Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - James 3:13 - 3:13
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Jam_3:13. With this verse apparently begins a new section, which, however, stands in close connection with the warning in Jam_3:1, whilst the true wisdom is here contrasted with the false wisdom of which the readers boasted, and by which they considered themselves qualified to teach. Also here in the words: τίς σοφὸς καὶ ἐπιστήμων ἐν ὑμῖν , the chief point is again placed at the beginning. These words are usually understood as a direct question (Tischendorf and Winer, p. 152 [E. T. 211]); on the other hand, Lachmann has only placed a comma after ὑμῖν , which is approved by Al. Buttmann (p. 217 [E. T. 252]); an inversio structurae then here takes place; whilst “the direct interrogative form, owing to the construction which follows, passed naturally over into the meaning of the kindred relative clause.” Certainly in the N. T. the direct question is frequently used instead of the indirect, indeed instead of the relative pronoun; also in the usual meaning “the disruption of the clauses, as well as the asyndetic transition to δειξάτω without any subject,” is surprising. But, on the other hand, the discourse by the direct question evidently gains in liveliness, as it is, moreover, peculiar to the diction of James; see, however, Sir_6:34, to which Schneckenburger appeals in support of the incorrect opinion that τις is here the indefinite pronoun.
σοφὸς καὶ ἐπιστήμων ] The same combination of these two words is found in Deu_1:13; Deu_4:6, LXX., as the translation of the Hebrew çÈëÈí åÀðÈáåÉï ; comp. also Hos_14:9. If James here considered these two synonymous ideas as different, σοφός is to be referred to the general, and ἐπιστήμων to the particular. Wiesinger refers the former to the intelligence, and the latter to the practical insight into the correct judgment of any given case; others differently.
That whosoever is actually wise is to show it by action, is the chief thought of the following sentence. The construction of δειξάτω with ἐκ and the object following on it, reminds us of chap. Jam_2:18 : δείξω ἐκ τῶν ἔργων μου τὴν πίστιν , but the relation is not entirely the same. In that passage πίστις is the invisible, which is to manifest itself as the visible by ἔργα ; but here both ἡ καλὴ ἀναστροφή and τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ are visible; the former is the general, the latter is the particular, which as individual special manifestations proceed from it. The verb δείκνυμι means here, as there, not to prove or demonstrate, but to show. The addition ἐν πραΰτητι —which is to be connected neither with τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ nor with τῆς καλῆς ἀναστροφῆς , forming one idea, but belongs to δειξάτω , more exactly defined by ἐκ τῆς … αὐτοῦ —has the principal accent, as πραΰτης σοφίας , i.e. the meekness springing from wisdom, and therefore peculiar to it (opposite of ὀργή ), is the necessary condition under which the showing forth of works out of a good conversation alone is possible. The mode in which the individual ideas of the sentence are united together is certainly somewhat surprising, but it is explainable from the fact that James placed together all the points which occurred to him as briefly as possible. James might have put τὴν σοφίαν αὐτοῦ as the object belonging to δειξάτω ; but instead of this he puts τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ , in conformity with the importance which works have to him, in which as faith (Jam_2:10) so also wisdom manifests itself. He then makes the idea σοφία to follow in the adverbial addition ἐν πραΰτητι σοφίας . The sentence might also be divided by a point after ἀναστροφῆς ; then the first clause would mean: let him show it out of a good conversation; and the second clause might either be taken as an addition dependent on δειξάτω (so Neander: “works performed in meekness suitable to wisdom”), or a verb would have to be supplied. However, the detachment of the second clause decides against this construction. ὡς σοφοῦ is not, with Schneckenburger, Theile, Wiesinger, to be supplied to αὐτοῦ , as the reference to wisdom is contained in the additional clause; but also αὐτοῦ must not be referred to σοφός (his works, that is, of the wise man), but it refers to the subject contained in δειξάτω (thus Lange and Brückner). The whole idea πραΰτης σοφίας is neither to be resolved into πραεῖα σοφία (Beza, Grotius, Baumgarten, Semler, Gebser, Hottinger, Schneckenburger), nor into πραΰτης σοφή (Laurentius), but to be explained: “the meekness which is proper to wisdom, and proceeds from it” (Wiesinger), or “in which σοφία evidences itself” (Lange).[182] With the emphasis on πραΰτης James passes on to βραδὺς εἰς ὀργήν (chap. Jam_1:19), of which what follows is a further explication.
[182] Luther inaccurately translates the passage: “who shows with his good conversation his works in meekness and wisdom.”