John Calvin Commentary James 4

From whence come wars. As he had spoken of peace, and had reminded them that vices must be exterminated in such a way as to preserve peace, he now comes to their contentions, by which they created confusion among themselves; and he shows that these arose from their invidious desires and lusts, rather than from a zeal for what was just and right; for if everyone observed moderation, they would not have disturbed and annoyed one another. They had their hot conflicts because their lusts were allowed to prevail unchecked.

It thus appears that greater peace would have been among them, had everyone abstained from doing wrong to others; but the vices which prevailed among them were so many attendants armed to excite contentions. He calls our faculties members. He takes lusts as designating all illicit and lustful desires or propensities which cannot be satisfied without doing injury to others.

You lust, or covet, and have not. He seems to suggest that the soul of man is insatiable when he indulges wicked lusts; and truly it is so, for whoever allows his sinful propensities to rule uncontrolled will know no end to his lust. If even the world were given to him, he would wish other worlds to be created for him. So it happens that they seek torments that exceed the cruelty of all executioners. For that saying of Horace is true:

The tyrants of Sicily found no torment greater than envy.

Some copies have φονεύετε, “you kill;” but I do not doubt that we ought to read φθονεῖτε, “you envy,” as I have rendered it; for the verb “to kill” in no way suits the context. You fight: he does not mean those wars and fightings which people engage in with drawn swords, but the violent contentions that prevailed among them.

They derived no benefit from contentions of this kind, for he affirms that they received the punishment of their own wickedness. God, indeed, whom they did not acknowledge as the author of blessings, justly disappointed them. For when they contended in ways so unlawful, they sought to be enriched through the favor of Satan rather than through the favor of God.

One by fraud, another by violence, one by calumnies, and all by some evil or wicked arts, strove for happiness. They then sought to be happy, but not through God. It was therefore no wonder that they were frustrated in their efforts, since no success can be expected except through the blessings of God alone.

Ye seek and receive not. He goes further: though they sought, yet they were deservedly denied, because they wished to make God the minister of their own lusts. For they set no bounds to their wishes, as he had commanded, but gave unbridled license to themselves, to ask for those things of which a person, conscious of what is right, ought especially to be ashamed. Pliny somewhere ridicules this impudence, that people so wickedly abuse the ears of God. Such a thing is less tolerable in Christians, who have been given the rule of prayer by their heavenly Master.

Undoubtedly, there appears to be in us no reverence for God, no fear of him—in short, no regard for him—when we dare to ask of him what even our own conscience does not approve.

James meant briefly this: that our desires ought to be bridled, and the way of bridling them is to subject them to the will of God. He also teaches us that what we wish for in moderation, we ought to seek from God himself. If this is done, we will be preserved from wicked contentions, fraud, violence, and from doing any injury to others.

Ye adulterers. I connect this verse with the preceding ones; for he calls them adulterers, as I think, metaphorically, because they corrupted themselves with the empty pursuits of this world and estranged themselves from God, as though he had said that they had become debased or illegitimate. We know how common in Holy Scripture is the mention of that marriage God establishes with us. He wants us, then, to be like a chaste virgin, as Paul says (2 Corinthians 11:2). This chastity is violated and defiled by all impure desires for the world. James, then, not without reason compares the love of the world to adultery.

Those, then, who take his words literally do not sufficiently observe the context, for he continues to speak against the lusts of men, which lead those entangled with the world away from God, as follows:

The friendship of the world. He calls it the friendship of the world when men surrender themselves to the corruptions of the world and become enslaved to them. For the conflict between the world and God is so great that to the extent anyone inclines toward the world, to that same extent he estranges himself from God. Hence, Scripture often commands us to renounce the world if we want to serve God.

Do you think. He seems to cite the following sentence from Scripture. Consequently, interpreters labor greatly, because no such passage, or at least none exactly like it, is found in Scripture.

But nothing prevents the reference from being made to what has already been said—namely, that the friendship of the world is hostile to God. Moreover, it has been rightly said that this is a truth which occurs everywhere in Scripture. And it is not surprising that he has omitted the pronoun that would have made the sentence clearer, for, as is evident, he is consistently very concise.

The Spirit, or, Does the Spirit? Some think that the human soul is meant and therefore read the sentence affirmatively. According to this meaning, the human spirit, being malignant, is so infected with envy that it always has a mixture of it. However, those who regard the Spirit of God as intended have a better interpretation, for it is He who is given to dwell in us. I therefore take the Spirit to be that of God and read the sentence as a question. For his objective was to prove that because they envied, they were not ruled by the Spirit of God, because He teaches the faithful otherwise. And this he confirms in the next verse by adding that he giveth more grace.

For it is an argument arising from the contrary. Envy is a proof or sign of malignity; but the Spirit of God proves Himself to be bountiful by the abundance of His blessings. Therefore, nothing is more repugnant to His nature than envy. In short, James denies that the Spirit of God rules where depraved lusts prevail, which incite mutual contention, because it is uniquely the office of the Spirit to enrich people continually more and more with new gifts.

I will not stop to refute other explanations. Some offer this meaning: that the Spirit strives against envy, which is too harsh and forced. Then they say that God gives more grace to conquer and subdue lust. But the meaning I have provided is more suitable and simple—namely, that He restores us by His bounty from the power of malignant emulation. The continuative particle δὲ should be understood adversatively, as equivalent to ἀλλὰ or ἀλλά γε; thus, I have rendered it quin, meaning 'but'.