becomes more significant for us as we consider its likely background. In his book The Jewish War, Josephus explains in detail how the Jews in Palestine revolted against the Romans in AD66-70. Initially, everything went well for them. The Romans were defeated at the foot of the temple mount, the legions of Cestius Gallus were defeated, and the Jewish zealots attributed these successes to God’s rewarding of their loyalty to the Law. They purified and rededicated the temple, and appointed a High Priest who was not a collaborator with Rome. The zealots spoke of the liberation of Israel in strong religious terms; there was a great wave of enthusiasm for the Law. It seems that Hebrew Christians were caught up in this revival, and of course all Jews were expected to take up arms and fight. The exhortation to the Hebrews therefore stressed the passing of the Mosaic Law, the need to rally around Christ as the true altar and the only true, pure High Priest (<em><a href='B:650 4:14'>Heb 4:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 10:19-25'>Heb 10:19-25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 13:10'>Heb 13:10</a></em>). There was the command to move outside the camp of Israel, i:e. Jerusalem (<em><a href='B:650 13:13'>Heb 13:13</a></em>). And the institutions of the temple, which the Jewish nationalists were so glorifying, are shown to be of no value compared to the blood of Christ. The references to the temptations of Jesus (<em><a href='B:650 2:17-18'>Heb 2:17-18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 4:15'>Heb 4:15</a></em>) may be references back to the wilderness temptations, where He faced the same choice that the Jewish Christians had- to opt for a Kingdom here and now, throwing off the Roman yoke; or to hold fast our faith in the Kingdom which is surely to come. The speaker / writer to the Hebrew Christians doesn’t specifically tackle the issues affecting them in bald terms. He instead sets a masterful example of how we should approach issues and weaknesses which need our comment. He adopts a Christ-centred and Biblical approach, demonstrating that he is exactly aware of the issues which face them, and reasoning from unshakeable principles towards specific applications of them.</p><h4>The Final Appeal<br/>All good sermons have a strong final appeal and focus on the sacrifice of Christ. <em><a href='B:650 12:23'>Heb 12:23</a></em> appears grammatically and structurally to be a climax: "Ye are come unto::. the general assembly and church of the firstborn". It is possible to understand this 'general assembly' as a reference to the combined ecclesia present at the breaking of bread. Indeed the Orthodox churches use this verse in this sense in their eucharist liturgy, rendering it "the festival of the firstborn" (3). Chapter 13 contains a series of brief practical exhortations just before the final appeal to home in on the body and blood of our Lord. <em><a href='B:650 13:10'>Heb 13:10</a></em> then goes on to compare us to the priests eating the sacrifice on the altar; a picture so appropriate to partaking the emblems at the memorial meeting. <em><a href='B:650 13:11-15'>Heb 13:11-15</a></em> is surely a fitting climax to the sermon, as the audience prepared to take the emblems: "The&nbsp;<em>bodies</em>&nbsp;of those beasts:::Jesus also, that He might sanctify the people with his own&nbsp;<em>blood, suffered</em>:::let us go forth therefore unto Him, bearing his reproach::. by Him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God&nbsp;<em>continually</em>&nbsp;(not just at this meeting)" . Notice the emphasis on the&nbsp;<em>body</em>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<em>blood</em>&nbsp;of Christ, and an appeal for our response in praise rather than further self-examination. The whole sermon started with God (the very first word in <em><a href='B:650 1:1'>Heb 1:1</a></em>), and ends with God; reflecting the fact that Christ's work is a manifestation of God, and is intended to bring us to the Father, and eternally reconcile us with Him:&nbsp;<br/>Indeed, a fair case can be made that most of the NT epistles are in fact based upon sermons read out at the breaking of bread service. Given that most Christians would have been illiterate, the memorial meeting would have been the logical time and place to read out the latest letter from Paul or Peter, in any case (<em><a href='B:580 4:16'>Col 4:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:590 5:27'>1Th 5:27</a></em>). Consider how Paul writes to the Corinthians in <em><a href='B:530 5:3-5'>1Co 5:3-5</a></em> as if he is present with them at their memorial meeting "ye being gathered together::.". Many of the endings and greetings of the letters have some reference to the memorial meeting. The commands to pray and kiss each other which conclude some of the letters must be compared to the information we find in Justin Martyr's description of the early communion meetings: "When we have ceased from prayer, we salute one another with a kiss. There is then brought to the president bread and a cup of wine" (<em>Apology</em>&nbsp;I, 65). The strange ending of <em><a href='B:530 16:20-24'>1Co 16:20-24</a></em> is an obvious allusion to the passage in the&nbsp;<em>Didache</em>, describing the words spoken at the breaking of bread meetings in the first century: "If any man loveth not the Lord, let him be anathema. Maranatha:::Amen". According to the&nbsp;<em>Didache</em>, the president at the memorial meeting said: " If any man is holy, let him come; if any be not, let him repent. Maranatha. Amen". Indeed, it is possible that the book of Revelation is a series of prophecies initially given at ecclesial gatherings. The whole book is punctuated by passages of liturgy and worship (4).</h4><p>The evidence provided here that ‘Hebrews’ was a sermon at the breaking of bread is to me quite strong. As we've said, in an oral culture of illiterate converts, it is to be expected that the majority of Paul or Peter’s letters would’ve been read aloud to the assembled congregations when they gathered for worship. There is reference to a “holy kiss” at the end of some of the letters (<em><a href='B:520 16:16'>Rom 16:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 16:20'>1Co 16:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 13:12'>2Co 13:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:590 5:26'>1Th 5:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 5:14'>1Pe 5:14</a></em>). This was understood by Justin, Tertullian and Hippolytus to be a signal to the hearers that now the sermon had ended, and they were to kiss each other and begin partaking of the Lord’s supper (5). Whether that’s the case or not, there’s some major homework here for the enthusiast- to study each of the New Testament letters as a sermon appropriate to the breaking of bread service.</p><p>Notes&nbsp;<br/>(1) See Joe Hill, 'An Ancient Bible Companion',&nbsp;<em>Tidings</em>, series 1994/5.<br/>(2) The only other times this construction occurs is in <em><a href='B:650 2:7'>Heb 2:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 2:9'>Heb 2:9</a></em>, where we read that Christ was for "a little while" (RV mg:) lower than Angels.<br/>(3) Christos Yannaras,&nbsp;<em>The Freedom Of Morality</em>&nbsp;(New York: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1996) p. 107.<br/>(4) This idea is developed further in Oscar Cullmann,&nbsp;<em>Early Christian Worship&nbsp;</em>(London: SCM, 1953):&nbsp;<br/>(5) References provided in Martin Hengel,<em>&nbsp;Studies In The Gospel Of Mark</em>&nbsp;(London: SCM, 1985) p. 176.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 13:23'>Heb 13:23</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:590 2:17'>1Th 2:17</a></em>.</p><p><em>Be informed that our brother Timothy has been set at liberty; along with whom, if he comes soon, I will see you-&nbsp;</em>This is a strong indication that Paul was the author, writing from Italy (:24), where it seems Timothy was also imprisoned. Paul expressed his concern for the situation in Jerusalem by sending Timothy to them. His begging of Timothy to come to him in 2 Timothy 4 was therefore asking a fair favour of Timothy, seeing timid Timothy had apparently been imprisoned with Paul at some stage. Although it has to be said that there is no specific implication that the place of Timothy's imprisonment was Rome.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 13:24'>Heb 13:24</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Greet all those that have the rule over you, and all the saints-&nbsp;</em>Paul recognizes their elders (see on :17), but parallels the elders with the church membership.</p><p><em>They of Italy greet you-&nbsp;</em>This is significant in that we get the impression from 2 Timothy 4 that the Rome ecclesia had come to ignore Paul, so that he effectively stood alone.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 13:25'>Heb 13:25</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Grace be with you all. Amen</em>- There is significance in the "all", because it's clear from the letter that some of the Hebrew Christians had returned to the temple cult. And I noted in commentary on Acts that there were apparently elements within the Jerusalem church who collaborated with the Jewish 'satan' to get Paul arrested and imprisoned. But we should likewise wish grace, the experience of God's gift working within to transform us, to all who have named the name of Christ; no matter how far they have apparently strayed from Him or personally turned against us:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:1'>Jas 1:1</a></em>&nbsp;<em>James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are of the dispersion, greeting</em>- A good case can be made that James was written as a follow up to the Council of Jerusalem. It's interesting to observe all the connections between the letter of James and the Acts 15 council. Note some of the more obvious: The salutation (<em><a href='B:660 1:1'>Jas 1:1</a></em> = <em><a href='B:510 15:34'>Act 15:34</a></em>); "Listen, my brothers" (<em><a href='B:660 2:5'>Jas 2:5</a></em> = <em><a href='B:510 15:13'>Act 15:13</a></em>); "The name which was called upon you" (<em><a href='B:660 2:7'>Jas 2:7</a></em> = <em><a href='B:510 15:17'>Act 15:17</a></em>); "Keep unspotted from the world" (<em><a href='B:660 1:27'>Jas 1:27</a></em> = <em><a href='B:510 15:29'>Act 15:29</a></em>); and there are at least three Greek words which occur only in James and Acts 15 (<em><a href='B:660 1:27'>Jas 1:27</a></em> = <em><a href='B:510 15:14'>Act 15:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 5:19'>Jas 5:19</a></em> = <em><a href='B:510 15:19'>Act 15:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 1:16'>Jas 1:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 1:19'>Jas 1:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 1:25'>Jas 1:25</a></em> = <em><a href='B:510 15:25'>Act 15:25</a></em>). Perhaps the letter of James is in some way his retraction of his wrong attitude, an example of where a man comes to understand what works are really important::. or perhaps it was to dissociate himself from those who are called "certain persons who came from James" (<em><a href='B:550 2:12'>Gal 2:12</a></em>), as if he was not actually behind them. Perhaps, however, it was that James saw through church politics for what they were, and focused upon the need for real, practical spirituality, the works of faith and spirit rather than mere legalism.</p><p>The reasons for believing James to be the Lord's brother are well summarized elsewhere; his introduction is therefore an essay in humility and not playing on human relationships as a means to assert authority, seeing he does not mention this fleshly relationship: "James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ". James the Lord's brother being the clear leader of the early church, it would be fitting that at least one of his letters (and Hebrews too?) be preserved. His high position of respect is indicated by <em><a href='B:480 15:40'>Mar 15:40</a></em> describing a "James the less"- i:e. than the great James the Lord's brother. It was not until after James' death that the Gospel mushroomed among the Gentiles, which again points to a basically Jewish readership being catered for. The Lord's brothers having been sceptical of him during his ministry (<em><a href='B:500 7:3-5'>Joh 7:3-5</a></em>), James' depth of appreciation must have developed at lightning speed for him to write this epistle at a relatively early date. Two outstanding characteristics of James are the constant allusions to previous Scripture, especially the Gospels and Proverbs, and the intensely practical understanding of the moment by moment spiritual battle which we all face. It is worth noting that the most senior brother of the early church scored highly on these points. His humility in calling himself a servant of the Lord Jesus is remarkable- Paul could legitimately lay weight to his reasoning by saying he had seen Christ in the flesh (<em><a href='B:530 9:1'>1Co 9:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 5:16'>2Co 5:16</a></em>); how much more so could James have gently pointed out his "(knowing) Christ after the flesh"?</p><p>"Greeting" means literally 'I wish you joy'. James then goes on to define what that joy is: "Count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations". And so we are introduced to the basic theme of James- the machinery of human nature and our evil desires, and how to overcome them. Contrary to how it is often read, the temptations here are spiritual temptations- so the context of the chapter and letter require. "Every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust (NIV "evil desire"), and enticed" (<em><a href='B:660 1:14'>Jas 1:14</a></em>). The real temptations in life are to give way to our evil desires; the trials of life like illness or disaster may not necessarily tempt us so strongly in this way. It is easy to think that 'temptation' refers to these 'physical' trials, and to see those problems as things in themselves to be bravely endured. But whether we lose a leg or miss a bus, the same spiritual temptation of frustration- or whatever- may be presented to each sufferer. The flesh tends to make a big difference between physical and spiritual temptations; but to God- and James- the spiritual temptations are of paramount importance; whatever physical temptations we have are not for their own sake but to create the situation which our evil desires will use to tempt us spiritually.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:2'>Jas 1:2</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Count it all joy, my brothers, when you fall into various temptations</em>- We must pray not to be led into temptation (<em><a href='B:470 6:13'>Mat 6:13</a></em>); but when we fall into such temptation (s:w:), count it all joy, James says (<em><a href='B:660 1:2'>Jas 1:2</a></em>). The exercise of praying not to experience those temptations was for our spiritual benefit, and God is willing that it should be so. James exhorts us to count falling into spiritual temptation as a joy; instead of the 'here we go again:::', 'sin after sin' kind of attitude descending on us as we sense such temptations approaching. We must instead rejoice that here is another opportunity to please God on the highest level possible; to have an evil desire in your heart and to overcome it. The idea of falling ("When you fall::.") may create the idea of giving way to the temptations. But there may be some degree to which we fall a little way before we are tempted: "Every man is tempted, when he is drawn away (from his normal safe spiritual self, abiding in Christ) of his own lust" (<em><a href='B:660 1:14'>Jas 1:14</a></em>). There is surely no real temptation if the evil desire appears so unattractive as to not even lead us part way towards realizing it. Thus the devil in the sense of the Lord's natural desires (<em><a href='B:650 4:15'>Heb 4:15</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:660 1:14-15'>Jas 1:14-15</a></em>) led Jesus away from His own supreme spirituality to tempt him.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:3'>Jas 1:3</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Knowing that the proving of your faith works patience</em>- Our joy at the onset of temptation should be because we know that we have an opportunity to develop permanent spiritual fruit, if only we can respond correctly in those split seconds when the process of being drawn away and enticed is going on. The trying of our faith due to spiritual temptation is in the sense of our faith that God "is able to keep (us) from falling" (<em><a href='B:720 1:24'>Jud 1:24</a></em>). In the moment of temptation, whether it be from an unkind word from someone or irritation at someone's natural characteristics, our joy will be helped by our faith that God will keep us from falling, and will not lead us any further into temptation unless we go on ourselves. However, "Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God" (<em><a href='B:520 10:17'>Rom 10:17</a></em>).</p><p>It is worth drawing attention to the remarkable parallels between James 1 and 1 Peter 1. The infallible principle of interpreting Scripture by Scripture will therefore allow more light to be shed on much of James 1. Peter's parallel to "the trying of your faith worketh patience" is "Ye are in heaviness through manifold temptations: that the trial of your faith::. tried with fire" (<em><a href='B:670 1:6-7'>1Pe 1:6-7</a></em>). A heavy spirit is more likely the result of prolonged spiritual temptation than physical trials, although these were no doubt the cause of the spiritual tests. The fire therefore represents the fire of the flesh, a figure which James also uses regarding the tongue as the epitome of our evil desires (<em><a href='B:660 3:5-6'>Jas 3:5-6</a></em>). Thus <em><a href='B:240 16:27'>Pro 16:27</a></em>: "An unGodly man digs up evil (out of the evil treasure of his heart- or is this the basis of the wasted talent parable?): and (therefore) in his lips there is as a burning fire"; cp. too <em><a href='B:530 7:9'>1Co 7:9</a></em>. It is the constant reaction to spiritual trial that forges an acceptable character, not just the receipt of physical trial, as would be the case if the fire only represented persecution in itself. This trial of faith "works patience"- which must therefore be defined in this context as the ability to grit one's teeth in the moment of temptation, and cling on to one's faith in God's spiritual protection in the power of the word.</p><p>The interpretation of "faith" as faith in the Spirit keeping us from falling (<em><a href='B:720 1:24'>Jud 1:24</a></em>) is confirmed by a closer look at Romans 5; "Not only so, but we glory in tribulations&nbsp;<em>also</em>"- as if he is saying that the "tribulations" had the same effect as "being justified by faith (in forgiveness), we have peace (through forgiveness) with God:::we have access by faith (in forgiveness) into this grace::." (<em><a href='B:520 5:1-2'>Rom 5:1-2</a></em>). So we see the equation: "Tribulations" (<em><a href='B:520 5:3'>Rom 5:3</a></em>)= same effect as having total faith in forgiveness (<em><a href='B:520 5:1-2'>Rom 5:1-2</a></em>)= "the trial of your faith" that God will help you overcome your sin (<em><a href='B:660 1:3'>Jas 1:3</a></em>), i:e. keep you from spiritually falling (<em><a href='B:720 1:24'>Jud 1:24</a></em>). In the language of Romans 5, the "experience" of patiently resisting sin gives birth to hope- confidence and a positive approach, hoping for grace in the last day. The more we overcome the hour by hour niggles of the flesh, the more humbly confident we will be of our eternal future.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:4'>Jas 1:4</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And let patience have its perfect work, so that you may be perfect and entire, lacking in nothing</em>- Such patience results in a "perfect work… perfect and entire, lacking in nothing" (<em><a href='B:660 1:4'>Jas 1:4</a></em>; note the triple emphasis of the same idea) in terms of spiritual development. The word of God has the power to make perfect (<em><a href='B:620 3:16'>2Ti 3:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 13:10'>1Co 13:10</a></em>), and we have seen its place in developing the faith and patience which James says lead us to perfection. The trial of faith leads to the development of these fruits of the Spirit; yet the word also leads to the same fruits (<em><a href='B:500 15:7'>Joh 15:7</a></em> cp. v:4,5). The goals of spiritual development James sets are high- contrast Paul, who frequently laments the realities of the flesh (why the different approach?). Maybe James was alluding to Christ's ultimatum "Be you therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in Heaven is perfect", <em><a href='B:470 5:48'>Mat 5:48</a></em>. The idea of perfection occurs again in <em><a href='B:660 3:2'>Jas 3:2</a></em>, where it applies to the man who does not offend in word, and therefore has his whole life in tight control- again, the result of a mind fully controlled by the word. In the context of sin and forgiveness, Paul's words in Romans 5 take on new meaning: "We glory in (spiritual) tribulations (cp. "Count it all joy::.") also: knowing that (spiritual) tribulation works patience; and patience, experience; and experience, hope: and hope makes not ashamed" (<em><a href='B:520 5:3-5'>Rom 5:3-5</a></em>). "Tribulation" is therefore to be equated with "the (spiritual) trial of your faith" in James 1.</p><p>"That you may be perfect" may seem an unreasonably high target. In <em><a href='B:560 4:13'>Eph 4:13</a></em> Paul says that through the ministry of the Spirit (now in the word) we are on the way to the "perfect man" state; he implies that he too is on that journey ("till we all come"). Yet in <em><a href='B:570 3:12-17'>Phi 3:12-17</a></em> Paul speaks as if whilst he has not yet reached that state, striving for literal perfection is the same thing as being perfect. "Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after::. reaching forth unto those things which are before, I press toward the mark for the prize::. let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded::. be followers together of me" in this example of all out striving for a perfect character. Does this indicate that a state of perfection is theoretically possible for us in this life, through developing a full faith in God's total justification of us on account of our being in Christ? Thus both the word and the blood of Christ sanctify us, seeing that the word reveals and develops faith in Christ's sacrifice (<em><a href='B:500 17:17'>Joh 17:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 10:10-14'>Heb 10:10-14</a></em>). Both blood and water (the word- <em><a href='B:560 5:26'>Eph 5:26</a></em>) came from Christ's side on the cross.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:5'>Jas 1:5</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives to all liberally and without reproaching, and it shall be given him</em>- "Wisdom" is associated with the faith and perfection which James well anticipates his readers would complain they lacked. We have seen that the word is the source of such faith, perfection and endurance; it seems fair to equate wisdom with the word. We will see by and by that James makes frequent reference to Proverbs- and in that book wisdom is almost a synonym for the word, in the local instance the Law of Moses, upon which Proverbs is often a commentary. Again, James anticipates the natural human fear that a totally spiritual God will upbraid us for our lack of spiritual strength; but God's giving of such strength is "liberal", to whoever asks. James evidently interpreted "Ask, and it shall be given you" (<em><a href='B:470 7:7'>Mat 7:7</a></em>) as primarily referring to asking for spiritual strength and knowledge. Similarly ":::how much more shall your Father which is in Heaven give good things ("the Holy Spirit", <em><a href='B:490 11:13'>Luk 11:13</a></em>) to them that ask Him?" (<em><a href='B:470 7:11'>Mat 7:11</a></em>). These passages appear to be alluded to by James here- thus wisdom, the word, the Holy Spirit, good things, "every good gift and perfect gift" (<em><a href='B:660 1:17'>Jas 1:17</a></em>), God's spiritual help to overcome sin, are all equated. These things are further defined in <em><a href='B:660 3:17'>Jas 3:17</a></em> as resulting in peace and harmony. "Reproaching" can imply to taunt, to cast in the teeth. James says that&nbsp;<em>God</em>&nbsp;doesn't do that, implying some others did. No doubt he was referring to the spiritually elitist Judaizers, who would have rejoiced to mock the spiritually immature who humbly sought for spiritual strength to overcome their temptations. God expects us to crawl to Him seeking for such strength to do better. But half the time our love of true spirituality just isn't strong enough to motivate us, and we let our fear of God's holiness and righteousness make us fear His 'upbraiding'.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:6'>Jas 1:6</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But let him ask in faith, never doubting. For he that doubts is like the surge of the sea driven by the wind and tossed-&nbsp;</em>A half hearted 'Dear God please keep me from this sin I think I may well commit soon' is no good. It is easy to conceive of faith as a sense of hope and trust in God in time of physical trial. But far more is it a totality of belief that God will hold us back from sinning as the temptation starts to develop- surely the supreme way of showing faith.</p><h4>There must be a connection with the later description of a controlled tongue being the force that overcomes fierce winds (<em><a href='B:660 3:2-4'>Jas 3:2-4</a></em>). Words being a reflection of the mind (<em><a href='B:470 12:34'>Mat 12:34</a></em>), controlled words show a controlled mind, which is through the influence of the word. Such a man is a "perfect man" (<em><a href='B:660 3:2'>Jas 3:2</a></em>)- i:e. matured by the word (<em><a href='B:620 3:16-17'>2Ti 3:16-17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 13:10'>1Co 13:10</a></em>). Thus the only way to ask for spiritual strength is if the mind is firmly controlled by the word, which thus generates an upwards spiritual spiral- "unto every one that hath (of spiritual strength) shall (more) be given::. but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath" (<em><a href='B:470 25:29'>Mat 25:29</a></em>). This parable of the talents must refer to spiritual knowledge and strength, and the need we have to develop (trade) the spiritual gifts we have been given. Notice how we are given the talents/ gifts of spirituality, totally at the discretion of the Master. In a similar way, the gift of wisdom in <em><a href='B:660 1:5'>Jas 1:5</a></em> equates with the "good and perfect gift::. from the Father::. the word of truth" of <em><a href='B:660 1:17-18'>Jas 1:17-18</a></em> and the wisdom that descends from above that is pureness, peace, gentleness, mercy etc. in <em><a href='B:660 3:17'>Jas 3:17</a></em>.</h4><p>"Doubts" comes from a root meaning 'division', giving the idea of inner debate. We will see that time and again James is warning us against having a semi-spirituality, whereby only part of our mind is totally influenced by the word, whilst other parts still retain the thinking of the flesh:&nbsp; James being so shot through with allusions to the Gospels, it is tempting to think that James is as it were taking a snapshot of Peter, wavering both in his physical movement and in faith as he stood on the water. Jesus did not upbraid Peter (cp. <em><a href='B:660 1:5'>Jas 1:5</a></em>) for his request for strength and support, but was eager to satisfy it. There is also a possible connection with <em><a href='B:560 4:13-14'>Eph 4:13-14</a></em>, which says that the miraculous Spirit gifts were to be possessed&nbsp;<em>until</em>&nbsp;the church reached the "perfect man" state, i:e. when the canon was completed (<em><a href='B:530 13:8-10'>1Co 13:8-10</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:620 3:16-17'>2Ti 3:16-17</a></em>), and that through being in that state they would "henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine::. and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive". The primary reference is doubtless to the doctrine of the Judaizers. This would liken the brother in James 1 whose faith in the Lord's protection from temptation is weak, to the brother in Ephesians 4 who will not make full use of the word to remain in the "perfect man" state, and is therefore liable to be influenced by false teaching. Both brethren are weak for the same reason- not making full use of the Spirit's gift in the word. <em><a href='B:560 4:13-14'>Eph 4:13-14</a></em> implies that firmly grasping the basic doctrines of the one faith results in us not being blown about by winds. This connection with James teaches that true doctrine will have a very practical effect upon our lives; in this case, by developing a firm faith.</p><p>It's significant and instructive that the other leaders of the early church not only accept Peter's authority, but do so exactly because of how he had dealt with his weaknesses and failures. It's as if they see in his humanity a reason to elevate him in their own estimations. Thus Peter’s wavering when walking on the water is picked up by James, in one of the earliest of the New Testament letters note the allusions to Stephen, John the Baptist, the references to Christians as still meeting in the synagogue, etc:- it has been argued by John Robinson that James was in fact the first of the epistles. It seems that the “scattered abroad” audience of <em><a href='B:660 1:1'>Jas 1:1</a></em> refers to the scattering abroad of the Jewish believers in <em><a href='B:510 8:1'>Act 8:1</a></em>. James warns that we shouldn’t waver in faith, like a wave on the water, blown and tossed around by the wind (<em><a href='B:660 1:6'>Jas 1:6</a></em>). James of course had seen Peter wavering on the water; and he holds up Peter, who at that time was the senior elder of the very early church, as an example of how<em>&nbsp;not</em>&nbsp;to be. My point is that the greatness of Peter was in his example of failure and how he overcame it.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:7'>Jas 1:7</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Do not let that man think that he shall receive anything from the Lord</em>- James constantly sets before us the need to strive for a "perfect" (complete, mature) man state, through having a mind wholly committed to the word. His black and white, "hot or cold" approach is now powerfully shown: "Let not that man (the waverer) think that he shall receive anything of the Lord" (<em><a href='B:660 1:7'>Jas 1:7</a></em>). This squashes the natural human reasoning that a bit of faith in prayer will lead to a bit of response from God. Faith is an absolute state. We either pray in faith- or with what are effectively empty words. But of course by contrast, if we do not waver, we certainly shall receive of the Lord. Again, there is another warning against semi-spirituality: having faith within certain limits, being content with expecting a small answer to our requests in accordance with our shaky faith. The way James understands human nature shines through, and it is fitting that someone of his experience and insight into the moment by moment ways of the flesh should have been the great leader of the early church. He too must have analysed his sins and temptations like we also can do. The correlation between his being such a senior brother and his evident appreciation of the wiles of the flesh must be significant; something to think about at the next ecclesial election?</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:8'>Jas 1:8</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:470 14:31'>Mat 14:31</a></em>.</p><p><em>He is a doubleminded man, unstable in all his ways</em>- The theme of semi-spirituality continues: "A double minded man is unstable in all his ways"- i:e. all his spiritual ways. "Ways" is often used in a spiritual context in Proverbs, to which James alludes so much. The more evident allusion here is to <em><a href='B:470 6:24'>Mat 6:24</a></em>: "No man can serve two masters: for he will hate the one, and love the other. You cannot serve God and mammon". James inspired interpretation of Matthew would make this apply to our minds. One can quite easily serve two masters physically, externally; as every self-examining Christian should be all too aware. It is only in our heart that we can only serve one master. "Mammon" in the James context is thus not just material goods, but more importantly the lack of a totally spiritual mind which is behind these things. Note again the 'all or nothing' approach. While surely every reader of these words finds this somewhat worrying, tempting to conclude that this exposition is so idealistic as to be out of touch with reality, it does us no harm to reflect that ultimately in God's sight things are in black and white. As we read these words we are either in black or white with God. The ideal standard is set by Christ speaking of taking up the cross daily and following him. "To me to live is Christ, and to die is gain" Paul could say. If our conscience is tuned according to the word, we should be able to sense whether we are "double minded::. wavering" or with that totality of commitment to the word in our heart, even if sometimes we falter. Considering these things should make us all recognize that spiritually we are but candles in the wind, desperately needing to make every effort to resist the winds of the flesh, and seek the shelter of Christ and His word of grace which keeps us from falling. "Double minded" means literally 'two souled', showing that the soul can refer also to the spiritual side of man, as well as the carnal. Notice how in the context James is talking about the mind being split into carnal and semi-spiritual divisions. The 'souls' referred to in the phrase 'double minded' would therefore be referring to attitudes of mind.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:9'>Jas 1:9</a></em><em>&nbsp;Let the lowly brother glory in his exaltation</em>-The riches which exalt the poor brother are the spiritual riches contained in the word (<em><a href='B:230 119:14'>Psa 119:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:240 3:16'>Pro 3:16</a></em> etc:). A poor brother being exalted recalls the parable about taking the lowest seat in the ecclesia so we may rise up higher at the judgement. Yet James uses the present tense- "he<em>&nbsp;is&nbsp;</em>exalted". This is one of many examples of believers being spoken of as if in prospect they are already in the Kingdom, in the same way as Israel were constituted the Kingdom of God at Sinai after their Red Sea baptism, but were not fully manifested as such politically until their entry into Canaan. Thus "The rich:::&nbsp;<em>is</em>(present tense) made low (i:e. told to take the lower seat, as he will at judgement)::. he&nbsp;<em>shall&nbsp;</em>(future) pass away" (v:10). However, this may have had a primary reference to the rich Jews of the first century being stripped of their wealth in some parts of the empire. Note that <em><a href='B:650 10:34'>Heb 10:34</a></em> was also written to the scattered, persecuted Christian Jews whom James was addressing: "Ye::. took joyfully the spoiling of your goods". If James is alluding to the parable of the wedding feast, then the reference to the poor brethren being given an honoured seating place in God's sight in this life, would have telling reference to the practice of the rich Christian Jews having their own honoured seats in the ecclesias to whom James was writing (<em><a href='B:660 2:3'>Jas 2:3</a></em>). This command to "rejoice" is in the context of v:2 speaking about rejoicing in spiritual trial. For the low brother who was to be exalted, the very thought of such greatness in the Kingdom could be a temptation to pride- and he should rejoice in the chance to fight this. '<em>Let</em>&nbsp;him rejoice' shows that the kind of joy James is thinking of would not come naturally, as it would if the brother was just thinking of his exaltation in this life.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:10'>Jas 1:10</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But the rich in his humiliation, because as a flower of the field he will pass away-&nbsp;</em><em><a href='B:670 1:24-25'>1Pe 1:24-25</a></em> has a similar passage: "All flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withers, and the flower thereof falls away: But the word of the Lord endures for ever". The fading grass is contrasted by Peter to the enduring Word of God, and this is repeated by James. The humble brother taking the lowest seat in the ecclesia (cp. the more spiritual members being told in <em><a href='B:660 2:3'>Jas 2:3</a></em> "sit here under my footstool::. you stand there" because all the chairs were taken by the rich) is connected with the one who asks the wisdom from God (v:5), who is not wavering or double minded, and who through the word is attaining to the perfect man state (v:4). Thus the poor in this world are rich in the faith that comes by hearing the word of God.</p><p>The figure of fading grass suggests reference back to <em><a href='B:290 40:5-8'>Isa 40:5-8</a></em>: "The glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together::. The voice said, Cry. And he said, What shall I cry? All flesh is grass, and all the goodliness thereof is as the flower of the field: the grass withers, the flower fades::. surely the people is grass::. but the word of our God shall stand for ever". The "glory of the Lord" being revealed primarily refers to Christ's manifestation to Israel at his first coming. The preceding verses 3 and 4 describe John's preparatory work: "The voice of him that cries in the wilderness::.". "All flesh" were to see the revelation of God's glory in Christ. This "all flesh" can refer to the Jews, "all" of whom went out into the wilderness to hear John's testimony regarding the coming Christ. This is confirmed by v:7 "The (Jewish) people is grass". The "goodliness thereof is as the flower of the field" would then be a reference to the Jewish law, which was "holy, just and good" but offered a fading glory, which Paul in <em><a href='B:540 3:7-18'>2Co 3:7-18</a></em> said epitomized the Law. The word of the Lord (v:5) and "the spirit of the Lord" (v:7) were to make the grass wither and pass away, although the word would remain. This pointed forward to the ending of the Jewish system and Law through the work of Christ, "the word made flesh", "the Lord the Spirit" (<em><a href='B:540 3:18'>2Co 3:18</a></em> R:V:), and the ministry of the word remaining. James seems to have this background in mind when he makes the allusion in <em><a href='B:660 1:9-11'>Jas 1:9-11</a></em> to Isaiah 40. The rich Christian Jews of the first century who were not that humble to the power of the word may well also have been swayed by Judaist arguments. They are being likened to the "grass" of Isaiah 40, which represented the Jewish system which was to be replaced by a permanent, unfading system based on the word. The Messianic <em><a href='B:230 102:4'>Psa 102:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 102:11'>Psa 102:11</a></em> describes our Lord as being "withered like grass", showing how in his life and death on the cross he took upon himself the punishment of apostate Israel. James is neatly exhorting them to commit themselves wholly to the word, lest the demise of the Jewish system should result in their fading away too. Yet there is also the very primary application to the materialism of this group, being obsessed by their earthly riches.