Sermon & Translation by Nate Wilson for Christ the Redeemer Church, Manhattan, KS, 23 Apr. 2023
Read my translation: 1:27 This is pure and undefiled religion according to our God and Father: to watch over orphans and widows in their distress, [and] to keep oneself unsullied from the world. My brothers, it should not be with preferential treatments of persons that y’all hold the faith concerning our Lord Jesus the glorious Anointed One. For if a man with gold rings in splendid clothing happens to enter your synagogue, and there also happens to enter a destitute man in filthy clothing, and y’all give regard to the one sporting the splendid clothes and say, “You sit down comfortably here,” but to the destitute one y’all say, “You stand there,” or “Sit here below my footstool,” Have y’all not made distinctions among yourselves and become evil-reasoning judges? Listen, my beloved brothers: Has not God chosen those who are destitute {in} regards to the world to be rich in faith and to be those who inherit the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him? Y’all, however, dishonored the destitute. Is it not those who are rich who use their power against y’all and themselves haul y’all into courts-of-law? Is it not they who blaspheme the good name named upon you? When, however, y’all achieve the goal of the King’s law according to the scripture, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself,’ you are doing well, but when y’all give preferential treatment, y’all commit sin, being convicted under the law as transgressors.
First notice what defines the Christian: The NIV erroneously omits the verb, but we are those who “have/hold/claim the faith concerning our glorious Lord Jesus Christ.”
Some English versions put the word “glorious” at the end of the phrase, and add the word “Lord” again.
Douglass Moo, in his commentary noted that “James is attributing to the Lord Jesus the quality of splendor that is peculiar to God himself.”
This, as I have noted before, is a concise statement of what Christians believe: Jesus is both the one true God of the Old Testament – the LORD, and Jesus is the Christ – the Anointed Prophet, Priest, and King who is the fulfillment of all the prophecies of the Messiah, Who brings God’s word to us, brings God’s atonement for sins to us, and reigns over us.
This is the good news to which we “hold” steadfastly, “keeping” it dear to us!
Then, what Christians should not do: “respect persons /be partial/show personal favoritism” lit. “Receivings of faces”
The word is plural, and the grammar of the verb indicates that they were repeatedly doing this.
“[So this is an] exhortation to stop ‘holding’ or not to have the habit of ‘holding’ in the fashion condemned.” ~A.T. Robertson, 1933 AD
And this is no new commandment; it first appears in Leviticus 19:15 “Y'all may not do what is unfair in the justice-system. You may not receive the faces of the needy, and you may not inflate the cases of the great; it is with righteousness that you must judge your fellow-man.” (NAW) Notice in Leviticus, it is commanded not to show favoritism to the poor, and now, James says, don’t show favoritism to the rich either!
“Christ's being the Lord of glory should teach us not to respect Christians for any thing so much as their relation and conformity to Christ. You who profess to believe the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ, which the poorest Christian shall partake of equally with the rich, and to which all worldly glory is but vanity, you should not make men's outward and worldly advantages the measure of your respect.”~Matthew Henry, 1714 AD
The description of the church assembly is actually the Greek word for “synagogue,” since the Jewish synagogue of the intertestamental times was a model used by Christians when they gathered together.
Matthew Henry suggested in his commentary that this was not just a worship service, but an ecclesiastical court1 where people could come in and ask the elders of the church to arbitrate disagreements. Whether or not that is what James is describing, the principle of not showing preferential treatment holds true in any setting.
Into this church meeting walks two very different men in this example:
One is described as literally a “gold-ringed man” with clothes described as “Goodly, fine, gorgeous, elegant, bright, shining, dazzling, white, splendid.”
Every Jewish man wore a ring on his left hand (Vincent), so this guy’s fingers must be loaded with rings, and the the kind of clothing he is wearing is what kings often wore.
It makes me wonder if this is a powerful political leader showing up. If so, it’s no wonder that people would try to brown-nose him. He might be able to connect them to a higher-paying job, pull strings with the government to give certain business advantages, give a really nice gift at your baby shower, or shield you from government persecution.
Or perhaps it was a scribe or Pharisee like the ones Jesus described in Matthew 23:5ff, who wore a priestly robe with the long tassels and phylacteries, and who loved the “principle chairs in the synagogue.”
The other man’s clothes are described in some versions as “dirty/shabby.” I think the Greek word is a bit stronger than that, and I prefer the translations “filthy/vile.”
Perhaps you’ve been in the uncomfortable situation of sitting in a church meeting next to somebody whose clothes literally stank. It can take everything you’ve got, just to keep from becoming preoccupied with trying to get away from them.
But each person is just as much a person as anybody else, and the command of our Lord, which is binding upon us is, “Love one another.”
We need supernatural power from the Holy Spirit to love like He loved us!
Anyway, the rich man is given special attention, fawned upon, and invited to sit down.
The adverb “well” is used to describe him sitting - “sit well/sit in style/sit comfortably.”
In that culture, the person who was given the chair was being invited to lead and teach.
What a way to decide who should speak and lead in church; he who has the most gold rings and fancy clothes!
The poor man, however, is told to stand (therefore not to teach or lead) or to sit literally “below” your footstool, thus taking the position of a servant who would be expected to do menial tasks for whoever asked. (Merely because his clothes were really dirty.)
James uses rhetorical questions to get his readers thinking: “have you not made distinctions/shown partiality/discriminated”?
