Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - James 3
Verse Commentaries:
Chapter Level Commentary:
Instead of πρὸς τὸ πείθεσθαι , Lachm. and Tisch. (approved by de Wette, Wiesinger, not by Bouman) have adopted εἰς τὸ π . (so B C à ).
Lachm. has retained the Rec. αὐτοὺς ἡμῖν , after B G K à , etc.; Tisch., on the contrary, reads ἡμῖν αὐτούς , after A C.
Jam_3:4. Instead of σκληρῶν ἀνέμων (A G, etc.), Lachm. and Tisch. read ἀνέμων σκληρῶν , after B C K à , which according to authorities is to be considered as the correct reading.
Jam_3:5. Lachm. and Tisch. 7 read μεγάλα αὐχεῖ (A C*) instead of the Rec. μεγαλαυχεῖ (Tisch. 2); attested by B C** G K à , almost all min.
Whether we are to read, with the Rec., ὀλίγον πῦρ , or, with Lachm. and Tisch., ἡλίκον πῦρ , cannot with certainty be decided by authorities, since A* C* G K, etc., are in favour of the former, and A** B C à of the latter reading. The latter reading, however, merits the preference, as it is not to be understood how ὀλίγον , suitable for the thought, should be exchanged for the difficult reading ἠλίκον ; without sufficient reason, Kern, Theile, Wiesinger, Bouman[167] would retain the reading of the Rec.
Jam_3:6. Before the second ἠ γλῶσσα the Rec., after several min. etc., has οὕτως , which already Griesbach considered suspicious, and, after A B C K à , etc., is according to Lachm. and Tisch. to be erased; it was evidently inserted in order to lighten the difficult construction; also de Wette, Wiesinger, Bouman, and others consider it spurious; Reiche decides otherwise.
After ΓΕΝΈΣΕΩς à only has ἩΜῶΝ , which is evidently an interpretation.
There is great variation with regard to the sequence of the words ΔΎΝΑΤΑΙ ἈΝΘΡΏΠΩΝ ΔΑΜΆΣΑΙ (thus the Rec. after G; retained by Tisch.); B C, etc., read δαμάσαι δύναται ἀνθρώπων (Lachm.), and A K à , etc., read δύναται δαμάσαι ἀνθρώπων . It is evidently indifferent for the sense.
Instead of the Rec. ἈΚΑΤΆΣΧΕΤΟΝ after C G K, etc., probably should be read, with Lachm. and Tisch., ἈΚΑΤΆΣΤΑΤΟΝ , after A B à , etc. (approved by Wiesinger and Lange, rejected by Reiche and Bouman).
Jam_3:9. The Rec. τὸν Θεόν after G K, etc., is to be changed for the better attested reading τὸν κύριον , after A B C à , etc., Lachm. Tisch.: the alteration is easily accounted for.[168]
Jam_3:12. According to the Rec. the last clause begins with οὓτως , after C** G K à , some min. and vss., which already Griesbach considered suspicious; it is, according to the testimony of A B C, to be erased as an insertion.
The words which follow in the Rec. (after G K, etc.) are ΟὐΔΕΜΊΑ ΠΗΓῊ ἉΛΥΚῸΝ ΚΑῚ ΓΛΥΚῪ ΠΟῖΗΣΑΙ ὝΔΩΡ . This reading, whose spuriousness was already recognised by Griesbach, is, as a correction for the sake of explanation, to be changed for ΟὔΤΕ ἉΛΥΚῸΝ ΓΛΥΚῪ ΠΟΙῆΣΑΙ ὝΔΩΡ ; attested by A B C, etc., and adopted by Griesbach, Lachm. Tisch. and others. à reads ΟὐΔΈ .
Jam_3:13. Whether after ἘΝ ὙΜῖΝ a comma is to be placed, with Lachm. and Buttm., or, with Tisch. and the Rec., a note of interrogation, see the explanation of the verse.
Jam_3:14. Instead of ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ , à has the plural ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις .