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:11'>Jas 1:11</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For the sun rises with the scorching wind and withers the grass, and the flower of it falls and the beauty of its appearance perishes. So also shall the rich man fade away in his business-&nbsp;</em>This is an obvious allusion to the person who received the word and quickly "sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth", referring to the person who falls away due to temptation (<em><a href='B:470 13:5'>Mat 13:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 13:20-21'>Mat 13:20-21</a></em>). The rich members of the ecclesia had therefore only let the word enter them skin-deep; it had not penetrated far through the "earth" of the flesh. The rising of the sun can refer both to Christ's coming (<em><a href='B:460 4:2'>Mal 4:2</a></em>) and also to trials. In a sense both these meanings were fulfilled in AD70, when the rich Jews converted just prior to AD70 fell away, having endured only "for a while". The call to let God's word fully penetrate our flesh goes out to us with great urgency, living as we do on the brink of the final period of trial, and the full coming of Christ.</p><p>"So also shall the rich man fade away in his business". "Business" is elsewhere translated "journeyings", and would connect with the reference to the itinerant Jewish traders in <em><a href='B:660 4:13'>Jas 4:13</a></em>: "You (amongst the believers) that say, Today or tomorrow we will go into such a city, and continue there a year, and buy and sell, and get gain".</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:12'>Jas 1:12</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Blessed is the man that endures temptation. For when he has been approved, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord has promised to them that love him</em>&nbsp;- Now James is giving us supreme encouragement in those moments when the decision between flesh and spirit looms large. When we endure spiritual temptation, hanging on to the spiritual side of our minds, we will at that moment receive a crown for overcoming in Heaven. Because of this, we will be given the crown of victory at the judgement (<em><a href='B:620 4:8'>2Ti 4:8</a></em>), which has been developed as a result of our moment by moment spiritual victories in this life. Therefore each temptation we face is like a mini-judgment seat. This idea of there being some recognition in heaven the moment we achieve a spiritual victory is perhaps based on <em><a href='B:470 5:11-12'>Mat 5:11-12</a></em>. So much of James is rooted especially in the Sermon on the mount. "Blessed are you, when men shall revile you:::rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great<em>&nbsp;is</em>&nbsp;(present tense) your reward in Heaven". Our eternal life "is hid with Christ in God. When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall you also appear with him in glory" (<em><a href='B:580 3:3-4'>Col 3:3-4</a></em>) Similarly <em><a href='B:730 3:11'>Rev 3:11</a></em> implies we do now have the crown in a sense: "Hold fast that thou hast (your reward you have in prospect?) that no man take thy crown". Through our trials, God "scourges every son whom he receives", and therefore we can be spoken of in the continuous tense as "receiving a Kingdom" through our continued correct response to trials (<em><a href='B:650 12:6'>Heb 12:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 12:28'>Heb 12:28</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:13'>Jas 1:13</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Let no one say when he is tempted: I am tempted by God. For God cannot be tempted with evil, and He tempts no one</em>- In those moments of spiritual temptation it is easy to recognize that the situation creating the temptation has clearly been arranged by God, and therefore to get bitter against Him. Now the earlier definition of 'temptation' as the spiritual temptation to sin which arises within us becomes vital. God may put the physical temptation in our way- e:g. the serpent in Eden, God tempting Abraham in <em><a href='B:10 22:1'>Gen 22:1</a></em> - but our evil desires or "lusts" in our minds (v:14) are alone responsible for our sinning, due to wrongly responding to these physical temptations. Thus God could therefore examine the inner thought process of David's mind to reveal whether he was giving way to the spiritual temptations that would be developed by the physical trials: "Examine me, O Lord, and prove (same word as "tempt" in <em><a href='B:10 22:1'>Gen 22:1</a></em>) me; try my reins and my heart" (<em><a href='B:230 26:2'>Psa 26:2</a></em>). Thus "Every man is tempted, when he is drawn away" (v:14).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:14'>Jas 1:14</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But each man is tempted, when he is dragged away by his own lust and enticed</em>- See on :13. It could be that James is arguing against the popular view that temptation is due to the overpowering swamping of a person by a cosmic satan. Instead, we are to understand temptation as coming from our “<em>own</em>&nbsp;lust”, internally. We can take ownership and control over the source of temptation, which is within us. We are not merely puppets of some external cosmic forces. Those internal lusts are personified here as a women enticing and then dragging away her male victim. Proverbs uses similar metaphor, appealing for the “young man” to be wise and to resist her. The Judaist false teachers are described with the same word for “enticed” (<em><a href='B:680 2:14'>2Pe 2:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:680 2:18'>2Pe 2:18</a></em>). The essence of the enticement was an appeal to the flesh, to the internal mechanism of temptation within each person.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:15'>Jas 1:15</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Then the lust, when it has conceived, carries sin; and the sin, when it is fully grown, brings death- The</em>&nbsp;lusts inside our mind are being likened to an attractive woman enticing us. Thus the instinct to illicit sexual attraction within us is seen as a type of all wrong attraction to sins of any kind. It is a repeated New Testament theme that the punishment for sin is some kind of burning by fire. To the Old Testament mind, this image of being burnt at judgment day would have connected with the command to burn a whore (<em><a href='B:30 21:9'>Lev 21:9</a></em>); thus all types of sin are to be seen as prostitution against God. The same process in sexual attraction of a wrong thought taking root, constantly preying on the spiritual mind, resulting in our allowing it to grow under the excuse that we are still in control, eventually bringing forth gross sin, is repeated time and again as we are faced with the spiritual temptations of life every hour. The same figure occurs in <em><a href='B:40 15:39'>Num 15:39</a></em> speaking of 'going a whoring' "after your own heart and your own eyes", as if our natural mind is a whore.</p><h4>Our carnal mind being likened to a whore or glamorous woman is a strong theme of Proverbs. The important thing to note is that Proverbs emphasizes that it is obedience to the word which will keep us from the lusts which the woman represents. "The lips of a strange woman drop as an honeycomb, and her mouth is smoother than oil::. hear me now therefore (says the wisdom / word), O you children, and depart not from the words of my mouth. Remove your way far from her" (by listening to wisdom's words); <em><a href='B:240 5:3'>Pro 5:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:240 5:7-8'>Pro 5:7-8</a></em>. "For the commandment is a lamp; and the law is light::. to keep you from the evil woman, from the flattery of the tongue of a strange woman" (<em><a href='B:240 6:23-24'>Pro 6:23-24</a></em>). <em><a href='B:240 7:1-5'>Pro 7:1-5</a></em> is an even stronger emphasis: "Keep my words, and lay up my commandments::. keep my commandments::. My Law::. that they may keep you from the strange woman, from the stranger which flatters with her words". The woman was "subtle of heart" (v:10), recalling the serpent, and had a guise of spirituality: "I have peace offerings with me; this day have I payed my vows" (v:14). She reasons that "the goodman is not at home, he is gone on a long journey: he has taken a bag of money with him, and will come home at the day appointed" (v:19,20). This is almost certainly the basis of the Lord's parable of the talents, revealing that the reasoning of the one talent man was that since the Lord was not physically around, he need not develop. Thus that man does not represent just the lethargic Christian; but the man who consciously indulges in sin because he cannot feel the Lord's presence. "The goodman" is further equated with the Lord in <em><a href='B:470 20:11'>Mat 20:11</a></em>. Notice the emphasis in the three Proverbs passages mentioned on the words of the woman being her means of attraction. <em><a href='B:240 7:21'>Pro 7:21</a></em> is explicit: "With her much fair speech (cp. the serpent again, and <em><a href='B:540 11:3'>2Co 11:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 16:18'>Rom 16:18</a></em>, which connect the fair speaking, the whore, the serpent and the Judaizers) she caused him to yield". Words are a reflection of the mind (<em><a href='B:470 12:34'>Mat 12:34</a></em>), again indicating that the woman represented an epitome of fleshly thinking. The parable of the prodigal son is clearly meant to show the path which we all take whenever we sin. The women upon whom he wasted his (spiritual) substance represent our giving way to sin in its various forms (<em><a href='B:490 15:13'>Luk 15:13</a></em>).</h4>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:16'>Jas 1:16</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Be not deceived, my beloved brothers</em>- See on :15. This suggests there was some kind of ‘deception’ circling around which the readership needed to be aware of. And surely it refers to the Judaist false teaching and the “evil woman” of the temple cult plaguing the Jewish converts to whom James is writing. The same word is used of “them that seduce you”, again in a Judaist context (see on <em><a href='B:690 2:26'>1Jn 2:26</a></em>). So often there is the appeal by Paul and Peter to not be deceived, to resist the seduction of the Judaists. This was a major problem in the early Jewish churches. And James gives an interesting window onto that seduction, by portraying it was actually appealing to the flesh. The idea of ritualistic obedience, thereby freeing us up to act how we like in other areas, is terribly appealing. It explains why religion&nbsp;<em>per se</em>&nbsp;is so popular. But true Jesus-based spirituality is not like that.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:17'>Jas 1:17</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom can be no variation nor shifting shadow</em>- Again, James warns us not to err in thinking that God is leading us into sin by stressing that "every good gift and every perfect gift (gift of perfection) is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights" (v:17). The gift that leads to perfection is that of the Holy Spirit working in our hearts to bring us towards the maturity of Christ. This coming down of the "good gift" (cp. "the good word of God", <em><a href='B:650 6:5'>Heb 6:5</a></em>) is parallel with the gift of wisdom in v:5, which gift is further expanded in <em><a href='B:660 3:15-17'>Jas 3:15-17</a></em>: "The wisdom that is from above is first pure (cp. "the words of the Lord are pure"; "Your word is very pure", <em><a href='B:230 12:6'>Psa 12:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 119:140'>Psa 119:140</a></em>), then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits". Thus the effect of asking for wisdom (<em><a href='B:660 1:5'>Jas 1:5</a></em>) is to be liberally given the gift of responding to the word so that it cultivates a fullness of spiritual fruit in us (<em><a href='B:660 1:17'>Jas 1:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 3:17'>Jas 3:17</a></em>). The gift of wisdom produces a fullness ("full of::.") of characteristics which recall the moral characteristics of God's Name as declared to Moses: "Merciful and gracious, longsuffering and abundant (cp. "full of good fruits") in goodness and truth, keeping mercy::." (<em><a href='B:20 34:6-7'>Exo 34:6-7</a></em>). The R:V. describes Yahweh as a God "full of" these things. Thus the Spirit through developing those characteristics in us leads to God's Name being upon us and God being manifested to us.</p><p>The gift of the Spirit "comes down from the Father". 'Coming down' is the language of God manifestation- e:g. God "came down" upon Mount Sinai in a mighty theophany; Jesus "came down from Heaven"; God "came down" to destroy Sodom and Babel. It is through the word 'coming down' into our hearts that we are able to manifest God. Thus <em><a href='B:500 3:5'>Joh 3:5</a></em> speaks of being born again (lit. 'from above') by the Spirit. &nbsp;</p><p>"The Father of lights" means that the light within us is from God, by His direct gift. Another connection in this context starts in <em><a href='B:690 1:5'>1Jn 1:5</a></em>: "This then is the message (word) which we have heard of Him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in Him is no darkness at all". The prologue of John's Gospel is closely linked to that of his epistles. The parallel to <em><a href='B:690 1:5'>1Jn 1:5</a></em> is <em><a href='B:500 1:4'>Joh 1:4</a></em> "In him (the word) was life, and the life was the light of men". Thus the Father of lights is the source of the logos-word, which is the gift that can be given to us in our hearts.</p><p>James again puts his finger on the feelings we have in those moments of weakness- there is "no variableness, nor shifting shadow" in the amount of spiritual strength He gives. It is tempting to think that the power of the Spirit does vary, and therefore God’s involvement somehow waxes and wanes in our lives, and this affects the likelihood of us overcoming sin. But this is not the case. There is no variableness from His side; any such sensation is solely our fault. There is a subconscious element of doubt within us as to the stability of God; and we need to recognize that and realize that we are wrong and it is we who move from Him and not He from us:<br/>- In <em><a href='B:40 23:19'>Num 23:19</a></em> Balaam assures Balak that God will not suddenly give him a different prophetic word after the one he had just given, and that the prophecy he had just given would be surely fulfilled: "God is not a man, that He should lie; neither the Son of man, that He should repent: has He said, and shall He not do it? Or has He spoken, and shall He not make it good?".<br/>- Later Saul thought that the word of God was variable, in that he doubted whether the command to totally destroy the Amalekites still stood. Samuel rebuked him for not "obeying the voice of the Lord::. the Strength of Israel will&nbsp;<em>not</em>&nbsp;lie nor repent: for He is not a man, that He should repent" (<em><a href='B:90 15:22'>1Sa 15:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:90 15:29'>1Sa 15:29</a></em>).<br/>- <em><a href='B:460 3:6'>Mal 3:6</a></em> "I am the Lord, I change not; therefore you sons of Jacob are not consumed"- because of the eternal covenant of grace which God made with Israel.<br/>- <em><a href='B:630 1:2-3'>Tit 1:2-3</a></em>: "In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised::. in::. His word through preaching". &nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:18'>Jas 1:18</a></em> will- see on <em><a href='B:220 22:27-28'>Job 22:27-28</a></em>.</p><p><em>Of His own will He gave us birth by the word of truth-&nbsp;</em>According to John 17, our unity will convert the world. The Gospel is a message of reconciliation with God which overflows into reconciliation between each other, according to Ephesians. The church is a foretaste, an advertisement, of what the future Kingdom will be like (<em><a href='B:660 1:18'>Jas 1:18</a></em>).</p><p>In contrast to the process of conceiving sin explained in v:14,15, "Of His own will&nbsp; He gave us birth by the word of Truth" (v:18). The child of God is born "Not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God" (<em><a href='B:500 1:13'>Joh 1:13</a></em>)- i:e. of the will of God. The act of intercourse which leads to human conception is the ultimate and strongest expression of the fleshly will of man. The same immense drive and will is possessed by God, who channels it through His word and Spirit to result in the conception of spiritual people. What&nbsp;<em>tremendous</em>&nbsp;power there is therefore in that word Note the comparison: "Of his own lust::. of His own will::. the word" (v:14,18).</p><p>"Being born again, not of corruptible (human) seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God" (<em><a href='B:670 1:23'>1Pe 1:23</a></em>). <em><a href='B:500 3:3'>Joh 3:3</a></em> says that the new birth comes from above- <em><a href='B:660 1:17'>Jas 1:17</a></em> describes the good and perfect gift of the word as being "from above". Notice that the word of God is connected with the will of God. Perhaps our faith in our prayers is militated against by our resigned 'If it be Your will' being so liberally sprinkled in them. Generally the Biblical examples of prayer- which presumably guide our approach- are conspicuous by their omitting of 'If it be Your will:::'. They seem to request things in total faith- and normally receive them. Even Paul in recounting his experience of having three prayers go unanswered (<em><a href='B:540 12:8'>2Co 12:8</a></em>) does not make any specific comment about the will of God. If we have the word of God in our minds and guiding our prayers, then we will be praying according to the will of God, "in the Holy Spirit". <em><a href='B:500 15:7'>Joh 15:7</a></em> is explicit: "If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, you shall ask what&nbsp;<em>you</em>&nbsp;will, and it shall be done unto you". Jesus doesn't say that our prayers will be answered according to<em>&nbsp;God's&nbsp;</em>will, but according to our own will. This is because the word guiding our thoughts results in our will becoming identical with that of God, in so far as it is guided by the word. Again, an ideal is being suggested to us- a wholly spiritual mind filled with the word will result in a far more powerful prayer life. It is by birth of the word, therefore, that we become a son of God, part of the Divine family; and Jesus said "Whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in Heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother" (<em><a href='B:470 12:50'>Mat 12:50</a></em>)- thus equating the will of God and the word. Similarly <em><a href='B:500 7:17'>Joh 7:17</a></em> "If any man will do His will, he shall know of the doctrine" (in the word). Even more fundamentally, the covenant name of God is 'I will be who I will be' (<em><a href='B:20 3:14'>Exo 3:14</a></em> R:V:mg)- and God executes the will that is intrinsic in His very Name through His word. &nbsp;</p><p><em>That we should be a kind of firstfruits of His creations</em>- We are living the eternal life, the Kingdom life, right now- if we have the Spirit living within us. We are already part of a new creation by the Spirit, which is a foretaste of the new order / creation which is to come. We can have the firstfruits of that state now in our minds, which if they are spiritual are the only part of our bodies which are experiencing the Kingdom life now, albeit in a limited form. An alternative approach to this verse is to view the "creatures" as the whole multitude of the redeemed, of which the present believers are only "the firstfruits". In this case, all the faithful who have been influenced acceptably by "the word of truth" are only a small foretaste of the many who will be so converted at the Lord’s coming.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:19'>Jas 1:19</a></em>&nbsp;<em>You know this, my beloved brothers But let every man be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger</em>- If we are truly born by the word then we will swift to hear it, as Jesus was of quick understanding in the word (<em><a href='B:290 11:3'>Isa 11:3</a></em>). We will share His aptitude for it, and we will be slow to speak anything else. The great danger is to be hearers and not doers of the word (<em><a href='B:660 1:22'>Jas 1:22</a></em>), but James implies that the antidote to this is to reflect upon the very nature of the word which gave us spiritual birth.</p><p>Because of the glorious power of the word of the Gospel as outlined in the previous verses, we should be quick to hear that powerful word. The idea of running swiftly in eager response to the word is quite a common Biblical idiom (<em><a href='B:600 3:1'>2Th 3:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 119:32'>Psa 119:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 119:60'>Psa 119:60</a></em>; <em><a href='B:420 2:2'>Hab 2:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:370 8:11-12'>Amo 8:11-12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:340 12:4'>Dan 12:4</a></em>). Inevitably some practical examination of our eagerness of response to the word has to be made. How frequently do we rise up from our readings with an eager resolve to do something practical, to make some subtle change in our character? How often do our minds burn and race within us as we chase connections and themes through Scripture (cp. <em><a href='B:490 24:32'>Luk 24:32</a></em>) and God's word falls open to us? Or are we content to dash through our Bible readings on the way to work, or leave them to the dog end of the day? God and the Angels no doubt look eagerly to those parts of the day when we read the word as their opportunity to guide and teach us, to strengthen us against the flesh. What a despite to them if our minds are somewhere else as we read- if we bother doing any Bible readings at all that day. The practical effects of swiftly hearing this powerful word are to make us "slow to speak, slow to wrath". Along with many other examples in James, this definitely alludes to the Proverbs- in this case <em><a href='B:240 10:19'>Pro 10:19</a></em> and <em><a href='B:240 17:27'>Pro 17:27</a></em> for "slow to speak", and <em><a href='B:240 14:29'>Pro 14:29</a></em> for "slow to wrath". The context in these passages is that "instruction::. reproof (<em><a href='B:240 10:17'>Pro 10:17</a></em>)::. knowledge::. understanding (<em><a href='B:240 17:27'>Pro 17:27</a></em>) :::understanding" (<em><a href='B:240 14:29'>Pro 14:29</a></em>) lead to the control of speech and wrath. All these things are true concerning the word- the ultimate source of reproof (<em><a href='B:620 3:16-17'>2Ti 3:16-17</a></em>) and understanding. This is exactly the context of James 1 - by being "swift to hear" the spiritual strength which is in the word, we find the strength in practical terms to be "slow to speak, slow to wrath". It may be that James is alluding to Moses being "slow of speech, and of a slow tongue"- i:e. rather quiet, unsure of his words. Hence God reassured him: "I will teach thee what thou shalt say" (<em><a href='B:20 4:10-12'>Exo 4:10-12</a></em>). This would be specially relevant to James' persecuted Jewish readership; telling them to 'be like Moses' in his quiet speaking. And remember that James is writing to Jews, for whom Moses was an unattainable saint. But they are asked here to actually be like him.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:20'>Jas 1:20</a></em><em>&nbsp;For the anger of man does not work the righteousness of God</em>-The implication is that the word making us "slow to anger"<em>&nbsp;does&nbsp;</em>work the righteousness of God- i:e. the word works or develops the righteous attributes of God within us, e:g. being "slow to anger". This is a specific characteristic of God's Name (<em><a href='B:230 103:8'>Psa 103:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 145:8'>Psa 145:8</a></em>); thus the word gives us God's Name. In a similar way, the spiritual trial of our faith "<em>worketh</em>&nbsp;patience" (<em><a href='B:660 1:3'>Jas 1:3</a></em>)- another aspect of "the righteousness of God". In this case, we see that the word has the same effect upon us as trials. Our present tribulation "<em>works</em>&nbsp;for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory" (<em><a href='B:540 4:17'>2Co 4:17</a></em>). <em><a href='B:690 2:29'>1Jn 2:29</a></em> is also relevant- "every one that does righteousness is born of God", which James and John say is by the Spirit. Thus the word and Spirit of God acting on a man "works::. the righteousness of God". There are so many allusions in James to the Sermon on the mount that the mention of the righteousness of God probably links with the only time Jesus mentioned this, in <em><a href='B:470 6:31-33'>Mat 6:31-33</a></em>: "Take no thought, saying, What shall we eat::. but seek &nbsp;first the Kingdom of God, and His righteousness". Thus seeking God's righteousness is contrasted with over-concern about food. In the wilderness Jesus made the contrast between not living by bread alone, but by every word of God. Thus living by the word of God is associated with seeking the righteousness of God. It is also stressed that we only receive ('work') the righteousness of God by faith (<em><a href='B:520 3:22'>Rom 3:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 10:3-6'>Rom 10:3-6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:570 3:9'>Phi 3:9</a></em>)- which comes from the word (<em><a href='B:520 10:17'>Rom 10:17</a></em> - which is in the context of a whole chapter showing that righteousness comes by faith).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:21'>Jas 1:21</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:490 8:11'>Luk 8:11</a></em>.<br/><em>Wherefore put away all filthiness and rampant wickedness, and receive with meekness the implanted word which is able to save your souls</em>- The word of the gospel is “implanted”. It’s not that we come to it by a process of correct intellectual study. As Paul points out in Romans, our calling is a matter of grace and even predestination. The call operates through the word, but that word is implanted in human hearts. God operates directly on human hearts. But it all depends how we “receive” that implanted word. Receiving the word so that it makes us "slow to speak, slow to wrath" is helped by laying apart "filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness". The Greek phrase translated "lay apart" is elsewhere used always concerning forsaking the practical, specific characteristics of the flesh (<em><a href='B:650 12:1'>Heb 12:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 2:1'>1Pe 2:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 4:25'>Eph 4:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 13:12'>Rom 13:12</a></em>). We have seen so far that James is emphasizing that it is through the new birth from the word that this can be achieved. <em><a href='B:670 2:1'>1Pe 2:1</a></em> also tells us to lay aside fleshly characteristics by being "newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word" (v:2). Similarly <em><a href='B:560 4:23-25'>Eph 4:23-25</a></em>: "Be renewed in the spirit of your mind::. put on the new man (created by the word)::. putting away lying" (etc). <em><a href='B:520 13:12-13'>Rom 13:12-13</a></em> gives us the greatest motivation to make this effort to so apply the word: "The night is far spent, the day (of the Kingdom) is at hand; let us therefore cast off (same word "lay apart") the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light. Let us walk honestly, as (if we are) in the day" of the Kingdom. Thus we can therefore live now to some degree as we will in the Kingdom- by using the word to cast off the flesh and put on spiritual attributes, resulting in us walking (living in our day to day lives) as if we are in "the day" of the Kingdom.</p><p>The word acting on our minds should help us lay apart all "superfluity of naughtiness". "Superfluity" is from the same word translated "abundance" in <em><a href='B:470 12:34'>Mat 12:34</a></em> "Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh". It must have occurred to us all at some time that the command to bring "into captivity&nbsp;<em>every</em>&nbsp;thought to the obedience of Christ" (<em><a href='B:540 10:5'>2Co 10:5</a></em>) seems impossible to achieve. There are so many thoughts which are necessary in our secular lives, they cannot all be brought around to Christ. However, the word "abundance" means 'that which is over and above the necessary'. The point of bringing our thoughts to Christ is so that our words will be Christ-like, and as our thoughts lead to our words, we must control them. The context of <em><a href='B:540 10:5'>2Co 10:5</a></em> is Paul justifying the apparently hard words he was having to use to the Corinthians- he assured them that in practice he was bringing all his thoughts captive to Christ, therefore his words were not the outpouring of unspiritual bitterness. Thus only those thoughts which are "of the&nbsp;<em>abundance</em>" of the heart (the mind) control our words; those thoughts which are over and above our necessary ones. James is saying that this "abundance" or "superfluity" of wrong thinking ("naughtiness") can be displaced by the word.</p><p>The Greek for 'implanted' means more literally 'something placed inside you which springs up'. This must have some reference to the sower parable- "The seed is the word", and if we are to receive the word meekly, James must be likening us to the ground of the parable- in this case, 'meek' ground. Are we meek to the word- 'quiet, mild', as 'meek' implies? It is so true that a settled, quiet mind is vital if we are to let the word really act on us. There may also be a reference back to Romans 11, where Paul reasons that the Gentiles had been grafted into the Israelitish olive tree. Having a Jewish readership, James is maybe gently hinting that&nbsp;<em>all</em>&nbsp;men, including Jews, need the word grafted into them.</p><h4>We have spoken in general terms about "the word" being the power of righteousness, which comes down from above and germinates spiritual life within us. This verse 21 gives us some hints as to a more precise definition. We have noted the clear allusion to the parable of the sower- the "engrafted"/ implanted word-seed. "The word of truth" of v:18 "begat" us, which the almost parallel passage in <em><a href='B:670 1:23'>1Pe 1:23</a></em> says is the seed-word of God. The word in the parable of the sower is defined as "the word of the Kingdom" (<em><a href='B:470 13:19'>Mat 13:19</a></em>)- i:e. the Gospel of the Kingdom. The sower parable shows the response of various people to the Gospel which they&nbsp;<em>initially hear</em>. <em><a href='B:660 1:21'>Jas 1:21</a></em> continues by saying that this word is "able to save your souls". This recalls a number of passages which say that it is the message of the basic Gospel which saves our souls:</h4><p>"To you is the word of this salvation sent" (<em><a href='B:510 13:26'>Act 13:26</a></em>).<br/>"The Gospel of Christ::. is the power of God unto salvation" (<em><a href='B:520 1:16'>Rom 1:16</a></em>)<br/>"I declare unto you the Gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received (cp. "receive with meekness the engrafted word")::. by which also ye are saved; if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you" (<em><a href='B:530 15:1-2'>1Co 15:1-2</a></em>); this Gospel which would save them was centred around the basic truths of the resurrection and second coming of Christ which Paul goes on to reiterate in 1 Corinthians 15. There really&nbsp;<em>is</em>&nbsp;power in them, to save our souls.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:22'>Jas 1:22</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But be doers of the word and not hearers only, deluding your selves</em>- This plainly states how easy it is to hear the word, and&nbsp;<em>deceive</em>&nbsp;ourselves into thinking that this very process justifies us. But if we are not doers of the word, we only “seem to be religious::. (<em>deceiving&nbsp;</em>our) own heart, this man’s religion is vain” (<em><a href='B:660 1:26'>Jas 1:26</a></em>). We are invited to see a parallel between the process of hearing God’s word, and seeming to be religious.</p><p>The subsequent warning "Be doers of the word" in the sense of bridling the tongue and visiting the sick (v:22,26,27) implies that "the word" of the Gospel included practical matters- something hinted at in many other passages. The believers to whom James was writing had already received the implanted word-seed of the Gospel at their conversion- but James implies that they needed to keep on receiving it. <em><a href='B:670 1:22-23'>1Pe 1:22-23</a></em> connects loving "one another with a pure heart fervently" with "being born again::. by the word of God". Thus again the new birth is not just a question of accepting doctrine in the sense of 'first principles', but also the doctrine of practical Christian living. Thus it needs continued intercourse with the word to create a stream of new life. On a practical note, let us remember that we should get this power of new life entering us from re-hearing the basic Gospel as much as from the deeper parts of our Bible study. Notice that the word can "save your souls", showing that the soul does not always just refer to the life or body/creature, but can also refer to our spiritual selves, which the word is able to save or preserve.</p><p>One of the easiest forms of self deceit is to hear the correct exposition of the word and feel that therefore we are on the right track towards the Kingdom. Yet a comparison with v:27 indicates that it is quite possible to be "spotted by the world" as well as being a hearer of the word. This must be something we are especially liable to, hearing as many of us do up to three times a week the correct exposition of the word at church meetings. There must be a reference back to <em><a href='B:520 2:13'>Rom 2:13</a></em>: "for not the hearers of the Law are justified before God, but the doers of the Law shall be justified". Thus again James is thinking of the Jewish nature of his readership, and leading them to redirect their zeal for keeping the Law to zeal for receiving and doing "the engrafted word" of Christ's Gospel. "Deceiving" implies 'reasoning'- and again, James has his finger on the pulse of human nature. If we ask ourselves, 'Do I reason with myself that I am doing the word when actually I'm only hearing it' the instinctive answer is, 'No, I'm not aware I do anyway'. The reasoning or "deceiving" goes on in our deep subconscious. "Doer" is also translated "poet", in the sense of a performer of a written script. Thus Paul speaks of "how to perform that which is good (i:e. the law/word of God, v:16) I find not" (<em><a href='B:520 7:18'>Rom 7:18</a></em>). This theme of self-deception is continued in v:26- if a man "seem to be religious, and bridles not his tongue (he) deceives his own heart". Words are a product of the mind (<em><a href='B:490 6:45'>Luk 6:45</a></em>), and thus to bridle the tongue is to bridle the mind, which can only be done through the application of the word. If this is not done, then we deceive ourselves- which v:21 says we do by hearing and not doing the word. Thus to be a doer of the word in this case is to apply the word to our minds, to consciously make the mental effort to let the word control our thinking and words when in a provocative situation. Therefore being a doer of the word does not necessarily involve any physical work. There are other examples of 'works' not being physical actions but mental effort to apply the word to our minds, allowing the operation of the Spirit:</p><p>- "This is the work of God, that you believe on Him whom He has sent" (<em><a href='B:500 6:29'>Joh 6:29</a></em> - cp. <em><a href='B:520 10:17'>Rom 10:17</a></em> "Faith comes by hearing::. the word of God"). <em><a href='B:240 12:22'>Pro 12:22</a></em> (Septuagint) speaks of the man that "works faith".<br/>- "The work of the Law written in their hearts" (<em><a href='B:520 2:15'>Rom 2:15</a></em>)<br/>- Sin "did work in our members" (<em><a href='B:520 7:5'>Rom 7:5</a></em>)<br/>- God "has begun a good work in you" (<em><a href='B:570 1:6'>Phi 1:6</a></em>)- i:e. in your spiritual development<br/>- "Fruitful in every good work::. patience::. longsuffering::. joyfulness" (<em><a href='B:580 1:10-11'>Col 1:10-11</a></em>)<br/>- A man carefully examining himself by the word, "the perfect law of liberty", is "a doer of the work" (<em><a href='B:660 1:25'>Jas 1:25</a></em>).<br/>- We will be judged according to our works (<em><a href='B:730 22:12'>Rev 22:12</a></em>)- and our spiritual development rather than physical achievements will be of paramount interest to our Judge.<br/>- Those who believe false doctrine about Christ's nature should be shunned because "He that bids him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds", i:e. his beliefs (<em><a href='B:700 1:11'>2Jn 1:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:700 1:7'>2Jn 1:7</a></em>). A like example is in <em><a href='B:730 2:6'>Rev 2:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 2:15'>Rev 2:15</a></em>: "The&nbsp;<em>deeds</em>&nbsp;of the Nicolaitanes, which I also hate::. the&nbsp;<em>doctrine&nbsp;</em>of the Nicolaitanes, which thing I hate".<br/>- Similarly the Lord worked "the works of Him that sent me" (<em><a href='B:500 9:4'>Joh 9:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 17:4'>Joh 17:4</a></em>) not just in miracles and good deeds, but in developing that perfect character until He "finished the work (of saving man) which you gave me to do".<br/>- "The works of Abraham" (<em><a href='B:500 8:39'>Joh 8:39</a></em>) in the context were to believe in Christ.<br/>All this is part of the great Bible theme that our thoughts really are reckoned as works by God. In the light of this housebound housewives and hard working bread winners can take courage that their lack of 'works' physically achieved is totally appreciated by the Father. With this definition of works it is no longer necessary to feel we can only work for God at weekends or in the evenings- or after the children are asleep. Our whole life can be one of active, working service. But to inspire those works, constant contact with the word must be made. The odd glances at the pocket Bible during the day, or the Commandments of Christ on the wall, will be worth their weight in golden faith in the great day.