This verb is used Acts to condemn ethnic ‘apartheid’: Acts 11:12 Peter told the Jerusalem council concerning his visit to a Roman centurion, "‘The Spirit told me to go... without [making a division]... we entered the man's house.’ … 15:9 ‘and He [the Holy Spirit] made no distinction between us [Jews] and them [Romans], cleansing their hearts by faith.’” (NASB)
It also condemned when it shows up in church denominational rivalry between apostles: 1 Corinthians 4:7 Paul chided them for splitting the church over loyalty to him vs. Apollos: “For who is making distinctions between you, and what do you have which you did not receive, and if you received, what are you boasting about as though you had not received?” (NAW)
And it shows up in regards to socio-economic distinctions in 1 Corinthians 11:16 “Now if someone intends to be a lover of competition, we ourselves do not have such a habit, and neither do the churches of God... I'm hearing that divisions exist among you when you come together as a church... 20 Therefore when you gathered together in the same [place], it was not to eat the Lord's Supper, 21 for in your eating each one takes his own supper first; and one is hungry and another is drunk. 22 What! Do you not have houses in which to eat and drink? Or do you despise the church of God and shame the have-nots? ... 29 For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself by not distinguishing the body rightly. 30 For this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a few too many sleep [in death]. 31 But if we had been distinguishing ourselves rightly, we would not have been judged out [of line]... 33 So then, my brethren, when you come together to eat, wait for one another.” (NAW)
Now, the Bible affirms that there are times when it is good to make distinctions such as between good and evil, or between Christians and non-Christians, but it condemns making discriminatory distinctions between any other class of persons, such as Male/Female, Jew/Greek, Free/Slave (Gal. 3:28). Not that practical differences won’t exist between persons in those categories, but that neither one should get preferential treatment over the other.
James’ second rhetorical question, “Haven’t you become judges with evil motives?” alludes to a quote from Jesus: Matthew 15:19 “For out of the heart come evil rationalizations/ motives/ thoughts …,” which may be, in turn, a quote from Jeremiah 4:14 “O Jerusalem, wash your heart from wickedness, That you may be saved. How long shall your evil thoughts/motives lodge within you?” (NKJV).
Showing such preferential treatment to one Christian over another merely based on how nice or filthy their clothes are, is a result, says James, of “evil thoughts/bad motives/distorted reasoning.”
Why is this wrong? First of all, because God does not give preferential treatment to rich or poor, but relates to all fairly.
Romans 2:3 “And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God? … 6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds… 11 For there is no respect of persons with God.” (KJV)
Eph. 6:9 “And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him.” (KJV)
Col. 3:25 “But he that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done: and there is no respect of persons.” (KJV)
1 Pet. 1:17 “...the Father y'all are calling upon is the One who judges against the work of each man without showing favoritism...” (NAW)
Secondly, not only does God not show partiality to the rich, He actually shows more favor toward the poor! James tells us that God has “chosen” the poor to have a rich faith that will result in inheriting the kingdom!
Now, part of this turns on the fact that the Greek word for “poor” carries, not only the meaning of “financially destitute,” but it also carries the meaning of “spiritually humble.” Later on, James writes that “God is opposed to the proud but gives grace to the humble.”
Now, the poor are not always humble, but as a general rule, it is easier to find humility among the poor than among the wealthy. Those who know that they have needs are usually more open to getting help.
(That’s one reason why Christianity has spread so quickly among the untouchable class of India – and other mission fields – and so slowly among the upper castes.)
If we keep both meanings of this Greek word in mind, everything will make more sense. God is more generous with His kindness towards those who are both poor and humble toward Him.
This was the case in God’s “choice” of Israel. He said in Deut. 7:6-8 "For thou art a holy people to the Lord thy God; and the Lord thy God chose thee to be to him a peculiar people beyond all nations that are upon the face of the earth. It was not because ye are more numerous than all other nations that the Lord preferred you, and the Lord made choice of you: for ye are fewer in number than all other nations. But because the Lord loved you, and ... redeemed thee from the house of bondage, out of the hand of Pharao king of Egypt.” (Brenton)
The Apostle Paul also recalled that, "The God of this people Israel chose our fathers, and exalted the people when they dwelt as strangers in the land of Egypt, and with an uplifted arm He brought them out of it.” (Acts 13:17, NKJV)
Paul taught that the same was true of the church in 1 Cor. 1:26-29 “For y'all see your calling, brothers, that not many were wise according to the flesh, not many were powerful, not many were upper-class. But it was the stupid ones of the world God chose for Himself in order that He might put down the strength of the wise men, and it was the weak ones of the world God chose for Himself in order that He might put down the strength of the strong, and the ones without class of the world and the ones that have been despised God chose for Himself and the ones who do not exist in order that He might put out of commission the ones that do exist, so that all flesh might not boast before the face of God.” (NAW)
This is God’s way. When John the Baptizer asked whether Jesus was the Messiah, Jesus’ response was, effectively, “Of course! It is the fingerprint of God that the lowly poor are ing ministered to by me!” Matthew 11:5 “Blind men are seeing again, and lame men are walking around, lepers are being cleansed, and deaf men are hearing, [and] dead men are being raised up, and lowly men are getting good news” (NAW)
Jesus also commended the faith of poor people:
like the widow at the temple treasury who gave all she had to the Lord (Luke 21:1-4),
and the faithful, but poor, sick man Lazarus, in the parable, who went to heaven when he died, while the rich man went to hell (Luke 16:19-31),
and the church in Smyrna in Revelation 2 which was experiencing “poverty” and persecution, but to whom Jesus promised a “crown of life!”
