Charles Ellicott Commentary James 2

My brothers.—The second chapter opens with some stern rebukes for those unworthy Christians who had men’s persons in admiration, and, undoubtedly, that because of advantage to themselves . The lesson is distinctly addressed to believers, and its severity appears to be caused by the Apostle’s unhappy consciousness of its need. What was endurable in a heathen, or a foreigner, or even a Jew, ceased to be so in a professed follower of the lowly Jesus.

And this seems to be a further reason for the indignant expostulation and condemnation of James 2:14. Thus the whole chapter may really be considered as dealing with Faith; and it flows naturally from the preceding thoughts upon Religion—or, as we interpreted their subject matter, Religious Service.

Do not have (or, hold) the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with (or, in) respect of persons (James 2:1). “You know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ,” wrote St. Paul to the proud and wealthy men of Corinth (2 Corinthians 8:9), “that, though He was rich, yet for your sakes He became poor, that you through His poverty might be rich;” and, with a more cogent appeal, to the Philippians (Philippians 2:3–7), “In lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves: look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others. Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God”—i.e., Very God, and not appearance merely—nevertheless “thought not His equality with God a thing to be always grasped at,” as it were some booty or prize, “but emptied Himself” of His glory, “and took upon Him the shape of a slave.”

Were these central, even initial, facts of the faith believed then; or are they now? If they were truly, how could there be such folly and shame as “acceptance of persons” according to the dictates of fashionable society and the world? Indeed, “Honour,” “to whom honour” is due (Romans 13:7).

The Christian religion does not allow that contempt for even earthly dignities—affected by some of her followers, but springing more from envy and unruliness than anything else. True reverence and submission are in no way condemned by this scripture: but their excess and gross extreme, the preference for vulgar wealth, the adulation of success, the worship, in short, of some new golden calf.

For if there comes into your assembly (literally, synagogue).—This is the only place in the New Testament where the Jewish word is used for a Christian congregation.

A man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel.—Better, a man golden-ringed, in bright apparel.

Roman satirists had much to say upon the fops and dandies of their time, with “all their fingers laden with rings.” Some, if we may trust the sneer of Martial, had six on each. Others wore heavy or light gold rings, according to the oppressiveness of the season. No doubt, the fashions set in Rome extended to Jerusalem.

“Goodly apparel” is, rather, gorgeous—splendid in colour or ornament. The same two words are translated “gay clothing” in the following verse.

And there comes in also a poor man in vile raiment.—Squalid, even dirty, as from work and wear—the exact opposite of the idle, over-dressed exquisite.

And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing (or, bright apparel). — You look on him, that is, because of his fine appearance, with undue respect and consideration.

And say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place (or, as margin, well); and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool. — The church official or elder in charge of the church finds a stall for the person of substantial presence, while anything suffices for the poor one; but — most considerate offer — he can stand; or, if he prefers it, sit under the great man’s footstool, that is, lower down on the floor beneath. We know Christ’s words for those who formerly loved the chief seats in the synagogues (Matthew 23:6), nor can there be any doubt as to their full application now.

What excuse can be offered for the special pews in churches and chapels, hired and appropriated, furnished luxuriously, and secured by bolt and lock? If men and women in fine clothing still sit in the prominent places, while the poorly clad are crowded into side benches and corners, or are beneficently told to stand and wait until room is found somewhere beneath the daintier feet — how can there be escape from condemnation on the charge that follows? — namely, this.

Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts?—Or, as the sense, fully expressed, would be: “My brethren, if you acted thus, did you not doubt in yourselves, and become by such false and unfaithful discrimination judges of and in your own evil thoughts? Did you not lose the idea of brotherhood, and become contentious as to supremacy of self and place—serving yourselves while prepared for the service of Christ? The Lord Jesus thought not His equality with God a thing ever to be grasped at, if work for man could be done by self-humiliation.

Therefore, although being ‘equal to the Father, as touching His Godhead,’ He became ‘inferior . . . as touching His Manhood.’ And none may turn unmoved from that picture of sublime condescension to the petty strifes of quality and position which profane the Christian sanctuary. Most sadly true is it that in making distinctions such as these between rich and poor, we ‘become of the number of those who doubt respecting their faith;’ for, while it abolishes such altogether in the presence of God, we set them up of our own arrogance and pride. ‘We draw nigh unto Him with our mouth, and honour Him with our lips, but our heart is far from Him; and our worship therefore vain.’” (Comp. Isaiah 29:13; Ezekiel 33:31; Matthew 15:8–9.)

Listen, my beloved brethren.—With a complete change of manner, the Apostle now writes as if he were speaking, in brief, quivering sentences, appealing to the hearts that his stronger words may not compel.

Has not God chosen . . .?—There is, then, an election on the part of God. It would be folly to deny it. But this passage, like so many others, gives the reason for that choice. The poor of this world are His chosen; not merely for their poverty, although it may have been the atmosphere, so to speak, in which the virtues that endeared them to Him have flourished most. And these are rich for present and for future. They know Him now by faith, and after this life have the fruition of His glorious Godhead.

Blessed be ye poor, for yours is the kingdom of God (Luke 6:20). The way to it for them is nearer and less encumbered than for the rich, if only they fulfill the Scripture , and are poor in spirit: then, indeed, are they heirs of the kingdom which He hath promised to them that love Him. The world must always measure by its own standard, and consider poverty a curse, just as it looks on pain and trouble as evil.

But the teaching of God, declared most eloquently in the life of His blessed Son, is the direct opposite to this. In a worship that demands of its worshippers costly gifts and offerings—and every religion tends downwards to such desires—the rich man has a golden pavement to his future bliss. No wonder, therefore, that again and again the voice of the Spirit of God has pointed out the narrow way, and the eternal excellence of truth, faith, and love, the riches most easily acquired by the poor.