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:23'>Jas 1:23</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like to a man seeing his natural face in a mirror</em>- Hearing the word but not doing it is a sermon on the mount allusion- those who&nbsp;<em>heard</em>&nbsp;those sayings but did not&nbsp;<em>do&nbsp;</em>them were likened to the man building his house on the sand (<em><a href='B:470 7:26'>Mat 7:26</a></em>). In the same way as he&nbsp;<em>thought</em>that he was building and was doubtless quite pleased at his progress, so the man who glanced in the mirror thought all was well with his spiritual development. The acquiring of knowledge ('hearing') can give the impression that we are progressing; but practice ('doing') is the real foundation. It is sad that the ever deepening level of the church’s Bible scholarship is not always matched by such 'doing'. Hearing the word is likened to glancing in a mirror and then going on with life, immediately forgetting that vision. Like the quick glance at the mirror, straighten the tie, brush the hair, off to the office. Maybe this equates with the sleepy, half awake doing of the readings in the morning and then off into the day with not a further thought about our real spiritual figure.</p><p>"Beholding" means 'observing fully'- the man's mistake was in his immediate forgetting of the image he saw. Thus he was a very careful hearer- because it is not always that we apply ourselves so much to the word that it is as if we are staring into our own face, observing fully our real spiritual self. In the previous analogy, here is someone who got up, washed, dressed and did his readings at the table with a concordance, and was really helped in those minutes to examine himself. But Bible study was only part of his life- he "immediately forgot". Surely none of us can feel complacent at this challenge of James?</p><p>Notice how the word is likened to a mirror- our study of it should always lead to some form of self-examination and assessment as we compare ourselves against the deep things of the Spirit. Thus our studies should revolve around the application of the word to our moment by moment spiritual lives, rather than the mental gymnastics with Scripture at one extreme and empty platitudes at the other, which seem to characterize so much of our communal Bible study. The idea of the word being represented by a mirror occurs again in <a href='B:530 13:8-12'>1Co 13:8-12</a>. Verse 8 describes the withdrawal of the miraculous spirit gifts, and their replacement by the completed word- "that which is perfect", v:10 (cp. <em><a href='B:620 3:16-17'>2Ti 3:16-17</a></em>). Paul then contrasts the dispensation of the Spirit gifts and the word: "Now we see through (look into) a glass, darkly; but then face to face". Thus the dispensation of the word would enable him to see a clear reflection of himself- "Then shall I know (myself) even as also I am known" (<em><a href='B:530 13:12'>1Co 13:12</a></em>). The implication of these few words are tremendous- through using the completed word to examine ourselves, it is possible for us to see ourselves as God sees us- to know ourselves even as God knows us. Paul expresses his lack of full knowledge in <em><a href='B:530 4:4'>1Co 4:4</a></em>: "I know nothing by myself (therefore) am I not hereby justified". The context is Paul's countering of the Corinthians who claimed to have examined and judged him. Paul is saying that he is not qualified to fully examine and judge himself, so therefore cannot comment. But now, with the completed revelation compared with the partial understanding of only some facets of God's revelation to man given by the ministry of the miraculous gifts (<em><a href='B:530 13:9'>1Co 13:9</a></em>), we are able to achieve a fuller self-examination. James' description of the word as the "perfect law" (<em><a href='B:660 1:25'>Jas 1:25</a></em>) strengthens the impression that he is consciously alluding to 1 Corinthians 13 (cp. "that which is perfect" concerning the completed word); as if he is preparing his readers for how they should use the completed word which he, like Paul, knew in advance would soon be available.</p><p>The word enables us to 'behold' ('Observe fully') our "natural face". "Natural" is from the Greek&nbsp;<em>gennas</em>- to regenerate, conceive, gender, beget. This must connect with the concept of v:17,18 and the parallel <em><a href='B:670 1:23'>1Pe 1:23</a></em> - we are conceived by the word entering us, through God’s initiative through the Spirit. The man James is speaking of looked at his "natural face". This could imply at least two things- he examines the state of spiritual regeneration he has reached from the word; or he looks back to his initial spiritual birth, how he was at his first 'genesis' by the word of the Kingdom when it developed within him for the first time. The same idea is picked up in <em><a href='B:660 3:6'>Jas 3:6</a></em>; the tongue "defiles the whole body, and sets on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell". Our thoughts lead to the words of the tongue. Thus ultimately an undisciplined mind "sets on fire the course of nature"- unless our thoughts are restrained by the word, our 'genesis' ("nature") so far developed by the word, and our initial spiritual strength developed by the word of the Gospel, will be destroyed, "set on fire". Strong interprets "course" as meaning 'A circuit of effects'- the circuit of effects due to our 'genesis' ("nature") will be destroyed or broken unless we make a conscious effort to control the mind. We have seen that the 'genesis' is a result of the action of the word on a man's heart. This creates a 'circuit of effects'- hence <em><a href='B:660 3:6'>Jas 3:6</a></em> AVmg. speaks of the "wheel of nature" (the 'genesis') in the sense of something continuous. Surely the implication is that once the word starts to take effect, it initiates a circular, upwards spiral of spirituality- spiritual strength leading to spiritual strength, a certain level of appreciation of the word steadily leading to a higher level. However, this "course of nature" can be broken by not making a conscious effort to control the mind and the words which follow from it (in the context of <em><a href='B:660 3:6'>Jas 3:6</a></em>), and of not making the effort to&nbsp;<em>continue</em>&nbsp;beholding our "natural face" in the mirror of the word, and letting the word act on the results of our self-examination.</p><p>That the word should lead to an ever-increasing level of self-examination and recognition of the urgency of our need to spiritually improve is also hinted at in <em><a href='B:690 1:10'>1Jn 1:10</a></em>: "If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us"- implying that the more the word is in us, the more we recognize the degree to which we have sinned. But notice it is not just a reading of the word that results in this- seeing that the Jews to whom Paul partly wrote Romans, for all their Bible knowledge and ability to assimilate the detailed Old Testament allusions Paul makes in Romans, were of the opinion they could "continue in sin that grace may abound" (<em><a href='B:520 6:1'>Rom 6:1</a></em>)- i:e. they reasoned that whatever they did was automatically blotted out by reason of being in Christ (and Jewish?). "We make Him (God) a liar" must refer back to the serpent in Eden, who also lacked the word of God in him, thus effectively leading him to the conclusion that Adam and Eve could not sin, even if they consciously disobeyed the commandments. Saying we have not sinned is equivalent to saying that we do not need Christ- both statements make God a liar (<em><a href='B:690 1:10'>1Jn 1:10</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:660 5:10'>Jas 5:10</a></em>); which again was the implication of the serpent reasoning. Paul picks this point up in <em><a href='B:540 11:3'>2Co 11:3</a></em>, where he connects the reasoning of the serpent with that of the Judaizers, who also argued that Christ was not vital for salvation. Eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge made Adam and Eve aware of their sin- as does eating of the word of knowledge in our day. <em><a href='B:500 15:22'>Joh 15:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 12:47-48'>Luk 12:47-48</a></em> and many other passages clearly teach that the more knowledge of the word a man has, the more aware he is of his sins, and therefore the more answerable to judgement.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:24'>Jas 1:24</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For he sees himself and goes away and immediately forgets what manner of man he was</em>- <em><a href='B:660 1:24-25'>Jas 1:24-25</a></em> parallel looking at ourselves, and looking into the perfect law of liberty. To read Scripture as God really intended, not as mere words on paper, is to find ourselves engaged in an inevitable self-examination. Reflect a while on two consecutive verses in <em><a href='B:330 8:18'>Eze 8:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:330 9:1'>Eze 9:1</a></em>: “Though they Israel&nbsp;<em>cry in my ears with a loud voice</em>&nbsp;when they are under judgment for their actions, which I now ask them to repent of, yet will I not hear them. He God&nbsp;<em>cried also in my&nbsp;</em>Ezekiel’s&nbsp;<em>ears with a loud voice</em>, saying…”. Do you see the connection? As we read and hear God’s word today, He is passionately crying in our ears with a loud voice. Just imagine someone literally doing this to you If we refuse to hear it, then we will cry in&nbsp;<em>His</em>&nbsp;ears with a loud voice in the last and final day of condemnation. The intensity of&nbsp;<em>His</em>&nbsp;appeal to us now will be the intensity with which the rejected plead for Him to change His verdict upon them; and God, like them in this life, will refuse to hear. What arises from this is a simple fact: as we read and hear the pages of Scripture, as we turn the leaves in our Bibles, God is crying in our ears with a loud voice. Our response to Him is a foretaste of our acceptance or rejection at the day of judgment.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:25'>Jas 1:25</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But he that looks into the perfect law of liberty and continues, being not a hearer that forgets, but a doer that works, this man shall be blessed in what he does</em>- The very nature of life in this present world appears to make it impossible to permanently "continue therein" ("continue"= 'to stand beside'). Thus looking at the word and hearing the word are paralleled. The only access to the word by the average believers was probably by hearing it read publicly. The ability to read would not have been widespread, and copies of the scrolls not widely available (hence the ministry of the miraculous spirit gifts to provide the word of prophecy and its interpretation). Other passages refer to this hearing of the word through public reading of it in the ecclesia: <em><a href='B:510 13:27'>Act 13:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 15:21'>Act 15:21</a></em> (cp. <em><a href='B:660 2:2'>Jas 2:2</a></em> AVmg:); <em><a href='B:540 3:15'>2Co 3:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 4:16'>Col 4:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:590 5:27'>1Th 5:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 1:3'>Rev 1:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 2:7'>Rev 2:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 2:11'>Rev 2:11</a></em>. The believers should hear the word spoken or read and look into it continually- i:e. keep it in mind, meditate upon it. Thus <em><a href='B:660 1:19'>Jas 1:19</a></em> encourages them to be "swift to hear" the word of God- not to mentally doze through those all-important meetings of the ecclesia when the word was read. Thus James never intended these words to be read as meaning 'You must walk around with your head in a Bible all day'- he was too practical to advocate that. But he was offering an even greater challenge- to live each day continually looking into the things of the word in one's mind, with "the eyes of your understanding being (open)", <em><a href='B:560 1:18'>Eph 1:18</a></em>. We who can read and have convenient access to the written word have so much more opportunity- but we seem to lack the degree of mental spiritual alertness to the word that James is speaking of. Surely every Christian who can afford one should have a pocket Bible close at hand during the day and frequently refer to it- even for a few brief seconds in the hour. But above all, we must strive to achieve that continual mental looking into the things of the word. But he who continues looking into "the perfect law", "this man shall be blessed in his deed"- and that in itself means that James is not setting an impossible standard. It is realistic for a man to achieve it. Note how the continual looking into and application of the word is "his deed". We have earlier commented how 'deeds' and 'works' can refer to the mental effort made in daily life, rather than specific physical actions.<br/>Notice the reference to "the law of liberty"- another gentle dig at his Jewish readers, reminding them of "the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free:::be not entangled again with the yoke of (Mosaic) bondage" (<em><a href='B:550 5:1'>Gal 5:1</a></em>). Other references to "liberty" are clearly in the context of liberty from the Mosaic Law, and they also have indirect hints at our liberty being because of a word ("law") of liberty:</p><h4>- "We are not children of the bondwoman (the Law) but of the free" (<em><a href='B:550 4:31'>Gal 4:31</a></em>). We are children by being born of the word of God (<em><a href='B:660 1:18'>Jas 1:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 1:23'>1Pe 1:23</a></em>). Thus "the free" is the free word of the liberty of the Spirit.<br/>- "You have been called unto liberty::. (to) walk in the spirit" (<em><a href='B:550 5:13'>Gal 5:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 5:16'>Gal 5:16</a></em>)- i:e. in a way of life guided by the Spirit (<em><a href='B:500 6:63'>Joh 6:63</a></em> etc:)<br/>- "As free::. (doing) the will of God" (<em><a href='B:670 2:16'>1Pe 2:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 2:15'>1Pe 2:15</a></em>)- which is in the word (<em><a href='B:660 1:18'>Jas 1:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 1:13'>Joh 1:13</a></em>)<br/>- "Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty" (<em><a href='B:540 3:17'>2Co 3:17</a></em>)- the Lord's Spirit is in the hearts of His people who are influenced by the word of the gospel.<br/>- "The truth (the word- <em><a href='B:500 17:17'>Joh 17:17</a></em>) shall make you free::. the servant abides not in the house for ever (alluding to Hagar being cast out, representing the casting out of the law, <em><a href='B:550 4:30'>Gal 4:30</a></em>). If the Son therefore (i:e. because the law was being cast out) shall make you free, you shall be free indeed" (<em><a href='B:500 8:32'>Joh 8:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 8:35-36'>Joh 8:35-36</a></em>). That freedom comes from the Truth (<em><a href='B:500 8:32'>Joh 8:32</a></em>), which is the Spirit.</h4><p>Now it may be argued that if "the law of liberty" is the words of Jesus and the New Testament, then that part of Scripture is far more spiritually powerful than the Old Testament, particularly the Law. Why not just concentrate our Bible reading on the New Testament? Two comments present themselves:</p><p>- "The spirit of Christ was in (the prophets)" (<em><a href='B:670 1:11'>1Pe 1:11</a></em>). The Spirit of Christ was in them, but it was only there for our benefit who came after Christ (<em><a href='B:670 1:12'>1Pe 1:12</a></em>). Thus the prophets "searched diligently" for the meaning of their prophecies (<em><a href='B:670 1:10'>1Pe 1:10</a></em>)- the implication being that they were unsuccessful because the purpose of the prophecies was for our benefit not for theirs- "not unto themselves::. they did minister the things, which are&nbsp;<em>now</em>&nbsp;reported (explained) unto&nbsp;<em>you</em>" (<em><a href='B:670 1:12'>1Pe 1:12</a></em>). We have shown that the Spirit-word is the law of liberty, which is contrasted to the Mosaic law or word of bondage. The contrast is not specifically made between the word and the Mosaic law, but between the Spirit word and the Mosaic Law. Thus it may be that the Spirit in the sense of a power of righteousness that can change a man's mind was only released fully from the Old Testament word when it was read by believers after Christ. Notice how the parallel with us looking into the law of liberty in 1 Peter is in <em><a href='B:660 1:12'>Jas 1:12</a></em> concerning the Angels desiring to look into the word. This is a parallel with <em><a href='B:660 1:10'>Jas 1:10</a></em>, describing how the prophets desired to look into the word. Thus seeing that prophets and Angels have unsuccessfully tried to look into the word, we should grasp the opportunity we have. This parallel show that the "law of liberty" was also the prophetic word of the Old Testament which the prophets tried to "look into".</p><p>- There is considerable evidence that the power of the Old Testament word was opened by the death and resurrection of Christ, when He became "the Lord the Spirit" (<em><a href='B:540 3:17-18'>2Co 3:17-18</a></em> RV), thus enabling us to be changed from the Mosaic glory to the Christian glory- "From glory to glory::. by the Spirit of the (risen) Lord" (cp. <em><a href='B:500 1:16-17'>Joh 1:16-17</a></em>). In passing, it is worth considering whether Paul's other reference to contrasting types of glory also has reference to the Mosaic/ Christian system comparison- "the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another::. so also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption" (<em><a href='B:530 15:40'>1Co 15:40</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 15:42'>1Co 15:42</a></em>). Thus Paul would be likening the present mortal state of our bodies to the earthy (terrestrial) Jewish system, compared to the glory of the spiritual heavenlies in Christ.</p><p>The man who keeps mental hold of the Spirit of the word in his daily life "Shall be blessed in his deed". This must be alluding to <em><a href='B:490 11:28'>Luk 11:28</a></em> "Blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it". Again, the hearing of the word was a literal hearing, as Jesus had been speaking orally to the people. Thus James' interpretation of keeping the word was to continually look into it in one's mind and let it have the effect of self-examination upon us. The preceding verse records the comment "Blessed is the womb that bare you, and the breasts which you&nbsp; sucked" (<em><a href='B:490 11:27'>Luk 11:27</a></em>). Jesus is saying that the more important spiritual equivalent of this is to "hear the word of God". Thus being breast fed is likened by Jesus to hearing and keeping the word. In Peter's language: "As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word" (<em><a href='B:670 2:2'>1Pe 2:2</a></em>). It is only the spiritually young who should feed on the milk of the word (<em><a href='B:530 3:2'>1Co 3:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 5:12-13'>Heb 5:12-13</a></em>). Those to whom Jesus spoke about the sucking of breasts being like hearing and keeping the word were also spiritually young, having only just heard the word. <em><a href='B:660 1:24-25'>Jas 1:24-25</a></em> is saying that the man who continually looks at his natural face in the mirror of hearing and keeping the word will be blessed for his effort. <em><a href='B:490 11:27-28'>Luk 11:27-28</a></em> is saying that the spiritually young who as newborn babes keep hearing and keeping the word will be blessed. Remember that it was suggested that the "natural" (Genesis-ed) face of the man could refer to his recently spiritually born self. This would fit the connections with <em><a href='B:490 11:27'>Luk 11:27</a></em> nicely. Thus James implies that there is an especial temptation for those newly converted or spiritually conceived by the word to soon give up their zeal for the word and to stop carefully examining their own position in the light of the word. The parable of the sower puts this in black and white.</p><p>"If (we) know these things, happy (blessed) are (we) if (we) do them" (<em><a href='B:500 13:17'>Joh 13:17</a></em>). Also worth mentioning is <em><a href='B:490 8:21'>Luk 8:21</a></em>: "My mother and my brethren are these which hear the word of God and do it". By being born again of the Spirit by hearing, doing, keeping and continually looking at the word, we take on the family likeness- Jesus can feel to us as to a mother or brother. These things help us appreciate the real spirit of the frequent commands to "Keep my commandments, and do them" (<em><a href='B:30 22:31'>Lev 22:31</a></em>). This implies that keeping and doing the word are different. God is not so much looking for individual cases of us 'doing' the word in the sense of occasionally obeying a highly specific command- but for us to "keep" the word in the sense of continually keeping it in mind in our lives, so that as a consequence we 'do' the specific commands when necessary. The copious parallels between James 1 and 1 Peter 1 further illuminate the looking into the word of this v:25; the parallel is Peter's description of the Cherubim Angels earnestly looking down into the mercy seat in <em><a href='B:670 1:12'>1Pe 1:12</a></em>, as if paralleling that supreme place of God manifestation with the Word.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:26'>Jas 1:26</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:670 1:18'>1Pe 1:18</a></em>.</p><p><em>If anyone thinks himself to be religious while he does not hold his tongue but rather just deceives his own heart, this man's religion is vain</em>- The Greek word translated "religious" is elsewhere always used in the context of the Mosaic law; James is implying that they were not properly keeping the spirit of the Mosaic law if they "bridled not (their) tongue". This idea of bridling the tongue is picked up again in <em><a href='B:660 3:2-4'>Jas 3:2-4</a></em>, where James says that we put bits in the horses' mouths to control them, "but the tongue can no man tame", i:e. bridle (<em><a href='B:660 3:8'>Jas 3:8</a></em>). "No man" here must mean 'no ordinary man of the flesh', since <em><a href='B:660 1:26'>Jas 1:26</a></em> says that the believer must bridle his tongue. In the preceding verses in James 1, James has been talking about 'doing' the word in practice rather than just theoretically receiving it. The prime example of this, he continues, is whether you can bridle your tongue. This is because our thoughts lead to our words, and therefore to bridle the tongue is to control the mind- and this can only be done through the conscious application of the word. This is the main 'doing' of the word. Again there is the warning against semi-spirituality; seeming to be religious.</p><p><em><a href='B:230 32:8-9'>Psa 32:8-9</a></em> provides the basis for <em><a href='B:660 1:26'>Jas 1:26</a></em>: "I will instruct you and teach you in the way which you should go: I will guide (mg. 'Counsel') you::. be not as the horse, or as the mule, which have no understanding: whose mouth must be held in with bit and bridle, lest they come near unto you". Thus having the instruction, teaching and understanding of God should replace having a bridle or bit. God does not want to force our tongues and bodies to obey Him- but for us to effect this by our application of His word to our minds. Thus the word is the means of bridling our tongues and therefore our minds- our whole lives. Note too that a bridle is a two-way thing. It stops the horse approaching the rider in an ungainly and painful way. The action of the word on our minds should lead to us similarly being helped in our approach to God. The man who thinks he has his mind bridled but whose words belie this "Deceives his own heart, this man's religion is vain" (v:26- cp. <em><a href='B:300 17:9'>Jer 17:9</a></em>). To be "Double minded" (<em><a href='B:660 1:8'>Jas 1:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 4:8'>Jas 4:8</a></em>) is thus to have what we think is our 'spiritual' heart or mind deceiving our real heart- that of the flesh, "his own heart".</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 1:27'>Jas 1:27</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:510 6:3'>Act 6:3</a></em>.</p><p><em>Pure and undefiled religion before God the Father is this: To visit orphans and widows in their trouble, and to keep oneself unstained by the world</em>- Visiting (in the Hebrew sense of coming near to) the fatherless and widow in the ecclesia is associated with being unspotted from the world; our closeness to the world of the ecclesia in itself will keep us separate from the pull of the kingdoms of this world (<em><a href='B:660 1:27'>Jas 1:27</a></em>). Visiting the fatherless and widows will result in the believer keeping himself unspotted from the world (<em><a href='B:660 1:27'>Jas 1:27</a></em> Gk:).</p><p>"Pure ('clean') religion" may refer to the system of religion that comes as a result of "the washing of water by the word" (<em><a href='B:560 5:26'>Eph 5:26</a></em>). This religion is also "undefiled"- possibly implying that to not let the word totally affect our lives is to allow ourselves to be defiled by our fleshly mind and desires. The sexual connotations of the word for "Undefiled" would suggest that passive laziness to apply the word is equivalent to active unfaithfulness against Christ. This pure and undefiled religion "Before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction" (v:27). The reference to God as the Father is in the context of v:17- "the Father of (the) light" of the word which came down to us. We may well ask 'Why is God so especially concerned for "the fatherless and widows"'? Maybe because He had witnessed the emotional agony of His humanly fatherless Son, Jesus, and the broken heart of Mary on the Lord's death? There is a possible connection between this verse and <em><a href='B:500 14:18'>Joh 14:18</a></em> where Jesus promises that he "Will not leave you orphans (fatherless- A:V. 'comfortless'): I will come to you" through the Holy Spirit Comforter.</p><p>The ideas of God 'coming down' and 'visiting' people are common Old Testament idioms for God manifestation. Thus it may be that James is implying that in the same way as Jesus has visited us through the Spirit-word, so we should share the spiritual Comfort of the word with the fatherless and widows. We have noted the association between 'coming down' and the gift of the Spirit-word already in v:17, which provides the background for this v:27. This pure religion is also to keep ourselves "Unspotted from the world". The words "pure", "undefiled::. unspotted" are all the language of marriage. Because the notion of us being the bride of Christ, engaged to Him, seems so far above our feeble spirituality, it is tempting to think that the relationship between a man and his bride is just being used as a vague likeness of our relationship with Christ. But the glorious fact is that we are in absolute reality the typical bride of Christ Intercourse with the world and fleshly mind is as bad as being unfaithful to our bridegroom- and almost on the night of our marriage, too. The comment is sometimes made that Christians are too dreary and weighed down by our sins. But bearing in mind the nature of our relationship to Jesus and His faithfulness unto death for us, it is not surprising that we are seriously worried about the continual failures which we have to admit to; these are equivalent to being unfaithful to Him. To balance this, there is the joy of receiving "every good and perfect gift" from our loving, truly merciful Father, the knowledge that He is delighted by our strivings to truly develop spiritually; and the happiness ("blessedness") of the man who does try to keep the word in his heart. Whilst we need to be careful that we are not giving way to spiritual pride, there can be a sense of deep joy and peace at the little victories we slowly win against the flesh.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 2:1'>Jas 2:1</a></em>&nbsp;<em>My brothers, do not hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with partiality</em>-&nbsp; This gives the Lord Jesus the title of “the glory" (Gk:, as also in <em><a href='B:490 2:32'>Luk 2:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 1:17'>Eph 1:17</a></em>). And James makes the point that we cannot believe in the Lord Jesus as the Lord of glory and have respect of persons. This may seem a strange connection at first sight. But perhaps the sense is that if we see the&nbsp;<em>height</em>&nbsp;and surpassing extent of&nbsp;<em>His</em>&nbsp;glory, all others will pale into insignificance, and therefore we will be biased for or against nobody and nothing because of the way they are all as nothing before the brightness of the glory of the Lord we follow. "The Lord" is not in the original- "Our Lord Jesus Christ of glory". This idea of Jesus being the glory is picked up in <em><a href='B:670 4:14'>1Pe 4:14</a></em>: "If you be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are you; for the spirit of glory (parallel with "the name of Christ") and of God rests upon you"- as the cloud of glory did over the tabernacle. Also on the same track is <em><a href='B:540 3:8-9'>2Co 3:8-9</a></em>: "How shall not the ministration of the Spirit (in Christ) be rather glorious? For if the ministration of condemnation (the Mosaic law) be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory". Thus James describing Jesus as the Lord of glory may be yet another hint against keeping to the Mosaic glory. Notice the gentle yet firm way in which James makes the point- appealing to his Jewish readers through Biblical allusions which he knew they would appreciate.</p><p>"With respect of persons" is another link back to the Proverbs- here to <em><a href='B:240 24:23'>Pro 24:23</a></em>: "These things also belong to the wise. It is not good to have respect of persons in judgement". Thus through having wisdom- which is from the word- respect of persons is avoided. This is the point made in <em><a href='B:660 2:8-9'>Jas 2:8-9</a></em>: "If ye fulfil… the Scripture::. you do well: but if you have respect of persons, you commit sin"- through fulfilling the Scriptures, we avoid respecting persons. There is also a link with the fact that "God is no respecter of persons" (<em><a href='B:510 10:34'>Act 10:34</a></em>) in a Jew/ Gentile context. It seems from this allusion that the Jewish brethren were prejudiced against poor Gentile believers.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 2:2'>Jas 2:2</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For if there come into your synagogue a man with a gold ring, in fine clothing, and there come in also a poor man in vile clothing</em>- Gk. 'Gold fingered'- not just one ring. The use of the word 'synagogue' here shows that some of the early Jewish ecclesias were the result of whole synagogues being converted to Christ. The ecclesias are also called synagogues in <em><a href='B:510 6:9'>Act 6:9</a></em>; thus <em><a href='B:650 10:25'>Heb 10:25</a></em> reads literally "Not forsaking the synagoguing of yourselves together". The fact James uses the word 'synagogue' rather than 'ecclesia' indicates the degree to which early Jewish Christians still kept a fair amount of the Jewish approach to religion. The Lord said that the time would come when they would be cast out of the synagogues; He made no demand that they leave the system at that stage, for He had no concept of guilt by association. Thus the letter of Acts 15 concerning this implies that it was felt quite in order for Jewish believers to continue being circumcised, whilst the Gentile believers still had to abstain from blood (<em><a href='B:510 15:29'>Act 15:29</a></em>). Elsewhere Paul vigorously argues that obedience to both these Mosaic commands was quite irrelevant to salvation or spiritual growth. Similarly Paul seems to have placed great importance on keeping a Jewish feast (<em><a href='B:510 18:21'>Act 18:21</a></em>), whilst telling the Colossians (<em><a href='B:660 2:14-17'>Jas 2:14-17</a></em>) that this was not necessary due to Christ's death. The rich stranger who unexpectedly turned up at their ecclesia perhaps refers to the same class of Jewish itinerant preachers as are mentioned in <em><a href='B:700 1:7-11'>2Jn 1:7-11</a></em>. James is writing to Jewish believers. The "poor man" walking into the ecclesia was a brother- "the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the Kingdom" (v:5). If this poor brother was also a Jew, why does James talk about "Your assembly… you have respect to (the rich)::. and say to the poor:::.""? We have two possibilities at least:</p><p>1) The letter was written just to a group of rich Jews; or<br/>2) The letter was written generally to all Jewish believer and the "poor man" represented the poor Gentile brethren whom the Jewish believers despised.</p><p>There is fair support for both:</p><p>1) Poor believers are equally in need of exhortation as are the rich. They are even more prone to the temptations of materialism; but there is nothing aimed at this group in James. Chapter 2 rebukes rich brethren for belittling these poor brethren. Chapter 3 is about brethren seeking to be "many masters" (<em><a href='B:660 3:1'>Jas 3:1</a></em>) and proudly talking to that end. These are the temptations especially faced by rich, capable brethren. Chapter 4 describes the itinerant Jewish traders always hungry to make more money (<em><a href='B:660 4:13'>Jas 4:13</a></em>). Chapter 5 is specifically about "you rich men::. your riches are corrupted" (<em><a href='B:660 5:1-2'>Jas 5:1-2</a></em>).</p><p>2) "The poor of this world" could be Gentiles- "He has dispersed abroad; he has given to the poor" (<em><a href='B:540 8:9'>2Co 8:9</a></em>) is quoted by Paul to show that the poor Gentiles had received spiritual riches, and should therefore contribute their earthly riches to the poor Jewish believers at Jerusalem (<em><a href='B:520 15:26'>Rom 15:26</a></em>). "Rich in faith" would then refer to the Gentiles being given the spiritual riches of Christ (<em><a href='B:540 9:9'>2Co 9:9</a></em>). "Heirs of the kingdom" recalls <em><a href='B:560 3:6'>Eph 3:6</a></em> "That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs" through also having the promises of inheriting the Kingdom made to them (<em><a href='B:550 3:27-29'>Gal 3:27-29</a></em>).</p><p>There are no doubt elements of truth in both views. Thus the letter does seem to be aimed at the rich Jewish Christians who had fled Israel from the persecution of Saul; but there may also be a secondary implication that the poor brethren they were despising were Gentiles. This would be in keeping with the fact that every reference in James to the Jew/Gentile, Moses/ Christ question within the ecclesia is indirect and subtle.</p><h4>One of the reasons for James writing was to encourage the Jews to spiritually improve so that the second coming would be hastened and the Kingdom established for real, rather than the 'coming' being just a 'coming down' manifestation of the Lord, as it actually was. It was the affluent sector of Jewry who had a partial faith in Christ whom James singles out as being the important ones whose repentance would hasten the second coming. Applying these things to the last days, it cannot be without significance that the 'Jews for Jesus' movement is gaining phenomenal ground- amongst whom? The affluent, loud mouthed (cp. James 3), money-loving, trade-crazy Jews of North America (cp. <em><a href='B:660 4:13'>Jas 4:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 5:2'>Jas 5:2</a></em>). Bearing in mind the orthodox false doctrines these people are full of, they fit well their prototypes in James- Jews who were not truly humble to the power of the word, committed to a 'hail fellow well met' Christianity (cp. <em><a href='B:660 2:2-3'>Jas 2:2-3</a></em>). Notice that generally it has not been the poor Jews of London's East End or downtown Tel Aviv who are professing Christ. We know that the Jews are still to face their greatest holocaust. How relevant then is <em><a href='B:660 5:1-3'>Jas 5:1-3</a></em>: "You rich men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you::. you have heaped treasures together for the last days". Every persecution of the Jews has been partly inspired by Gentile jealousy at their wealth- not least in these last days. Turning the spotlight to spiritual Israel- maybe the implication of James is that if only we can summon the courage to repent of our gross materialism into which the ecclesia of the last days has slumped, then there will be a hastening of the second coming. It is Biblically argued elsewhere that a specific rejection of materialism by the ecclesia of the last days may save us from part of the tribulation to come, and thus hasten the coming of Christ for us. If we do not curb it, we may need to go through the tribulation to achieve the same spiritual effect upon us as would a specific repentance from it here and now.</h4><p>"A gold ring, in goodly apparel" probably connects with <em><a href='B:670 3:1'>1Pe 3:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 3:3'>1Pe 3:3</a></em>: "you wives::. whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of::. wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel". The links between James and Peter are so numerous that it seems fair to assume that there is a conscious connection here. In this case it is worth noting that the passage in <em><a href='B:670 3:3'>1Pe 3:3</a></em> about adorning has subtle reference to Judaism- e:g. "adorning" is the Greek 'kosmos'-ing, often used about the Jewish age. 'Cosmetic' is derived from this word too.</p><p>"A poor man in vile raiment” may also be talking about spiritual pride and partiality. For the word "vile" carries the idea of morally filthy- it is translated "filthiness" a few verses earlier in <em><a href='B:660 1:21'>Jas 1:21</a></em> in a moral sense; and "the filthiness of the flesh" in <em><a href='B:670 3:21'>1Pe 3:21</a></em> (note <em><a href='B:730 22:11'>Rev 22:11</a></em> too). The idea of raiment or clothing representing a spiritual state is common in the New Testament. Thus James may be warning them against judging a brother who, due to his poverty, appears outwardly to have an appearance of evil when this is not the case.