Regardless of your socioeconomic status, do you have that attitude of humility before God – acknowledging your need before Him?
In Luke 6:20 “[Jesus] lifted up His eyes toward His disciples, and said: ‘Blessed are you poor, For yours is the kingdom of God.’” (NKJV)
Ephesians 2:4-7 But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.” (NKJV)
At the end of v.5, it says that the inheritance of God’s kingdom was promised beforehand to the poor. Where was that “promised”?
The Scriptures point us back to the promise God gave to Abraham in Genesis 12 that he would inherit the Promised Land. Abraham was wealthy – he owned lots of cattle and slaves and money, but he didn’t have a child and he didn’t have a place he could call his own, so he humbly waited on God to meet his deep desires.
Hebrews 6:12 “...become imitators of those who, through faith and longsuffering, are inheriting the promises... 11:7-9 With faith, Noah, after being informed concerning the things which were not yet seen, taking good heed, constructed an ark for the purpose of saving his household, through which he condemned the world and became an inheritor of the righteousness according to faith. With faith, Abraham, when he was called, obeyed [and] went out to the place which he was going to receive as an inheritance – indeed, he went out, not knowing where he was going. With faith he migrated into the country of the promise like it was a foreign one, residing in tents with Isaac and then Jacob...” (NAW, cf. Rom. 7:13-16)
God then repeated that promise of inheriting a literal kingdom, to Abraham’s descendants, on condition that they love him: Deuteronomy 30:16 "...I command you today to love the LORD your God, to walk in His ways, and to keep His commandments, His statutes, and His judgments, that you may live and multiply; and the LORD your God will bless you in the land which you go to [inherit].” (NKJV)
The promise of the land and the inheritance of it by Israel was a type and figure of the church of Christ being promised the kingdom of heaven and eventually coming into it as an inheritance.
In Jesus’ parable of the sheep and the goats, He effectively promised that God would tell Christians, "Come here, you who have been blessed by my father! Start inheriting the kingdom prepared for y'all from the foundation of the world…” (Matthew 25:34, NAW)
And the Apostle Paul, after he was battered and left for dead in the town of Lystra, rose up, and came back into the town, and told “the disciples... to continue in the faith... saying, ‘We must through many tribulations enter the kingdom of God.’" (Acts 14:22, NKJV)
“We read of the crown promised to those that love God, in [James chapter 1]; we here find there is a kingdom too!” (Matt. Henry) You see a poor, persecuted Christian now, but in heaven he or she is going to be a king or queen, the sort of person before whom you would be ashamed to remember having treated them neglectfully or unkindly in this life.
Now, after this argument from God’s character and promises, James continues to exhort Christians not to despise the poor (or give preferential treatment to the rich) using an...
James asks his fourth rhetorical question to get his readers to think back on past history: “Is it not those who are rich who oppress/exploit/use their power against y’all…?”
The first three times that verb is used in the Greek Old Testament, it refers to those who kidnapped or forced others into slavery, and many of the uses of that verb in the O.T. history books refer to a foreign army conquering a nation and looting it. When we read about the persecution of the early church, there was certainly looting and kidnapping and enslavement.
This was nothing particularly new. The following passages are from Brenton’s translation of the Greek Old Testament where the same word James used for “oppressing” was also used by the prophets:
Jeremiah 22:1-3 “...Hear the word of the Lord, O king of Juda, that sittest on the throne of David, thou, and thy house, and thy people, and they that go in at these gates: ... Execute ye judgment and justice, and rescue the spoiled out of the hand of him that wrongs him: and oppress not the stranger, and orphan, and widow, and sin not, and shed no innocent blood in this place.” The king of Judah was oppressing/exploiting/using his power against orphans and widows.
Ezekiel 22:6-8 “Behold, the princes of the house of Israel have conspired... each one with his kindred, that they might shed blood… they have reviled father and mother... they have behaved unjustly toward the stranger: they have oppressed the orphan and widow. And they have set at nought my holy things, and... have profaned my sabbaths … 27 Her princes... are as wolves ravening to shed blood, that they may get dishonest gain…. 29 That sorely oppress the people of the land with injustice, and commit robbery; oppressing the poor and needy, and not dealing justly with the stranger.” Exhibit B: The princes of Israel oppressing the poor.
Amos 4:1 also had a word from the LORD for the Israelite princesses: “Hear ye this word, ye heifers of the land of Basan that are in the mountain of Samaria, that oppress the poor, and trample on the needy, which say to their masters, Give us that we may drink… 8:4-7 Hear now this, ye that oppress the poor in the morning, and drive the needy ones by tyranny from the earth, saying, When will the month pass away, and we shall sell, and the sabbath, and we shall open the treasure, to make the measure small, and to enlarge the weight, and make the balance unfair? That we may buy the poor for silver, and the needy for shoes; and we will trade in every kind of fruit. The Lord swears against the pride of Jacob, None of your works shall ever be forgotten.”
