James 4.11

[Randy Kluth]

James 4.11 Anyone who speaks against a brother or sister or judges them speaks against the law and judges it.

What does this mean? How is slandering a brother in Christ judging the Law? I think that in the Law of Moses there were both rules and remedies for breaking those rules. And so, the Law was a guardian to keep people in compliance with the Law through a system of mercy.

Of course, in Christ today, we are no longer under the Law. We've received mercy beyond the Law because the Law could never bring everlasting mercy.

However, did mercy exhibited under the Law teach us not to slander one another? Is this the commandment: "Do not bear false witness against another?"

Is persisting in defying the commandments of the Law a form of "judging the Law?" Is it judging the worth of the Law?

 

[Desire Of All Nations]

The message James is communicating in this passage is that Christians who think they have a license to slander each other are in effect saying they have a better standard of morality than the principles God laid out in the Law, that the Law is evil or unjust because it prohibits slander, and that God is a liar for saying slander is sin.

This is connected to what Christ said in Matt. 5:20 about how a Christian's righteousness must exceed the Pharisees' righteousness. The whole problem Christ had with those men is the same exact problem that exists in Romanism: the Pharisees generally refused to practice what was in the Law, and so they found it extremely easy to slander anyone who lived by it, even if it was another Pharisee. As a result, they made themselves judges of the Law because they viewed their own man-made laws as being superior to God's(Mar. 7:7, 9).

That being said, this passage also concretely proves that the 1st century apostles did not teach Christians that the Law is merely a set of suggestions or that it was wholly abolished. In this passage, James can be seeing reinforcing what was taught in the OT: the Law was given to teach all human beings how to align their attitude, conduct, and thoughts with God's. And as such, Christians were held to a greater degree of responsibility for keeping it because they were given this knowledge.

 

[Randy Kluth]

The message James is communicating in this passage is that Christians who think they have a license to slander each other are in effect saying they have a better standard of morality than the principles God laid out in the Law, that the Law is evil or unjust because it prohibits slander, and that God is a liar for saying slander is sin.

This is connected to what Christ said in Matt. 5:20 about how a Christian's righteousness must exceed the Pharisees' righteousness. The whole problem Christ had with those men is the same exact problem that exists in Romanism: the Pharisees generally refused to practice what was in the Law, and so they found it extremely easy to slander anyone who lived by it, even if it was another Pharisee. As a result, they made themselves judges of the Law because they viewed their own man-made laws as being superior to God's(Mar. 7:7, 9).

That being said, this passage also concretely proves that the 1st century apostles did not teach Christians that the Law is merely a set of suggestions or that it was wholly abolished. In this passage, James can be seeing reinforcing what was taught in the OT: the Law was given to teach all human beings how to align their attitude, conduct, and thoughts with God's. And as such, Christians were held to a greater degree of responsibility for keeping it because they were given this knowledge.

I think that's pretty well said, and I at least partly agree with it. I don't believe that the Law, as a *covenant,* in any way remains in the New Covenant. But as principles of righteousness, the Law does speak into the NT era. We are justified apart from the Law, because the Law consigns all of Mankind to eternal judgment. But when we apply those same moral principles under the justification of Christ, they become a form of eternal righteousness.

 

[Mark51]

James 4.11 Anyone who speaks against a brother or sister or judges them speaks against the law and judges it.

What does this mean? How is slandering a brother in Christ judging the Law? I think that in the Law of Moses there were both rules and remedies for breaking those rules. And so, the Law was a guardian to keep people in compliance with the Law through a system of mercy.

Of course, in Christ today, we are no longer under the Law. We've received mercy beyond the Law because the Law could never bring everlasting mercy.

However, did mercy exhibited under the Law teach us not to slander one another? Is this the commandment: "Do not bear false witness against another?"

Is persisting in defying the commandments of the Law a form of "judging the Law?" Is it judging the worth of the Law?

Apparently, the early Christian-as well as many today-were proud, boastful, and critical of their brothers and sisters. They, in effect were judging them. God is the only law giver and judge; and He is only able to save or destroy. (Romans 14:4; James 4:11, 12) If they were following the Law, then they would not be critical of other Christian and instead show compassion and love.-James 2:8.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Apparently, the early Christian-as well as many today-were proud, boastful, and critical of their brothers and sisters. They, in effect were judging them. God is the only law giver and judge; and He is only able to save or destroy. (Romans 14:4; James 4:11, 12) If they were following the Law, then they would not be critical of other Christian and instead show compassion and love.-James 2:8.