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 2:3'>Jas 2:3</a></em><em>&nbsp;And you have regard to him that wears the fine clothing, and say: Sit here in a good place; and you say to the poor man: Stand there, or, Sit under my footstool</em>-The Greek for "fine" implies dazzling bright- it is used of the "white (same word) linen" in which the saints will be clothed (<em><a href='B:730 15:6'>Rev 15:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 19:8'>Rev 19:8</a></em>), the "bright clothing" of the Angel in <em><a href='B:510 10:30'>Act 10:30</a></em> and "the bright and morning star" (<em><a href='B:730 22:16'>Rev 22:16</a></em>). This further supports the suggestion that James 2 is referring to spiritual pride- apart from wearing gaudy clothes, these brethren were imagining themselves to be supremely righteous, and therefore lording it over those they considered to be spiritually poor. This is almost confirmed beyond question by the rest of the verse being an allusion to the parable of the guests at the marriage supper- some come into the ecclesia wanting to immediately have the places of honour, whilst others -the truly spiritual- gratefully accept whatever place they are given. There is also possible reference to <em><a href='B:470 23:5-6'>Mat 23:5-6</a></em> which also speaks of outward dressing by the Jews to give a spiritual impression, and a loving of chief seats in the synagogue: "They make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments, and love the uppermost rooms at (Jewish) feasts (cp. the communion service), and the chief seats in the synagogues". The fact that within the Jewish ecclesias there were seating arrangements in order of seniority further shows how they were based around the Jewish synagogue system, even suggesting that the ecclesia had the actual building as their ecclesial hall. Similarly there is ample evidence that the communion service was originally run on the lines of the Jewish Passover, with the eating of a meal in fellowship as a vital part of the 'love-feast'. Notice that James does not criticize the existence of such seating arrangements in themselves, but the wrong brethren being put in the wrong place. "A good place" does not just imply a nice seat- "good" is normally used in the sense of being morally good, and is also translated "honest"; it comes from a root meaning 'virtuous, morally worthy'. "Sit here under my footstool" also has a mainly spiritual implication- unless some brethren were so pompous that they had virtual thrones to sit on in the ecclesia. Jesus being seated at God's footstool shows his subjection to Him spiritually, and does not necessarily refer to the physical place where Jesus sits. Marshall's Interlinear renders "sit here" as "sit here well", implying that James' readers were thinking well of brethren in spiritual terms due to their outwardly impressive appearance.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 2:4'>Jas 2:4</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Do you not make distinctions among yourselves, and become judges with evil thoughts?-&nbsp;</em>Being partial within their minds, resulting in them respecting ('judging') the thoughts generated by their evil minds continues the theme of being only semi-spiritual due to being "double minded", a result of not letting the word totally dominate the mind. Verses 8 and 9 also go on to show that only through lack of application to the word was this partial thinking coming about. In similar vein Jeremiah accused the Jews of 'dissembling in their hearts' (<em><a href='B:300 42:20'>Jer 42:20</a></em>), using a Hebrew word which can mean both 'to go astray' and also 'to vacillate'; as if partiality and spiritual vacillation between good and evil are the same as rank disobedience.</p><p>It makes an interesting exercise to read through the letter of James and note how frequently we are warned about our internal thought processes; to control them and have them influenced by the Lord is the essence of following Him. <em><a href='B:660 2:4'>Jas 2:4</a></em> would be an obvious example – when we see a well dressed believer, we are not to judge him “within yourself” as a judge who has evil thoughts, an unjust judge (see R:V:). We shouldn’t deceive ourselves within ourselves (<em><a href='B:660 1:22'>Jas 1:22</a></em>), our mind is not to immediately forget the truths we encounter in God’s word (<em><a href='B:660 1:25'>Jas 1:25</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 2:5'>Jas 2:5</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Listen, my beloved brothers. Did not God choose those that are poor in the world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which he promised to those that love him?</em>- James really pleads with us to see the importance of all this, as if he is physically with them and known to them. This would again imply that the initial readership which James was focussing on was quite a small group of brethren. This should not be read merely as meaning 'God has called the poor people to the Gospel'- seeing that the rich to whom James was writing had also been called (cp. <em><a href='B:290 66:2'>Isa 66:2</a></em>). Rather the emphasis is on "<em>God</em>&nbsp;(has) chosen the&nbsp;<em>poor&nbsp;</em>of this world" for positions of authority within the ecclesia- implying, in the context of v:3, that&nbsp;<em>they&nbsp;</em>had made a wrong choice, saying to the man in gay clothing "sit here in a good place" in the ecclesia. Thus James implies that God's choice should be our choice. The fact has to be faced that looking around the ecclesias of today, it is not "the poor of this world" who are in places of authority. Yet James here implies that they should be- as does Paul (<em><a href='B:530 6:4'>1Co 6:4</a></em>). Now it can reasonably be argued that this category of brethren do not want such positions, and are happy to see those humanly more competent doing the job. Because of this, it is not the done thing to even nominate such brethren for office. Perhaps the fault lies with both sections of our community- surely those brethren should both be nominated and be prepared to accept responsibility, in the light of what James and Paul are saying? Remember that Peter, James and John were simple working men- but through the power of the Spirit James could talk to his brethren as "my beloved brethren" and rebuke them. That same Spirit can be in us through the word. <em><a href='B:530 6:4'>1Co 6:4</a></em> shows beyond cavil that in a case of disagreement or difficulty in judgement- and such cases are now increasingly common- the opinion of the most humble and least esteemed brother should be sought and accepted. Such a brother will, by his very qualification for the task, naturally demur- as doubtless the brother chosen in the Corinth ecclesia did initially (if they obeyed Paul's advice). But surely this is what is required by these passages?</p><p>"Heirs of the Kingdom which he has promised to them that love Him" (v:5) &nbsp;mirrors <em><a href='B:660 1:12'>Jas 1:12</a></em> "Blessed is the man that endures temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which he has promised to them that love Him". The implication is that it is "the poor of this world" who successfully endured spiritual temptation by the power of the word, and who therefore will have the reward "which the Lord has promised to them that love Him". The repetition of this phrase in <em><a href='B:660 1:12'>Jas 1:12</a></em> and <em><a href='B:660 2:5'>Jas 2:5</a></em> encourages us to make this interpretation. Yet in the first century, "the poor of this world" would have been those with the least free time, probably unable to read and anyway unlikely to be able to afford their own Scriptures, and probably more heavily burdened with domestic cares than the "rich men" of the ecclesia. Thus the point is again made that our spirituality is not related to the amount of spare time which we have free to devote to Bible reading. It is from the constant daily meditation on whatever spiritual food we have had time to feed on that we can overcome temptation and thus have the heart-warming knowledge of being thought of by God as "them that love Him". "If you love me, keep (in memory) my commandments" Jesus had also said. Note that "the Kingdom" and "the crown of life" are equated by comparing <em><a href='B:660 1:12'>Jas 1:12</a></em> and <em><a href='B:660 2:5'>Jas 2:5</a></em>; as in <em><a href='B:620 4:1'>2Ti 4:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 4:8'>2Ti 4:8</a></em>. Thus "the Kingdom" does not only refer to the 'political' situation on the earth when Christ's rule has been established, but is also a synonym for eternal life, "the crown of life". Thus at the judgement seat the sheep are told "Inherit the Kingdom" (<em><a href='B:470 25:34'>Mat 25:34</a></em>)- when the Kingdom in the sense of Christ's political rulership of the earth has not yet been established. Similarly, Christ's preaching "The Gospel of the Kingdom of God" to Israel (<em><a href='B:470 4:23'>Mat 4:23</a></em>) was not just composed of details about the state of the world after His second coming- but also about the opportunity of receiving "the crown of life" at His return. A study of the Greek word 'basileia' translated 'Kingdom' indicates that it can refer to all aspects of the King's rulership, not just the political Kingdom.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 2:6'>Jas 2:6</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But you have dishonoured the poor man. Do not the rich oppress you, and themselves drag you before the courts</em>?- "The poor" here are brethren- and therefore the poor labourers who were oppressed by the "rich men" of the ecclesia in <em><a href='B:660 5:4'>Jas 5:4</a></em> must also refer to brethren in the ecclesia. "Dishonour" here in <em><a href='B:660 2:6'>Jas 2:6</a></em> in the Greek can also carry the idea of active abuse- it is also translated "dishonour" in <em><a href='B:500 8:49'>Joh 8:49</a></em>, "suffer shame" in <em><a href='B:510 5:41'>Act 5:41</a></em> and "entreated shamefully" in <em><a href='B:490 20:11'>Luk 20:11</a></em>. These are all concerning the Jews persecuting Christ and the early church. The only other occurrence of the word (<em><a href='B:520 1:24'>Rom 1:24</a></em>) is also concerning the apostate Jews. Thus it may be that James is implying that this despising of the poor Jewish believers and Gentiles in the ecclesia was the same as the Judaizers and Jewish authorities behind them were doing. It would be surprising if the letter of James, being addressed to Jewish Christians, did not make some reference to the Judaist infiltration of the ecclesias, which Paul's letters show was a major threat to the early church (e:g. <em><a href='B:550 2:4'>Gal 2:4</a></em>). The use of this word "despise" may thus imply that this group of rich Jews had been infiltrated by the Judaizers. Their lack of total commitment to the word would mean that their resistance to the Judaist infiltration was low indeed. It is therefore to be expected that they succumbed.</p><p>This recalls the descriptions of Jewish persecution of the saints:</p><p>"Saul… entering into every house (church?), and haling ("Dragging"- same word in <em><a href='B:500 21:8'>Joh 21:8</a></em>) men and women committed them to prison" (<em><a href='B:510 8:3'>Act 8:3</a></em>); "they drew Jason and certain brethren unto the rulers of the city" (<em><a href='B:510 17:6'>Act 17:6</a></em>). The believers to whom James was writing had therefore suffered violent physical persecution, and yet still they lacked any deep spirituality. The rebuke later in this chapter of their attitude that works alone could substitute for their weak faith may well have reference to this (cp. <em><a href='B:530 13:3'>1Co 13:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 2:13-14'>Rev 2:13-14</a></em>). No doubt it is extremely tempting when being physically persecuted to feel that this excuses us from making the effort to control our minds by the application of the word. In the holocaust to come which we may well have to endure we will do well to remember this. The implication behind James' use of these words is that as the Jews were doing to them, so they were doing to their brethren, thus equating them with the Jews- maybe implying that the Judaist infiltration was so subtle that they were being influenced doctrinally by these people, and yet also submitting to persecution from their 'provisional' wing. Israel's relationship with Egypt, Assyria and Babylon had been similar.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 2:7'>Jas 2:7</a></em><em>&nbsp;Do not they blaspheme the honourable Name by which you are called?</em>- Or 'that is called upon you'- in baptism. <em><a href='B:610 6:1-2'>1Ti 6:1-2</a></em> associates the blaspheming of God's Name with servants despising their masters who were believers. The context in James is of believers despising their poor brethren (v:6), perhaps through despising the brethren who were in their employ (<em><a href='B:660 5:4'>Jas 5:4</a></em>). Thus the suggestion is that the same spiritual blasphemy which occurred when believers were persecuted was repeated when a rich brother abused or despised a fellow brother. Notice that it is the name of God which is blasphemed in <em><a href='B:610 6:1'>1Ti 6:1</a></em>, whilst at baptism the believers called upon themselves the name of Christ- they were baptized into Christ and thus became Christ's. This interchangeability of the name of Christ and God occurs frequently in the New Testament- because God's Name was given to Christ on his ascension (<em><a href='B:570 2:9'>Phi 2:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 3:12'>Rev 3:12</a></em>). The reason for the rich brethren despising the poor was through not appreciating that God's Name was called upon those brethren- in the same way as the Jews' blasphemy of the Name was through their lack of appreciation that the believers carried the Name. Thus the key to successfully, humbly relating to our brethren is to remind ourselves of the mighty Name which they bear, and that to despise them is to despise God.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 2:8'>Jas 2:8</a></em><em>&nbsp;However, if you fulfil the royal law, according to the scripture: You shall love your neighbour as yourself, you do well</em>-&nbsp;<em>&nbsp;</em>&nbsp;"Royal" means the Kingly law- James' comment on the emphasis which Jesus gave to the command to "love your neighbour" in <em><a href='B:470 22:39'>Mat 22:39</a></em>, and especially to the giving of the "new commandment::. that you love one another, as I have loved you" (<em><a href='B:500 13:34'>Joh 13:34</a></em>). <em><a href='B:470 22:37-38'>Mat 22:37-38</a></em> clearly states that the command to "love your neighbour" was secondary to that to love God. Yet the "new commandment" of <em><a href='B:500 13:34'>Joh 13:34</a></em> to love your neighbour ("one another"), and James' calling of this "the royal law" implies that now the law had been ended on the cross, including the ten commandments written in stone (<em><a href='B:580 2:14-17'>Col 2:14-17</a></em>), these two commands were one- because to love God is equivalent to loving your spiritual neighbour, because by calling on the name of Christ the neighbour therefore carried the Name of God, and thus to love the neighbour is the same as loving God. This is the teaching of the preceding v:7, as we have seen. Alternatively, "the royal law" may refer to the entire Mosaic law- seeing that the law was fulfilled in the keeping of that one commandment, to "love your neighbour as thyself" (<em><a href='B:520 13:9'>Rom 13:9</a></em>). <em><a href='B:550 5:14'>Gal 5:14</a></em> says the same, and as in James 2 the context is of not biting and devouring one another within the ecclesia, as a result of Judaist infiltration to stir up strife (<em><a href='B:550 5:11-12'>Gal 5:11-12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 5:15'>Gal 5:15</a></em>). If the command to "love your neighbour" was fulfilled with no subsequent despising of poor brethren, "you do well". The Greek for "well" is the same word translated "good" in v:3- the rich were invited to sit in a "good place" in the ecclesia, i:e. in a place of spiritual honour and respect. Thus James is saying that the ultimate qualification for sitting in the "good place" in the ecclesia was to love the members of the ecclesia as oneself, especially those whom it was tempting to despise. If the "royal law" refers to the whole law of Moses, it should be noted that&nbsp;<em>we</em>&nbsp;must fulfil it in spirit. It is easy to think that the Law was fulfilled solely by Christ's death on the cross.</p>


text:
<h4><em><a href='B:660 2:9'>Jas 2:9</a></em><em>&nbsp;But if you show favouritism, you commit sin, being convicted by the law as transgressors</em>-This conviction by the Law may refer to the command to Israel's judges: "You shall not respect persons in judgment; but you shall hear the small (poor) as well as the great" (<em><a href='B:50 1:17'>Deu 1:17</a></em>). These judges were therefore matched by Spirit-gifted ecclesial elders in the New Israel. These judges were 'given' as heads over Israel (<em><a href='B:50 1:15'>Deu 1:15</a></em> A:V:mg), as the ecclesia were 'given' Spirit-gifted elders (<em><a href='B:560 4:11'>Eph 4:11</a></em>). Because of their power, "all the people shall hear and fear" (<em><a href='B:50 17:13'>Deu 17:13</a></em>), exactly as they did after Peter's Spirit-guided judgment of Ananias (<em><a href='B:510 5:11'>Act 5:11</a></em>). The judges were "wise men" (<em><a href='B:50 1:13'>Deu 1:13</a></em>)- hence James' rebuke of the elders because they were&nbsp;<em>un</em>wise: "Who&nbsp;<em>is</em>&nbsp;a wise man::. among you?" (<em><a href='B:660 3:13'>Jas 3:13</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:530 6:5'>1Co 6:5</a></em>). The book of Malachi is a rebuke of Israel's priests and judges- James' many allusions to it tabulated in our comments on <em><a href='B:660 4:8'>Jas 4:8</a></em> are understandable once the connection between Israel's judges and ecclesial elders is appreciated. Psalms 82 condemns the judges for doing many things which James accuses the elders of doing: possessing the Spirit, but respecting persons, overlooking the poor, fatherless and needy; neglecting the true knowledge of God, although they had been called to be God's children. <em><a href='B:580 2:14-17'>Col 2:14-17</a></em> clearly shows that the law in the form of the ten commandments, including that to "love thy neighbour", had been replaced by Christ. Yet James reasons with his readers as if they still respected the old law of commandments- again indicating the slow transition to an acceptance that the Law had been ended in Christ. The command to love one's neighbour as oneself is an absolute statement; it cannot be fulfilled if one neighbour is loved more than another. The love a man has for himself is complete- in fundamental terms the degree of this love does not change with time or with the characteristics he exhibits. This nature of love should be shown to the brethren. To respect persons was to break this ideal. Thus Jesus could ask us to love each other "As I have loved you" (<em><a href='B:500 13:34'>Joh 13:34</a></em>). He loved us as the church as a whole ("you" is plural), and therefore each of us receives the same all consuming love of Christ, shown in summation by his death on the cross. Our love to each other should be equally constant and without the favouritism which seems almost inevitable with our natural mind.</h4>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 2:10'>Jas 2:10</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For whoever shall keep the whole law and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of breaking all of it- As</em>&nbsp;with so much in James, this seems almost too idealistic. But James drives the importance of it home: "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all" (v:10). This is identical reasoning to <em><a href='B:550 3:10-13'>Gal 3:10-13</a></em>, where Paul is arguing that the Galatians should resist the inroads of the Judaizers and not return to the Law- therefore suggesting that there was an identical situation amongst James' readers, as there probably was in nearly every first century ecclesia, especially the Jewish-dominated ones.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 2:11'>Jas 2:11</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For He that said: Do not commit adultery, also said: Do not kill. So if you do not commit adultery but if you kill, you have become a transgressor of the law</em>- "For that law which said (AVmg:), Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if you commit no adultery, yet if you kill, you are become a transgressor of the Law" (v:11). The statement that "that law" included two separate commandments (concerning murder and adultery) shows that "the royal law" of v:8 may well refer to the whole law of Moses, which was fulfilled by loving the neighbour (<em><a href='B:520 13:9'>Rom 13:9</a></em>). These two commands concerning adultery and murder occur together elsewhere; it may be that James chose them because in spirit they are easily broken due to an uncontrolled mind; and the control of the mind is the great theme of James. Spiritual adultery is further defined in <em><a href='B:660 4:4'>Jas 4:4</a></em>: "You adulterers and adulteresses, know you not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God?", thus interpreting adultery as having worldly friends. Those to whom James was writing were aware, so v:11 implies, that literal and spiritual adultery were wrong, but were not so conscious of the command not to kill each other by hating them in their heart (<em><a href='B:470 5:21-22'>Mat 5:21-22</a></em>). The fighting and killing which James describes as happening amongst his readers (<em><a href='B:660 4:1-2'>Jas 4:1-2</a></em>) must refer also to this spiritual murder due to lack of love (to what else can it apply?). It is noteworthy that James is one of the few New Testament letters that does not contain explicit warning against sexual misbehaviour. We can thus start to build up a fuller picture of James' audience- keeping dutifully away from worldly friendships, holding themselves back from sexual sin, yet trading zealously with the world to make much profit (<em><a href='B:660 4:13'>Jas 4:13</a></em>), and unaware of the supreme importance of the command to love each other, resulting in them transgressing the law in spirit. Perhaps they are not without their counterparts today.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 2:12'>Jas 2:12</a></em>&nbsp;<em>So speak and act as men that are to be judged by a law of liberty</em>- The Saviour came more to save than condemn (<em><a href='B:500 12:47'>Joh 12:47</a></em>); it is men who condemn themselves as inappropriate to receive eternal life. It is&nbsp;<em>their</em>&nbsp;words, not His, which will be the basis of their rejection. We must so speak as those who will be judged, knowing that he who shewed no mercy in his words will receive none (<em><a href='B:660 2:12-13'>Jas 2:12-13</a></em>); our words of mercy or condemnation, and perhaps&nbsp;<em>the way we say them,&nbsp;</em>will be the basis upon which we will be accepted or rejected.<br/>This lack of love was especially shown in their words: "So speak and act…”. Notice the equation of words and actions ("speak::. do"), continuing the theme of thoughts and words being the same as physical actions. "The law of liberty" is normally used elsewhere in contrast to the Law of Moses- another subtle swipe at the Judaist tendencies in the early Jewish ecclesias. We must speak our words in accordance with the fact that we will be judged by the word; if we have the word/law of liberty (cp. <em><a href='B:660 1:25'>Jas 1:25</a></em>) in our hearts and therefore influencing our words, we need not fear our judgement by that word. Thus we judge ourselves now by our response to the word in practice, by how far we let it influence our words and doings, especially in the area of showing love to our brother.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 2:13'>Jas 2:13</a></em><em>&nbsp;For judgment is without mercy to whomsoever has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment</em>-This appears to be alluding to <em><a href='B:220 22:6-11'>Job 22:6-11</a></em>, where Eliphaz says just the same about Job, saying that the harsh judgements coming upon Job were a result of him being harsh in his dealings with his fellow men previously- e:g. "Thou hast sent widows away empty:::therefore snares are round about thee" (AV), as they were around a widow. Several of the things Eliphaz mentions in his accusations of Job are also themes in James:</p><table><tr><td></p><h4><em><a href='B:220 22:6-11'>Job 22:6-11</a></em></td><td>James</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>"Thou hast:::stripped the naked of their clothing</td><td>"If a brother or sister be naked" (and you don't clothe them), (<em><a href='B:660 2:15'>Jas 2:15</a></em>)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Thou hast not given water to the weary to drink, and thou hast withholden bread from the hungry::.</td><td>"Destitute of daily food"</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>But as for the mighty man, he had the earth (i:e. you gave much to&nbsp;<em>him</em>)</td><td>"You have respect to him that wears the gay clothing" and neglect the poor (<em><a href='B:660 2:3'>Jas 2:3</a></em>)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>:::thou hast sent widows away empty, and the arms of the (<em><a href='B:220 22:9'>Job 22:9</a></em>) fatherless have been broken".</td><td>"Visit the fatherless and the widow in their affliction"</td><td></td></tr></table><p>If these connections are valid- and there are several other places where James is writing with Job in mind- then it appears that James did not see Job as beyond reproof; but that like those to whom James wrote he was a rich businessman, trusting in his own strength. This fits in to the many other indications that Job represented those Jews who trusted in the Law. If the allegations of Eliphaz in Job 22 are therefore partly true, Job's clearing of himself from these things in Job 31 is to be read as sophistry- and therefore this clearing of himself is vigorously rebuked by Elihu, speaking on God's behalf, in Job 32. It is not unreasonable to think that it is not just the recording of the friends' words that was inspired but that to some degree their rebuke of Job was also directly inspired by God, although not all they said can be treated like this. We are quick enough to accept their reasoning regarding the mortality of man as inspired statements of Divine truth- why not some of their other statements about Job?</h4><p>"<em>He</em>&nbsp;shall have judgment without mercy" suggests the picture of two people at the judgment seat being judged for the same sin; one is forgiven because he had showed mercy, while the other is rejected for not doing so. The rejoicing of the merciful brother is then set against the misery of the unmerciful brother. Mercy will then rejoice&nbsp;<em>against</em>&nbsp;judgment in the same way as the men of Nineveh will rise up&nbsp;<em>against</em>&nbsp;the unworthy at judgment day.</p><p>Note the implication that the believer should&nbsp;<em>shew&nbsp;</em>mercy. The Greek word translated "shewed" in v:13 is not the normal word translated thus. The word used here means literally 'to do a work', again continuing James' theme that spiritual actions are still 'works'. This lack of love and harsh judgement amongst James' audience was also connected with an academic emphasis on faith to the neglect of works- seeing that v:14 continues "What does it profit, my brethren, though a man say he has faith, and have not works? Can faith save him?". It seems true in practice that those who are busy actively expressing their faith in works tend to have less time for unnecessarily harsh judgement of others in the ecclesia. It did not "profit"- literally 'heap up'. Those to whom James wrote were hard working traders (<em><a href='B:660 4:13'>Jas 4:13</a></em>); thus such language was especially relevant to them. Again, James is working out a very telling play on words: 'Your heaping up of material profit while being academically familiar with your faith is not heaping up spiritual profit'. These brethren<em>&nbsp;said</em>&nbsp;they had faith. Later in chapter 3 James points out that because the word was not really controlling their thoughts, their words were uncontrolled. An example of this would be this public talking about their faith, heaping up a reward in the eyes of men.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 2:14'>Jas 2:14</a></em>&nbsp;<em>My brothers, what good is it if a man claims to have faith but has no works? Can that faith save him?</em>- James speaks of the man who says to his poor brother ‘Be ye warmed and filled’ but does nothing about it practically. This, James says, is dead faith; faith without works is not faith. But the man said those words, so James’ logic goes,&nbsp;<em>in faith</em>&nbsp;that somehow the poor man would be helped. Yet he did nothing, and therefore his faith wasn’t really faith; “can&nbsp;<em>that</em>&nbsp;faith save him?” (<em><a href='B:660 2:14'>Jas 2:14</a></em> RV). There is true faith, and ‘that’ kind of faith which only appears to be faith in the eyes of the person holding it.</p><p>A notable example of faith without works is then given in v:15,16. It ends with the challenge "What does it profit"- cp. v:14 "What does it profit:::though a man say he has faith, and have not works?".</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 2:15'>Jas 2:15</a></em>&nbsp;<em>If a brother or sister is naked and in lack of daily food</em>- It is probable that this was not a hypothetical situation; <em><a href='B:660 5:4-5'>Jas 5:4-5</a></em> describe some rich brethren as oppressing their brethren who were their agricultural employees. "Lack" means literally 'coming short', perhaps connecting with the fact that the employers kept back these brethren's wages (<em><a href='B:660 5:4'>Jas 5:4</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 2:16'>Jas 2:16</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And one of you says to them: Go in peace, be warmed and filled And yet you do not give them the things needful to the body- what does it profit?</em>- <em><a href='B:530 13:2'>1Co 13:2</a></em> makes the point that it is quite possible to have great faith without having any true love for one's brother. Similarly, these people were saying in absolute faith, really believing it would be done by God, "Go in peace, be warmed and filled". “Go” or "Depart" either implies they were told this by their employers to whom they came with their request, or perhaps that they were told to depart from the ecclesial meeting where such requests were considered. It would seem that their rich employers were these brethren who refused their requests. The mention of lack of food and clothing ("naked") recalls <em><a href='B:470 6:25'>Mat 6:25</a></em>, where the Lord assures His people that these needs will always be provided for. Yet the believers James writes of had to be concerned about these things. It may be that God provides for our needs by giving the means to the rich in the Ecclesia, but it still depends on their freewill decision to share what they have.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 2:17'>Jas 2:17</a></em><em>&nbsp;Even so, faith, if it does not have works, is dead in itself</em>- This is in the context of the previous eight verses which have been reprimanding the readers for the lack of a loving mind. These are the "works" which were lacking, as well as the physical "works" of giving material support. There must be a connection here with Christ's words: "Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abides alone: but if it die, it brings forth much fruit" (<em><a href='B:500 12:24'>Joh 12:24</a></em>). If this connection is valid, then James is equating faith with the seed of wheat. The seed represents the word (<em><a href='B:490 8:11'>Luk 8:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 1:23'>1Pe 1:23</a></em>), supremely manifested in the Lord Jesus. The equation is because "Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God". Thus James is saying that the word seed in us should bring forth fruit in our caring for others, in the same way as Jesus died in order to bring forth much spiritual fruit in us. The rich brethren needed to make the same kind of short term sacrifice due to the effect of the word in their lives, in order to care for their brethren's welfare, as Jesus did for them. It is significant that in v:26 faith is likened to a dead body, which is the same figure being used here in v:17.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 2:18'>Jas 2:18</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Yes, a man will say, you have faith and I have works. Show me your faith apart from your works and I, by my works, will show you my faith</em>- The man is implying that if James has faith and he has works, then between them they should be accepted. Thus the man was effectively advocating salvation by works, whilst agreeing that faith was also important- although not essential for him personally to develop. This sounds like the reasoning of the wavering Jewish believers. James replies that faith and works are indivisible, that true spiritual works cannot exist without faith. Thus it is irrelevant for a believer to think that he must concentrate on developing 'faith' or 'works' as independent things- what God looks for is 'faith-works', i:e. a faith whose very nature leads to works; a faith that&nbsp;<em>works&nbsp;</em>by love (<em><a href='B:550 5:6'>Gal 5:6</a></em>). Thus the works follow as an inevitable corollary from the faith, and therefore are not consciously performed. Therefore James reasons that a wise man will "shew out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom" (<em><a href='B:660 3:13'>Jas 3:13</a></em>). "You believe that there is one God"- the fundamental truth of Judaism which the Christian Jews prided themselves on- "the devils (demoniacs) also believe, and tremble" (v:19), alluding to the sick often trembling before their cure. This may refer to the many incidents of curing of demoniacs in the Gospels, all of whom were parabolic of the hopeless state of the Jewish system. More significantly, James is referring to the fact that many people during Christ's ministry had had the faith to be cured, but only a handful had responded with the works which a word based faith should have produced- as opposed to the intense hope and belief in personal betterment which the people had. The other person in the conversation is described as a "vain man" (v:20); "vain" meaning empty headed or minded, referring to the demoniac state of v:19. We saw in <em><a href='B:660 1:26'>Jas 1:26</a></em> how the man who did not have the word in his heart to control his tongue was also "vain". The man referred to here in <em><a href='B:660 2:20'>Jas 2:20</a></em> was without faith, and thus without the word, seeing this is the basis of faith. Faith without works is barren (v:20, Gk:). This is in the context of v:21 speaking of once barren Abraham (<em><a href='B:520 4:19'>Rom 4:19</a></em> implies he was impotent when Isaac was conceived) being "<em>our</em>&nbsp;father", as well as that of Isaac. Faith&nbsp;<em>with</em>&nbsp;works is therefore spiritually fruitful. Faith&nbsp;<em>without</em>&nbsp;works being barren or dead may hint at the deadness of Abraham's body and Sarah's womb (<em><a href='B:520 4:19'>Rom 4:19</a></em>). Despite having produced Isaac, their faith and works were only completed by the offering up of Isaac. Until that point, they were still effectively 'dead' in God's sight, not being totally proven.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 2:19'>Jas 2:19</a></em>&nbsp;<em>You believe that God is one You do well. The demons also believe and shudder</em>- <em><a href='B:660 2:14-18'>Jas 2:14-18</a></em> speaks of the connection between&nbsp;<em>faith</em>&nbsp;(believing) and&nbsp;<em>works</em>&nbsp;(doing). It is no co-incidence that <em><a href='B:660 2:19'>Jas 2:19</a></em> then says in this context: "You&nbsp;<em>believe</em>&nbsp;that God is one… you&nbsp;<em>do</em>&nbsp;well". To have&nbsp;<em>faith</em>&nbsp;in the unity of God will lead to&nbsp;<em>works</em>, 'doing well'.<br/>“Demons” is put here by metonymy for the supposedly demon possessed people, and their observed ‘trembling’ at the time of their cure. But I don’t think that this verse is James as it were telling us doctrinal truth about demons. The context of James 2 shows it to be part of an imagined dialogue between the “works man” who thinks works can save, and a “faith man” who thinks merely saying we believe is enough and our lives are irrelevant. Both these imaginary men come out with ‘wrong’ statements, so it’s not surprising that the ‘works man’ disparages ‘faith’ by saying that even demon possessed people can believe and be cured. Of itself, this passage can hardly be taken as proof that demons really do believe – the usual position taken is that demons are fallen angels who cannot believe and cannot repent nor be healed. This passage even taken on face value would contradict that system of belief.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 2:20'>Jas 2:20</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But, O vain man, do you need evidence that faith without works is useless?</em>- Faith without works is “barren” (<em><a href='B:660 2:20'>Jas 2:20</a></em> RV)- the implication being that if we do the works which our beliefs elicit from us, yet more creative fruit is brought forth. And James goes straight on to speak of Abraham offering Isaac (<em><a href='B:660 2:21'>Jas 2:21</a></em>)- as if to say that Abraham and Sarah’s ‘barrenness’ was overcome by their faith, and this led them to the ‘opportunity’ to show yet more faith in being prepared to offer Isaac:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 2:21'>Jas 2:21</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Was not Abraham our father justified by works, in that he offered up Isaac his son upon the altar?</em>- James goes on to show how Abraham's faith brought works as a natural by-product. The phrase "Abraham our father" looks back to <em><a href='B:470 3:8-9'>Mat 3:8-9</a></em> and <em><a href='B:500 8:33'>Joh 8:33</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 8:39'>Joh 8:39</a></em>, where the Jews who said this were told to "bring forth fruits (works) meet for repentance" and to "do the works of Abraham" respectively. Thus James was telling his readers to do the works of Abraham. The fact they were doing works already shows that the real 'work' of Abraham they needed to develop was his faith. "This is the work of God, that ye believe" (<em><a href='B:500 6:29'>Joh 6:29</a></em>), Jesus had said. The Biblically minded would have spotted the apparently flat contradiction between "Abraham our father (was) justified by works" and <em><a href='B:520 4:2'>Rom 4:2</a></em>, which stresses that Abraham was not justified by his works but by his faith. Thus again the "works" which James says Abraham was justified by were his faith&nbsp;<em>and</em>&nbsp;the practical outworking of it in being prepared to offer Isaac. Abraham's "works" were that "he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar" (v:21). Notice the past tense of "he had offered" and that it does not say 'he bound Isaac:::'. Because of Abraham's faith that God would resurrect Isaac on behalf of the perfect lamb sacrifice that he believed was to come (<em><a href='B:10 22:5'>Gen 22:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 22:8'>Gen 22:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 22:14'>Gen 22:14</a></em>), it was reckoned to Abraham as if he had performed the 'work' of offering Isaac even though he had not physically performed it. Thus the Biblically minded would be able to see from these allusions to other Scriptures that the spiritual attribute of faith and the concept of works are almost indivisible. This is confirmed by noting that the one act of offering up Isaac is described as "works" in the plural- because it involved many separate decisions of faith. And in our lives too, God may count something to us as a completed work when we have only summoned enough true faith to do it, and have not actually performed it in reality.