Hab. 1:4 “...the law is frustrated, and judgment proceeds not effectually, for the ungodly man prevails over the just; therefore perverse judgment will proceed.” (All these quotations are from Brenton)
All of these are descriptions of Israel and Judah before they went into exile, but Malachi 3:5, as well as the descriptions in the New Testament of what was going on in Jerusalem, make it clear that the Jewish nation fell back into the same patterns of oppressive sin that it had fallen into before the exile, in fact, the book of Acts provides two very specific examples of wealthy men oppressing poor Christians and trying to get them in trouble with the law:
Acts 16:19-24 When Paul and Silas cast the demon out of the fortune-teller in Philippi, “... when her masters saw that their hope of profit was gone, they seized Paul and Silas and dragged them into the marketplace to the authorities. And they brought them to the magistrates, and said, ‘These men, being Jews, exceedingly trouble our city; and they teach customs which are not lawful for us, being Romans, to receive or observe.’ Then the multitude rose up together against them; and the magistrates tore off their clothes and commanded them to be beaten with rods. And when they had laid many stripes on them, they threw them into prison, commanding the jailer to keep them securely. Having received such a charge, he put them into the inner prison and fastened their feet in the stocks.” (NKJV)
The other is in Acts 21:30, when Paul returned from his second missionary journey and attended a purification ceremony in the temple at Jerusalem, “...the people ran together, seized Paul, and dragged him out of the temple…” (NKJV) Now, the Roman government had built an army post right outside the temple, so, by dragging Paul out of the temple, that meant he was being taken to the Roman authorities, and it resulted in Paul having to defend himself in a string of court cases that lasted for years.
In v.7, the history of “blasphemy” from the rich is also mentioned.
What they blaspheme/slander is literally “the good name, the one named upon y’all.”
Probably the meaning here is along the lines of Psalm 135:3 “...the Lord is good: sing praises to his name; for it is good.” (Brenton) The “good name” then, is the name of Christ, after whom we are called “Christians.”
The contrast is between them “blaspheming/slandering” and denying the name of Christ vs. us “calling upon” the name of the Lord to be saved and accepting being “called by His name” as Christians.
Of course, those with the political and military power in Jesus’ time “blasphemed” Jesus:
Luke 22:63-65 “Now the men who held Jesus mocked Him and beat Him. And having blindfolded Him, they struck Him on the face and asked Him, saying, ‘Prophesy! Who is the one who struck You?’ And many other things they blasphemously spoke against Him.” (NKJV)
Matthew 27:38-42 “...Also those passing by were blaspheming Him, shaking their heads and saying, ‘The one who demolishes the temple and who builds [it] within three days, save yourself! Since you are the Son of God, come down from that cross!’ Likewise the chief priests with the scribes and elders were also mockingly saying, ‘He saved others; He is not able to save Himself!’...” (NAW)
And then, when Paul started preaching the gospel, the Jewish synagogue leaders also “blasphemed”: Acts 13:45 “But when the Jews saw the multitudes [who had come to hear Paul preach in Pisidian Antioch], they were filled with envy; and contradicting and blaspheming, they opposed the things spoken by Paul.” Then later in Corinth, Acts 18:5-6 “...Paul was compelled by the Spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus is the Christ. But... they opposed him and blasphemed...’"
So, it is fair for James to say that, in general, it had been the rich that had oppressed and prosecuted and slandered believers? Yes.
Of course, this is not to say that there haven’t been wealthy people who have used their power to be a blessing to fellow-believers. James isn’t denying that. (A great deal of world missions in the modern age has ridden on the support of rich and powerful Christians!)
But what James is saying is, that you shouldn’t spend all your time brown-nosing people who appear rich and powerful, because that can backfire on you.
Now, after arguing from God’s character and from human history, James clinches his point with an...
The phrase “royal law” is not found anywhere else in the Bible, but it is defined by the phrase, “Love you neighbor as yourself,” which is quoted from Leviticus 19:18.
There is some debate among scholars on the meaning of “the royal law,” but I think it refers to God as the king (the “one lawgiver and judge,” as James notes in chapter 4)
and perhaps to Jesus’ elevation of this law to supreme status as the foremost commandment “on which is framed all the law and the prophets.”
“The rule for Christians to walk by is settled in the scriptures: [James says,] ‘If... according to the scriptures,’ etc. It is not great men, nor worldly wealth... that must guide us, but the scriptures of truth… [A]s the scripture teaches us to love all our neighbours, be they rich or poor, as ourselves, so, in our having a steady regard to this rule, we shall do well.” ~Matthew Henry
Verse 9 sums it up by stating negatively what v. 8 stated positively: τελεῖτε/fulfil/achieve the goal of loving your neighbor as yourself, and you’ll do all-right; break that law by giving preferential treatment to the wealthy at the expense of the poor, and you’re sinning and will be convicted as a transgressor.
Although we should not despise the poor by showing preferential treatment to the great, there is nevertheless a place for showing appropriate regard to those who are great. Rom 13:7 says, “Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor.” (NKJV)
But God does not play favorites/show partiality. It is because God is fair and just and cannot be corrupted that we should be fair and just and not influenced by favors. It is a sin to act contrary to God’s character, and at the heart of God’s character is love.
“Christ is little esteemed by us, when the admiration of worldly glory lays hold on us.” ~John Calvin, 1554 AD
We are tempted to sin by being discriminatory, when we worship the wealth or power that God has given to others. When we pay special attention to those with wealth and power, they might like it, and they might reciprocate by sharing some of that wealth with us or by using their power to do favors for us.
But Jesus said, “...When you give a dinner or a supper, do not ask your friends, your brothers, your relatives, nor rich neighbors, lest they also invite you back, and you be repaid. But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind. And you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you; for you shall be repaid at the resurrection of the just." (Luke 14:12-14, NKJV) Ultimately, are you angling to get temporal favors from humans or do you want to get eternal favors from God? It’s one or the other, and “you can’t serve two masters.”
