Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - James 2:2 - 2:3
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Jam_2:2-3. In these verses the conduct of the readers, which occasioned the exhortation of James (Jam_2:1), is described; hence the confirming γάρ . Both verses together form the protasis, on which Jam_2:4 follows as the apodosis; whilst they in form appear by their connection with δέ (according to the Rec. by και ) as co-ordinate sentences, in thought Jam_2:2 is subordinate to Jam_2:3; Jam_2:2 assigning the circumstances under which the conduct described in Jam_2:3 occurred.
Hammond, Homberg, Baumgarten, Michaelis, and Herder assign even Jam_2:4 to the protasis; but incorrectly, as in that case the conjunctive would be required in that verse as in Jam_2:2-3. As regards the matter itself, the fault is not directed against the rulers of the congregation,—the presbyters and deacons (Grotius, Pott, Schulthess, Hottinger),—but, as the address ἀδελφοί μου (Jam_2:1) shows, it is entirely general. It was not the custom in the time of James for the deacons to point out places to those who entered their assemblies (Constit. Apost. ii. 56, 58).
The instance ( ἐάν ) which James states is, as regards the matter, not a hypothetical assumption, but a fact; and certainly not to be regarded as a solitary instance which only once took place, but as something which often occurred, that even in their religious assemblies the rich were treated with distinction, and the poor with disdain. It is not surprising that James in the description employed the aorist, since he generally uses that tense to represent that which is habitually repeated as a single fact which has taken place; see chap. Jam_1:11; Jam_1:24.
The words εἰς τὴν συναγωγὴν ὑμῶν ] show that it is an entrance into the religious assemblies of the congregation that is here spoken of. It cannot be inferred from the usual signification of the word συναγωγή that a Jewish synagogue is here meant (Semler, Schneckenburger, Bouman); opposed to this is ὑμῶν ; besides, the Christians would certainly not have the right to show seats to those who entered into such a place of worship; but, on the other hand, by συναγωγή here is not to be understood the religious assembly (de Wette). The whole description, both εἰσέλθῃ and the pointing out of seats, shows that συναγωγή denotes the place where the Christian congregation assembled for worship.[111] That James calls this by the word which was appropriate for Jewish places of worship, cannot be regarded in his mouth as anything surprising. Hammond, Baumgarten, Storr, Herder, and others most arbitrarily understand by συναγωγή the judicial assemblies of the congregation and their elders. According to Lange, the name of the Jewish place of worship is here a symbol “of the religious fellowship of the entire Jewish Christian dispersion;” this opinion is not less unjustifiable than the view connected with it, that “a literal understanding of what follows cannot be thought of.”
The rich man is here described as ἀνὴρ χρυσοδακτύλιος ἐν ἐσθῆτι λαμπρᾷ , and the poor man as πτωχὸς ἐν ῥυπαρᾷ ἐσθῆτι , the difference between them being represented to the eye in their clothing.
χρυσοδακτύλιος ] a purely ἅπ . λεγ . = χρυσόχειρ (Lucian, in Tim.: πόρφυροι καὶ χρυσόχειρες περιέρχονται ; in Nigrin.: τῶν δακτυλίων πλῆθος ἔχων ). On λαμπρός , used of clothes, see, on the one hand, Luk_23:11 (comp. with Mat_27:28), and, on the other hand, Rev_15:6. Raphelius: nullum certum colorem declarat, sed splendidum, clarum, nitidum sen rubrum seu album sit, seu alius generis. The counterpart of the ἐσθὴς λαμπρά is the ἐσθ . ῥυπαρά of the poor man.
ῥυπαρός ] in its proper meaning only here in N. T.; in Zec_3:3-4, it is also used of garments. Are Christians or non-Christians meant by these incomers? Most expositors consider them to be Christians only, whether they belonged to the congregation or came there as ξένοι (guests). But the following reasons decide against this view:—1. They are distinguished by James from the brethren addressed, and are not indicated as brethren, which yet, particularly in reference to the poor (Jam_2:5), would readily have suggested itself as a strong confirmation of their fault. 2. In Jam_2:6-7, the rich are evidently opposed to Christians ( ὑμῶν , ὑμᾶς , ἐφ ̓ ὑμᾶς ), and reprimanded for their conduct towards Christians (not merely toward the poor), which if rich Christians had been guilty of, would certainly have been indicated as an offence against their Christian calling. That those who were not Christians might and did come into the Christian religious assemblies is a well-known fact; see 1Co_14:22-23. The view of Weiss (Deutsch. Zeitschrift f. christl. Wissensch. etc., 1854, No. 51), that the rich man was not a Christian, but that the poor man was a Christian, is supported by no feature in the description; in that case James would certainly have indicated the dissimilarity of relation; then “must Jam_2:5 ff. bring it forward as the gravest offence, that the brother chosen by God is slighted for the sake of the rich who were not Christians” (Wiesinger[112]).
[111] The word συναγωγή occurs in the N. T. in both meanings; usually it designates the religious place of meeting of the Jews; but that it also denotes the assembly, Act_13:43 shows; see also Rev_2:9. In the Apocrypha of the O. T. it has only the last meaning, and, indeed, in a general sense; see Wahl, Clav. Apocryph. συναγωγή .
[112] Lange considers the mode of expression symbolical; by the rich man is meant the Jewish Christian, who, as wearing a gold ring, boasts of his covenant rights; and by the poor man is meant the Gentile Christian. According to Hengstenberg, the meaning is precisely the reverse. Both opinions are unjustified.