Face Value in Religion (2:1)

This is a very hard verse to translate at once, for we must decide three

disputed questions. One is whether the verb is imperative or

interrogative. It is taken as imperative in most versions, and so most

interpreters hold, but Hort urges that it is a tame conception compared

with the indignant query expecting the answer no. There is force in this

point, as thus James would be expressing vehement surprise that such

partiality could exist among the Jewish Christians. Still, the

prohibition against such partiality makes good sense.

There is little doubt that “the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ” should

be rendered “faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.” It is objective, not

subjective, genitive. For a similar use of the objective genitive with

faith one may note Mark 11:22 and Acts 3:16. It is not the faith of

Jesus that is under discussion but the faith of the readers in Jesus

Christ our Lord. This interpretation commits James to the worship of

Jesus as Lord and Messiah, but that is surely what would be expected in

one who claimed to be a “servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ”

(1:1). It is true that the standpoint of James is nearer to that of the

Old Testament than is true of Peter, John, and Paul, but after the great

Pentecost there seems to be no wavering on the great fundamentals of

Christianity, though there is rich development and enlargement.

The essence of the Christology of James is precisely that of Paul,

though James does not amplify his implications as Paul does. James,

though very Jewish in background, is thoroughly Christian. The heart of

Christianity, the worship of Jesus as Lord and Saviour, is here, though

chronologically the Epistle of James precedes the teaching of Paul and

John in their writings. It is like the child and the man (Plummer), not

a retrograde movement. It is the outlook of Jerusalem, not that of

Antioch. What James is discussing is not the personal religion of Jesus

but the reader’s faith in Jesus.

The third disputed point in the verse is the word “glory.” The English

versions generally insert the words “the Lord” and make it “the Lord of

glory,” but Bengel makes “the glory” _ipse Christus_. In this he is

followed by Mayor, Hort, and Oesterley; and it is almost certainly true

that by “glory” James has in mind the Shekinah. In the Septuagint for

Leviticus 26:11 the word for Shekinah is just that used in Revelation

21:3: “Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men.” In John 1:14 we read:

“And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory,

glory as of the only begotten from the Father).” Add to this Hebrews

1:3, “who, being the effulgence of his glory,” and the case seems made

out. In _Pirke Aboth_ iii. 3 we note: “Two that sit together and are

occupied in words of Thorah have the Shekinah among them.”

Jesus claimed, “For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am

I in the midst of them” (Matt. 18:20). Jesus is thus not only the Way,

the Truth, the Life, and the Resurrection but also the Glory. James may

have in mind the resurrection glory of Jesus as he appeared to him. In

Luke 2:32 Simeon says: “The glory of thy people Israel.”

But all this is by way of emphasis for the main point. One who has faith

in such a Lord as Jesus should not be guilty of “acts of partiality”

(Hort). The meaning of the phrase is clear, though the origin is

obscure.[65] The Greek use of the word for mask is illustrated by the

word for hypocrite. In Leviticus 19:15 we see the full force of the

idiom: “Thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honor the

person of the mighty.” See Acts 10:34, where Peter learns that God is no

respecter of persons.

God does not accept the outside appearance for the inner reality—nor

should we. God is the God of reality. (Compare Heb. 4:12 f.) A just

judge must not be influenced by the bias of personal preference,

prejudice, rank, power, money (Mayor). He must decide the case on its

merits. There is no room for class prejudice or for the caste system in

Christianity, as there is none in the heart of God. Christianity is

democratic to the core, that is, real Christianity. Organized

Christianity has sometimes been the very thing that James here condemns.

Even in the single church little rifts and cliques easily develop.

Studies in the Epistle of James · 第 40 / 90 题