The bottom line is, will you obey God and love each and every neighbor as yourself? If so, you will do well in your Christian life, and that will keep you safe from committing the injustices of preferential treatment of some over others.
ByzantineB |
NAW |
KJVC |
Vulgate |
PeshittaD |
1:27 θρησκεία καθαρὰ καὶ ἀμίαντοςE παρὰ τῷ Θεῷ καὶ πατρὶ αὕτη ἐστίν, ἐπισκέπτεσθαι ὀρφανοὺς καὶ χήρας ἐν τῇ θλίψει αὐτῶν, ἄσπιλονF ἑαυτὸν τηρεῖν ἀπὸ τοῦ κόσμου. |
1:27 This is pure and undefiled religion according to our God and Father: to watch over orphans and widows in their distress, [and] to keep oneself unsullied from the world. |
1:27 Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit [the] fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world. |
1:27 religio munda et inmaculata apud Deum et Patrem haec est visitare pupillos et viduas in tribulatione eorum inmaculatum se custodire ab hoc saeculo |
1:27
[For
the]
worship that is pure and |
1 ᾿Αδελφοί μου, μὴ ἐν προσωποληGψίαις ἔχετεH τὴν πίστιν τοῦI Κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ τῆς δόξηςJ. |
1 My brothers, it should not be with preferential treatments of persons that y’all hold the faith concerning our Lord Jesus, the glorious Anointed One, |
1 My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respectX of persons. |
1 fratres mei nolite in personarum acceptione habere fidem Domini nostri Iesu Christi gloriae |
1
My
brethren, hold ye not the faith of the glory of our Lord Jesus the
Messiah, with |
2 ἐὰν γὰρ εἰσέλθῃ εἰς Kτὴν συναγωγὴνL ὑμῶν ἀνὴρ χρυσοδακτύλιοςM ἐν ἐσθῆτιN λαμπρᾷO, εἰσέλθῃ δὲ καὶ πτωχὸς ἐν ῥυπαρᾷP ἐσθῆτι, |
2 for if a man with gold rings in splendid clothing happens to enter your synagogue, and there also happens to enter a destitute man in filthy clothing, |
2 For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment; |
2 etenim si introierit in conventu vestro vir aureum anulum [habens] in veste candida introierit autem et pauper in sordido habitu |
2
For
if there come into your assembly a man with rings of gold |
3 καὶ ἐπιβλέψητεQ ἐπὶ τὸν φοροῦνταR τὴν ἐσθῆτα τὴν λαμπρὰν καὶ εἴπητε Sαὐτῶ, σὺ κάθου ὧδε καλῶςT, καὶ τῷ πτωχῷ εἴπητε, σὺ στῆθι ἐκεῖ ἢ κάθου ὧδεU ὑπὸ τὸ ὑποπόδιόν μου, |
3 and y’all give regard to the one sporting the splendid clothes and say {}, “You sit down comfortably here,” but to the destitute one y’all say, “You stand there,” or “Sit here below my footstool,” |
3 And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here [in a] good [place]; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool: |
3 et intendatis in eum qui indutus est veste praeclara et dixeritis X tu sede hic bene pauperi autem dicatis tu sta illic aut sede X sub scabillo pedum meorum |
3 and ye show respect to him who is clothed in splendid garments, and say to him, Seat thyself here, conspicuously; while to the poor man, ye say, Stand thou there, or sit thou here before my footstool; |
4 Vκαὶ οὐW διεκρίθητεX ἐν ἑαυτοῖς καὶ ἐγένεσθε κριταὶ διαλογισμῶν πονηρῶνY; |
4 Have y’all not made distinctions among yourselves and become evil-reasoning judges? |
4 Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts? |
4 X nonne iudicatis apud vosmet ipsos et facti estis iudices cogitationum iniquarum |
4 X are ye not divided among yourselves, and become expositors of evil thoughts ? |
5 ᾿Ακούσατε, ἀδελφοί μου ἀγαπητοί· οὐχ ὁ Θεὸς ἐξελέξατοZ τοὺς πτωχοὺςAA τοῦAB κόσμουAC πλουσίουςAD ἐν πίστει καὶ κληρονόμους τῆς βασιλείαςAE ἧς AFἐπηγγείλατο τοῖς ἀγαπῶσιν αὐτόν; |
5 Listen, my beloved brothers: Has not God chosen those who are destitute {in} regards to the world to be rich in faith and to be those who inherit the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him? |
5
Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of th |
5
audite fratres mei dilectissimi nonne Deus elegit pauperes |
5
Hear,
my beloved brethren; hath not God chosen the poor of the world,
[but]
the rich in faith, |
6 ὑμεῖς δὲ ἠτιμάσατε τὸν πτωχόν. οὐχ οἱ πλούσιοι καταδυναστεύουσιν ὑμῶνAG, καὶ αὐτοὶ ἕλκουσινAH ὑμᾶς εἰς κριτήρια; |
6 Y’all, however, dishonored the destitute. Is it not those who are rich who use their power against y’all and themselves haul y’all into courts-of-law? |
6 But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and X draw you before [the] judgment seats? |
6 vos autem exhonorastis pauperem nonne divites [per potentiam] opprimunt vos et ipsi trahunt vos ad iudicia |
6
But
ye have despised
the poor man. Do not rich men |
7 οὐκ αὐτοὶ βλασφημοῦσιAI τὸ καλὸν ὄνομαAJ τὸ ἐπικληθὲνAK ἐφ᾿ ὑμᾶς; |
7 Is it not they who blaspheme the good name named upon you? |
7
Do not they X blaspheme
that |
7 nonne ipsi blasphemant bonum nomen quod invocatum est super vos |
7
Do
they X
not
revile
that |
8 ALεἰ μέντοι νόμον τελεῖτεAM βασιλικὸνAN κατὰ τὴν γραφήν, ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν, καλῶς ποιεῖτε· |
8 When, however, y’all achieve the goal of the King’s law according to the scripture, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself,’ you are doing well, |
8 If X ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well: |
8 si tamen X legem perficitis regalem secundum scriptura[s] diliges proximum tuum sicut te ipsum bene facitis |
8
And
if [in
this]
ye fulfill the law |
9 εἰ δὲ προσωπολημπτεῖτε, ἁμαρτίανAO ἐργάζεσθε, ἐλεγχόμενοι ὑπὸ τοῦ νόμου ὡς παραβάταιAP. |
9 but when y’all give preferential treatment, y’all commit sin, being convicted under the law as transgressors. |
9 But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, [and] are convinced of the law as transgressors. |
9 si autem personas accipitis peccatum operamini redarguti a lege quasi transgressores |
9 but if ye have respect of persons, ye commit sin; [and] ye are convicted by the law, as transgressors [of the law]. |
1Gill agreed, but Calvin, Vincent, ATR, and Moo said it was more likely a worship service.