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 2:22'>Jas 2:22</a></em>&nbsp;<em>You saw that faith worked together with his works, and so by works was faith perfected</em>- Faith is perfected / matured by the process of works (<em><a href='B:660 2:22-23'>Jas 2:22-23</a></em>). The works, the upward spiral of a life lived on the basis of faith, develop the initial belief in practice. Thus Abraham believed God in Genesis 15, but the works of Genesis 22 offering Isaac made that faith “perfect”. It is that faith, therefore, which does the works. Verse 22 puts this in so many words: "Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?". Note too the upward spiral initiated by having a basic faith- faith led to works, and those works perfected the faith. The Greek word for "wrought" is the same translated 'worker together' in <em><a href='B:540 6:1'>2Co 6:1</a></em>: "We then, as workers together with (God)". Faith 'works' alongside the physical works. The preceding verse (<em><a href='B:540 5:21'>2Co 5:21</a></em>) speaks of how God is working through His gift of Christ for our salvation through our not relying on our own works. Paul says he is working together with God to get the believers not to "receive the grace of God in vain" by relying on their physical works for salvation. By having this attitude to works and faith, Abraham's faith was "made perfect" or finished, implying that it is possible for a man to develop a fullness of faith in something, a totality of belief which needs no further improvement. If Abraham could reach this dizzy height, it must certainly be within reach of all his seed.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 2:23'>Jas 2:23</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And the scripture was fulfilled which said: And Abraham believed God and it was accredited to him as righteousness; and he was called the friend of God</em>- <em><a href='B:660 2:23'>Jas 2:23</a></em> speaks as if the comment "Abraham believed in God, and it was counted to him for righteousness" was a one-off statement made at that time when Abraham believed; and it was subsequently justified when Abraham demonstrated his faith by offering Isaac. So the comment that "Abraham believed" surely must refer to Abraham's response as he stood there looking up at the stars.</p><p>This is quoting <em><a href='B:10 15:5-6'>Gen 15:5-6</a></em>, where in the moment that Abraham looked up at the stars and believed (so <em><a href='B:520 4:23'>Rom 4:23</a></em> implies) "So shall your seed be", God "counted it to him for righteousness". God knew that Abraham's faith in those words would really be shown when he was asked to offer Isaac, the only human means of their fulfilment. Thus the Scripture recorded that Abraham was righteous when this was as yet unproved by his works. However, that Scripture was fulfilled when Abraham was prepared to offer Isaac. The point is being made that just that kind of intense faith is as if the works have already been done- which is exactly in line with James' preceding reasoning. The use of the phrase "The Scripture" implies that either there was a literal written account made of the words of <em><a href='B:10 15:6'>Gen 15:6</a></em> which was then validated by Abraham's offering of Isaac (note "<em>was</em>&nbsp;fulfilled", past tense), or "The Scripture" refers to some kind of (Angelic?) record in Heaven of events in our probations, similar to the concept of the deeds of believers being written in a book of life. The evidence for either seems about equal, and there is no reason why both cannot be correct. "The scripture of truth" in <em><a href='B:340 10:21'>Dan 10:21</a></em> appears to have been some written record available to the Angels which they revealed to man. "The Scripture" elsewhere in James seems to refer to the general spirit of God's principles in dealing with man: "The Scripture saith:::The spirit that dwelleth in us::." (<em><a href='B:660 4:5'>Jas 4:5</a></em>) does not seem to refer to any specific written scripture, and "the royal law" (i:e. what was specifically placed on record) seems to be separate from "the scripture" in <em><a href='B:660 2:8'>Jas 2:8</a></em>. Similarly "the scripture" foresaw that God would justify the heathen (<em><a href='B:550 3:8'>Gal 3:8</a></em>), and "concluded all under sin "(<em><a href='B:550 3:22'>Gal 3:22</a></em>), hinting that "the scripture" is more than just the written words. Writing was certainly developed by Abraham's time, and a literal written statement of Abraham's acceptance with God being verified by his offering of Isaac is an attractive idea. That "the scripture" which was fulfilled at the time of the offering of Isaac (<em><a href='B:660 2:20'>Jas 2:20</a></em>) was something written is suggested in <em><a href='B:520 4:22-23'>Rom 4:22-23</a></em>, where the fact "it was imputed to him" in <em><a href='B:10 15:6'>Gen 15:6</a></em> "was not written for his sake alone". The fact Abraham was justified for his faith was written for Abraham to see at some time in his life. The point has been made&nbsp;that the descriptions of Sodom in <em><a href='B:10 10:19'>Gen 10:19</a></em> (cp. <em><a href='B:10 14:3'>Gen 14:3</a></em>) imply that Genesis 10 was written before Sodom's destruction as recorded in Genesis 19. Thus it is reasonable to suggest that Genesis 15 may also have been in written existence.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 2:24'>Jas 2:24</a></em>&nbsp;<em>You see that by works a man is justified and not only by faith</em>- Romans 4 stresses that works do&nbsp;<em>not&nbsp;</em>justify a man, but rather a true faith that is expressed in actions. "Faith only" must therefore refer to a holding of true doctrine and a hope that God provides physical help, as characterized by the healed demoniacs (<em><a href='B:660 2:19'>Jas 2:19</a></em>) and exemplified by those who asked in prayer for things to "consume upon your lusts" (<em><a href='B:660 4:2-3'>Jas 4:2-3</a></em>). There is a definite connection between "faith" as a spiritual quality and "the faith" as the set of doctrines which the believer accepts. It is these which produce the attribute of faith. The "works" James is referring to are 'faith works'- i:e. works that come as a natural corollary to faith and which include spiritual attributes like belief in God's word.</p>


text:
<h4><em><a href='B:660 2:25'>Jas 2:25</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And in like manner was not also Rahab the harlot justified by works, in that she received the messengers and sent them out another way?</em>- The use of the word "messengers" instead of "spies" implies that the spies came with a message which Rahab believed. The Joshua record stresses how she knew the covenant Name, knew and quoted the words of Moses (<em><a href='B:60 2:9'>Jos 2:9</a></em>), and had her roof covered with flax- i:e. linen, perhaps hinting at the righteousness already imputed to her for her faith. The message which the spies brought was probably a call to repentance, or perhaps a statement of the coming destruction of Jericho. Rahab's acceptance of this message based on her knowledge of God's basic principles corresponds to the holding of 'the faith' by the Jewish Christians. Her sending out of the spies another way was the 'works' that came as a natural response to her true faith. Her hiding of the spies, courageous lying to the Jericho Gestapo or putting the cord out of the window as a public testimony to her separation were her physical 'works'- but these are not chosen as an example of her 'faith-works'. Her scheming to enable the spies to safely return to Joshua by them going out "another way" and thereby enabling the campaign against Jericho to begin, showed her real "works". She believed their message about the destruction of Jericho, therefore in faith she enabled the spies to return to bring this about. Rahab was "justified:::&nbsp;<em>when</em>::.", again showing that justification or faith being made perfect (v:22) is something that can occur at a specific moment after reaching a certain degree of faith which has been expressed in actions (cp. Abraham looking up at the stars and believing). The implication here in v:25 is that the moment the spies were sneaking through the outskirts of Jericho following her directions, Rahab was justified.</h4>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 2:26'>Jas 2:26</a></em><em>&nbsp;For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, even so faith apart from works is dead</em>-'Faith' is being likened to a person, i:e. the believer in the conversation of v:18-20 who thinks that his own faith alone will save him. "The Spirit" is often a reference to a spiritual mind, notably in Romans. Thus the body is equated with faith as the Spirit or spiritual attributes are with "works".</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 3:1'>Jas 3:1</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Be not many teachers. My brothers, realize that we teachers shall receive heavier judgment</em>- We will be condemned by the very presence of the excellence of the Lord's glory; but we will have judgment / condemnation with mercy (<em><a href='B:660 2:13'>Jas 2:13</a></em>); we will receive damnation, and yet be saved (<em><a href='B:660 3:1'>Jas 3:1</a></em>).</p><p>James continues to be increasingly specific as to how the word should act upon us to produce a spiritual character. The whole of Chapter 3 is devoted to showing how&nbsp;<em>our</em>&nbsp;words are the clearest indicator of how&nbsp;<em>the</em>&nbsp;word is affecting our heart, and the emphasis we should therefore give to the control of the tongue and the thoughts behind it. This being addressed to those leading the ecclesia further suggests that this letter was written primarily to the rich Jewish believers who were the Spirit gifted eldership in the mainly Jewish ecclesias of the first century. These two verses must have <em><a href='B:470 23:8'>Mat 23:8</a></em> in mind: "Be not you called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all you are brethren". Hence James addresses them as "my brethren", gently reminding them that they were not masters but brethren. The context of Matthew 23 is denouncing the Pharisees for loving the prominent seats in synagogues and to be publicly recognized for their righteousness, which again indicates that these brethren were influenced by Judaistic attitudes. We have seen how in <em><a href='B:660 2:2-3'>Jas 2:2-3</a></em> they were placing great importance on having good seats in the synagogue/ecclesia. "Masters" means 'teachers'; and maybe this is echoing Paul's condemnation of the Jews in <em><a href='B:520 2:17-24'>Rom 2:17-24</a></em>: "You are called a Jew::. and makes your boast (cp. <em><a href='B:660 4:16'>Jas 4:16</a></em>) of God::. and are confident that you yourself are::. an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes". There are several other links:</p><table><tr><td></p><h4><em><a href='B:520 2:17-24'>Rom 2:17-24</a></em></td><td>James</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>"Makest thy boast of God"</td><td>The tongue of the teachers in the ecclesia boasted (<em><a href='B:660 3:5'>Jas 3:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 4:16'>Jas 4:16</a></em>)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>"Knowest His will"- so they thought.</td><td>They should have said "If the Lord will" (<em><a href='B:660 4:15'>Jas 4:15</a></em>)- implying they thought they already knew God's will.</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>"An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes"</td><td>"Many masters" (teachers); <em><a href='B:660 3:1'>Jas 3:1</a></em></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>"Dost thou commit adultery?"</td><td>"Ye adulterers" (<em><a href='B:660 4:4'>Jas 4:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 2:11'>Jas 2:11</a></em>)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>"Through breaking the Law"</td><td>"Ye commit sin, and are convinced of the Law as transgressors" (<em><a href='B:660 2:9'>Jas 2:9</a></em>)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>"The name of God is blasphemed among the which ye Gentiles because of you (Jews).</td><td>"Rich men… the judgement seats(Gentiles) :::blaspheme that worthy name by (Jewish believers) are called" (<em><a href='B:660 2:6-7'>Jas 2:6-7</a></em>)</td><td></td></tr></table>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 3:2'>Jas 3:2</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For in many things we all make others stumble. If any does not cause stumbling by his words, the same is a perfect man, able to bridle the whole body also</em>- We all offend others (<em><a href='B:660 3:2'>Jas 3:2</a></em>), and he who offends his brother will be condemned. Those who are sleeping at the Lord’s coming will be found unworthy, so says the spirit in Thessalonians. But in the Lord’s parable,&nbsp;<em>all</em>&nbsp;the virgins are sleeping at His coming, wise and foolish alike. They were all living on far too low a level, and yet the Lord will save them us by grace alone. God accepts we aren’t going to make it as we should. There ought to be no schism in the body (<em><a href='B:530 12:25'>1Co 12:25</a></em>), but He realizes that inevitably there will be (<em><a href='B:530 11:19'>1Co 11:19</a></em>).<br/>Their desire to be teachers therefore indicated that they were bringing the attitude of their former religion and the surrounding world into the ecclesia. The rest of Chapter 3 is about the tongue; James' argument therefore seems to run 'As a teacher you will have to speak many words, and the chances are (v:2) your words will offend someone in the ecclesia. Remember that as a teacher of the ecclesia you are responsible for the flock, and therefore "we shall receive the greater condemnation"(v:1). Only a "perfect man" who has his words totally in control will not offend anyone, and only he is "able also to bridle the whole body" (v:2)- the ecclesia, the body of Christ'. It is worth noting that our judgement in the last day will take into account the quality of our converts and the effort we have made to build up others. Our receiving condemnation as a result of being masters may be alluding to <em><a href='B:470 12:37'>Mat 12:37</a></em>: "By your words you shall be justified, and by your words you shall be condemned". In this case, the words Christ is speaking about are specifically our words to our brethren and sisters. The context in v:34 is Christ telling the teachers of the law that it was impossible for them to "speak (i:e. teach) good things" because their heart was evil. "A good man out of the good treasure of the heart brings forth good things" (v:35), which connects with the description of the Scribes (teacher of the Law) instructed in the Truth bringing forth "out of his treasure things new and old" (<em><a href='B:470 13:52'>Mat 13:52</a></em>). The ideal ecclesial 'master' will not offend any in the ecclesia because his words are controlled on account of his being a "perfect man". <em><a href='B:620 3:16-17'>2Ti 3:16-17</a></em> says that the word of God through the spirit has the power to create a perfect man (cp. <em><a href='B:530 13:8-10'>1Co 13:8-10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 4:8-13'>Eph 4:8-13</a></em>). <em><a href='B:660 1:4-5'>Jas 1:4-5</a></em> has shown that by the wisdom of the word, a man can be made "perfect and entire". Only such a brother will be able to "bridle the whole body" (ecclesia). Earlier, in <em><a href='B:660 1:26'>Jas 1:26</a></em>, the bridling of the tongue is spoken of as a result of the word acting on the heart. Thus only someone able to bridle his own tongue can bridle the ecclesia. That this interpretation is on the right lines is also suggested by v:6 talking about the "members::. the whole body" being influenced by the tongue. This is the language of 1 Corinthians 12 concerning the ecclesial body.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 3:3'>Jas 3:3</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Now if we put the horses' bridles into their mouths that they may obey us, we turn about their whole body also</em>- This can probably be read on two levels- the need to control our lives by concentrating on the control of the mouths (the tongue), and also the implication that the whole body of the ecclesia can be turned about by their leader controlling the ecclesial tongue- i:e. encouraging the members to control their thoughts and words. And this is exactly what James, the real leader of the Jerusalem ecclesia and the Jewish believers of the Diaspora (<em><a href='B:660 1:1'>Jas 1:1</a></em>), was trying to do. The way he asserts his own leadership like this is so subtle that only the thoughtful and spiritually aware would appreciate it. The Greek&nbsp;<em>pletho&nbsp;</em>translated 'obey' carries the idea of yielding and friendly confidence- as one would deal with a horse; and this is precisely how James was trying to influence this ecclesial "body". This was to the end that the body would be turned about, a phrase implying a total about turn, thus showing the degree to which the ecclesia needed to change. The reference to bits in the horses' mouths is an allusion to <em><a href='B:230 32:8-9'>Psa 32:8-9</a></em>. This teaches that the understanding of God, having experienced His mercy, should lead us to control our tongues, rather than our having to be forced to do so by a bridle. This fits in with the teaching of v:8, that the tongue cannot be tamed by man's human efforts (cp. bit and bridle), seeing that the natural mind which produces our words is 'beyond cure' (<em><a href='B:300 17:9'>Jer 17:9</a></em> Heb:).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 3:4'>Jas 3:4</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Behold the ships also, though they are so great and are driven by rough winds, they are all the same turned about by a very small rudder, wherever the impulse of the steersman wills</em>- The figure of the ecclesia's leaders as the rider and the church as the horse is now transferred to that of a captain steering the ship. Again, emphasis is given to how relatively easy it is to control the direction of our spiritual lives and the whole ecclesia- by a dedicated concentration on the control of the tongue and the thinking behind it. The ships seem "so great" (translated "mighty" in <em><a href='B:730 16:18'>Rev 16:18</a></em>); the flesh seems so vast and strong, the task of turning round a wayward ecclesia appears so impossible. They "are driven of fierce winds" representing the winds of false Judaist doctrine (<em><a href='B:560 4:14'>Eph 4:14</a></em>), and the winds of the flesh and trials of life which beat upon the spiritual house of our lives and the ecclesia, as described in the parable of the house on the rock (<em><a href='B:470 7:25-27'>Mat 7:25-27</a></em>). Note how the immature ecclesia is being likened to a ship blown about by the wind, and yet this was a foretaste of judgment day. Our experiences now are training for that day. The winds of the parable of Matthew 7 were overcome by hacking away at the rock of our hard human heart in order to hear the sayings of Christ and put them into practice. It is significant that the winds of <em><a href='B:660 1:6'>Jas 1:6</a></em> could be overcome by faith, which comes from the word. The wavering believer is likened there to a ship in trouble on a windy sea. The ship can be turned about "Wherever the impulse of the steersman wills". The hint may be that there is a greater steersman in our lives than our own steel will, and He works by the impulse of the Spirit. The word for "wills" means 'intense desire or will', showing the great concentration of mental effort required by the captain of the spiritual ship. Again, the way to have a powerful will is to have our own personal will merged with that of God. The will of God is in the word (<em><a href='B:670 1:23'>1Pe 1:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 1:18'>Jas 1:18</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:500 1:13'>Joh 1:13</a></em>), and a saturation of the mind with the word will result in our mind becoming like that of God. Thus <em><a href='B:500 15:7'>Joh 15:7</a></em> states the tremendous encouragement: "If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, you shall ask what you will, and it shall be done". Jesus does not say we must ask according to God's will- but according to our&nbsp;<em>own</em>&nbsp;will, because if the word abides in us then our will becomes that of God- and any prayer according to His will is heard (<em><a href='B:690 5:14'>1Jn 5:14</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 3:5'>Jas 3:5</a></em><em>&nbsp;So the tongue also is a little member, and boasts great things. Behold, how much wood is kindled by how small a fire</em>-The believer is identified with his tongue. "A little (Greek: micro) member" stresses the small physical size of the tongue in proportion to the vast spiritual effect it has. If the body and its members also have reference to the ecclesia as a whole, it may be that James is implying that one very subtle member- i:e. an individual in the ecclesia- was using his words to mislead the ecclesia. The ship can be easily influenced- by either a good or bad governor. The individual referred to was probably an agent of the Judaizers, whom the New Testament often describes as doing their evil work through "Great swelling words of vanity" (<em><a href='B:720 1:16'>Jud 1:16</a></em>; see too <em><a href='B:710 1:10'>3Jn 1:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:680 2:3'>2Pe 2:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 2:14'>2Ti 2:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:610 6:4'>1Ti 6:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 2:4'>Col 2:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 5:6'>Eph 5:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 1:17'>1Co 1:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 16:18'>Rom 16:18</a></em>). The tongue boasting "great things" is looking back to <em><a href='B:230 12:2-3'>Psa 12:2-3</a></em>: "They speak vanity every one with his neighbour: with flattering lips and with a&nbsp;<em>double heart&nbsp;</em>do they speak. The Lord shall cut off all flattering lips, and the tongue that speaketh great things" (AVmg:) The context of bad words coming as a result of a double mind is exactly the same as in James (<em><a href='B:660 1:8'>Jas 1:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 4:8'>Jas 4:8</a></em>). the vain man of <em><a href='B:230 12:2'>Psa 12:2</a></em> is mentioned again in <em><a href='B:660 2:20'>Jas 2:20</a></em>. <em><a href='B:230 12:4-5'>Psa 12:4-5</a></em> also have connections with James. Psalms 12 concludes with praise of God's words: "The words of the Lord are pure words" (v:6), as if to suggest that the word of God is the antidote to proud speaking. This all fits the context of James nicely. Thus "the tongue" here in <em><a href='B:660 3:5'>Jas 3:5</a></em> is being used to represent a group of proud, vain talkers within the ecclesial body, who were probably all influenced by the Judaizers, possibly with one specific ringleader. Being "a little member" of the ecclesia, this group may not have been numerically large. "Behold, how great a matter ('wood') a little fire kindles" (v:5). The Greek word for "little" here is different from that in the phrase "a little member". This implies rather a short period of time- i:e. 'consider what havoc can be caused by fire so quickly'. The implication is that James' readers needed to act quickly both to bring their own tongue under control and also to restrain "the tongue" element that were leading the ecclesia astray, and soon would burn down the ecclesia- represented by the 'wood', composed of "the planting of the Lord". The New Testament epistles often give reason to think that the ecclesia will be in a state of great spiritual weakness just prior to the second coming. Those who find this hard to believe should bear in mind how&nbsp;<em>quickly</em>&nbsp;a small group of brethren can influence the ecclesia for bad.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 3:6'>Jas 3:6</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:660 1:23'>Jas 1:23</a></em>.</p><p><em>And the tongue is a fire. The world of iniquity among our members is the tongue, which defiles the whole body and sets on fire the wheel of nature, and is set on fire by Gehenna</em>- Our words are as fire, and are to be connected with the fire of condemnation (<em><a href='B:660 3:5-6'>Jas 3:5-6</a></em>), which our words have already kindled (<em><a href='B:490 12:49'>Luk 12:49</a></em>). Speaking of the last day <em><a href='B:290 33:11'>Isa 33:11</a></em> had foretold: "your breath i:e. words, as fire, shall devour you". See on <em><a href='B:660 5:3'>Jas 5:3</a></em>.</p><p>If we may speak in human terms, the speed and power of God’s intellect is such that He does not need words as we do in order to reason and reach conclusions. This begins to be reflected by the way in which the Bible is full (fuller than many realize) of the device of metonymy, whereby the cause is put for the effect. The piercing analysis of God is reflected by the way in which He uses this linguistic device so frequently. Much misunderstanding of the atonement has arisen through failing to appreciate God’s use of metonymy. Other examples include <em><a href='B:660 3:6'>Jas 3:6</a></em>, where “the tongue” means the words the tongue speaks; and <em><a href='B:690 5:15'>1Jn 5:15</a></em>, where God hearing our prayers means (see context) that He answers them. Unless we appreciate metonymy, we will come to the conclusion that God’s word is making incorrect statements; for example, that mere possession of a tongue means that our whole body is defiled (<em><a href='B:660 3:6'>Jas 3:6</a></em>).</p><p>The root of all sin is in our hearts (<em><a href='B:300 17:9'>Jer 17:9</a></em>), and as the tongue so accurately reflects the heart, it is "a world of iniquity". God "has set the world in (man's) heart" (<em><a href='B:250 3:11'>Ecc 3:11</a></em>), which means that "there is no good in" man (<em><a href='B:250 3:12'>Ecc 3:12</a></em>), i:e. in man's heart. The tongue will defile the whole body- the ecclesia, and also our individual lives. Remember how in <em><a href='B:660 2:26'>Jas 2:26</a></em> a man's spiritual life is also likened to a body. The tongue defiles the body. This is alluding to the Lord's words in <em><a href='B:470 15:11'>Mat 15:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 15:18'>Mat 15:18</a></em> that "those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man". Jesus says our evil desires defile us; James describes our tongue as doing the same, again showing the effective identification of our thoughts and words. We have suggested that "the body" refers to both the ecclesia and the spiritual life of the believers. There are many references to "the body" which cannot be applied to our physical body; most obviously <em><a href='B:660 3:2'>Jas 3:2</a></em> speaks of the body being bridled by control of the tongue. Similarly, every part of the body we have in the Kingdom will be spiritually aware and significant. It is for this reason that abuse of the body we now have is such a serious offence. The word for 'defile' is the same translated 'spot' regarding the need for a believer to keep himself and his spiritual garments unspotted by the world (<em><a href='B:660 1:27'>Jas 1:27</a></em>)- thus equating "the body" and the garments, and "the world" with our evil thinking which leads to our bad works. Remember that God has set the world in our heart, so that there is no good in man (<em><a href='B:250 3:11-12'>Ecc 3:11-12</a></em>). The tongue and the evil heart behind it "sets on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell" (v:6). We have commented earlier on this. The tongue will be set on fire of Gehenna- i:e. the destruction of the physical body of the rejected at the judgement will be the destruction of his "tongue", seeing that there is a certain association between our spiritual character and our physical body. The language here implies physical fire may be used to destroy the unworthy saints- an idea supported elsewhere.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 3:7'>Jas 3:7</a></em><em>&nbsp;For every kind of beasts and birds, of creeping things and things in the sea, is tamed and has been tamed by mankind</em>-"Mankind" in Greek is from two words- 'Man' and 'kind'. The latter is the same as occurs earlier in the verse, and as well as meaning a genus it fundamentally means 'nature' (see A:V:mg). In the same way as a horse and ship can be "tamed" because we can relatively easily analyse their nature and make them respond in an expected way to a certain stimulus, it seems that some in the ecclesia were thinking that the use of human wisdom could tame our animal human nature. Marshall's Interlinear offers the rendering "every nature of beasts::. has been tamed by human nature". The fact animals have increasingly been tamed by man ("is tamed and hath been tamed") perhaps encouraged these believers to think that there could be a gradual progression in the taming of human nature also by human strength. The connection between the animals and our bestial sinful instincts would have been appreciated by these brethren; "every kind" of animals had been increasingly tamed, and thus they thought human strength could also tame human nature.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 3:8'>Jas 3:8</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But the tongue no one can tame; it is a restless evil, it is full of deadly poison</em>- our pets are more obedient to us than our tongues. The Greek for "mankind" well describes the reasoning ability of our human nature that can apparently tame animal instincts. "Man" alone can imply human, semi-spiritual reasoning- e:g. "I speak (reason) after the manner of men", or "I am speaking in human terms" (N:I:V:) in <em><a href='B:520 6:19'>Rom 6:19</a></em>. "Kind" carries the idea of growth by germination.<br/>But rather than being progressively tamed, human nature is in a progressive downward spiral to death if it goes unchecked (<em><a href='B:660 1:14-15'>Jas 1:14-15</a></em>). The deception of our natural thinking is that to a limited extent it can be spiritually sound: "The Gentiles::. do by nature the things contained in the law" (<em><a href='B:520 2:14'>Rom 2:14</a></em>), "nature itself" teaches the spiritual principles governing hair length (<em><a href='B:530 11:14'>1Co 11:14</a></em>). Like James' ecclesia, it is possible to live in the Truth adhering to correct doctrine- "the faith"- and make a half-hearted attempt to develop a spiritual mind to control our actions in our own strength. James argues for a totality of success in our spiritual lives; he is saying that any striving for spiritual development based on our natural reasoning will fail, ultimately, to develop the high standard of being totally spiritual that James is setting. He holds up Abraham and Rahab as examples of those who did reach a certain point of fullness of faith and subsequent justification with God, showing that such a state is not impossible for us. <em><a href='B:720 1:10'>Jud 1:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:720 1:12'>Jud 1:12</a></em> describes the Judaizers speaking "great swelling words:::which they know naturally" at the communion service ("feast of charity"). This again suggests that James' warning about using natural wisdom- i:e. from within our own nature- to control the ecclesial body and our own lives is aimed at a group of false teachers within the ecclesia who were controlling the ecclesia and encouraging its members to control themselves by relying on the mental abilities of human nature, rather than on the wisdom from the word filling the mind. "But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison" (v:8).</p><p>The likening of "the tongue" to a deadly snake invites comparison with the serpent in Eden, and therefore with the Judaizers, who "as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty" were enticing Christians away "from the simplicity which is in Christ" by preaching "another Gospel" based on "another Spirit"- i:e. of the human spirit or mind, as opposed to the Holy Spirit which was in the word of the true Gospel (<em><a href='B:540 11:3-4'>2Co 11:3-4</a></em>). The serpent in Eden is elsewhere a symbol of the Jewish system. The serpent was to be&nbsp;<em>destroyed</em>, not just tamed, by the seed of the woman. The serpent/ devil being in our natural mind, our tongue must be regarded by us as a rampant snake, seeing that it reflects our thoughts. The following verse 9 contains another allusion to early Genesis. By the tongue, the man made in God's similitude is cursed, due to the serpent's tongue. Through the unbridled tongue and also the influence of the Judaist serpent, the new creation of believers could be cursed, as they can be today too. The tongue cannot be tamed by man; the emphasis being on the word "man". Yet in <em><a href='B:660 1:26'>Jas 1:26</a></em> we saw that the mark of a true believer influenced by the word is that he&nbsp;<em>can&nbsp;</em>bridle his tongue. Thus here James is saying that "no man" in the sense of the natural man, a reliance on human strength, can control the tongue. There must be a connection with the demoniac Legion whom no man could tame (<em><a href='B:480 5:4'>Mar 5:4</a></em>)- perhaps in that he also represented the Jewish system. There is also an echo here of Paul's description of how human nature is so impossible for the natural man to control: "The carnal mind::. is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be::. in my flesh dwelleth no good thing::. how to perform that which is good I find not" (<em><a href='B:520 8:7'>Rom 8:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 7:18'>Rom 7:18</a></em>). Thus it is not a question of changing the carnal mind by the strength of the carnal mind; Paul says that is impossible; but of creating a "new man" by a spirit or power of reasoning outside the natural man. If the spirit of man is no use, the only other source of power is God's Holy Spirit. The parallels between the untamable nature of the tongue and that of our evil thinking as described in Romans shows how exactly our words are to be equated with the thinking of our heart. The tongue is "an unruly evil"; Strong defines "unruly" as 'unrestrainable', which fits in with the exposition offered above.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 3:9'>Jas 3:9</a></em>&nbsp;<em>With this we bless the Lord and the Father, and with this we curse men, even though they are made after the likeness of God</em>- James warns his converts of the need to restrain our tongue; and yet he admits that “we”, himself included, use the tongue to bless God and curse men; whereas in other parts of his letter he addresses his readers as “you” when he criticizes their behaviour. But in this matter of the tongue, he holds himself, their teacher, to be afflicted with the same failures as them (<em><a href='B:660 3:9'>Jas 3:9</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:660 4:15-16'>Jas 4:15-16</a></em>).</p><h4>James himself appeals in his letter for us to bridle the tongue. But here he seems to say that the tongue is uncontrollable, and “we”- he includes himself- use it to both bless God and curse men. And he goes on to say that this shouldn’t be so, because a good tree brings forth good fruit, i:e. words. Inappropriate words from our mouths indicate that there is something fundamentally wrong with our spirituality. What is the reconciliation of this? I suggest that James, despite being a leading brother, is showing a chink in his own armour, and thereby empowering his message all the more. He is saying that he himself has to admit that “we”, including himself, do sometimes say inappropriate things. The tongue can be bridled, it can be as Peter puts it ‘refrained’. But in practice, no man seems able to totally tame the tongue. And this is why James also says in this very context that we shouldn’t be eager to be teachers, because it is almost inevitable that we will use words wrongly and thereby offend our brother, with all the Biblical implications this carries: “For in many things we offend all. If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man” (<em><a href='B:660 3:2'>Jas 3:2</a></em>). James, a teacher in the ecclesia, a Master in Israel, says that “we”, himself included, at times offend others; because “the tongue can no man tame”. And yet it&nbsp;<em>can</em>&nbsp;be bridled, refrained, tamed, just as a horse can be tamed by use of a bridle. Surely what James is saying is this: ‘This matter of the tongue worries me no end. I know I, and all of us, could tame our tongues. It’s vital we do. But inappropriate words do still come out of me, and you. And it worries me, because a good tree doesn’t bear such bad fruit. It seems no man among us can tame his tongue as he ought. Oh wretched men that we are. Me especially, because I’m your teacher, James the brother of Jesus Himself. Yes, let us strive the more earnestly in this matter of bridling the tongue. But who in the end shall deliver us from this bondage of corruption, this seeming inability to live and speak and do and be as we ought to? I thank God, through Jesus Christ our Lord and His saving grace’.</h4><p>God as creator created man in His own image; and therefore we shouldn't curse men (<em><a href='B:660 3:9'>Jas 3:9</a></em>). By reason of the image they bear, we are to act to all men as we would to God Himself; we are not to treat some men as we would animals, who are not in the image of God. Because we are made in God's image, we should therefore not kill other humans (<em><a href='B:10 9:6'>Gen 9:6</a></em>). James says the same, in essence, in teaching that because we are in God's image, we shouldn't curse others. To curse a man is to kill him. That's the point of James' allusion to Genesis and to God as creator. Quite simply, respect for the person of others is inculcated by sustained reflection on the way that they too are created in God's image.