Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - James 4:4 - 4:4
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Jam_4:4. μοιχαλίδες ] The Rec. μοιχοὶ καὶ μοιχαλίδες has not only the most important authorities against it, but is also easily explained, because the term was taken in its literal sense, which is expressly done by Augusti, Jachmann, and Winer. The context, however, proves that the literal meaning is not here to be retained. If the idea is used in a figurative sense, according to the view which prevails in Psa_73:27 (Isa_57:3 ff.; Eze_23:27), Hos_2:2; Hos_2:4, and other passages of the O. T. (comp. also Mat_12:39; Mat_16:4; as also 2Co_11:2; Rev_2:22), and as the context requires, then every reason for a distinction of sex ceases. Theile, Lange, Brückner have therefore correctly declared for the reading μοιχαλίδες . Theile’s opinion: non minus recte singuli homines scorta dicuntur, quam totum genus atque universa aliqua gens scortum, is so far inappropriate, as the expression μοιχαλίδες used “of individuals in the church of God is certainly singular” (Wieseler); it is here to be referred not to individuals, but to the churches to whom James writes (not “the Jewish factions into which Judaism was sundered,” Lange); so also Brückner. These, according to the conduct described by James, had fallen away from God, and therefore James, full of moral indignation, addresses them with these certainly severe words.
οὐκ οἴδατε , ὅτι ] points the readers to their own conduct.
ἡ φιλία τοῦ κόσμου ] By κόσμος expositors understand either worldly goods (Pott, Gebser, Hottinger, Schneckenburger, Theile, Wiesinger) or worldly desires (Didymus, Laurentius), or both of these together (de Wette, Stier); and by ἡ φιλία τοῦ κόσμου , the inclination of the heart diverted toward worldly things. But it is more correct to take κόσμος in the same sense as in chap. Jam_1:27 (see explanation of that passage), and to understand ἡ φιλία τοῦ κόσμου of reciprocal friendship; yet so that active conduct toward the world here predominates. The Christian who aims at worldly glory conforms himself (contrary to the admonition in Rom_12:2) to the world, attaching himself to its pursuits, and is thus inclined to it with his heart, his endeavour at the same time being to be esteemed and not despised by the world. The explanation of Piscator: amicitia cum impiis, is in essentials correct. The term φιλία ( ἅπ . λεγ . in N. T.) does not suit the usual explanation.[194]
ἜΧΘΡΑ ΤΟῦ ΘΕΟῦ ] expresses as ΦΙΛΊΑ ΤΟῦ ΚΌΣΜΟΥ a reciprocal relation; yet here also the active reference predominates, on account of which most expositors explain it directly by ἜΧΘΡΑ ΕἸς ΘΕΌΝ (Rom_8:7), although Pott gives also the explanation: ad ejusmodi agendi rationem nos abripit, quae Deo displicet, nosque privat amore divino. Lachmann, following the translation of the Vulgate: inimica, has adopted the reading ἐχθρὰ , by which, however, the peculiar force which consists in the opposition of the two substantives is removed.
From the judgment here expressed concerning the ΦΙΛΊΑ ΤΟῦ ΚΌΣΜΟΥ , James infers the sentiment that follows: ΟὖΝ , therefore.
ὃς ἂν οὖν βουληθῇ κ . τ . λ .] By the usual explanation of ΦΙΛΊΑ Τ . ΚΌΣΜΟΝ , and of the corresponding ΦΊΛΟς ΤΟῦ ΚΌΣΜΟΥ , ΒΟΥΛΗΘῇ is at all events disconcerting. Whilst some expositors urge that by it designed and conscious intention is designated (Baumgarten), and others oppose it to the actual deed,[195] and find the idea expressed that even the simple inclination to the love of the world (de Wette: “whosoever has perchance willed to love the world”) effects ἔχθρα τοῦ Θεοῦ ,[196] Schneckenburger, on the contrary, says: verbi ΒΟΥΛΗΘῇ cave premas vim. With each of these explanations the expression retains something strange, which also is not removed by distinguishing, with Lange, the “formal” and the “material intention,” and understanding ΒΟΥΛΗΘῇ only of the latter. But it is different as soon as ΚΌΣΜΟς is considered not as an aggregate of things but of persons, since then ΦΙΛΊΑ , as above remarked, consists in a reciprocity. The meaning is: Whosoever, although a Christian, giving himself up to the pursuits of the world, will live in friendship with it, and thus will be not despised but esteemed and loved by it, has directed to it his wish ( βουληθῇ )[197]—he (thereby) is constituted an enemy of God; ἐχθρὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ ] is likewise used in the sense of reciprocal relation, although here the passive meaning predominates.
ΚΑΘΊΣΤΑΤΑΙ ] has here the same meaning as in chap. Jam_3:6 (so also Lange); it is generally rendered incorrectly = ἘΣΤΙ ; inaccurately by Theile = fit, sistitur; by Schneckenburger = stands there as; by Bouman = constituitur divino in judicio.
[194] According to Lange, the friendship with the world consisted “in the chiliastic desire of the enjoyment of a worldly glory which was only coloured with hierarchical piety.”
[195] Laurentius states this opposition in the most definite terms: non si tantum est inimicus Dei, qui est ipso opere amicus mundi, sed etiam ille, qui cum non possit, vult tamen … et sic voluntate implet, quod ipso opere non potest.
[196] Similarly also Wiesinger: “James brings under the same judgment not only the decided and expressed love to the world, but even the inclination to step into such a relation to the world.”
[197] In essentials Estius correctly says: Terribilis valde sententia adversus cos qui suas actiones et studia componunt ad gratiam humanam. Hoc enim vere est esse amicum hujus seculi.