AWhen
a translation adds words not in the Greek text, but does not
indicate it has done so by the use of italics or greyed-out text, I
put the added words in [square brackets]. When one version chooses a
wording which is different from all the other translations, I
underline it. When a version chooses a translation which, in my
opinion, either departs too far from the root meaning of the Greek
word or departs too far from the grammar form of the original text,
I use strikeout. And when a version omits a word
which is in the original text, I insert an X. I also place an X at
the end of a word if the original word is plural but the English
translation is singular. I occasionally use colors to help the
reader see correlations between the various editions and versions
when there are more than two different translations of a given word.
NAW is my translation. My original chart includes annotated copies
of the NKJV, NASB, NIV, and ESV, but I erase them from the online
edition so as not to infringe on their copyrights.
BThe Septuagint (LXX), edited by Alfred Rahlfs. Published in 1935; public domain.
C1769 King James Version of the Holy Bible; public domain.
DJames Murdock, A Literal Translation from the Syriac Peshito Version, 1851, Robert Carter & Brothers, New York. Scanned and transcribed by Gary Cernava and published electronically by Janet Magierra at http://www.lightofword.org
E2
Ma. 14:36; 15:34; Wis. 3:13; 4:2; 8:20; Heb. 7:26; 13:4; 1 Pet.
1:4
“pure and undefiled, present the positive and
negative sides of purity.” ~Vincent
F1 Tim. 6:14; 1 Pet. 1:19; 2 Pet. 3:14
GCritical editions insert a μ here, but it makes no difference in meaning.
HATR: “Present active imperative of echō with negative mē, exhortation to stop holding or not to have the habit of holding in the fashion condemned.”
I ATR: “objective genitive... not subjective (‘faith of’), but ‘faith in our Lord Jesus Christ,” like… Mar_11:22 ‘have faith in God.’ See the same objective genitive with pistis in Acts 3:6; Gal. 2:16; Rom. 3:22; Rev. 14:12.”
J“of glory” is placed in the Greek text right after “Christ,” thus it either modifies “Christ” or the whole phrase “our Lord Jesus Christ” as in “Christ of glory,” or “our Lord Jesus Christ of Glory.” However, the Syriac moved it back several words in the sentence to translate it as referring to “faith” (“the faith of the glory…”) and the KJV and ESV assumed that the word “Lord” was omitted from the end of the sentence (even though no manuscript or ancient version contains the word “Lord” a second time) and so wrote in the word “Lord” followed by “of glory,” alternately, the Geneva, NASB, NIV, NET, and NLT turned the original preposition and its object into an adjective (“glorious”) describing “Lord…” Nowhere else does “Christ of glory” occur in the Greek Bible, but “Lord of Glory” occurs in Num. 24:11 and 1 Cor. 2:8.
KThree out of the four oldest-known Greek manuscripts do not have the definite article here, but it is in the vast majority of manuscripts and dates all the way back to the oldest manuscripts and there are only a half dozen manuscripts which omit it. It doesn’t make a difference in meaning, however, whether it is “a synogogue of yours” or “the synagogue of yours.”
L“[T]here were numerous synagogues in Jerusalem, representing different bodies, such as the descendants of Jewish freedmen at Rome, and the Alexandrian or Hellenistic Jews. Among these would be the synagogue of the Christians, and such would be the case in all large cities where the dispersed Jews congregated.” ~Marvin Vincent, 1886 AD
MHapex legomenon. “Not a man wearing a single gold ring... which would not attract attention in an assembly where most persons wore a ring, but a gold-ringed man, having his hands conspicuously loaded with rings and jewels. The ring was regarded as an indispensable article of a Hebrew's attire, since it contained his signet... The Greeks and Romans wore them in great profusion... To wear rings on the right hand was regarded as a mark of effeminacy; but they were worn profusely on the left... The practice of wearing rings was adopted by the early Christians. Many of their rings were adorned with the symbols of the faith - the cross, the anchor, the monogram of Christ, etc.” ~Vincent
NThis is not the usual word for “clothes;” it only appears a few other places in the Bible (Luke 23:11; 24:4; Acts 1:10; 10:30; 12:21, and in the Apocypha: 1 Es. 8:68, 70; 2 Ma. 8:35; 11:8), and only referring to the garments of kings, priests, and angels – except perhaps for here.