</p><p>The fact that they did use their tongues to praise God tempted James' readers to think that this meant that they had their tongues and therefore their thinking too in control. Again, the warning against semi-spirituality and a 'feel good religion' comes over. We have seen that the rich, proud speaking members of the ecclesia are the target of much of what James is saying. Our previous notes on <em><a href='B:660 2:6'>Jas 2:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 2:16'>Jas 2:16</a></em> have shown that this group were quite aggressive to the lower ranks of believers. The men "made after the similitude of God" may well refer to the creative power of the word making them in God's image. As with Daniel, Nehemiah and other faithful spiritual leaders of the Jews, James totally associates himself with his brethren-&nbsp;<em>we&nbsp;</em>curse men, he says. It is noteworthy that as a faithful shepherd James does not disassociate himself from this wayward flock. However, elsewhere in the letter he repeatedly addresses them as "ye"- e:g. v:14 is in the same passage concerning control of the tongue: "<em>Ye&nbsp;</em>have bitter envying and strife in your hearts". The only other places where James associates himself with the readers are in <em><a href='B:660 3:1-2'>Jas 3:1-2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 3:6'>Jas 3:6</a></em>, again in this same passage about the tongue- it is "among&nbsp;<em>our</em>&nbsp;members". There seem two possibilities to explain this. It may be that James personally felt guilty of misusing his tongue- "If any man offend not in word the same is a perfect man" (<em><a href='B:660 3:2'>Jas 3:2</a></em>). No doubt James had spoken wrongly at some time and was conscious of this, and therefore felt he could not phrase this criticism of them as he does all the others- he could not write 'You both bless God and curse men with your tongue' when he too was guilty. However, James' 'cursing' and thereby offending ("we offend all", <em><a href='B:660 3:2'>Jas 3:2</a></em>), was no doubt a temporary slip-up, compared to his readers whose generally unbridled tongue was because "<em>You</em>&nbsp;(not James) have bitter envying and strife in your hearts" (v:14). This envying and strife within the ecclesia caused the "fightings among you" (<em><a href='B:660 4:1'>Jas 4:1</a></em>), and this again suggests that the cursing of men which they were guilty of related to their words to their brethren. The other possible explanation of why James personally associates himself with the 'cursing' done by the tongue is that "the tongue" may indirectly refer to a certain group within the ecclesial body. They were part of the body of Christ, as was James, therefore the tongue was "among our members" (<em><a href='B:660 3:6'>Jas 3:6</a></em>), and its cursing of men therefore implicated the rest of the ecclesia.</p><p>We have seen that James often bases his reasoning on the sermon on the mount. The ideas of blessing, cursing and men in God's similitude are found in <em><a href='B:470 5:44-48'>Mat 5:44-48</a></em>: "Bless them that curse you::. that you may be the children of your Father which is in Heaven (i:e. showing His spiritual characteristics)::. be you therefore perfect" (cp. <em><a href='B:660 3:2'>Jas 3:2</a></em> "If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man"). This again suggests that the men in the similitude of God who were being cursed were those of the ecclesia who blessed these rich brethren who cursed them, and thus became the children of God due to their being born of the word, which makes a man "perfect". "Similitude" is from a word meaning 'to assimilate', implying a likeness that has been taken on. The "men" like this are those who have developed the likeness of God, "men having become according to likeness of God" (Marshall's Interlinear). The frequent references to Peter's letters also makes an interesting point. The parallel there is in <em><a href='B:670 3:8-11'>1Pe 3:8-11</a></em>: "Be ye all of one mind::. not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing: but contrariwise blessing::. refrain (your) tongue from evil::. the Lord is against them that do evil". The "evil" spoken of here is therefore that of bitter speaking within the ecclesia which must not be responded to. This type of evil is far harder to resist than being taken to law unfairly, which is how we tend to read this passage. However, the context in Peter is also of physical persecution by the Romans, influenced by Jewish criticism of the Christians. There seems a hint that this group of evil speakers within the ecclesia were associated with the Roman and Jewish authorities.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 3:10'>Jas 3:10</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Out of the same mouth comes forth blessing and cursing. My brothers, these things ought not to be so</em>- There is possibly a passing allusion here to Moses, the only other person in Scripture to be recorded as having blessing and cursing coming from him. He could justifiably do so, because he had the word of God in him. But these who did not have the word in them were not justified in doing so- i:e. the association of themselves with Moses which was being made by these Judaist-influenced brethren was not valid. For another example of this, see notes on v:15 and also <a href='B:660 4:12'>Jas 4:12</a>. Verse 11 implies that this sending out of blessing and cursing was simultaneous- the figure is of a spring gushing out both salt and fresh water from the same place (Greek 'hole'- cp. the mouth) at the same time. If the cursing of the other brethren was being done in the name of God, then this figure is apt- i:e. along with praise of God there was apparently righteous condemnation of these other brethren, in the same way as Moses simultaneously blessed and cursed the people on God's behalf.</p><p>No doubt the withholding of wages from these brethren (<em><a href='B:660 5:4'>Jas 5:4</a></em>) and refusing to materially alleviate their poverty (<em><a href='B:660 2:16'>Jas 2:16</a></em>) was justified by accusing the poor brethren of spiritual weakness that warranted this cursing by God. The close association of material wealth and spiritual pride throughout Israel's history and also here in James must be taken to heart by us in these last days. Just before the Lord returns there will be some who "eat and drink with the drunken" due to their wealth, and this leads them to beat their fellowservants (<em><a href='B:470 24:45-50'>Mat 24:45-50</a></em>). This group will be those who are called to be the rulers of the ecclesia ("his Lord has made ruler over his household, to give them their- spiritual- meat in due season"). Those James speaks of were the "masters", "governors" and horse-riders in the ecclesia (<em><a href='B:660 3:1-5'>Jas 3:1-5</a></em>). The fact that some of our ecclesial leaders are in a position to be rich in this world must mean that all this is a serious warning to them- some will, according to the parable, allow the authority and power they have in their secular life to corrupt them, so that they act like that in the ecclesia. Let us all humbly resolve that our Lord's parable will not be fulfilled in us. Note how that parable formed a footnote to the Olivet prophecy- as if to say that this temptation to have a lack of true love for one's brethren in these last days will really be something to be reckoned with. The blessing and cursing "proceeds" from the mouth. This is the same word used in <em><a href='B:470 15:18-19'>Mat 15:18-19</a></em>: "Those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart:::out of the heart proceed evil thoughts". Again, the mouth is effectively identical with the heart, showing the great emphasis by James on a man's words as being the main form of manifestation of his evil heart, and the need to control them if all other sin is to be avoided. "My brethren, these things ought not so to be". The Greek for "ought" occurs nowhere else and is extremely strong (cp. "my brethren" with the gentle opening gambit of the Lord in His letters to the ecclesias). It is worth noting at this point how well and personally James seems to have known his readership, although they were all "scattered abroad" (<em><a href='B:660 1:1'>Jas 1:1</a></em>) throughout the Roman world. Surely he would not have been so dogmatic in his denunciation of the type of words they spoke unless he knew exactly their situation. The nature of inspiration is such that James could have just sat and wrote as a result of a specific revelation to him of the weaknesses of these people, seeing in vision how they selected comfortable chairs in the meeting room for the rich (<em><a href='B:660 2:3'>Jas 2:3</a></em>), refused welfare to the poor, and spoke such wrong words as described in chapter 3. However, it seems more likely that inspiration worked through a band of dedicated (young?) servants of the ecclesias moving around the scattered pockets of Jewish Christians as they went from city to city (<em><a href='B:660 4:13'>Jas 4:13</a></em>) and reporting back to James. Or maybe James himself moved around visiting them, as a good shepherd; or perhaps he knew them all personally due to them all being in the Jerusalem ecclesia together in happier days.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 3:11'>Jas 3:11</a></em><em>&nbsp;Does the fountain send forth from the same spout both fresh and bitter water?</em>-<em>&nbsp;&nbsp;</em>We have already made some comment on this in our notes on v:10. The spring gushing out (the idea of "spout") sweet and bitter water corresponds to the mouth having blessing and cursing proceeding from it. The idea of their words gushing from them corresponds to the rebuke that their tongue was unbridled in v:3. Note that both blessing of God and cursing of brethren gushed from them. For our words in regard to God to be unbridled is a sin, as much as to curse a brother without restraint. It is so tempting to feel that our relationship with God is fine, and therefore to assume that our attitude to our brethren is therefore beyond rebuke. These who blessed God and cursed their brethren fell into this trap. Our praise of God needs to be bridled or restrained by the word. Any ecstatic release of praise to God can therefore only be acceptable if it is within the bridle, or control, of the word- i:e. if its root motivation is in the word rather than human emotion. The word for "bitter" is from a root meaning 'to pierce'; the words of this group in the ecclesia who are being reprimanded must have really pierced the heart of the poor, humble brethren. A spring can either emit sweet or bitter water, depending on the surrounding soil type- cp. the parable of the sower/types of ground. So our words really are an indication of our spiritual status; they will not really alternate between sweet and bitter, although they may appear to in our human self examination. In God's eyes they are either sweet or bitter. There is a significant link with <em><a href='B:300 6:6-8'>Jer 6:6-8</a></em>: "Cast a mount against Jerusalem (ecclesia?): this is the city to be visited (AD70 language); she is wholly oppression in the midst of her (cp. <em><a href='B:660 2:6'>Jas 2:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 5:4'>Jas 5:4</a></em> concerning the Jewish believers oppressing their brethren). As a fountain casts out her waters, so she casts out her wickedness: violence and spoil is heard in her (i:e. the waters cast out are paralleled with her words of violence- that is how violence is&nbsp;<em>heard</em>)::. be instructed (the same idea as "endued with knowledge" in the Greek of <em><a href='B:660 3:13'>Jas 3:13</a></em>), O Jerusalem, lest My soul depart from you; lest I make you desolate, a land not inhabited"- as happened after AD70. The Jewish believers are thus being likened to apostate Jerusalem-fitting, seeing they were all once members of the Jerusalem ecclesia that had since been "scattered abroad" (<em><a href='B:660 1:1'>Jas 1:1</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:510 8:1'>Act 8:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 8:4'>Act 8:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 11:19'>Act 11:19</a></em>).</p><p>The sending out of sweet and bitter waters must also look back to Marah, where the bitter waters were changed to sweet by the tree cast into the waters (<em><a href='B:20 15:25'>Exo 15:25</a></em>), pointing forward to the cross. James' way of changing the bitter water of human nature into sweet waters was by true obedience to the word in our heart. Exodus 15 suggests that this change is due to the cross being applied to the waters. By doing so, "there He proved them" (<em><a href='B:20 15:25'>Exo 15:25</a></em>) whether they would believe in the efficacy of the tree or not. Therefore our belief in the cross of Christ and the power he has subsequently made available for the development of 'sweet water' is only shown by our zeal to obey the word. The need to obey the word in order to drink the sweet waters is also stressed in Exodus 15. The people feared they would catch disease from drinking the bitter water, and so immediately after the tree had been thrown into the waters "there he made for them a statute and an ordinance, and there He proved them, and said, If you will hearken to the voice of the Lord::. I will put none of these diseases upon you:::and they came to Elim, where were twelve wells of (sweet) water, and seventy palm trees: and they encamped there by the waters" (v:25-27). Obedience to the word would lead to the bitter waters being changed to wells of good water, of the spirit, as witnessed by their coming to the prosperous oasis of Elim. Compare the wells of Elim with James' fountain (spring) of sweet waters.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 3:12'>Jas 3:12</a></em><em>&nbsp;My brothers, can a fig tree yield olives or a vine figs? Neither can salt water yield fresh</em>-We have seen that the fountain yielding water represents our heart or tongue yielding our words. The trees bearing fruit therefore must be interpreted as being our hearts bearing the spiritual fruit of our words. Both fig and olive trees are well hacked Old Testament symbols of Israel- as if to imply to these Jews that only by having the real spirit of Israel in their hearts rather than just in their flesh could they bear spiritual fruit. The bearing of fruit by the fig tree is a consistent symbol of the repentance of Israel in the "last days" of AD70 and (hopefully and prayerfully) in the twentieth century. In his usual neat style James is implying that the national repentance of Israel would be imputed to them if the "remnant" of Jewish Christians bore fruit; but with their present attitude of mind this was impossible. This is the same idea as in <em><a href='B:660 5:7'>Jas 5:7</a></em>: "The husbandman (God? Christ?) waits for the precious fruit of the earth (the land- of Israel? i:e. from the Jewish believers especially?), and has long patience for it"- a connection with <em><a href='B:680 3:15'>2Pe 3:15</a></em>, where Peter says that the delay in the second coming to await the development of "all holy conversation and Godliness" (v:11) among Peter's Jewish readers shows "the longsuffering of our Lord" (Christ). It is possible to argue that the exact timing of the second coming is related to the repentance of Israel, and was deferred from AD70 due to lack of Jewish repentance. Thus we can appreciate why James, knowing this as he wrote before AD70, so earnestly begs the Jewish believers to develop true spiritual fruit that would result in the second coming, as opposed to petty bickering and infighting. Peter's plea is just as intense. The same plea, with even greater urgency, has to be made to natural and spiritual Israel in these days. In practice, let us again notice how all spiritual fruit is epitomized by the type of words we speak; the fruit of the olive is parallel with the water from the fountain.</p><p>There is a clear link with <em><a href='B:470 7:15-20'>Mat 7:15-20</a></em>: "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing (looking like a lamb, appearing to have the gentle, spiritual characteristics of Christ):::you shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns? or figs of thistles?::. a corrupt tree brings forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit (cp. "so can no fountain::. yield")::. every tree that brings not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire (cp. <em><a href='B:660 3:6'>Jas 3:6</a></em> - the tongue will be destroyed in Gehenna fire). Wherefore by their fruits you shall know them". This almost conclusively shows that this group of Jewish believers within the ecclesia whom James is writing about were the Jewish "false prophets"- or those influenced by them- whom the Lord had warned would try to infiltrate the ecclesia. For those who were attune to these connections with other Scripture, it would have been obvious that these brethren were false prophets because their words so clearly gave them away. Note how James has slightly changed Christ's analogy-from grapes and figs growing on thorns and thistles to grapes growing on figs, and figs growing on olives.</p><p>Thorns and thistles is used to describe the fruit of the (same?) Jewish false prophets in the ecclesia in <em><a href='B:650 6:5-8'>Heb 6:5-8</a></em>, and they would also recall the curse in Eden to any Jewish mind. This would associate these Jewish false teachers with the serpent who brought thorns and thistles into Eden- a simile repeated in <em><a href='B:540 11:3'>2Co 11:3</a></em> and elsewhere. James is saying that the thorns and thistles had become figs and olives, i:e. they appeared far more acceptable than the false prophets of Christ's parable, but the fact their fruit was not consistent with what they appeared to be was still the litmus test which proved they were false. Again, there is a warning against thinking that semi-spirituality means acceptability with God. As the ecclesia seemed duped into thinking that because they used their tongue to bless God, all their words must be acceptable, so they thought that because these men didn't appear to be thorns and thistles but rather figs and olives, they must be acceptable even if there was some mismatch between the tree and the fruit.</p><h4>There is a slight change of figure also with v:11: sweet and bitter water becomes "salt water and fresh". The many links with the sermon on the mount suggest a connection with the group of passages that show that the salt in a believer (<em><a href='B:470 5:13'>Mat 5:13</a></em>) represents his gracious, "seasoned with salt" way of speaking (<em><a href='B:580 4:6'>Col 4:6</a></em>) which leads to peace within the ecclesia (<em><a href='B:480 9:50'>Mar 9:50</a></em>). Both salt water and fresh represent positive spiritual ways of speaking; as their parallel figs and olive berries both equally represent spiritual fruit. The point is thus being made that a spring or tree cannot yield two types of products, and therefore encourages the connection with <em><a href='B:470 7:15-20'>Mat 7:15-20</a></em>. Figs, olives and bitter water recalls <em><a href='B:300 8:13-14'>Jer 8:13-14</a></em>: "There shall be no grapes on the vine, nor figs on the fig tree:::for the Lord our God has:::given us water of gall ('poison'- <em><a href='B:50 29:18'>Deu 29:18</a></em>) to drink, because we have sinned against the Lord". The lack of spiritual fruit on Israel is here associated with bitter or poisonous water. If James is referring to this passage, the tongue "full of deadly poison" (<em><a href='B:660 3:8'>Jas 3:8</a></em>) and the corrupt mind it reflected was the cause of the Jews' lack of fruit, and there is even the implication that God had given them the 'bitter water' of their tongues as a curse, as He did to Israel at Marah, in the sense that God confirms the spiritual or unspiritual attributes of a man- e:g. He hardened Pharaoh's already hard heart.</h4>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 3:13'>Jas 3:13</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Who is wise and understanding among you? Let him show his works in his good life, in meekness of wisdom</em>- A "wise man" is a synonym for a prophet: "I send unto you prophets, and wise men" (<em><a href='B:470 23:34'>Mat 23:34</a></em>), the implication being that these brethren thought that they were prophets (i:e. having the Spirit gift of prophecy) and endued with Heavenly knowledge. This follows on nicely from the albeit indirect accusation in the previous verse (through the Matthew 7 allusion) that they were false prophets. Verse 14 lends support to this: "If you have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the Truth". "Thy word is Truth" (<em><a href='B:500 17:17'>Joh 17:17</a></em>), and therefore if they had bitterness in their hearts they were blaspheming against the word which they were inspired to speak. The elders of the early ecclesias (the "presbytery" of <em><a href='B:610 4:14'>1Ti 4:14</a></em>) probably had the Spirit gifts, especially that of prophecy- i:e. 'forth-telling' inspired words of God to the ecclesia. Our Lord said that many who had the gifts of the Spirit would be condemned at judgment day (<em><a href='B:470 7:22'>Mat 7:22</a></em>)- a prophecy hard to apply to anyone other than the Jewish believers and elders of the first century.</p><p>Thus it is possible that James is telling these brethren to validate their spiritual position by humbly showing the word at work in their hearts by their way of life ("a good conversation"), rather than thinking that just because they had the gifts this was proof that they were righteous before God. In this case the "blessing" of God (v:9) which they thought justified all their other words would have been blessing or praying to God using the spirit gifts as described in <em><a href='B:530 14:16'>1Co 14:16</a></em> and <em><a href='B:720 1:20'>Jud 1:20</a></em>. The fact their mouths uttered the "sweet" water of the inspired word along with their own brash speaking was therefore especially serious. Because they possessed the gift of prophecy they thought it unnecessary to make the personal effort of applying the word in their hearts to control their thoughts and subsequent words. Examples abound in Hebrews, Corinthians and the Lord's letters in Revelation of those possessing the gifts being unacceptable to God, hence His withdrawal of them. There are similarities between this and our possession of the word of Truth. A true response to the word must always produce humility- any Bible study that does not result in this in some way is pointless.<br/>A comparison of verses 13 and 14 shows that "a good conversation" is the same as not having "bitter envying and strife in your hearts". "Conversation" therefore does not simply mean 'way of life' but rather the thinking that is behind that life. "The former conversation" is "the old man:::the deceitful lusts" and is replaced by being "renewed in the spirit of your mind" (<em><a href='B:560 4:22-23'>Eph 4:22-23</a></em>), showing that "conversation" applies to the state of mind. It is because of this that Timothy's "Conversation" was to be comprised of mental attributes like "charity::. faith::. purity" (of mind), <em><a href='B:610 4:12'>1Ti 4:12</a></em>.</p><p>As was argued in Chapter 2, "works" are 'shown out' of the state of the mind, and cannot be separated from it. The context being of the tongue, the "works" referred to are probably words, which epitomize all a man's spiritual "works". Words should therefore be humble ("with meekness of wisdom"), and based on a heart saturated by the word, and this will indicate whether a man is a true prophet. By contrast, proudly speaking inspired words to publicly show off the gift of prophecy, and also gushing out the words of an unregenerated heart, were equally unacceptable. Such a person was not a true prophet in God's sight.</p><p>The idea of "showing out" goes back to <em><a href='B:660 2:18'>Jas 2:18</a></em>, where James asks this class of believers to show him how it was possible to have faith without works. There he is arguing that they are indivisible, and here in <em><a href='B:660 3:13'>Jas 3:13</a></em> he is effectively saying the same- that the works or words are an inevitable reflection of the heart, "the faith", or "conversation".</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 3:14'>Jas 3:14</a></em><em>&nbsp;But if you have bitter jealousy and rivalry in your heart, do not boast about it and deny the truth</em>-<em>&nbsp;&nbsp;</em>The bitter envying in the heart connects with the bitter water of v:11, representing the bitter words of the brethren- again showing that words and heart are effectively identical. "Envying" is the Greek&nbsp;<em>zelos</em>&nbsp;and is the word used to describe zeal for God; it is not the normal word translated "envy". This envying, as we can imagine from what we know already of these brethren, was justified by them with spiritual reasons; similarly <em><a href='B:510 13:45'>Act 13:45</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 17:5'>Act 17:5</a></em> and <em><a href='B:530 3:3'>1Co 3:3</a></em> describe Jews and believers envying each other for supposedly spiritual reasons. Envying and strife within the ecclesia were a (conscious?) product of the work of the Judaizers and other false teachers amongst the brethren. It may well be that they were envious of others in the ecclesia spiritually, being jealous of the true spirituality possessed by the poorer brethren. However, the "wars and fightings" of James 4 seem to be associated with desiring material possessions (<em><a href='B:660 4:2'>Jas 4:2</a></em>), resulting in evil speaking between brethren (<em><a href='B:660 4:11'>Jas 4:11</a></em>). In this case the envying of chapter 3 could just be envying the possessions of other brethren. Yet the spiritual associations of "envying" ('zealousing') suggest that either this envying of possessions was couched in spiritual terms- e:g. 'You shouldn't have that car (which I envy) because you should show more generosity to the Truth'- or that the envying was of the more spiritual members. The envying and strife was clearly within the ecclesia, from what chapter 4 and other mentions of envying and strife imply (<em><a href='B:530 3:3'>1Co 3:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:570 1:15'>Phi 1:15</a></em> etc:). But the root cause of this was because this bitterness and envying was "in your hearts". Amazingly, these brethren were glorying (boasting, rejoicing) in this: "glory not". Similarly they rejoiced in their boastings about how they made plans to make business trips without taking account of the working of God's will (<em><a href='B:660 4:13-16'>Jas 4:13-16</a></em>)- presumably because they thought that as prophets they knew God's will. They were clearly rejoicing in what was wrong and evil, doubtless as a result of taking on board the Judaist-pedalled philosophy that "let us continue in sin, that grace may abound" (<em><a href='B:520 6:1'>Rom 6:1</a></em>). Romans was written largely to Jews- the first two chapters especially describe how the Jewish ecclesia of the first century were repeating the same errors as that in the wilderness. The Jewish believers were reasoning that because they were Jews they were justified, and Christ being a Jew confirmed the impossibility of sin being held against them. Thus they smugly rejoiced in being able to commit sin and, as they thought, remain justified, thereby spurring their spiritual condemnation of their poorer Gentile brethren.</p><p>The basic message of the Gospel was "in the beginning", in John's language, right from Eden and Abraham, and was made flesh in the person of Jesus. God could have left it at just “the word", but to make it powerful and compelling of acceptance it had to be made flesh in a person. That word must become flesh in us too. This is why <em><a href='B:660 3:17'>Jas 3:17</a></em> speaks of "wisdom" as if it has been made flesh in the believer: "The wisdom that is from above is pure peaceable, gentle, easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality and hypocrisy" . Abstract wisdom can't be spoken of in those terms; but wisdom made flesh in a person can be. The "wisdom" of which James speaks is "the truth" (<em><a href='B:660 3:14'>Jas 3:14</a></em>). The true Gospel, the doctrine of Christ, must be lived out in flesh; this is the whole intention. It isn't merely an intellectual test to see who can figure it out, and on that basis a relationship with God is given as a reward. One of the Hebrew words for "wisdom" also means "practical working" - and as so often in the Hebrew language, the Divine perspective is reflected in the language. Wisdom is "manifold in effectual working" (<em><a href='B:220 6:11'>Job 6:11</a></em> RV); and compare the AV and RV of <em><a href='B:220 12:16'>Job 12:16</a></em>: "With him is… wisdom AV / effectual working RV". The man Christ Jesus was made unto us "wisdom"; in Him wisdom was made flesh.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 3:15'>Jas 3:15</a></em>&nbsp;<em>This wisdom is not a wisdom that comes down from above, but is earthly, sensual and devilish-&nbsp;</em>This is reminding them that such philosophy was not by God's inspiration- that because one is a vehicle for God's inspired word, it does not follow that all ones' thoughts and reasoning are correct. "Sensual" means 'natural', and looks back to v:7 implying that human nature cannot be tamed by the 'natural' reasoning of human nature, or the human mind- it is "devilish", or 'demoniacal'. <em><a href='B:660 2:19'>Jas 2:19</a></em> has associated these Jewish believers and their semi-faith with the healed demoniacs; James is saying that such semi-faith which has enough hope to be healed but does not respond with works subsequently, is not a positive spiritual attribute at all- it is rooted in the natural, earthly mind.</p><p>James is pointing a contrast between wisdom- or the word (cp. notes on <em><a href='B:660 1:5'>Jas 1:5</a></em>)- which comes from above, and that which is of the earth. There is a link here with <em><a href='B:650 2:2-3'>Heb 2:2-3</a></em>, a letter which we have suggested was sent to the same readership as James and may have been known by them already. "If the word spoken by Angels (the Law) was steadfast::. how shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation::. spoken by the Lord". "If they escaped not who refused him that spake on earth (Moses? The Angel who spake the Law?), much more shall not we escape, if we turn away from Him that speaketh from Heaven" (<em><a href='B:650 12:25'>Heb 12:25</a></em>). The wisdom that came from the earth is therefore associated with the Jewish system, and it is this which was resulting in all the human reasoning of these brethren; not the Law itself, but the influence of the Judaizers who advocated it. The wisdom from above mentioned in v:17 is therefore that which comes from the new covenant in Christ as opposed to that of the Law. "Comes down" carries the idea of literal downwards movement, perhaps referring to the Angel physically descending in the cloud to give Moses the words of God by which he was constituted a prophet. If this is the reference, then as we saw in the notes on v:10, this is another rebuke of these brethren who were seeking to parallel themselves with Moses.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 3:16'>Jas 3:16</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For where jealousy and division are, there is confusion and every vile deed</em>- If there is envying and strife in the heart, "there is confusion and every evil work" in the same place. Yet again, the works are said to take place in the heart. The Corinthians are twice rebuked by Paul for having confusion in the ecclesia (<em><a href='B:530 14:33'>1Co 14:33</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 12:20'>2Co 12:20</a></em> translated 'tumults'), due to their misuse of the Spirit gifts. This would seem to be relevant to the situation in James' ecclesia; but again, the confusion began in the heart due to the lack of impact the word had made upon it. Another repeated theme is that "every evil work" is paralleled with the uncontrolled tongue, showing that the tongue is the summation of every potential sin that lies within our heart. The Greek for "evil work" only occurs four times; one of them is in <em><a href='B:630 2:8'>Tit 2:8</a></em>, which speaks of the Jewish and Roman adversaries of the ecclesia seeking to speak evil of the believers. Whilst on its own this would not be significant, in view of the constant parallels between the Jewish system and his readers which James is making, it appears that he is linking the evil thoughts in their hearts concerning their poor brethren, with the evil speaking about the ecclesia being done by the Jewish 'satan' outside the ecclesia.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 3:17'>Jas 3:17</a></em><em>&nbsp;But the wisdom that is from above is most importantly pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, without variance, without hypocrisy</em>-The wisdom coming from above is the gift of the word coming down from God, making us "firstfruits of His (spiritual) creatures" (<em><a href='B:660 1:17-18'>Jas 1:17-18</a></em>). We have suggested that the wisdom from above is the word of Christ as opposed to that of Moses; in Jesus the word became flesh (<em><a href='B:500 1:14'>Joh 1:14</a></em>), the whole of God's revelation became associated with the person of Christ, not just the words of the New Testament inspired after His time. Thus this verse describes both the work of the word, and also the character of Christ, the wisdom/word of God from above.</p><p>If the word was truly in them , they would have the characteristics of purity as opposed to their double mindedness; they did not have peace in their hearts (cp. v:16), their rejecting of their poor brethren's welfare requests (<em><a href='B:660 2:16'>Jas 2:16</a></em>) and harsh treatment of them (<em><a href='B:660 2:6'>Jas 2:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 5:4'>Jas 5:4</a></em>) contrasted with the gentleness and ease with which brethren should feel they can entreat us with. The word with it's associated spirit of Christ will develop these attributes within us. Purity of mind (cp. <em><a href='B:570 4:8'>Phi 4:8</a></em>) is of "first" importance; if this is achieved, "then" the characteristics which the ecclesia were so sadly lacking in would then naturally follow. The Greek 'proton' occurs again in <em><a href='B:470 6:33'>Mat 6:33</a></em>: "Seek&nbsp;<em>first</em>&nbsp;the Kingdom of God, and His righteousness". This is achieved, according to James, by striving to let the word develop now those righteous attributes which will be revealed so fully and widely in the Kingdom (cp. <em><a href='B:520 14:17'>Rom 14:17</a></em>).</p><p>"The wisdom that is from above" must also refer to <em><a href='B:500 3:3-5'>Joh 3:3-5</a></em>, which speaks of being born from above, i:e from Heaven by the Spirit. Nicodemus thought that he had already been born from above, seeing that he had a knowledge of the Law. But Christ told him "heavenly things" (<em><a href='B:500 3:12'>Joh 3:12</a></em>), which Nicodemus found hard to accept. The word which makes us born again (<em><a href='B:500 3:5'>Joh 3:5</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:670 1:23'>1Pe 1:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 1:18'>Jas 1:18</a></em>) does so because it reveals Heavenly principles to us. This wisdom/word in James was "full of mercy and good fruits". The word develops these fruits (<em><a href='B:500 15:5-8'>Joh 15:5-8</a></em>), as does Christ (<em><a href='B:570 1:11'>Phi 1:11</a></em>)- again showing His equation with the word. The language of fruiting goes back to v:12, where the tree that bears fruit is the heart of the believer. Now what bears fruit is the word- because that must be equated with the heart if good fruit is to be produced. Thus we can make the equation: Christ=Spirit=Word=In heart=fruit. These factors may be arranged in any order, showing how Christ dwells in our heart by faith (<em><a href='B:560 3:17'>Eph 3:17</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:580 3:16'>Col 3:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 10:17'>Rom 10:17</a></em>). The fullness of spiritual attributes mentioned here may refer back to <em><a href='B:20 34:5-7'>Exo 34:5-7</a></em> (R:V:), which describes the name of God as being<em>&nbsp;full</em>&nbsp;of His attributes of mercy, patience, justice etc. The word of true wisdom produces these characteristics in us, thereby giving us the Name of God. Again, James is setting an ultimate standard- aiming for the fullness of God to be developed in us through the almighty power of the word. It must be theoretically possible for a man to be perfect in God's sight; even though in the past he has failed and thus come short of Christ's standard, he can still be justified by the faith which is developed by the word acting upon him. Our Lord was of our nature, and yet still attained perfection. We are invited to follow him to perfection, being perfect even as God is. The means by which we achieve this may be slightly different to how he did; yet through the word "now are we the sons of God" (<em><a href='B:690 3:1-2'>1Jn 3:1-2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 1:13'>Joh 1:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 1:23'>1Pe 1:23</a></em>), Spirit-begotten as He was.</p><p>This degree of commitment to the word leads to a brother being "without partiality"; something which the ecclesia were guilty of due to their lack of having the word in their hearts (see notes on <em><a href='B:660 2:4'>Jas 2:4</a></em>). Having their own minds full of strife, division and confusion (v:14-16) would inevitably lead them to be partial or divided in their dealings with other brethren. The word 'affectionately believed' will lead us to be "without hypocrisy"- again inviting a comparison between these brethren without the word truly in them and the Pharisees, who are those invariably described as "hypocrites" in the New Testament. However, the phrase also occurs in the sermon on the mount, and the many allusions to this discourse in James suggest that he may have had <em><a href='B:470 7:5'>Mat 7:5</a></em> in mind: "Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye". We have seen that the context of James 3 is of a group of brethren criticizing another group, with the inference that their criticism was masked with pseudo-spiritual reasoning. This is exactly the theme of <em><a href='B:470 7:5'>Mat 7:5</a></em>. To avoid being a hypocrite, James implies, we need to let the word sink into ourselves- which has the same effect as casting the plank out of our own eye. It is the word which has the power of self-examination; <em><a href='B:690 1:10'>1Jn 1:10</a></em> implies that if the word is in us, then we appreciate what sinners we have been. The telling thing about the description of the Spirit gifted eldership as "hypocrites" ('play-actors') is that their make-up and costume was the Truth itself. The fact we are wearing this can lead us to think that we really are the part we are playing- but putting on the clothes and changing our heart to truly identify with what we profess are two different things.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 3:18'>Jas 3:18</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace for those that make peace- There</em>&nbsp;are a number of connections here with the Septuagint of <em><a href='B:290 32:16-20'>Isa 32:16-20</a></em>: "Righteousness remain in the fruitful field::. the work of righteousness shall be peace::. quietness and assurance::. blessed are you that sow". This is clearly a Kingdom passage, yet it is quoted about our present ecclesial experience. This is one of many examples of where spirituality in this life can give us a foretaste of the Kingdom. The wisdom coming from above in v:17 we have shown to have reference to our birth by the word, to become new creatures. Verse 18 has links with two passages which also contain this theme of spiritual re-birth by the word.<br/>The mention of being "full of good fruits" in v:17 may be looking back to the list of spiritual fruits in the beatitudes in Matthew 5 - the poor in spirit, the weeping, the meek, the pure in heart, those hungering after righteousness, the peacemakers etc. comprise all the main spiritual fruits; and are also a fair description of the oppressed, spiritually minded underclass in the ecclesias to whom James is writing. Now v:18 makes a definite connection with <em><a href='B:470 5:9'>Mat 5:9</a></em>; "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God".