Tiago 5
William Barclay · Citado em PreceptAustin
Tiago 5
Barclay - "James is not thinking of what we call bad language, and of swearing in the modern sense of the term; he is thinking of what we call taking oaths, and confirming a statement or a promise or an undertaking by an oath. In the ancient world, there were two evil practices. (1) There was a distinction--especially in the Jewish world--between oaths which were binding and oaths which were not binding. The distinction was this: any oath in which the name of God was directly used was considered to be definitely binding … (2) There was in this age an extraordinary amount of oath-taking. This in itself was quite wrong. For one thing, the value of an oath depends to a large extent on the fact that it is very seldom necessary to take one. Its impressiveness lies in its exceptional character … And for another thing, the practice of taking frequent oaths was nothing other than a proof of the prevalence of lying and cheating and falsehood and swindling. In an honest society no oath is needed; it is only when men cannot be trusted to tell the truth that they have to be put upon oath." Tasker: "The way to avoid swearing of this kind is by being strictly truthful in ordinary speech, avoiding exaggeration (ED: OH MY, AM I GUILTY ON THIS ONE!), so often indulged in to create an impression, eschewing the half-truth which conceals the lie, and generally aiming at simplicity and straightforwardness. Sometimes it is the fear that their words will not be taken at their face value which leads men to try and reinforce them by swearing; and that in itself is a reflection upon the insincerity and duplicity which so often characterize conversation. Men should say what they mean, and mean what they say." My brethren - So James is speaking to believers, to the church. "James’ teaching is a radical call to radical truthfulness...If heeded, this call will set us apart from the rest of the world, and even get us in trouble at times. But radical truthfulness will also bring power to our lives and grace to a confused world." (K Hughes) Do not swear - This is a present imperative with a negative which means either do not begin this or stop this practice. James echoes the words of Jesus Again, you have heard that the ancients were told, ‘YOU SHALL NOT MAKE FALSE VOWS, BUT SHALL FULFILL YOUR VOWS TO THE LORD.’ 34 “But I say to you, make no oath at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God, 35 or by the earth, for it is the footstool of His feet, or by Jerusalem, for it is THE CITY OF THE GREAT KING. 36 “Nor shall you make an oath by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black. (Mt 5:33-36+) Steven Cole quotes Haddon Robinson - In commenting on Mt 5:33-37, Haddon Robinson (The Christian Salt & Light Company [Discovery House Publishing], p. 156) says with regard to the Sermon on the Mount, “If anger was the real issue of murder, lust the real issue of adultery, selfishness the real issue of divorce, then deceit is the real issue of oaths.” He adds (p. 158), “Jesus wasn’t addressing whether or not we should take an oath. He was talking about whether or not we are truthful…. We don’t tell the truth because we have taken an oath; we tell the truth because we are truthful.” (James 5:12 Talking Straight) William Barclay on Mt 5:33-37 - Here is a great eternal truth. Life cannot be divided into compartments in some of which God is involved and in others of which he is not involved; there cannot be one kind of language in the Church and another kind of language in the shipyard or factory or the office; there cannot be one kind of standard of conduct in the Church and another kind of standard in the business world. The fact is that God does not need to be invited into certain departments of life, and kept out of others. He is everywhere, all through life and every activity of life. He hears not only the words which are spoken in his name; he hears all words; and there cannot be any such thing as a form of words which evades bringing God into a transaction. We will regard all promises as sacred, if we remember that all promises are made in the presence of God. When read in context of all Scripture, it is clear that James is not forbidding taking of a solemn oath, but is stressing need for integrity in speech, and the avoidance of using God's name or a sacred object to guarantee that what one said is truthful. Stated another way, truthfulness is to be the norm among brothers and sisters in Christ. When speech is truthful, taking oaths is totally unnecessary. But apparently these believers had brought this practice into the church leading James to issue this command. Either by heaven or by earth or with any other oath - These (by heaven or by earth) were well-known Jewish "oath formulas" and were not used by Gentiles (see Mt 5:34 above for 4 examples given by Jesus). As alluded to above (see comment), in James' day, the Jews had developed a complex system of making oaths, so that they could swear by something other than the Name of God (like "I swear by heaven" or "I swear by earth") and it was not considered binding by the one who made the oath! In other words this was a deceptive way to hide one's lying speech behind the veneer of an oath that supposedly guaranteed truthfulness, which was not always (perhaps even not often) the case! If one swore using God's Name, they would in essence be invoking His punishment on themselves if what they said proved not to be truthful. Understandably, this latter type of oath was felt to be a serious matter, and so His Name was generally avoided when one intended to speak an untruthful oath. The solemn nature of taking oaths is underscored by the sad example of Jephthah who made a horrible oath that ended up costing the life of his only child, his daughter (Read Jdg 11:30-36+). The phrase with any other oath signifies any other oath of the same kind (other = allos, not heteros).
Tiago 5
Barclay writes that hupodeigma means "a specimen, or, still better, a sketch-plan. Hiebert on example - James knew the value of an "example" (hupodeigma), an objective illustration that we can hold before us as a model to spur one to pursue the conduct desired. Though an example may be negative, showing us what not to do (Heb. 4:11; 2 Pet. 2:6), James here stresses the positive value of a good example. The term is emphatic as the first word in the sentence. (James Commentary) Suffering (only here in NT)(2552)(kakopatheia from kakos = bad, evil + pathos = passion, that which befalls one, cf verb kakopatheo) describes evil circumstances coming on someone causing suffering, affliction, misery, misfortune. (Only other use is in the LXX of Malachi 1:13+). Also has the sense of facing evil circumstances courageously with perseverance, endurance. Thus it describes here in James suffering that a person endures, a strenuous effort that one makes, or perseverance. This suffering is to provide an example for the believers to be encouraged by and to imitate in the power of the Holy Spirit. The writer of Hebrews made a similar exhortation to those Jews who were beginning to believe in Messiah and who were beginning to experience suffering (cf Hebrew 10:32-39+). Patience (longsuffering) (3115)(makrothumia rom makros = long, distant, far off, large + thumos = temper, passion, emotion or thumoomai = to be furious or burn with intense anger) is literally long-temper (as opposed to "short tempered), a long holding out of the mind before it gives room to action or passion. It describes a state of emotional calm or quietness in the face of provocation, misfortune or unfavorable circumstances. Makrothumia is the capacity to be wronged and not retaliate. It is the ability to hold one's feeling in restraint or bear up under the oversights and wrongs afflicted by others without retaliating. It is manifest by the quality of forbearance under provocation. It is used of God's patience toward sinful men (see note Romans 2:4) and of the attitude which Christians are to display. Hiebert says makrothumia "points to their brave endurance and steadfastness under affliction without succumbing." (James Commentary) Patience is the spirit which never gives up for it endures to the end even in times of adversity, exhibiting self-restraint such that it does not hastily retaliate a wrong. Vine says makrothumia is the opposite of anger. It follows that a lack of patience often leads to wrath or revenge.