OAlso occurs in Luke 23:11; Acts 10:30; and Rev. 15:6; 18:14; 19:8; 22:1, 16, where it is translated by various versions: Gorgeous, elegant, bright, shining, dazzling, white, splendid, clear.
PRare word, only here, Zech. 3:3-4; and Rev. 22:11.
QA
handful of Greek manuscripts read “de”
instead of the majority which read “kai,”
and, since Vaticanus
is one of them, the editors of the Nestle-Aland and UBS GNT’s
went with de,
but kai is
supported by Sinaiticus
and Alexandrinus,
manuscripts of pretty much
the same antiquity. At any
rate, it isn’t a significant enough difference in meaning to
make a difference in English translation.
Concerning
the verb, although common in the O.T., this is one of only three
instances in the NT of blepo
with the epi-
prefix, the other two being in Luke. 1:48 (“ For he hath
regarded
the low estate of his handmaiden”) and 9:38 (“look
at/upon my son”).
RLit. “carrying.” Also occurs in Matt. 11:8; John 19:5; Romans 13:4, and 1 Cor. 15:49.
S“to him,” although in the majority of Greek manuscripts is found in none of the five oldest-known manuscripts, and a minority of manuscripts throughout history have carried on the form without this prepositional phrase. The referrent of speech is obvious, however, with or without the explicit object, so it makes no difference in meaning.
T This Greek adverb is translated “well” (or “good”) by all the English versions when it occurs in vs. 8 and 19. I think it should modify the verb “sit,” as in, “sit well/sit in style/sit comfortably.” Calvin translated “sit becomingly/honorably.” The contrast with the next verse (“under my footstool”) is the main point.
U“here” is omitted in the Vulgate and in a handful of Greek manuscripts, thus it is omitted by the UBS GNT and by the NASB and ESV, but it is supported by the oldest-known Greek manuscripts, and that by a majority. The NIV and ESV “by my feet” is found in only one Greek manuscript. Furthermore, this is the only time that the NIV translates this Greek word as “feet” instead of “footstool,” and 77% of the time, the ESV translated this Greek word as “footstool,” so one is left to wonder why the inconsistency?
VAlthough the majority of Greek manuscripts start with an “and,” this conjunction is not found in any of the four oldest-known manuscripts, or in the Vulgate or Peshitta. The Nestle-Aland GNT included it, but the Westcott-Hort and UBS (3rd ed.) GNT’s don’t. It doesn’t make a difference in translation, however.
W “conclusion of the third-class condition (future) in a rhetorical question in the gnomic aorist (as if past) with ou expecting an affirmative answer.” ~ATR
XThe other place this word appears in James 1, it means “doubt.” Here, most English versions render it “to make distinctions/assessments.” Vincent, ATR, and Moo, however, translated it “you are divided among yourselves.” It is used Acts to condemn ethnic apartheid (Acts 11:12… 15:9), It also shows up in rivalry between apostles (1 Cor. 4:7), And in regards to socio-economic distinctions (1 Cor 11:16-33)
Y This is a quote from Jesus (Matthew 15:19), which may be, in turn, a quote from Jeremiah 4:14. Dialogizmos, while it has a morally neutral tone in the Gospels is consistently a negative thing in the Epistles: “doubting/ dissention/ disputing/ controversy” 1 Timothy 2:8, “disputing/ arguing” Phil. 2:14, “doubtful/disputable/opinion” Rom. 14:1, “imaginations/ speculations/thoughts” Rom. 1:21. Combined with “evil” here, both words spelled with genitive plural endings, it acts as an adjective describing the plural “judges.” The KJV faithfully translates the genitive case with the English word “of,” as in, “judges who are characterized by evil,” but since that construction (“judges of”) normally signals to the reader of English an objective case )“judges who judge other people’s evil thoughts”), contemporary English versions change the preposition to “with,” which works, as long as the “evil rationalizations” are understood as intrinsic (“of/characterized by”) rather than ancillary (“with”) to the judge.
Z “Chosen” cf. Deut. 7:6-8, Mark 13:20, John 15:16, Acts 13:17, 1 Cor. 1:26-29, Ephesians 1:4
AA “Poor/lowly/destitute” cf. Matthew 11:5, Luke 6:20, Luke 16:19-31, Luke 21:1-4.
AB NIV & ESV follow the Vulgate “this” instead of the Greek and Syriac “the.”
AC
Although the majority of Greek manuscripts spell this prepositional
phrase in the Genitive case (“of the world”), all 5 of
the oldest-known manuscripts spelled it in the dative case (tw
kosmw – “in/to
the world”) – and the Vulgate Latin also uses in.
I suspect this is merely an idiomatic style change over time, where,
hundreds of years after the original writing, the idiom changed to a
genitive form, but meant the same thing.
C.
