Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - James 5:3 - 5:3
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Jam_5:3. Continuation of the description of the judgment: ὁ χρυσὸς ὑμῶν καὶ ὁ ἄργυρος ] a further specification of riches. κατίωται ] in the N. T. ἅπ . λεγ . (Sir_12:10), equivalent to the simple verb, only in a stronger signification. Correctly Hornejus: loquitur populariter, nam aurum proprie aeruginem lion contrahit; so in the Epistle of Jeremiah 11, where it is said of gold and silver images: οὐ διασώζονται ἀπὸ ἰοῦ ; see also in the same, Jer_5:23. With too minute accuracy, Bretschneider justifies the use of the verb here, that we are to think on gold and silver vessels which are alloyed with copper (similarly Bouman). It is no less incorrect, with Pott, to weaken the idea κατίωται , that it is to be understood only of amisso auri et argenti splendore, de mutato auri colore ex flavo in viridem; against this is ὁ ἰός directly following. Wiesinger thinks that because κατίωται is here used figuratively, it is a matter of indifference that rust does not affect gold; but the ideas must suit each other in the figurative expression. The verb is rather here to be justified by the fact that since rust settles on metals generally, James in his vivid concrete description did not scrupulously take into consideration the difference of metals, which, however, is not to be reckoned, with de Wette, as a “poetical exaggeration.”[220]
καὶ ὁ ἰὸς αὐτῶν (namely, τοῦ χρυσοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἀργύρου ), εἰς μαρτύριον ὑμῖν ἔσται ] Most expositors agree with the explanation of Oecumenius: καταμαρτυρήσει ὑμῶν , ἐλέγχων τὸ ἀμετάδοτον ὑμῶν ; accordingly, “The rust which has collected on your unused gold and silver will testify to your hardness, and that to your injury = κατʼ ὑμῶν .” But since the preceding κατίωται describes the judgment overtaking earthly glory, ἰός can only be understood with reference to it; correctly Wiesinger: “the rust is a witness of their own destruction; in the destruction of their treasures they see depicted their own.”[221] Augusti superficially explains it: “will convince you that all riches are transitory.” After their riches are destroyed, the judgment seizes upon themselves; therefore καὶ φάγεται τὰς σάρκας ὑμῶν . The subject is ὁ ἰός , “the corroding rust seizes also them, and will eat their flesh” (Wiesinger). The figurative expression, although bold and peculiar, is not unsuitable, since ἰός is considered as an effect of judgment. φάγεται ] is not the present (Schneckenburger), but in the LXX. and N. T. the ordinary future for ἔδεται ; see Buttmann, Ausf. gr. Sprach. § 114 [E. T. 58], under ἐσθίω ; Winer, p. 82 [E. T. 110]. The object τὰς σάρκας ὑμῶν belonging to φάγεται is neither = ὑμᾶς (Baumgarten), nor yet in itself indicates “bloated bodies” (Augusti, Pott: corpora lautis cibis bene pasta); also Schneckenburger lays too much stress on the expression, explaining it: emphatice, quum ejusmodi homines nihil sint nisi σάρξ . According to usage, αἱ σάρκες denotes the fleshy parts of the body, therefore the plural is also used with reference to one individual; comp. 2Ki_9:36 : καταφάγονται οἱ κύνες τὰς σάρκας Ἰεζάβελ ; further, Lev_26:29; Jdt_16:17; Rev_19:18; Rev_19:21; in definite distinction from bones, Mic_3:2-3. It is to be remarked that in almost all these passages the same verb is united with the noun.[222] The context shows that what is spoken of is not “the consuming of the body by care and want” (Erasmus, Semler, Jaspar, Morus, Hottinger, Bouman), but the punishment of the divine judgment (Calvin, Grotius, Pott, Schneckenburger, de Wette, Wiesinger, and others). The words ὡς πῦρ may be united either with what goes before or with what follows. Most expositors prefer the first combination; yet already A, the Syriac version (where ὡς is wanting), and Oecumenius in his commentary put a stop after ὑμῶν . Grotius, Knapp, and Wiesinger, considering this construction as correct, accordingly explain it: tanquam ignem opes istas congessetis; Wiesinger states as a reason for this, that without the union with ὡς πῦρ the words ἐθησαυρίσατε κ . τ . λ . give too feeble a meaning. But this is not the case, since the chief stress rests on ἐν ἐσχάταις ἡμέραις (so also Lange); also James could not well reckon riches as a fire of judgment. Besides, in the O. T. the judgment is frequently represented as a devouring consuming fire, which was sufficient to suggest to James to add ὡς πῦρ to φάγεται ; see Psa_21:10, LXX.: καταφάγεται αὐτοὺς πῦρ ; Isa_10:16-17; Isa_30:27 ( ἡ ὀργὴ τοῦ θυμοῦ ὡς πῦρ ἔδεται ); Eze_15:7; Amo_5:6.[223] The sentiment is: After the judgment has overtaken the wealth of the rich, it will attack themselves. Kern gives the sentiment in an unsatisfactory manner: “The destruction of that which was everything to the rich will punish him with torturing sorrow, as if fire devoured his flesh.” That the ΤΑΛΑΙΠΩΡΊΑΙ already draw near is said in Jam_5:1, and James by the words ἘΘΗΣΑΥΡΊΣΑΤΕ ἘΝ ἘΣΧΆΤΑΙς ἩΜΈΡΑΙς indicates that the judgment is close at hand, so that this time is the last days directly preceding the judgment; accordingly, the heaping up of treasure appears as something so much the more wicked. Estius, Calvin, Laurentius, and others incorrectly supply to the verb the word ὀργήν in accordance with Rom_2:5 (comp. Pro_1:18). The object to be supplied to ΘΗΣΑΥΡΊΖΕΙΝ , which is often used absolutely (comp. Luk_12:21; 2Co_12:14; Psa_38:7), is contained in the verb itself, and also follows from what has preceded. The preposition ἘΝ is not used instead of ΕἸς , and ἜΣΧΑΤΑΙ ἩΜΈΡΑΙ are not the last days of life (Wolf: accumulavistis divitias extremae vitae parti provisuri; Morus: cumulastis opes sub finem vitae vestrae), but the last times which precede the advent of Christ (Jam_5:7), not merely the final national judgment (Lange). Jachmann most erroneously takes the sentence as interrogative: Have ye collected your (spiritual) treasures on the day (i.e. for the day) of judgment, in order to exhibit them?
[220] Lange strangely thinks that it is here intended to bring out the unnatural fact that the princes of Israel are become rebellious and companions of thieves: “It is as unnatural for gold and silver to be eaten up with rust, as for the glory of Israel to be as corrupted as the glory of other nations corrupts, which may be compared to base metals.”
[221] Stier incorrectly understands by rust “the guilt of sin which cleaves to mammon.”
[222] Although σάρκες in itself indicates only flesh according to its separate parts, yet the expression is here chosen in order to name in a concrete manner that which is carefully nourished by the rich. According to Lange, αἱ σάρκες are “the externals of religious, civil, and individual life;” and the thought of James is that “the rotten fixity described as rust in its last stage transforms itself in the fire of a revolutionary movement!”
[223] Pott: Aerugo describitur, quasi invadat membra divitum, eaque quasi, ut metallum, arrodat atque consumat et quidem … ὡς πῦρ , tanquam flamma membra quasi circumlabens carnemque lento dolore depascens.