Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - James 2:14 - 2:14
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Jam_2:14. After James, proceeding from the exhortation to receive the word ( τὸν … λόγον τὸν δυνάμενον σῶσαι τὰς ψυχάς ) in meekness, had enforced the necessity not only to be hearers but also doers of the same, and with reference to the respect of persons practised by the readers had designated the exercise of compassionate love as true θρησκεία , he now, in close connection with the preceding, opposes the opinion that πίστις which has no works ( χωρὶς ἔργων ) can save ( σῶσαι ). The section from Jam_2:14 to Jam_2:26 treats of this; for the correct understanding of which it is to be held fast that James considers πίστις as the necessary ground of σωτηρία , which is evident from chap. Jam_1:18-21, but of course that πίστις which is not without works. In combating the above delusion, James adopts his characteristic mode of first stating in clear and well-defined language the fundamental thought on which all the rest depends, and he does so by the introduction of brief interrogative sentences which reject that false opinion. He commences with the words τί τὸ ὄφελος .; see Jam_2:16 and 1Co_15:32. The article is not superfluous: What is the use which arises from it, if, etc.; without the article (according to B and C) it means: What kind of use is it = what use is it? thus frequently with the classics. With regard to the construction with ἐάν , see Mat_16:26; 1Co_13:3. The following words: ἐὰν πίστιν λέγῃ τις ἔχειν , show that James had in view one who trusts for σωτηρία , because he has faith, although works are wanting to him. Many expositors place the emphasis on λέγῃ , as if it was thereby indicated that this assertion was a mere pretext, the person introduced as speaking not in reality possessing faith. Gataker: emphasis hic est in voce dicendi; intelligit istos fidem quidem jactare, non tamen habere; similarly Vorstius, Piscator, Wolf, Baumgarten, Pott, Gebser, Hottinger, Kern, Wiesinger, Stier, Lange, Philippi (Glaubensl. I. p. 298 ff.); also de Wette translates λέγῃ by “pretends.” This is incorrect, for the sequel does not give the lie to this λέγειν , but, on the contrary, it is granted that the man may have faith without having works. Besides, it is self-evident that James did not require to say that a faith, which one has not, cannot save him. That it is not simply said ἐὰν πίστιν τις ἔχη , is explained from James’ lively mode of representation, by which he introduces his opponent as appealing to his πίστις .[131] It is also incorrect to emphasize the want of the article before ΠΊΣΤΙΝ (Schneckenburger: recte articulo caret = to have faith, quum revera non habeat ΤῊΝ ΠΊΣΤΙΝ , Jam_2:1; ita omissio articuli jam quodammodo scriptoris judicium est). The article is here wanting, as is often the case in the N. T. where the word expresses something definite in itself (thus Brückner), particularly when it is to be brought forward according to its quality. Also ΠΊΣΤΙΝ must not be precisely explained as = nuda notitia, nor hardly = nuda professio; for those whom James combats could not possibly think that they by their faith possessed only the so-called theoretical faith, but rather they considered it the whole and complete faith. Also this faith was not defective in point of confidence, which Lange should not have denied, for they thought to be saved thereby; although this was not true confidence, but an empty reliance on Christ;[132] they indeed believed, but they did not receive Christ in themselves as a principle of a new life; the object of their faith remained to them purely external, and thus they wanted those works which spring from living faith.[133]
ἜΡΓΑ ΔῈ ΜῊ ἜΧῌ ] ἜΡΓΑ is here indeed entirely general, but according to the context those works are meant which are proofs of living faith, by which the νόμος ἐλευθερίας is fulfilled on the ground of ΠΊΣΤΙς .
After ἜΧῌ a simple comma (Gebser) is not to be put, but a note of interrogation; the verse contains two questions, the second interrogative sentence ΜῊ ΔΎΝΑΤΑΙ Κ . Τ . Λ . confirming the judgment contained in the first, that it profits nothing to have faith without works. Some expositors incorrectly put a special emphasis on the article before ΠΊΣΤΙς (Bede: fides illa, quam vos habere dicitis; or, that faith which has no works; so also Lange). The article here has not vim pronominis demonstrativi, but is used because there is a resumption of the previous idea ( πίστις ); see chap. Jam_1:3 and Jam_4:15. It is also incorrect to supply out of what goes before the more precise definition of faith: quae non habetur revera sed dicitur tantummodo et jactatur (Theile), or to supply ΜΌΝΗ (Pott), or to understand by ΠΊΣΤΙς here bare notitia. Recourse has been had to these explanations, because it was thought that James otherwise denied to faith its saving-power, which is not to be assumed. But the force of ΑὐΤΌΝ has been overlooked. If this pronoun be taken into consideration, it is evident that James does not affirm generally that faith cannot save, but that it cannot save him whose faith, on which he trusts, is destitute of works; for αὐτόν refers back to the subject ΤΙς , that is, to the person whom James has introduced as speaking
ΣῶΣΑΙ ] as in Jam_1:21, is used here of the attainment of future salvation; the expression is explained from the fact that eternal condemnation belongs to sinful man as such, and thus requires a deliverance in order to be saved. The idea σωτηρία generally signifies in the N. T. the future salvation; see besides other passages, particularly 1Th_5:8, where σωτηρία is designated as the object of ἘΛΠΊς . Certainly the present state of salvation of Christians may also be called ΣΩΤΗΡΊΑ , but it is evident from the connection with what precedes that James has not that in view, but the complete salvation (against Lange).
[131] λέγῃ is the more appropriate, as a faith without works, as James indicates in ver. 18, is something which cannot be proved, of which he who possesses it can only give information by λέγειν .
[132] It was otherwise with them than with those Christians who indeed considered the teaching of the gospel as true, and did not doubt to be saved, but who rested their hopes not on Christ as the object of faith, but on their supposed righteousness, i.e. on their good works; for James entirely denies good works to them, and never indicates that they appealed to their supposed good conduct.
[133] For the view here rejected an appeal is incorrectly made to ver. 19, as those thought to have in their faith the guarantee of their σωτηρία , whilst their faith only produced φρίσσειν to the demons.