F. D. Moule, in his Idiom Book of New Testament Greek,
p.46 wrote, “The
dative
τω
κοσμω is
best translated into English by an adverb, “the literally
(i.e., materially) poor.” Vincent
= “poor as to the world” ATR
= “ethical dative of interest, as the world looks at it”
This
variant rules out the possibility of translating “of the
world” in an ablative sense – “chosen out of the
world.”
AD
“Rich in faith” cf. 2 Cor. 8:9, Eph. 2:4-7,
Rev 2:8-10
“heirs” cf. Romans 7:13-16,
Hebrews 6:12,
11:7-9, Acts 14:22, Matthew
25:34.
AE Typified in the inheritance of the Promised Land (Deuteronomy 30:16)
AFLatin and Syriac insert the explicit subject “God,” but He is already understood as the subject, whether or not explicitly.
AG
A few manuscripts spell this in the accusative case instead of the
genitive case, but it makes no difference in translation.
Regarding
the verb, it is only used one other time in the NT, Acts 10:38,
where the Devil is the “oppressor,” but it occurs over
30x in the Greek OT. All three Penteteuch references refer to those
who force others into slavery (also in Nehemiah). Many of the uses
of the word in Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles (and
probably Hosea)
refer to a foreign army conquering a nation and looting it, but
in most of the times it occurs in the books of the Prophets, it
refers to the problem of Jewish leaders oppressing their own people
(Jer.
7:2-6,
22:1-3,
Ezek.
22:6-8,
27-29,
Amos
4:1, 8:4-7,
Hab.
1:4).
All
of these are descriptions of Israel and Judah before they went into
exile, but Malachi 3:5, as well as the descriptions in the New
Testament of what was going on in Jerusalem make it clear that the
Jewish nation fell back into the same patterns of oppressive sin
that it had fallen into before the exile.
AH Used in the Gospel of John to denote “drawing in” fishnets as well as human hearts, but Acts provides two examples of what James is talking about: Acts 16:19-24, when Paul and Silas cast the demon out of the fortune-teller in Philippi, and Acts 21:30, when Paul returned to Jerusalem after his second missionary journey and attended a purification ceremony in the temple.
AI“blaspheme” cf. Luke 22:63-65, Matthew 27:38-42, Acts 13:45, 18:5-6. The contrast is between them blaspheming/ slandering the name of Christ and denying that they are Christians vs. us calling upon the name of the Lord to be saved and accepting being called by His name as Christians.
AJThe only other place in the Greek Bible where we find this phrase “good name” is Prov. 22:1, where it is speaking of a “good reputation.” Probably the meaning here in James is more along the lines of Psalm 135:3 “Praise ye the Lord; for the Lord is good: sing praises to his name; for it is good.” (Brenton) The “good name” then, is the name of Christ, after whom we are called “Christians.”
AK
“called” Although this word is used about half the time
in the NT in the sense of “call upon for salvation,” the
other half of the time it means “named,” and the passive
voice here along with the preposition “upon” make it
almost certain that it should be interpreted “named,” as
the phrase is used in a number of passages in the Greek O.T.:
Daniel
9:19 "Hearken, O Lord; be
propitious, O Lord; attend, O Lord; delay not, O my God, for thine
own sake: for thy name is called upon
thy city and upon thy people."
Jeremiah
14:9 “...yet thou art among us,
O Lord, and thy name is called upon us;
forget us not.”
Jeremiah
7:30 For the children of Juda have
wrought evil before me, saith the Lord; they have set their
abominations in the house on which my
name is called, to defile it.
1
Kings 8:43 “then shalt thou hear
them from heaven, out of thine established dwelling-place, and thou
shalt do according to all that the stranger shall call upon thee
for, that all the nations may know thy name, and fear thee, as do
thy people Israel, and may know that thy name
has been called on this house which I
have builded.”
“Almost
certainly the name of Christ as we see it in Acts 11:26.”
~ATR
Again,
we see the shift in emphasis from the temple and the Jewish people
in the O.T. to the believers in Jesus in the NT.
AL First class conditional, by which James implies that he believes it will be true that they will fulfill that law, thus my translation “when” instead of the popular “if.” The same goes for the next verse.
AM “achieve/fulfill/accomplish the law” same phrase without “royal” is in Rom. 2:27.
AN This phrase “royal law” is not found anywhere else in the Bible. (The closest I could get was Ezra 7:26 “And whosoever shall not do the law of God, and the law of the king…” ~Brenton), but it is defined by the quotation, “Love you neighbor as yourself,” quoted from Leviticus 19:18 (and by Jesus in Matt. 22:40, Luke 10:27-28). Vincent suggested that James was borrowing a Roman idiom lex regia, indicating the highest law of the land, but I am skeptical that this would have resonated with James’ Jewish readers. I suspect rather than it refers to God as the king (the “one lawgiver and judge,” as James notes in chapter 4) or to Jesus’ elevation of it to supreme status as the foremost commandment “on which is framed all the law and the prophets.” cf. ATR “It can mean a law fit to guide a king, or such as a king would choose, or even the king of laws.” Moo said it was related to the kingdom of God. Other commentators suggested things wider afield.
AO In addition to here and v.1, forms of this word appear in the Greek Bible only 4 other places, Acts 10:34; Rom. 2:11; Eph. 6:9, and Col. 3:25, all of them referring to the fact that God does not play favorites/show partiality. It is because God is fair and just and cannot be corrupted that we should be the same way. cf. Luke 14:12-14.
AP As a noun, only here (incl. v.11), Rom. 2:25-27, and Gal. 2:18, but as a verb, it occurs about 90 times.