</p><h4>This would indicate that James read the people mentioned in the beatitudes as being within the ecclesia, and "the peacemakers" being the quiet brother who humbly tries to calm the bitter vying for power between the rich, self opinionated leaders. In this case, James is reminding these leaders of the virtues of those they despised; they sowed the fruit of righteousness because the word developed those fruits in them. By doing so, <em><a href='B:470 5:9'>Mat 5:9</a></em> says, they became the children of God. Thus the word led them to develop the spiritual fruits which made them peacemakers, which made them the children of God. Thus possession of the word does not automatically make us sons of God, but the effect it achieves upon us in giving us the family characteristics of our Father. The other clear connection of v:18 is with <em><a href='B:650 12:11'>Heb 12:11</a></em>. Having spoken of the persecution of the Jewish believers being a proof of their sonship to God, "the Father of spirits", Paul encourages them that this chastening "yields the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby". The poor believers in James' ecclesias had also become the spiritual children of God by the word acting on them, making them react to the chastening they were receiving at the hands of the rich brethren by developing peace. Their peaceful sowing of the word, which was the seed sown (<em><a href='B:490 8:11'>Luk 8:11</a></em>), was going to lead them to "raise a harvest of righteousness" (N:I:V:) in their own characters. If this line of interpretation is correct, it would appear that the poor, mistreated brethren were humbly responding to the criticisms of them (the cursing of v:9) by quietly quoting the word, in order to try and make peace both between them and the rich brethren, and between the rival factions in the eldership. See notes on <em><a href='B:660 5:7'>Jas 5:7</a></em> for more on this. This problem of there being "wars and fightings" amongst this group is continued in <em><a href='B:660 4:1'>Jas 4:1</a></em>, thus making the chapter division unfortunate.</h4>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 4:1'>Jas 4:1</a></em>&nbsp;<em>What causes the wars and fights among you? Do they not come from your desires for pleasures that war within you?</em>- The way this is phrased implies that the unspiritual brethren were blaming the evident infighting within the ecclesia on others- perhaps the group of poor brethren who they spiritually cursed in <em><a href='B:660 3:9-10'>Jas 3:9-10</a></em>. Note how the fightings came out of their lusts- warring in the members suggests an allusion to <em><a href='B:520 7:23'>Rom 7:23</a></em> "I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members". The allusions to Romans may be because this letter too was in circulation amongst the dispersed Jewish believers. The "members" of <em><a href='B:660 4:1'>Jas 4:1</a></em> are therefore the parts of the evil human heart. The double mindedness in the hearts of the individual brethren was inevitably reflected in the members of the ecclesial body (cp. <em><a href='B:530 12:12'>1Co 12:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 4:25'>Eph 4:25</a></em>). Another link with 1 Peter clarifies that the warfare within the body was also within their own minds: "Abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul" (<em><a href='B:670 2:11'>1Pe 2:11</a></em>). The Greek for "lusts" here in James 4 is not the normal word so translated. The only other times it occurs are in <em><a href='B:680 2:13'>2Pe 2:13</a></em> translated "pleasure", where it is associated with the Judaist false teachers; <em><a href='B:630 3:3'>Tit 3:3</a></em>, where Paul says these lusts were part of his former Judaist life; and in <em><a href='B:490 8:14'>Luk 8:14</a></em> regarding that which chokes the growth of the word.</p><p>Their lusts or pleasures may have warred against each other in the sense that they desired different things which conflicted within their heart, but the idea of war and fighting seems more usually used with reference to the spiritual warfare within the human heart (cp. <em><a href='B:670 2:11'>1Pe 2:11</a></em>), whereby the spiritual reservoir is under violent attack from the united desires for the various pleasures to be possessed. The Greek for "fightings" occurs in <em><a href='B:630 3:9'>Tit 3:9</a></em> and <em><a href='B:620 2:23-24'>2Ti 2:23-24</a></em> concerning arguments within the ecclesia over the interpretation of the Law. It would therefore seem that the justification for gratifying their materialistic desires was based on misapplication of the word. Again we are seeing the classic characteristic of apostasy- a mixture of truth with error until a position of self-justification has been reached. These reasonings over certain passages began as a debate within their own heart ("members"), and then spread to the whole ecclesia. We have pointed out that the break between chapters 3 and 4 is unfortunate. The mention of "wars" in <em><a href='B:660 4:1'>Jas 4:1</a></em> and "confusion" in <em><a href='B:660 3:16'>Jas 3:16</a></em> only 3 verses earlier suggests a connection with the "wars and commotions" heralding the destruction of Jerusalem (<em><a href='B:490 21:9'>Luk 21:9</a></em>), seeing that "confusion" and "commotions" are the same Greek word. Is James implying that the crazy political situation in the world that heralded Jerusalem's downfall was going to be reflected in ecclesial life in the last days, resulting in a similar downfall of the scattered Jerusalem ecclesia? The situation within the body in these last days may provide an unfortunate parallel.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 4:2'>Jas 4:2</a></em><em>&nbsp;You want what you don't have, so you murder. You covet and cannot obtain, so you fight and quarrel. You do not have, because you do not ask</em>-<em>&nbsp;&nbsp;</em>The Greek for "lust" here is the normal word, and a powerful parallel is made between this and asking (praying) in the wrong way. Such prayer is an expression of lust; the very same word is used concerning lusting after a woman in <em><a href='B:470 5:28'>Mat 5:28</a></em>. Prayer to God for personal pleasures that gushes out without the restraint of the word is truly a serious offence. The idea of killing in <em><a href='B:660 2:11'>Jas 2:11</a></em> was interpreted as meaning showing lack of love to your brother, after the pattern of <em><a href='B:470 5:21-22'>Mat 5:21-22</a></em>. The word for "kill" here in James is not the usual Greek word. This one is normally translated "kill" in the phrase "Thou shalt not kill" when quoting the ten commandments. Thus James is making an especial appeal to their Jewish minds by implying that their lack of love really is effective manslaughter. Thus in order to satisfy their carnal desires they were killing or hating their brethren. An obvious fulfilment of this would have been in their withholding of the meagre wages of the poor brethren- effectively killing them by their lack of love- in order to indulge their latest pleasures. What parallels with saving for the holiday home at the expense of struggling ecclesias in the third world? "Desire to have" is a very emotion-loaded word in Greek, implying to be moved to jealousy by something or someone. Such a motivation for prayer is unacceptable. The parallel is with "and cannot obtain", which means literally 'to chance upon'. Their semi-spiritual attitude to life is epitomized by their psychology of prayer- thinking they might chance to get the answer to a prayer, they expressed their emotional, natural desires for the pleasures of this life in prayer, justifying this by misapplying Scripture. They never realized that the love of these pleasures was actually swamping the growth of the real word seed, which was occasionally planted in them by the poor brethren reminding them of the word; so the two references to the sower parable in <em><a href='B:660 3:18'>Jas 3:18</a></em> and <em><a href='B:660 4:1'>Jas 4:1</a></em> would imply.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 4:3'>Jas 4:3</a></em>&nbsp;<em>You ask and do not receive because you ask with the wrong motivation, you want only what will give you pleasure</em>- Some ask and receive not, because in reality, they don’t ask at all. They are playing around with the possible power of prayer for their own benefit. And Old Testament Israel fasted, but only to themselves, not to God (<em><a href='B:450 7:5-6'>Zec 7:5-6</a></em>).</p><p>Despite all the commotion within their hearts and the ecclesia, and perhaps also in their strivings in their misdirected prayers, although they asked in prayer, in God's sight such words are not prayer: "You ask not::. you ask", because desiring is not praying. Alternatively, this may be looking back to <em><a href='B:660 1:4-5'>Jas 1:4-5</a></em> about asking for wisdom, as if to say 'You don't receive answers to your prayers for material things because you don't pray firstly for the wisdom from the word to be in your heart, which would have made your subsequent prayers powerful'. There is a link here with <em><a href='B:470 7:7-8'>Mat 7:7-8</a></em>: "Ask, and it shall be given you::. for every one that asks receives". But "You ask and receive&nbsp;<em>not</em>". The reason for such powerful prayer is given in the surrounding context in Matthew 7 - if they were not hypocrites in criticizing their brethren, which <em><a href='B:660 3:17'>Jas 3:17</a></em> implies they were guilty of, and if they did to men as they would like God to do to them (<em><a href='B:470 7:2'>Mat 7:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 7:12'>Mat 7:12</a></em>). Not surprisingly therefore, the prayers of these brethren were not answered as Matthew 7 promised. There is probably also a reference to <em><a href='B:500 15:7'>Joh 15:7</a></em>: "If:::my words abide in you, you shall ask what you will, and it shall be done unto you". "Done unto you" possibly implies physical blessing. Because the word was not in them, which is the whole theme of James, this promise was not fulfilled in them.</p><p>“With the wrong motivation” is better "Amiss", and is from a word meaning to be sick or diseased, or generally 'evil'. Although it is not the same word translated "sick" in <em><a href='B:660 5:14-16'>Jas 5:14-16</a></em>, there may be a connection with the idea there of them being struck with physical sickness because of their sin and being advised to pray for forgiveness and therefore a cure. Here in <em><a href='B:660 4:3'>Jas 4:3</a></em> James is saying that their prayers were for human things and therefore they and their prayers were sick. This would explain their 'killing' of their brethren by holding back wages from them (<em><a href='B:660 5:4'>Jas 5:4</a></em>), because they specifically wanted the cash in hand; see notes on <em><a href='B:660 5:3'>Jas 5:3</a></em> too.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 4:4'>Jas 4:4</a></em><em>&nbsp;You adulteresses, do you not know that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? Therefore, whoever would be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God</em>-As the reference to killing in v:2 looks back to <em><a href='B:660 2:11'>Jas 2:11</a></em> in the sense of killing your brother by not loving him, so the command in the Old Covenant not to commit adultery mentioned in <em><a href='B:660 2:11'>Jas 2:11</a></em> is here interpreted as meaning not having friendship with the world. James' reasoning seems to be based (yet again) in the sermon on the mount- this time in the passage about not being able to serve two masters, which results in loving the one and hating the other (<em><a href='B:470 6:24'>Mat 6:24</a></em>). James is putting things in black and white terms again. By their prayers being based on the human desires of their heart they were loving the world and thereby hating God. "The world" is therefore primarily our evil desires- the world is in our heart (<em><a href='B:250 3:11-12'>Ecc 3:11-12</a></em>), and "The lust of the eyes" etc. is "All that is in the world". The language of adultery invites us to interpret being a "friend" of the world in a sexual context, or to see that mere friendship with the world is of the same intensity as intercourse with it, in God's sight. Serving mammon (the world) in the two masters parable is due to taking thought for human possessions (<em><a href='B:470 6:25'>Mat 6:25</a></em>)- i:e. the service of mammon is a mental condition in the heart rather than just physically spending time pursuing these things. This is exactly the context here in James.</p><p>"Friendship" (Greek&nbsp;<em>philia</em>) is a gentle word, even implying 'fondness'. Being a friend of the world means that, in the light of the two masters parable, they were not being a friend of God. This maybe connects with <em><a href='B:660 2:23'>Jas 2:23</a></em>, which calls Abraham a friend of God because of his faith and works based on the word of promise taking hold of his heart. Their friendship or sympathy to the world and its desires which were in their heart meant that they had no real faith because the word was not truly influencing their thinking. This friendship with the world is "enmity with God". This takes us immediately to <em><a href='B:520 8:7'>Rom 8:7</a></em>: "The carnal mind is enmity against God", thus again connecting the love of the world with the unregenerated mind. James is pounding away about the importance of the mind, and therefore of our attitude to the word which influences it. This enmity is further defined in <em><a href='B:560 2:15-16'>Eph 2:15-16</a></em>: "Having abolished in His (Christ's) flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments::. for to make in himself one new man::. that He might reconcile both unto God by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby". The phrase "<em>the</em>&nbsp;enmity" implies that this is the same enmity as referred to elsewhere, namely in <em><a href='B:520 8:7'>Rom 8:7</a></em>. The carnal mind allowed itself to be stimulated by the Law- not that the Law encouraged sin, but man's response to it encouraged carnal thinking, e:g. in the form of self righteousness. This again hints that their "friendship of the world" was justified by their misquoting of the Law. "The world" which they were so sympathetic towards (so "friendship" implies) may even refer to the Jewish world, both in its doctrine and its materialistic, pleasure-seeking attitude to life.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 4:5'>Jas 4:5</a></em><em>&nbsp;Or do you think that the scripture says in vain: The Spirit that dwells in us yearns jealously</em>-This does not appear to be a verbatim quote from any manuscript- for a comment on the word "scripture" see notes on <em><a href='B:660 2:23'>Jas 2:23</a></em>. James is effectively rebuking them for their lack of sensitivity to the word- by not recognizing the fundamentally lustful nature of our natural mind, they were effectively saying that the Scriptures' warnings about our evil human nature were "vain". They thought that by reason of possessing the Spirit gifts the evils of the human heart were by-passed an error also made by evangelical theology today. There appears to be a reference back to the descriptions of man at Noah's time in <em><a href='B:10 6:5'>Gen 6:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 8:21'>Gen 8:21</a></em> as having a fundamentally wicked heart. 2 Peter 3, Jude and the Lord in His Olivet prophecy all interpret Noah's world as being a type of the Jewish system heading towards destruction in AD70. So again James is saying that the lustful attitude of mind within these Jewish believers equated them with the rest of the Jewish world, which was about to be destroyed as Noah's world was. The Greek for "vain" is often used about vain Jewish philosophy that affected the ecclesias (<em><a href='B:560 5:6'>Eph 5:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 2:8'>Col 2:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:610 6:20'>1Ti 6:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 2:16'>2Ti 2:16</a></em>; and <em><a href='B:510 4:25'>Act 4:25</a></em>); it also looks back to the description of the brethren James is writing to as "vain" in <em><a href='B:660 2:20'>Jas 2:20</a></em>. This would imply that because of the influence of vain Jewish (Judaist?) reasoning, they had become vain in their minds, and therefore Scripture had also become vain to them. The Greek for "dwelleth" means 'to dwell as an integral part'; the same Greek word for 'dwell' occurs in <em><a href='B:520 7:17-18'>Rom 7:17-18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 7:20'>Rom 7:20</a></em>, describing "sin that dwelleth" within our members; we have seen <em><a href='B:660 4:1'>Jas 4:1</a></em> is alluding to this same passage in Romans 7 concerning the spiritual conflict in our members. The same word is also used in <em><a href='B:530 3:16'>1Co 3:16</a></em> about the Holy Spirit dwelling in the early believers - maybe suggesting that James is reminding the Jewish ecclesial elders that the Spirit gifts dwelling in them did not mean that the evil human spirit of our own nature did not dwell in them.</p><p>The very word "spirit" can refer both to this human spirit and also to the spirit of Christ in our minds. Thus they had to have the Spirit truly in their heart by their response to the word as well as tabernacling in them by reason of their possession of the gifts. The effort to apply the word to the human heart is therefore not just something which began after the miraculous gifts were withdrawn, but which also had to be practiced by their early possessors. If even those with the gift of prophecy (i:e. chosen by God to speak forth His word under direct inspiration) had to make this effort; how much more must we? God&nbsp;<em>yearns</em>&nbsp;that we might have a spirit like His, that we might be spiritually minded: "He yearns jealously over the spirit that He has made to dwell in us" (<em><a href='B:660 4:5'>Jas 4:5</a></em>). He so wants us to accept His Spirit. And be sure that He will be ever working in our lives to try to get us to have this focus. The particular aspect of our inherent natural spirit that James draws attention to is its capacity to envy. We have suggested previously that their desire for wealth led these brethren to show a lack of love to the others in the ecclesia, although they justified this by misinterpreting parts of the Law. James is saying that they should not justify these envious feelings so quickly, but remember that Scripture generally warns that these feelings are part of our fallen nature, and they should not misapply odd passages to justify them as acceptable. The Greek for "envy" here is always used elsewhere concerning either the envying of the Jews against the believers, or about the envying generated within the ecclesia by Judaist-stimulated controversies.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 4:6'>Jas 4:6</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:470 25:35'>Mat 25:35</a></em>.<br/><em>But He gives more grace. Wherefore the scripture said: God resists the proud but gives grace to the humble</em>- This apparent personality of "the Scripture" was commented on under <em><a href='B:660 2:23'>Jas 2:23</a></em>. Having quoted Scripture which states the pathetic spiritual condition of man, James quickly reminds us of another Scripture that gives more hope. The context of v:6 is in the earlier verses of the chapter concerning why their prayers were unanswered. "Grace" means 'gift', and can refer to the answer of prayer by God's Spirit. Thus James is saying 'God does actually answer prayer- <em><a href='B:240 3:34'>Pro 3:34</a></em> says he gives grace to the humble, i:e. He answers their prayers, although He resists the requests of the proud'. Note that James is quoting the Septuagint version of <em><a href='B:240 3:34'>Pro 3:34</a></em> here rather than the Hebrew Old Testament. Giving grace in the sense of a gift also recalls <em><a href='B:660 1:17-18'>Jas 1:17-18</a></em> and <em><a href='B:660 3:17'>Jas 3:17</a></em> concerning the gift of the word- as if to show that God would hear prayers for the wisdom of the word to be revealed to them (cp. <em><a href='B:660 1:5'>Jas 1:5</a></em>), but not answer a 'wants list' of worldly pleasures. The context of the quote from Proverbs is that the humble man is the one who has wisdom- i:e. who has taken note of the word in his heart. Being humble is paralleled with being submissive to God and resisting our evil nature (v:7) and drawing nigh to God acceptably (v:8); thus humility born of the word is revealed by both our attitude to God's holiness and to our own innate sinfulness. The brash prayers and self justification of these brethren was in sharp contrast to all this. The same verse from Proverbs is also quoted in <em><a href='B:670 5:5'>1Pe 5:5</a></em> in the context of the elders showing loving care to the flock, because God "giveth grace to the humble". This context of commands to elders is the same as in James, whose intended readership appears to have been the same group of elders in the Jewish ecclesias. Peter's argument, if it follows that of James, would therefore be that their prayers would be hindered, i:e. grace would not be shown- if the elders proudly oppressed the flock. Note that these same elders are warned not to exact money from the flock as a reward for their shepherding in <em><a href='B:670 5:2'>1Pe 5:2</a></em>, which we have seen was a problem mentioned by James in the form of them holding back wages from their brethren-employees. This would mean that this was being done under the spiritual pretext of keeping the money back as the wages of the elders, no doubt backed up with some misinterpretations from the Mosaic Law.</p><p>The giving of grace is of course not just in material giving; speaking of how this world has an envious, materialistic spirit, James comments that by contrast, God “gives more grace” (<em><a href='B:660 4:6'>Jas 4:6</a></em>), i:e. His grace is more than the material ‘giving’. Especially is grace given through forgiveness, especially forgiveness without demanding repentance, being inclusive rather than exclusive, patience, especially patience with others’ immaturities, forbearing one another, basic kindness and thoughtfulness, imagining how others feel or may feel. God&nbsp;<em>delights</em>&nbsp;in showing forgiveness and mercy; He loves doing it (<em><a href='B:400 7:18'>Mic 7:18</a></em>). It's "<em>son</em>&nbsp;<em>métier</em>" - 'what He's good at, His speciality’.</p>


text:
<h4><em><a href='B:660 4:7'>Jas 4:7</a></em><em>&nbsp;Therefore, be subject to God and resist the Devil, and the Devil will flee from you</em>- "Submit" means literally to put oneself under- i:e. to keep under these evil human desires, which is the same as resisting the Biblical devil. Bearing in mind the Jewish background of this letter and the other connections with Romans, this idea of submission to God may be referring back to <em><a href='B:520 10:3'>Rom 10:3</a></em>: "They (the Jews) being ignorant of&nbsp;<em>God's</em>&nbsp;righteousness, (through a lack of open-hearted Bible study), and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God". Thus one of the root causes of their pride and lack of recognition of their own sinfulness was that they were influenced by the Jewish concept of self-righteousness. Note the importance of doctrine in having very practical effects on a man's way of thinking and thereby his standing with God. There is a clear parallel between these verses in James 4 and <em><a href='B:670 5:2-9'>1Pe 5:2-9</a></em>. After making the quotation from <em><a href='B:240 3:34'>Pro 3:34</a></em>, Peter warns them to "be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walks about, seeking whom he may devour". This primarily refers to the Jewish and Roman authorities seeking occasion to criticize and therefore persecute the Christians. However, the parallel in <em><a href='B:660 4:7'>Jas 4:7</a></em> is "resist the devil", which corresponds with <em><a href='B:670 5:9'>1Pe 5:9</a></em> "Whom resist steadfast in the faith, knowing that the same afflictions are accomplished in your brethren that are in the world". The devil of Peter refers to the Jewish/ Roman systems as well as to the flesh. The Greek&nbsp;<em>pathema</em>&nbsp;translated "afflictions" means both physical persecution and 'an emotion or influence' (Strong), thus showing that both types of 'devil' are referred to here, although the emphasis in Peter's case is on the devil as a civil power:&nbsp;<em>Pathema&nbsp;</em>is used concerning physical persecution by the civil 'devil' in <em><a href='B:620 3:11'>2Ti 3:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 10:32'>Heb 10:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 1:6'>2Co 1:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 5:1'>1Pe 5:1</a></em>; and concerning our evil desires in <em><a href='B:520 7:5'>Rom 7:5</a></em> (the "motions" of sin within us), and the "affections" of the flesh in <em><a href='B:580 3:5'>Col 3:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 1:26'>Rom 1:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 5:24'>Gal 5:24</a></em>. Thus the parallel passage in <em><a href='B:660 4:7'>Jas 4:7</a></em> concerning resisting the devil is about both the Roman/ Jewish system and the evil desires of the flesh, although the latter is the context in James, whilst the former provides the backdrop to Peter's use of the word. Again, we see that the Jewish thinking influencing the ecclesia was encouraging the 'devil' of their evil hearts, whilst a conscious resisting of the Judaizers' inroads and of the fleshly heart would lead to those things fleeing.</h4>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 4:8'>Jas 4:8</a></em><em>&nbsp;Draw near to God and He will draw near to you. Cleanse your hands you doubleminded sinners, and purify your hearts</em>- The Greek phrase for "draw near" is used in the Septuagint to describe the priests drawing near to God in the offering of sacrifices and prayers. The elders were being reminded that they were equivalent of priests in the new Israel and therefore had a responsibility to acceptably and reverently draw near to God on behalf of the congregation, as well as to accurately expound the word publicly (<em><a href='B:460 2:7'>Mal 2:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:350 4:6'>Hos 4:6</a></em>; see too comments on <em><a href='B:660 2:9'>Jas 2:9</a></em>). This drawing near to God in prayer was only possible through a pure heart and therefore pure hands or actions. God would only hear their prayers if these things were in order; which is why the feeling we should have that our prayers are heard should give us confidence that spiritually we are going the right way (<em><a href='B:690 5:14'>1Jn 5:14</a></em>). "Turn ye unto me, saith the Lord of hosts, and I will turn unto you" (<em><a href='B:450 1:3'>Zec 1:3</a></em>) and "Return unto me, and I will return unto you" (<em><a href='B:460 3:7'>Mal 3:7</a></em>) must be the basis for these words of James. Both these passages are in the context of Israel's restoration at the time of the second temple; there are a number of other connections between James and the restoration prophets:</p><table><tr><td></p><h4>James</td><td>Restoration prophets</td><td></td></tr><tr><td><em><a href='B:660 1:13'>Jas 1:13</a></em></td><td><em><a href='B:460 3:15'>Mal 3:15</a></em></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><em><a href='B:660 1:17'>Jas 1:17</a></em></td><td><em><a href='B:460 3:6'>Mal 3:6</a></em></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><em><a href='B:660 1:27'>Jas 1:27</a></em></td><td><em><a href='B:460 3:5'>Mal 3:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:450 7:10'>Zec 7:10</a></em></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><em><a href='B:660 2:1'>Jas 2:1</a></em></td><td><em><a href='B:460 1:9'>Mal 1:9</a></em></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><em><a href='B:660 2:4'>Jas 2:4</a></em></td><td><em><a href='B:460 2:9'>Mal 2:9</a></em></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><em><a href='B:660 4:3'>Jas 4:3</a></em></td><td><em><a href='B:460 2:13'>Mal 2:13</a></em></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><em><a href='B:660 4:4'>Jas 4:4</a></em></td><td><em><a href='B:460 2:11'>Mal 2:11</a></em></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><em><a href='B:660 5:3'>Jas 5:3</a></em></td><td><em><a href='B:460 4:1'>Mal 4:1</a></em></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><em><a href='B:660 5:4'>Jas 5:4</a></em></td><td><em><a href='B:460 3:5'>Mal 3:5</a></em></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><em><a href='B:660 5:17'>Jas 5:17</a></em></td><td><em><a href='B:440 1:10-11'>Hag 1:10-11</a></em></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><em><a href='B:660 5:20'>Jas 5:20</a></em></td><td><em><a href='B:460 2:6'>Mal 2:6</a></em></td><td></td></tr></table><p>As it was the duty of the priests to convert the people of Israel by the word (<em><a href='B:460 2:6'>Mal 2:6</a></em>), so it was too for the ecclesial elders of the New Israel (<em><a href='B:660 5:20'>Jas 5:20</a></em>). But as the temple was neglected due to bickering, materialism and fleshly living among the priests, so was the ecclesia of the first century. The problems of Malachi's time and also those of James were solved by a coming of the Lord (<em><a href='B:460 3:1-2'>Mal 3:1-2</a></em>). Living on the brink of Christ's return, there must be similarities with the present ecclesial position. All these types highlight the key position of elders in influencing the ecclesia, and therefore the standards required of them. A fair degree of our current ecclesial problems may be traceable in some measure to our inattention to the importance of elders' qualifications.</h4><p>The idea of drawing near may have feint connections with the day of the Lord in AD70 drawing near; the same Greek phrase is used in <em><a href='B:470 24:32'>Mat 24:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 21:20'>Luk 21:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 21:28'>Luk 21:28</a></em>; and see notes on <em><a href='B:660 5:8'>Jas 5:8</a></em>. The Greek root is 'to squeeze close', which we can do to God by prayer, and which He will therefore do to us. The parallel in <em><a href='B:670 5:6'>1Pe 5:6</a></em> says that in response to humbly drawing near to God, He will "exalt you in due time"- i:e. answer your prayers eventually, and especially with a place in the Kingdom (cp. "friend come up higher" at the judgment seat). God's immediate drawing near to us as a result of our drawing near to Him is therefore not necessarily in the immediate answering of prayer, but in the sense of peace with God which we have after acceptably placing our requests before Him- "by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God. And the peace of God, which passes all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds" (<em><a href='B:570 4:6-7'>Phi 4:6-7</a></em>), even before we receive the answers.</p><p>The language of physical movement in verses 7 and 8 paints a fascinating picture of a man walking towards God ("drawing near" is often used in the sense of literal walking), thereby resisting the devil, and therefore the devil turning tail and fleeing in the opposite direction. As we walk towards God, he walks towards us- perhaps alluding to the parable of the prodigal son, where the man's walking towards the Father is matched by His running towards him (<em><a href='B:490 15:20'>Luk 15:20</a></em>), so eager is our God to respond to any real spiritual effort on our part. The context here in James 4 is of prayer- the drawing near to God is in prayer.</p><p>The idea of cleansing the hands suggests a link with Isaiah 1, which has other connections with James: "When you spread forth your hands (in prayer), I will hide My eyes from you: yes, when you make many prayers, I will not hear (as was happening to these brethren): your hands are full of blood. Wash you, make you clean (cp. "cleanse your hands"); put away the evil of your doings from before My eyes::. seek judgment, relieve the oppressed (what the brethren had not done- <em><a href='B:660 2:14-16'>Jas 2:14-16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 5:4'>Jas 5:4</a></em>), judge the fatherless, plead for the widow (cp. <em><a href='B:660 1:27'>Jas 1:27</a></em> - what they didn't do)::. if you be willing and obedient, you shall eat the good of the land (i:e. inherit the Kingdom): but if you refuse and rebel, you shall be devoured with the sword" (AD70; <em><a href='B:290 1:15-20'>Isa 1:15-20</a></em>). These scattered members of the Jerusalem ecclesia were therefore being equated with the "sinners in Zion" at the time of Sennacherib's Assyrian invasion; it was in their capacity to enable the Kingdom to be established in AD70, but if they continued in sin both they and Jerusalem along with natural Israel would be destroyed. Sadly they chose the latter, and their counterparts in Hezekiah's time made such a shallow reformation that they only succeeded in deferring judgment.</p><p>The Greek word is often used for the 'cleansing' of leprosy; the Lord likened the Pharisees to cups that needed cleansing, i:e. the cups were defiled by leprosy and needed purification; His description of Jerusalem's destruction stone by stone recalled the method of destroying a leprous house. The Jewish system was leprous because&nbsp;<em>inwardly</em>&nbsp;it was defiled; externally it looked fine (<em><a href='B:470 23:26'>Mat 23:26</a></em>). It was their fleshly way of thinking that was the real leprosy, and this is also the context here in <em><a href='B:660 4:6'>Jas 4:6</a></em>; the cleansing of actions is parallel to purifying a double-minded heart, because in James the thoughts of the heart and actions, especially words, are treated as identical. Cleansing or purifying ('washing') the heart suggests <em><a href='B:300 4:14'>Jer 4:14</a></em>, which is also in the context of the impending destruction of Jerusalem: "O Jerusalem (ecclesia), wash your heart from wickedness, that you may be saved. How long shall your vain (cp. <em><a href='B:660 2:20'>Jas 2:20</a></em> "vain man") thoughts lodge within you?". The parallels between these believers and apostate Israel are unmistakable. "Purify" is often used about Mosaic purification (<em><a href='B:500 11:55'>Joh 11:55</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 21:24'>Act 21:24</a></em> etc:)- cp. the idea of cleansing being associated with the Law's commandments about leprosy. This purification by washing comes from "the wisdom that is from above (that) is::. pure" (<em><a href='B:660 3:17'>Jas 3:17</a></em>)- i:e. the word, "the washing of water by the word" (<em><a href='B:560 5:26'>Eph 5:26</a></em>), which is the new covenant's equivalent to the purification process performed in the laver. For this reason John Thomas translates <em><a href='B:630 3:5'>Tit 3:5</a></em> as "the laver of regeneration", cp. "the washing of regeneration:::of the Holy Spirit”. "Purify your hearts, you double minded" implies that having a mind which was only semi-spiritual was as bad as being totally defiled and needing cleansing. It looks back to the description of those who had only semi-faith in prayer as "double-minded" in <em><a href='B:660 1:8'>Jas 1:8</a></em>. Here in chapter 4 the context is the same (see notes on <em><a href='B:660 4:1-3'>Jas 4:1-3</a></em>). Thus James is saying in <em><a href='B:660 1:6-8'>Jas 1:6-8</a></em> 'Ask for wisdom, the spiritual strength from the Spirit, in full faith, not the double-minded prayers you have been making for your pleasures ("lusts", <em><a href='B:660 4:3'>Jas 4:3</a></em>)'. See notes on <em><a href='B:660 1:8'>Jas 1:8</a></em> for more on "double minded".</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 4:9'>Jas 4:9</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Lament and mourn and weep, let your laughter be turned to mourning and your joy to gloom-&nbsp;</em>This exhortation to weeping and the general theme of making a repentance from the heart recalls Jesus' desperate, 11th hour call to repentance to avoid judgment on Jerusalem. "Turn ye even to me (cp. "draw near to God") with all your heart (cp. "you double minded"), and with fasting, and with weeping, and with mourning: and rend your heart, and not your garments (cp. their hypocrisy- <em><a href='B:660 3:17'>Jas 3:17</a></em>)::. who knows if He will turn and repent (of the planned judgments on Israel, natural and spiritual)?:::let the priests (cp. the ecclesial elders of James)::. weep" (<em><a href='B:360 2:12-17'>Joe 2:12-17</a></em>). Joel 2 goes on to describe the judgments of AD70 in verses 30-32- according to Peter's quotation of them in Acts 2.</p><p>The double emphasis on mourning in this verse suggests reference to <em><a href='B:470 5:4'>Mat 5:4</a></em> "Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted". This would mean that James interpreted this group of people as those mourning in repentance for their sins, receiving the comfort (Greek&nbsp;<em>parakleo</em>- drawing near) of closeness to God. The idea of God drawing near has been seen in the preceding verse- "Draw nigh to God and He will draw nigh to you". Again, the encouragement James' readers got from his words was proportionate to their ability to pick up these definite connections with other passages. To him that has spiritual talents of understanding the word, more will be given. James could have said 'Jesus basically said, "mourn and I will draw near to you", so mourn in repentance and this is how God through Christ will draw near to you, as I have just spoken about in v:8'. But instead we have to be sensitive to the two mentions of mourning here in v:9, recognize this is one of the many references back to the sermon on the mount, and appreciate the similarity of meaning between 'comforted' in <em><a href='B:470 5:4'>Mat 5:4</a></em> and "draw nigh" in v:8. That the connection with <em><a href='B:470 5:4'>Mat 5:4</a></em> is valid is confirmed by the Greek word for "joy" in <em><a href='B:660 4:9'>Jas 4:9</a></em> only occurring elsewhere in <em><a href='B:490 6:25'>Luk 6:25</a></em>, which is effectively repeating <em><a href='B:470 5:4'>Mat 5:4</a></em>: "Woe unto you that laugh now For you shall mourn and weep". "Mourn and weep" is repeated in <em><a href='B:660 4:9'>Jas 4:9</a></em>.</p><p>There seems fair reason to believe that the riotous merry making mentioned here occurred at the Breaking of Bread. 