In the same MS. τῆς ἀληθείας instead of after ψεύδεσθε stands after κατακαυχᾶσθε .
Jam_3:16. After ἐκεῖ , à has inserted καί .
Jam_3:17. The καί of the Rec. between ἈΔΙΆΚΡΙΤΟς and ἈΝΥΠΌΚΡΙΤΟς is, according to A B C à , etc., to be erased as an insertion; so also in Jam_3:18 the article Τῆς before ΔΙΚΑΙΟΣΎΝΗς , according to A B C G K à , etc.
[167] Bouman thinks that ἡλίκον arose from the following ἡλίκην ; but it is more correct to assume that even on this account it was changed for the easily understood ὀλίγον .
[168] Bouman erroneously thinks that Θεόν was changed for κύριον in order that a mention of Christ might once take place.
With chap. 3 James passes to the treatment of a new theme, to which the conduct of the Christians, to whom this Epistle was directed, likewise gave occasion. It is that which was already indicated by βραδὺς εἰς τὸ λαλῆσαι in chap. Jam_1:17, and by μὴ χαλιναγωγῶν γλῶσσαν αὐτοῦ in chap. Jam_1:26. The more unfruitful faith was in works corresponding to it (especially the works of compassionate love), the more did “the loquacious teaching and ruling of others” (Wiesinger) prevail. Words had taken the place of works. This section, which is closely united with the preceding, treats of this; yet without “any hidden indication contained in it that it was the doctrine of faith which was an object of controversy” (de Wette); for in the whole Epistle there is not the slightest indication of controversies in the churches in question. The fault refers to the same with which Paul in Rom_2:17 ff. blames the Jews, only that with these Christians πίστις , which was to them something entirely external, took the place of νόμος . The moral relation was essentially the same. The warning (as in chap. Jam_2:1) stands first, and the reason assigned for it follows: “Be not in great numbers teachers, my brethren, considering that we will receive a heavier judgment.” Calvin, Piscator, Laurentius, Baumgarten, and others arbitrarily refer this warning to the unauthorized judging and condemning of each other; by this explanation the idea διδάσκαλοι does not receive its proper meaning. On the other hand, we are not to think of persons rushing into the proper munus docendi (Bede, Semler, Pott, Gebser, Hottinger, Schneckenburger, and others), but on the free teaching in the congregation which was not yet joined to a particular office, but appertained to every one who felt himself called to it.
πολλοί belongs not to γίνεσθε ( πολλοὶ γίγνεσθαι = multiplicari, Gen_6:1; Schneckenburger), but is either the subject (de Wette, Wiesinger, Bouman) or forms the predicate united with διδάσκαλοι . In the first case, however, γινέσθωσαν would more naturally stand instead of γίνεσθε ; also from the second construction a more important thought arises; therefore it is to be explained: “Be not many teachers,” that is: “Be not a multitude of teachers” (Lange). It is inaccurate to explain πολλοί = πάντες (Grotius); it is false to explain it = nimii in docendo (Baumgarten: “be not excessive, vigorous judges”). The verb γίνεσθε has here the same meaning as in chap. Jam_1:22.
With εἰδότες κ . τ . λ .] James points to the reason of μὴ … γίνεσθε ; yet εἰδότες being closely joined to the imperative is itself hortatory: considering. In the phrase κρῖμα λαμβάνειν , κρῖμα has in the N. T. usage undoubtedly the meaning condemnation; comp. Mat_23:13 (Mar_12:40; Luk_20:47); Rom_13:2; but also elsewhere the word occurs in the N. T. almost entirely in this meaning, which Lange incorrectly denies (see Cremer). Because James includes himself, many expositors have been induced to take κρῖμα here as vox media (so also Lange), but it is to be considered that James does not use this expression as if the sentence of condemnation could not be removed (see chap. Jam_2:13); only this is evident to him, that the severer ( μεῖζον ) the condemnation, so much the more difficult is it to be delivered from its execution. The comparative μεῖζον (not = too great, Pott) is explained from a comparison with others who are not teachers.