Tiago 4
Leon Morris · Citado em PreceptAustin
Tiago 4
Morris - This is a striking statement of faith in the resurrection on the part of Hannah. At this time, no records show a dead person being revived, nor had there been any explicit revelation given as yet concerning a future bodily resurrection. Yet Hannah, like Abraham and Job, believed that God could and would do this (Genesis 22:5; Hebrews 11:17-19; Job 19:25-27). Isaiah 43:13 “Even from eternity I am He, And there is none who can deliver out of My hand; I act and who can reverse it?” Hosea 6:1 “Come, let us return to the LORD. For He has torn us, but He will heal us; He has wounded us, but He will bandage us. Matthew 10:28 “Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy (apollumi) both soul and body in hell. Luke 12:5+ “But I will warn you whom to fear: fear the One who, after He has killed, has authority to cast into hell; yes, I tell you, fear Him! Hebrews 7:25+ Therefore He is able also to save (sozo) forever those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them. Revelation 1:17; 18+ When I saw Him, I fell at His feet like a dead man. And He placed His right hand on me, saying, “Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last, 18 and the living One; and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of death and of Hades. Able (present tense)(1410)(dunamai) conveys the basic meaning of that which has the inherent ability to do something or accomplish some end. Thus dunamai means to be strong enough to do or have power to save and to kill. Save (heal, make well or whole) (4982)(sozo) has the basic meaning of rescuing one from great peril. Additional nuances include to protect, keep alive, preserve life, deliver, heal, be made whole. Jesus said "The Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost.”" (Lk 19:10+) Destroy (622)(apollumi from apo = away from or wholly + olethros = state of utter ruin <> ollumi = to destroy <> root of apollyon [Re 9:11] = destroyer) means to destroy utterly but not to cause one to cease to exist. Apollumi as it relates to men, is not the loss of being per se, but is more the loss of well-being. It means to ruin so that the person (or thing) ruined can no longer serve the use for which he (it) was designed. To render useless. The gospel promises everlasting life for the one who believes. The failure to possess this life will result in utter ruin and eternal uselessness (but not a cessation of existence). John
Tiago 4:6
Morris explains the contextual passages (Jas 4:4, 5-note) as follows… (James 4:4) Compromising with the present world-system--whether in philosophy, dress or behavior --is surely one of the most prevalent characteristics of modern Christianity, even evangelicalism. This indictment of such compromise urgently needs emphasis today (1Jn 2:15-17; Gal 1:4; Jn 15:19; 17:14; Ro 8:6, 7, 8; 2Co 6:14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 2Co 7:1). James 4:5 is a difficult passage, and interpretations have varied widely. There is no single Old Testament Scripture from which James is quoting, and he could not be referring to any New Testament Scripture, because the other New Testament books had not yet been written. He must, therefore, be referring to the general prophetic sense of those passages in the Old Testament that speak of God's Spirit as desiring the faithful love of His people and as opposed to any spirit of covetousness or adultery (whether spiritual or physical) in their hearts. Exemplifying this are such Scriptures as Ge 6:3; 2Sa 23:2; Ps 51:11; Isa 63:10,11; Ezek 36:26,27; Mic 2:7; Zech 7:12; 12:10; and others of the same general import. The verse can probably be best paraphrased as follows: "Do ye think that the Scriptures are speaking in vain when they testify that God's Holy Spirit [who is now actually dwelling in us] is longing for us to envy [that is, to covet after] God's love and friendship, rather than that of the world?" This rather free paraphrase seems to fit the entire context best, but, in view of the wide variety of translations and interpretations of this verse, it is not feasible to be dogmatic. (Morris,