1 Corinthians 11 rebukes some at the Corinth ecclesia (which included Jews, and was probably in receipt of James' letter, therefore) for getting drunk at the communion service. Similarly Peter and Jude warn of those brethren who 'feasted' at the love feast (Breaking of Bread). The Greek in <em><a href='B:720 1:12'>Jud 1:12</a></em> means to revel or be sumptuous, and describes those guilty as "feeding themselves without fear". This word for "feeding" specifically means to shepherd- as if it were the ecclesial elders or shepherds who were particularly guilty of these abuses. Thus James is saying that they ought to be mourning and weeping in repentance at the Breaking of Bread rather than revelling. If this is what James is meaning, some important practical issues emerge. Firstly, sorrow and an apparently long face are to be expected from many of us who inevitably feel the need for repentance burning keenly as we face the supreme dedication and holiness of Christ on the cross. There seems far too much criticism of those who do "weep and mourn" in their souls with a spirit of heaviness (cp. <em><a href='B:290 61:3'>Isa 61:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 4:9'>Jas 4:9</a></em>) at the memorial service. How can any of us tell another to be more happy or look more cheerful without knowing the nature of their relationship with God in the past few days? For such an intensity of self-knowledge and repentance to occur, there must be a fair period of time for reflection and self-examination- not just the odd minute as we wait for the emblems to reach us. The "feast of charity" referred to in <em><a href='B:720 1:12'>Jud 1:12</a></em> would have been a replica of the last supper- a whole meal of fellowship followed by the specific taking of the bread and wine.</p><p>"Afflicted" means 'to realize ones own misery' (Strong) and only occurs elsewhere in <em><a href='B:520 7:24'>Rom 7:24</a></em> and <em><a href='B:730 3:17'>Rev 3:17</a></em>. Romans 7, 8 have been alluded to previously in the letter, and <em><a href='B:520 7:24'>Rom 7:24</a></em> is describing the wretchedness Paul felt due to appreciating how sinful his innate evil desires really were. This marvellously fits the context of James 4, where he is advising them to analyse their own evil hearts more and appreciate their inherent sinfulness. By doing so they would feel "wretched" or "afflicted". The Laodiceans were perhaps another ecclesia with a Jewish element to whom James was also writing; they certainly had the same problems of materialism and a lukewarm, semi-spirituality. The Lord criticized them for not knowing that they were wretched, i:e. not examining the wretchedness of their own evil desires enough. The idea of wretchedness is similar, although not linguistically connected, to the descriptions of the rejected at the day of judgment, writhing in the pain of self-hate, realizing for the first time the degree of their inherent sinfulness. If we judge ourselves now, i:e. examine ourselves and realize we are worthy of condemnation (judgment- <em><a href='B:470 7:1'>Mat 7:1</a></em>), then we will not be judged (<em><a href='B:530 11:31'>1Co 11:31</a></em>). They were to "turn" their revelling into sorrow; a word which means basically 'to pervert'- e:g. the Judaizers perverted (same word) the Gospel of Christ (<em><a href='B:550 1:7'>Gal 1:7</a></em>). This would imply that as they had perverted the Gospel, they were to 'pervert' it back again; they had spiritually justified their laughter and revelling by this perversion.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 4:10'>Jas 4:10</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and He shall exalt you- The</em>&nbsp;parallel in <em><a href='B:670 5:6'>1Pe 5:6</a></em> indicates that this lifting up is at the judgment seat: "Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that He may exalt you (same Greek as "lift you up" in James) in due time", i:e. in the future, at the judgment (cp. "come up higher" in the wedding feast parable). Thus if we examine ourselves to the degree of wretchedly feeling that we in our own strength will be only worthy of condemnation, then as we will be lifted up from our grovelling before Christ at the judgment, so He will lift us up now. <em><a href='B:490 21:36'>Luk 21:36</a></em> seems to refer to this lifting up at the judgment: "Pray always::. to be stood before the Son of man"- by the Angel gently lifting us up from the ground at Christ's feet, as He did to Daniel in his acting out of our experience at the judgment (<em><a href='B:340 10:8-19'>Dan 10:8-19</a></em>). The humbling of self spoken of in verses 6 and 7 was in the context of being humble in prayer. The lifting up which comes as a result of this we have shown to be our exaltation in the Kingdom. Thus by reason of having our prayers heard, especially those for the gift of the understanding of the word (<em><a href='B:660 4:6'>Jas 4:6</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:660 1:17-18'>Jas 1:17-18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 3:17'>Jas 3:17</a></em>), it is as if we are exalted in prospect into places in the Kingdom. Thus <em><a href='B:690 5:14'>1Jn 5:14</a></em> says that the confidence we have of acceptance at the judgment is based on our prayers being answered now. <em><a href='B:660 1:9'>Jas 1:9</a></em> spoke of the humble brother rejoicing in that he is exalted ("lifted up" in <em><a href='B:660 4:10'>Jas 4:10</a></em>). The context there was of having prayers for wisdom heard (<em><a href='B:660 1:5-6'>Jas 1:5-6</a></em>). The rich man's wavering prayers (<em><a href='B:660 1:6'>Jas 1:6</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:660 4:14'>Jas 4:14</a></em>) were unheeded compared to those of the poor.</p><p>Thus the poor brother being "lifted up" was through his prayers being answered. Now in <em><a href='B:660 4:10'>Jas 4:10</a></em> James is again telling the rich elders to humble themselves like the poor brethren so that they too could be lifted up. The emphasis in <em><a href='B:660 1:9'>Jas 1:9</a></em> and <em><a href='B:660 4:10'>Jas 4:10</a></em> is on God lifting us up (same word as "exalting"). This must look back to the repeated warnings in the Gospels about exalting oneself (<em><a href='B:490 14:11'>Luk 14:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 18:14'>Luk 18:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 23:12'>Mat 23:12</a></em>), often referring to the Jews who did this. The man of sin, which must have reference to both Jewish and Roman systems of apostasy, also "exalteth himself" (<em><a href='B:600 2:4'>2Th 2:4</a></em>). The Jewish characteristic of spiritual self-exaltation was therefore seen in these Jewish brethren. There is a parallel between verses 6 and 10; God "giveth grace unto the humble" (v:6) and lifts them up (v:10). The giving of grace we have interpreted as giving the answer to prayer, and especially in the gift of wisdom from the word; this equates with being lifted up with a place in the Kingdom. Thus to an extent we are in the Kingdom now in prospect through experiencing the gifts of the word and answered prayer.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 4:11'>Jas 4:11</a></em><em>&nbsp;Brothers, do not speak evil against each other. He that speaks against a brother, or judges his brother, speaks against the law, and judges the law. But if you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law but a judge</em>- James now speaks specifically of one particular manifestation of their evil desires and the things which militated against their prayers being answered, namely evil speaking and condemning the poor brethren. This is the same thing as noted in <em><a href='B:660 3:9-10'>Jas 3:9-10</a></em>, where we saw that they cursed these brethren with the excuse that they were doing it under the inspiration of God. Their evil speaking was due to not letting the word curb their evil desires; they were thus effectively judging the word, saying that their own natural spirit was superior to that holy Spirit provided by a humble response to the word. Similarly they effectively thought that the Scriptures' warning against the natural lust of our heart was "vain" (<em><a href='B:660 4:5'>Jas 4:5</a></em>). Note that speaking evil of the brother and speaking evil of the law are equated, implying that the brethren they were slandering had the word in them.</p><p>The parallel passage in <em><a href='B:670 2:1-2'>1Pe 2:1-2</a></em> says that the antidote to "evil speakings" was to "desire the sincere milk of the word" as newborn spiritual babes- strong medicine for ecclesial 'elders', who probably had the gift of prophecy. Possession of the miraculous gifts did not force them to desire the true spirit of the word. Speaking evil is equivalent to condemning or spiritually killing a brother, according to James- no doubt basing his reasoning on that of the Lord, that to hate your brother was to kill him (<em><a href='B:470 5:21-22'>Mat 5:21-22</a></em>).</p><p>James saw the Mosaic command not to kill your brother as meaning 'do not condemn' under the New Covenant. Therefore to do so was to speak evil of "the law" both of Moses and Christ. The Lord also said that to call your brother a "Fool" was as bad as condemning or killing him. The Greek for "fool" implies someone who has been shut out of a certain knowledge; the word is invariably used in the New Testament regarding someone lacking in the true knowledge of God. There does seem to be a definite reference to <em><a href='B:470 5:21-22'>Mat 5:21-22</a></em>, and therefore James would be implying that the Jewish elders were accusing the others of not having their true knowledge of God (due to their gift of prophecy, they may have argued?) and therefore being condemned by God. By doing so they were speaking evil of the word which the other brethren had received, which was enough to make them spiritually wise ("the wisdom that is from above", <em><a href='B:660 1:17-18'>Jas 1:17-18</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:660 3:17'>Jas 3:17</a></em>) and not fools, as the elders accused them of being. The elders were not denying that the others had received part of the word, but were saying that without having the knowledge which they claimed to have, these brethren were fools, i:e. 'judged' or condemned. This spiritual superiority due to supposed additional revelation is a common characteristic of the descriptions of the Judaizers and their followers: <em><a href='B:730 2:24'>Rev 2:24</a></em>, "the (pseudo) depths of (the Jewish) satan"; <em><a href='B:720 1:10'>Jud 1:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 1:17-21'>1Co 1:17-21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 2:1-7'>1Co 2:1-7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 3:18-19'>1Co 3:18-19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 11:19'>2Co 11:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 1:22'>Rom 1:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 12:16'>Rom 12:16</a></em>. <em><a href='B:720 1:19'>Jud 1:19</a></em> describes these brethren as separating themselves, falsely claiming to have the Spirit, although they still attended the communion service to spread their false ideas (v:12); thus their separating of themselves was not in a physical sense, but an elitism due to their claim to have superior Spirit-given knowledge. Even today it is possible for there to be spiritual elitism from thinking that we have a deep understanding of the Spirit word which others are not yet able to appreciate.</p><h4>This verse 11 seems to consciously refer back to <em><a href='B:660 2:5-16'>Jas 2:5-16</a></em>. Speaking evil of "the law" by evil speaking about the brethren is probably based on <em><a href='B:660 2:8-9'>Jas 2:8-9</a></em>: "Respect to persons (breaks):::&nbsp;<em>the</em>&nbsp;royal law according to the Scripture, You shall love your neighbour as yourself". The chapter 2 passage mentions the oppression of the poor brethren before the "judgment seats" of the eldership (<em><a href='B:660 2:6'>Jas 2:6</a></em>), and the subsequent turning down of their welfare requests (<em><a href='B:660 2:16'>Jas 2:16</a></em>), as examples of breaking the royal law. That same law was being broken by the elders falsely accusing and condemning their brother, according to <em><a href='B:660 4:11'>Jas 4:11</a></em>. Thus these elders were trying to act like Christ in His role as judge, and were bringing false accusation against the brethren and subsequently condemning them, as an excuse not to provide them with their basic needs, and to withhold their legitimate wages (<em><a href='B:660 5:4'>Jas 5:4</a></em>). The judges of Israel under the Mosaic Law were those "to whom the word of God came", and yet they were condemned for judging unjustly, accepting the persons of the wicked (cp. saying to the well dressed man 'sit here', <em><a href='B:660 2:3'>Jas 2:3</a></em>), not defending the poor and fatherless (the Jewish ecclesial elders also neglected these; <em><a href='B:660 1:27'>Jas 1:27</a></em>) and not delivering the poor and needy (cp. <em><a href='B:660 2:15-16'>Jas 2:15-16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 4:5'>Jas 4:5</a></em>). Despite being inspired with the word of God "they know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness" (<em><a href='B:500 10:34-36'>Joh 10:34-36</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 82:1-5'>Psa 82:1-5</a></em>). James is making a very apt comparison between these judges and the Jewish eldership, who had become so obsessed with being the equivalent of these judges in the new Israel that they had come to think that their personal doing of the law was not important. Similarly those today who publicly expound the word can become 'judges' rather than doers. That they judged the law may even imply that they set up their personal ideas as being greater and more inspired than the word of God itself, and maybe even 'judged' or condemned part of the word which conflicted with their personal 'wisdom'. Being a doer of the law must be another allusion to Romans: "not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified" (<em><a href='B:520 2:13'>Rom 2:13</a></em>). This is again in the context of Paul's rebuke of the Jewish thinking that by being Jews and having heard the Law they were justified; and this also connects with the argument in <em><a href='B:660 2:20'>Jas 2:20</a></em> that holding "the faith" must be accompanied by works, and being "doers of the word, and not hearers only" (<em><a href='B:660 1:22-23'>Jas 1:22-23</a></em>).</h4><p>James could tell others not to speak against their brother (<em><a href='B:660 4:11'>Jas 4:11</a></em> RV) knowing full well he had done the same to Jesus, his brother. Preaching and pastoral work is so often powerfully achieved on the basis of having personally experienced grace. &nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 4:12'>Jas 4:12</a></em><em>&nbsp;One only is the lawgiver and judge. He who is able to save and to destroy. Who are you to judge your neighbour?</em>-&nbsp;<em>&nbsp;</em>The stress on<em>&nbsp;one</em>&nbsp;lawgiver suggests, in harmony with our previous comments, that the elders were making new laws under the claim of inspiration, and were using these to condemn their brethren. Note how the evil speaking which began as a result of the word not controlling their thoughts led them to condemn others, contrary to the clear law of Christ (<em><a href='B:470 7:1'>Mat 7:1</a></em>), and having effectively disregarded the word their next step was to literally add to it. They had already done this in effect by trying to Biblically justify their wrong actions. The phrase "there is one lawgiver" would have rung bells in every Jewish mind concerning Moses the lawgiver. Again their likening of themselves to Moses is being condemned (see notes on <em><a href='B:660 3:10'>Jas 3:10</a></em>). However, the ultimate lawgiver is God, who is "able to:::destroy" soul and body (alluding to <em><a href='B:470 10:28'>Mat 10:28</a></em>). The fact that God's ability to save and destroy in Gehenna at the judgment (note the <em><a href='B:470 10:28'>Mat 10:28</a></em> allusion) is chosen out of all His powers, shows that the elders were specifically claiming that they had the power to make the decision of salvation or destruction, and that the judgment panel which they formed to judge the poor brethren was rated by them as an exact equivalent to Christ's judgment seat at the second coming.</p><p>The extent of their blasphemy of the word of God which they claimed justified them in all this is hard to comprehend:&nbsp;<br/>This verse has clear reference to <em><a href='B:520 14:4'>Rom 14:4</a></em>: "Who art you that judges another man's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. Yes, he shall be held up: for God is able to make him stand". We have seen in <em><a href='B:660 4:10'>Jas 4:10</a></em> the idea of being lifted up at the day of judgment. Thus Paul in Romans is also using 'judging' in the sense of spiritually condemning, and is saying that the brethren doing such judgment were usurping Christ's position as the judge, saying<em>&nbsp;they</em>&nbsp;were the master of the servants. Therefore Paul says that such condemned brethren will be justified by being lifted up to acceptance at the true judgment seat. The similarity of the situation suggests strongly that Romans and James were written to the same readership, and that their writers expected the readers to make connections between the letters- due to the same spirit inspiring both writers. The context in <em><a href='B:520 14:3'>Rom 14:3</a></em> is judging (i:e. condemning) your brother due to his attitude to the Mosaic food laws and the Sabbath. Those who were doing the judging were "him that eats not"- i:e. the Judaizers who wanted a move back to the Jewish laws. The connections between Romans and James are such that we can safely say that the group who were doing the judging in James are identical to the group of Judaizers in Romans.</p><p>Thus the group of Jewish elders James writes to were almost definitely either Judaizers or Judaist influenced. The connections with James would explain why <em><a href='B:520 14:10-13'>Rom 14:10-13</a></em> stresses so much that the judge at the judgment seat is God through Christ, rather than men. The importance of this can be appreciated far more once it is recognized that the Jewish eldership were claiming to have an inspired command from God to set up judgment seats and judge to condemnation on Christ's behalf. The situation is made the more fascinating when we appreciate that the power of the Spirit was available to the apostles and possibly some elders to inflict physical sickness as a punishment- e:g. Peter could strike Ananias and Sapphira dead, Christ would threaten to strike down false teachers (<em><a href='B:730 2:23'>Rev 2:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 22:18'>Rev 22:18</a></em>); Peter could threaten many (unrecorded) physical curses that he could bring upon Simon for his blasphemy (<em><a href='B:510 8:24'>Act 8:24</a></em>); Paul could make Elymas blind (<em><a href='B:510 13:9-11'>Act 13:9-11</a></em>). It is probable that the gift of healing was largely used to cure such people after their repentance, and this is the basis of <em><a href='B:660 5:15'>Jas 5:15</a></em> (see note there). It would appear that the Jewish elders were claiming some kind of similar authority.</p><p>The omnipotence of God not only inspires faith; it demands even more than that. Because God alone has the power to save and destroy, He alone can ultimately judge; the fact there is only one law giver means there is only one judge (<em><a href='B:660 4:12'>Jas 4:12</a></em> RV). To judge, therefore, is to ‘play God’ in a blasphemous way, arrogating to ourselves the role of lawgiver and judge. Yet apart from God we are powerless, totally and utterly. Our powerlessness needs to be reflected upon more deeply. We simply cannot judge. The omnipotence of God alone precludes it.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 4:13'>Jas 4:13</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Come now, you that say that today or the next day we will go into this city and spend a year there and trade and make a profit-</em>&nbsp;The two references to "Come now" or "Go to" in James (here and <em><a href='B:660 5:1'>Jas 5:1</a></em>) suggest immediately the one other place where this idiom is used- it occurs three times in five verses in <em><a href='B:10 11:3-7'>Gen 11:3-7</a></em> concerning the building of Babel. There is good reason to believe that Babel represented the apostate Jewish system of worship. "A city and a tower" of <em><a href='B:10 11:4'>Gen 11:4</a></em> points forward to Jerusalem and the Jewish system having a tower in the midst of its vineyard (<em><a href='B:290 5:2'>Isa 5:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 21:33'>Mat 21:33</a></em>). All Jewish temples were built with the help of Gentile labour, as Babel was built by all nations collected together in one purpose. Babel and Shinar are the basis of Babylon in Scripture, and the descriptions of Babylon in Revelation have many echoes of the Jewish system. The scattering abroad of Babel all over the earth corresponds to God's Angelic 'coming down' on Jerusalem in AD70 and the subsequent scattering of the Jews world-wide. We have seen previously that James very much has the events of AD70 in mind, and the use of the phrase "go to" would be another reminder that unless the Jewish believers repented of their materialism and other unspirituality, then both natural and spiritual Jerusalem would be severely punished- as indeed happened to both of them. We have shown earlier that this verse primarily refers to the itinerant Jewish traders within the ecclesia.</p><p><em><a href='B:700 1:7-11'>2Jn 1:7-11</a></em> (also written to a Jewish audience?) also speaks of itinerant preachers who were likely to have serious doctrinal errors. The Jews with whom they mixed in such travelling would not have been wholesome spiritual company. Indeed, it was "Vagabond" (Greek 'strolling') Jews who stirred up trouble for the believers (<em><a href='B:510 19:13'>Act 19:13</a></em>). These brethren blatantly, proudly talked of their business plans, glorying in not saying 'God willing' (so v:15,16 implies). This was probably because they believed that they no longer personally had to keep the law (v:11), and that they were justified by reason of knowing the truth and being Jews by birth (<em><a href='B:660 2:20'>Jas 2:20</a></em> and cp. <em><a href='B:520 6:1'>Rom 6:1</a></em>).</p><p>The sudden switch of subject away from judging brethren to that of crazy materialism calls for an explanation. It seems that the letter of James criticizes the believers for increasingly serious things, with a corresponding increase in punishment from God. The sections can be categorized as follows:<br/>1:1-12 Semi-faith in prayer from lack of attention to the word due to materialism<br/>1:13-27 Falsely blaming God for temptation, hard speaking to brethren, and neglect of the fatherless and widows in the ecclesia due to brief, meaningless self-examination and not being sensitive to the word.<br/>2:1-13 Preference to the rich in the ecclesia, condemning the poor brethren, saying some parts of the word were unimportant.<br/>2:14-26 Saying external works and technical holding of the Truth justified a man, and that lack of real spiritual effort can be Biblically justified.<br/>3:1-4:12 Total unrestraint of the evil heart and its words, saying this was unnecessary for them. Claiming to be inspired with new revelation from God which replaced parts of the Bible and justified them totally.<br/>4:13-5:6 Sinking into total materialism, throwing off all sense of subjection to God, effectively crucifying Christ afresh (<em><a href='B:660 5:6'>Jas 5:6</a></em>).<br/>5:7-20 Subsequently being struck with physical sickness to try to lead them to repentance; final destruction at the Lord's 'coming' in AD70 and the holocaust for natural and spiritual Israel which followed.<br/>If this analysis is correct, then these separate parts of the letter would have been sent at different times- hence <em><a href='B:660 4:13'>Jas 4:13</a></em> "Go to&nbsp;<em>now</em>". How many of us are in the first category discussed in <em><a href='B:660 1:1-12'>Jas 1:1-12</a></em>? If our attention to the word continues to slip, it is only a matter of time before the ecclesia of the last days drops into the categories lower down the list. It has been suggested that the letter of James is a series of exhortations given to or at the Jerusalem ecclesia and then circulated. This would fit in with the pattern deduced here.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 4:14'>Jas 4:14</a></em><em>&nbsp;Whereas you do not know what shall be the next day. What is your life? For you are as a vapour that appears for a little time, and then vanishes away</em>-In view of the Jewish and Christian persecution which the parallel letter of Peter speaks of, they especially could not plan on predicting the future without God's help. Their travelling from city to city trading was probably enforced by the persecution. The Greek for "buy and sell" in v:13 means specifically to trade whilst travelling around, as a pedlar. Thus in their spiritual arrogance they were saying that their travelling around was done by their own spiritually correct decision, which obviated the need to say 'God willing'. They probably showed off their plans to the poor labouring brethren, as if they knew by direct inspiration what would be on the morrow. There must also be reference back to Christ's commands about not worrying about tomorrow because God would provide- "take therefore no (anxious) thought for the morrow" (<em><a href='B:470 6:34'>Mat 6:34</a></em>). If James had this in mind, then he was saying that he knew that in their evil heart they were worrying in a God-forsaking way about tomorrow, which they justified by saying that they had inspired knowledge of the future and the profit they would make, and therefore showed this off with a false air of confidence to the poorer brethren.</p><p>Again, these brethren are reminded of the need to remember their true nature: "For what is your life?" (cp. <em><a href='B:660 4:14'>Jas 4:14</a></em>). The description of life as a vapour appears to be an allusion to <em><a href='B:220 7:7'>Job 7:7</a></em>: "O remember that my life is wind". Thus James is asking them to learn the lesson of Job, as he does in <em><a href='B:660 5:11'>Jas 5:11</a></em>; to come to a true understanding of the weakness of human nature through responding in humility to the trials of life, and to the knowledge of God directly provided by Him. Again, as in <em><a href='B:660 2:3'>Jas 2:3</a></em> (see notes there) these brethren are being compared to Job, as they are again in chapter 5; as with him, physical trial was brought upon them in order for them to learn humility and the lessons concerning human nature and its relation to a holy God, which previously they had been unwilling to learn.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 4:15'>Jas 4:15</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For you ought to say: If the Lord wills it, we shall both live and do this or that</em>- "To say" implies that there should have been a verbal statement, publicly heard, of their recognition of the Lord's will in their lives. Their need to say that they would live if it was the Lord's will shows the extremely temporary nature of their lives at that time of persecution. Despite such tribulation, their hearts were so hardened against the true influence of the word that they were not made more sensitive to God's hand in their lives, but rather were hardened into thinking that in their own strength and wisdom, which they imagined was God-given, they would weather the present crisis. The Lord's "will" here is the Lord's desires and wishes, not necessarily the pre-determinate "will" of God. The parallel letter of Peter emphasizes that the will of God was what controlled their present persecution (<em><a href='B:670 2:15'>1Pe 2:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 3:17'>1Pe 3:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 4:19'>1Pe 4:19</a></em>), and that they should seek to do God's will by overcoming the natural will of the flesh (<em><a href='B:670 4:2-3'>1Pe 4:2-3</a></em>) by the word of God, which contains the will of God (<em><a href='B:670 1:23'>1Pe 1:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:680 1:21'>2Pe 1:21</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:500 1:13'>Joh 1:13</a></em>). Putting together these ideas, the message seems to be that it was the same will of God that they needed to get inside their hearts, to overcome the will of the flesh, which was also bringing their tribulations, implying that God was developing their response to the word through their persecutions.</p><p>James is therefore saying that they should recognize the will, the desires, the purpose of God behind their persecution from city to city, which was to develop in them a more truly spiritual mind. But by effectively saying that God's will or desires were irrelevant to them, they were denying themselves the opportunity to be spiritually developed by their sufferings. Lack of attention to what God is willing or desiring in our own trials can similarly lead to them being in vain for us too. That they should say "we shall live" if the Lord will suggests that they thought that their lives were protected from harm, or that they had some inherently indestructible element to them; hence the reminder in the previous verse that their life was only a brief vapour, as opposed to the more permanent 'immortal soul' they perhaps almost believed in as a result of the Roman/ Judaist philosophical influence upon them. The amazing thing is that despite these brethren's progressively worse problems in their doctrine and way of life, James continues to patiently reason with them, leading on towards his final appeal for repentance in Chapter 5.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 4:16'>Jas 4:16</a></em><em>&nbsp;But now you boast in your arrogance. All such boasting is evil</em>- We have previously commented on how their blatant rejoicing in their sin was due to their reasoning that it was impossible that they could sin- hence "all such…&nbsp;<em>is</em>&nbsp;evil". Similarly the Judaist element at Corinth rejoiced in the fact that there was a division in the ecclesia between the Paul and Apollos factions (<em><a href='B:530 4:6-7'>1Co 4:6-7</a></em>), and that they retained in fellowship a brother who had brazenly committed incest for all to see (<em><a href='B:530 5:6'>1Co 5:6</a></em>); this all shows the same mentality, of openly rejoicing in the freedom that they believed they had from all moral and spiritual constraints. "Rejoice" really means to glory or boast, which means that it had to be done to someone else. To boast that they did not need to say "If the Lord will" about their plans would not have made many eyes turn in the world generally; therefore it is more likely that they were boasting to the poor brethren whom they had spiritually condemned, saying that the superior revelation which they had received enabled them to have freedom from that kind of spiritual requirement which the poor brethren needed to obey.</p><p>"Boastings" occurs only three times elsewhere, and each time it is in the context of false Judaist reasoning. <em><a href='B:520 1:30'>Rom 1:30</a></em> describes how Israel in the wilderness, and also the last day Jewish ecclesias, were "boasters". If this means spiritually boastful, then it implies that the rejected generation in the wilderness thought up ways to spiritually justify themselves; hence <em><a href='B:520 1:30'>Rom 1:30</a></em> goes on to describe "inventors of evil things", i:e. the alternative tabernacle system of worship that they created and carried with them, based around their idols (<em><a href='B:510 7:43-44'>Act 7:43-44</a></em>). <em><a href='B:620 3:2'>2Ti 3:2</a></em> describes the boastful infiltrators of the ecclesias in the last days (<em><a href='B:620 3:6'>2Ti 3:6</a></em>), who had once known the Truth (<em><a href='B:620 3:5'>2Ti 3:5</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:520 2:20'>Rom 2:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 1:13'>2Ti 1:13</a></em>) but through their claims to superior knowledge and revelation ( <em><a href='B:620 3:7'>2Ti 3:7</a></em>) and giving way to their corrupted natural mind (<em><a href='B:620 3:8'>2Ti 3:8</a></em>) were "reprobate concerning the faith". This very well describes the Judaist brethren to whom James was writing.</p><p>"Boasting" also occurs in <em><a href='B:690 2:16'>1Jn 2:16</a></em> translated "pride": "All that is in the world (the Jewish world- so the phrase normally means in John's writings), the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eye, and the pride (boasting) of life, is not of the Father (as the Judaists were claiming?), but is of the world. And the world passes away" (in AD70). We have suggested that this boasting of life was a spiritual boasting by the Jews that they were blessed with superior wisdom and justification with God. <em><a href='B:690 2:16'>1Jn 2:16</a></em> is looking back to Eve's sin in Eden (<em><a href='B:10 3:6'>Gen 3:6</a></em>)- she saw that the fruit of the tree of knowledge was good for food (the lust of the flesh), pleasant to the eyes (lust of the eyes) and to be desired to make one wise (pride of life). The Jews' desire for worldly wisdom was like Eve in Eden. Her motivation for taking the fruit would therefore have been that of spiritual pride, the desire to boast to her husband that she was now under no restrictions at all and had a wisdom equal to that of God. Exactly the same was true of the first century Judaizers.</p>


text:
<h4><em><a href='B:660 4:17'>Jas 4:17</a></em><em>&nbsp;Therefore, to him that knows to do good and does it not, to him it is sin</em>-This indicates that these elders knew what they should be doing but consciously chose not to. In the light of their false claims to inspiration and the despicable doctrine and practice which they followed, it seems incredible that they could still have a knowledge of the real truth within them; and yet such is the deceit of the human heart that such doublemindedness can easily occur. There may be a reference here back to <em><a href='B:490 12:47'>Luk 12:47</a></em>: he that "knew his Lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes". <em><a href='B:660 4:15'>Jas 4:15</a></em> has spoken about their conscious disregard of their Lord's will. Thus v:17 is saying 'You know God's will and you know that you should show your recognition of it publicly- but you don't'. <em><a href='B:490 12:48'>Luk 12:48</a></em> goes on to say that knowing the Lord's will is the same as being given much- which the Jewish elders had been by having the miraculous Spirit gifts. The phrasing of "to him that knows::. to him it is sin" implies that not all James' readership did have that knowledge- because they had become so hardened in their belief that their attitudes were correct, that they no longer had the knowledge of the truth? "To him it is sin" implies that there were some without knowledge to whom their lack of doing good would not be reckoned as sin- i:e. although all unrighteousness is sin, no matter who commits it, "sin" is reckoned to the person who has the knowledge of what he ought to be doing. This is another of the many indications that an ongoing record is kept of our actions or lack of them, so that our failure to do an action that we know we should is counted as sin to us at a certain moment in time.</h4>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:660 5:1'>Jas 5:1</a></em><em>&nbsp;Come now, you rich, weep and howl for the miseries that are coming upon you</em>-&nbsp;<em>&nbsp;</em>The reference to rich men weeping again suggests a link with the beatitudes: "Woe unto you that are rich::. that laugh now, for you shall mourn and weep::. when all men shall speak well of you, for so did their fathers to the false prophets" (<em><a href='B:490 6:24-26'>Luk 6:24-26</a></em>). The mourning and weeping was what they were advised to do as a mark of their repentance in <em><a href='B:660 4:9'>Jas 4:9</a></em> - perhaps this was therefore to be as a result of their no longer being rich, i:e. sharing their wealth with their desperately poor brethren. The beatitudes were saying that the rich would mourn and weep at the judgment; James is advising them to do so now, i:e. to judge or condemn themselves by their self-examination in this life, so that they would not experience the weeping and gnashing of teeth then (cp. <em><a href='B:530 11:31'>1Co 11:31</a></em>). The weeping and howling were to be when "your miseries:::shall come upon you"- i:e. in AD70.</p><p>Thus the 'coming' of Christ then was also like the judgment seat at the second coming; the misery of the AD70 judgments and subsequent Jewish persecution was similar to that to be seen at the second coming. There should also be a parallel with the true contrition which we ought to have after repentant self-examination.</p><p>There is an allusion here to <em><a href='B:430 1:11-12'>Zep 1:11-12</a></em>: "Howl, you inhabitants of Maktesh (i:e. the market area near the temple- see N:I:V:)::. I will search Jerusalem with candles, and punish the men that are settled on their lees: that say in their heart, The Lord will not do good, neither will He do evil. Therefore your goods shall become a booty". The Jews Zephaniah addressed were facing the coming day of the Lord at the hand of Babylon; the materialism and subsequent money-making from the temple worshippers that they were guilty of, was being repeated in a more subtle form by their counterparts in the Jewish ecclesia in the days before AD70. Zephaniah warned "The great day of the Lord is near, and hastes greatly" (<em><a href='B:430 1:14'>Zep 1:14</a></em>), hoping to motivate them to repent. Similarly James: "The coming of the Lord draws near" (<em><a href='B:660 5:8'>Jas 5:8</a></em>). Ripping off the temple worshippers was paralleled by the financial abuses of the flock by the elders, to be mentioned in v:4. The idea of howling in Israel as a result of the impending day of the Lord due to their sins is common in the Old Testament prophets: <em><a href='B:290 13:6'>Isa 13:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 25:34'>Jer 25:34</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 47:2'>Jer 47:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:330 21:12'>Eze 21:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:360 1:5'>Joe 1:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:360 1:8'>Joe 1:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:360 1:11'>Joe 1:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:360 1:13'>Joe 1:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:400 1:8'>Mic 1:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:450 11:3'>Zec 11:3</a></em>. Many of these refer to the priests or the prophet howling. Thus James is saying that as well as howling in repentance, these ecclesial elders as counterparts of the priests and prophets under the Mosaic system should be howling out warning to the flock concerning the coming day of judgment.</p><p>"Miseries" can also imply spiritual lowness; the rareness of the Greek word and the other allusions to Romans 7 in James suggest that we are intended to see a connection with <em><a href='B:520 7:24'>Rom 7:24</a></em>: "O wretched (same word as "miseries") man that I am"- an exclamation concerning the intense evil of his natural mind that was called forth by Paul's self examination, maybe implying that if they judged (condemned) themselves now in their self examination, they would avoid the misery and self-realization they were to have in the coming holocaust.</p>