If I understand you correctly, I agree. My thought now is that whether under the Law or under the New Covenant, the system was and is a lawful system, with the inclusion of provisions for mercy. To not be merciful or to not be compassionate and kind towards brothers and sisters is to pass judgment on God's form of lawfulness, which requires forgiveness, patience, and respect.

James had nothing but respect for the Law, although he understood that the Law after the Cross brought freedom from all of the regulations of atonement. Therefore, he was speaking not in an OT/NT sense, but rather, in terms of what the Law meant both in its own time and in the NT period, since all applications of God's Law involve mercy, love, and kindness.

 

[Mark51]

If I understand you correctly, I agree. My thought now is that whether under the Law or under the New Covenant, the system was and is a lawful system, with the inclusion of provisions for mercy. To not be merciful or to not be compassionate and kind towards brothers and sisters is to pass judgment on God's form of lawfulness, which requires forgiveness, patience, and respect.

James had nothing but respect for the Law, although he understood that the Law after the Cross brought freedom from all of the regulations of atonement. Therefore, he was speaking not in an OT/NT sense, but rather, in terms of what the Law meant both in its own time and in the NT period, since all applications of God's Law involve mercy, love, and kindness.

Thank you for your insight.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Thank you for your insight.

You're welcome. I think I initially failed to recognize that when referring to the Law or to anything Old Testament that the idea is to portray what God is like, and to therefore ask that people take that into consideration in whatever they do. I could say that "God judged Sodom in the OT era," and prove that people today should flee those vices. Whether OT or NT God's character is being portrayed, and this requires that we take God's eternal nature into consideration.

When James references the Law, then, it doesn't really matter that the Law is no longer in effect as a covenant. What the Law proved then and still proves is what God is like. And if in the OT, under the Law, He asked Israel to be obedient to His moral character, then it is also what is expected of us today under the New Covenant.

I think James adequately explained that his NT concept of the Law was a "Law of liberty," meaning that people are freed from their sins and from the need to observe rituals of atonement. But since God's eternal nature is bound up in the Law it can still serve as a reminder of what God still expects of us today. The New Covenant therefore is indeed a system of Law.

 

[michaelvpardo]

James 4.11 Anyone who speaks against a brother or sister or judges them speaks against the law and judges it.

What does this mean? How is slandering a brother in Christ judging the Law? I think that in the Law of Moses there were both rules and remedies for breaking those rules. And so, the Law was a guardian to keep people in compliance with the Law through a system of mercy.

Of course, in Christ today, we are no longer under the Law. We've received mercy beyond the Law because the Law could never bring everlasting mercy.

However, did mercy exhibited under the Law teach us not to slander one another? Is this the commandment: "Do not bear false witness against another?"

Is persisting in defying the commandments of the Law a form of "judging the Law?" Is it judging the worth of the Law?

Context is key.
1 James, a bondservant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, To the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad:
Greetings.
The letter was written to the 12 tribes of the dispersion, to hebrews under the law of Moses and in chapter 4 to those judging and fighting with each other, presumably over Christian liberty. There was a lot of that going on, with Jewish believers trying to add the law to Christ.

 

[Curtis]

James 4.11 Anyone who speaks against a brother or sister or judges them speaks against the law and judges it.

What does this mean? How is slandering a brother in Christ judging the Law? I think that in the Law of Moses there were both rules and remedies for breaking those rules. And so, the Law was a guardian to keep people in compliance with the Law through a system of mercy.

Of course, in Christ today, we are no longer under the Law. We've received mercy beyond the Law because the Law could never bring everlasting mercy.

However, did mercy exhibited under the Law teach us not to slander one another? Is this the commandment: "Do not bear false witness against another?"

Is persisting in defying the commandments of the Law a form of "judging the Law?" Is it judging the worth of the Law?

James teaches that we are under the royal law, aka the law of love found in the two love commands, aka the law of Christ.

God always has law, but we as believers are not under the works of the law of Moses.

 

[MatthewG]

It’s about judging other people who are already believers.

It’s called not loving your neighbor, because of fighting and bickering over non-essentials to me.