Digital Logos Edition
The book of James is full of advice on how Christians should live. Thus, some say it contradicts Paul's gospel of grace and faith, and they question its place in the canon. However, this commentary will show that James' and Paul's thoughts are complementary, not contradictory.
C. Jeanne Orjala Serrão moves verse-by-verse through James after providing an in-depth introduction.
You can save when you purchase this product as part of a collection.
“For James, perfection is not just concerned with outward actions, but with the inward condition of the person. Overemphasis on the observable actions alone leads to a legalism, in which one’s spirituality is judged solely by what one does. Equally, an overemphasis on invisible, inward conditions can lead to self-absorption and a failure to appreciate that actions exhibit who one is.” (Page 53)
“Although James was written in Greek, its thought-world is Jewish. For James there can be no true faith that does not affect the way one lives. In contrast to the Greek division of the person into body and mind (or body, mind, and spirit), Jews held a unified view of the person. Thus, what one really believes can be seen in what one does.” (Page 23)
“This should not be taken to suggest that Christians cannot make friends with people who are not Christians. But Christians cannot align themselves with the values and goals of the forces of evil fighting against God and his church. The one who chooses to do this becomes a personal enemy of God.” (Page 140)
“Therefore, gentleness means ‘getting angry at the right time, in the right measure, and for the right reason’ (Zodhiates 1992, 1210).” (Page 127)
“Instead of mentioning his family relationship to Jesus, James preferred to use a strong word (doulos, slave) describing his relationship with God and with the Lord Jesus Christ. Apparently, James’ personal relationship with Jesus Christ as his Lord, and his submission to be his servant, is more important than his family connection. His Christian identity is defined by his servant-Lord relationship rather than his brother-brother relationship.” (Pages 46–47)