James 2:10–13

James 2:10 · Darby

For whoever shall keep the whole law and shall offend in one [point], he has come under the guilt of [breaking] all.

James is writing to people who favoured the rich and brushed the poor aside. To show how serious that is, he refuses to treat God's law as a list of items, where a good score on most of them covers one failure.

Partiality and the royal law

James has just called one command "royal" — love your neighbour as yourself. One writer explains what makes a command royal.

Verse 8 calls the Scripture "You shall love your neighbor as yourself" the royal law. This summarizes the last six of the ten commandments. The first four are no doubt priestly in character rather than royal, since they are toward God. But royal character is what bears testimony toward men. Genuine love for neighbors will seek their greatest good: it is impartial, and concerned for the purest blessing of the one it loves. If it is only my rich neighbour I love, this is not proper love at all — I expose my selfish motives.

Modernised from Leslie M. GrantOriginal wording

So favouritism is not a lapse in manners. It breaks the one command that sums up how we treat people.

One law, not a list

The sweeping claim of this verse makes sense once you see the law as one whole. One writer shows the difference with a picture.

Nothing could be more sweeping than the statement in verse 10. At first sight some of us might question whether it is right. But we have to remember that the law is one whole, and cannot be divided. An errand boy carrying a basket of bottles may slip and break one bottle in his fall. His employer cannot fairly accuse him of breaking all of them, because every bottle is separate and distinct from the others. But suppose the boy carried the basket hung from his shoulder by a chain. If in falling he also broke one link of the chain, his master could fairly tell him that he had broken the chain.

Modernised from F. B. HoleOriginal wording

The Lawgiver behind each command

Why should one failure count against everything? The same God speaks in every command, so each one carries His authority.

Here the law is what crushes self-righteousness. The law is of God, so it cannot be anything but unbending, and it resents every attempt of men to dodge it... If there were true obedience, one claim of God would be as binding as another, and violence would be as hateful to us as corruption. To offend in one point violates God's authority and brings us under the guilt of breaking all... For sinful man to try to gain righteousness by the law, and to stand before God on that ground, is fatal ignorance of self as well as of God.

Modernised from William KellyOriginal wording

Verse 11 is James' proof — the One who said "Do not commit adultery" also said "Do not murder."

No credit for the commands you kept

Many people lean on the hope that a mostly decent record will hold up. This verse closes that door.

The law knew nothing of mercy. Its demands were so strict that it held an offender in one point guilty of all (James 2:10). Some people shelter under the idea that they are not aware of having broken all of God's laws, so they are not exposed to His just condemnation. That hope is empty and deceptive. It is not even reasonable. Think how a man judges his fellow man. Whoever breaks one of the laws of his country has committed an act of rebellion, and so deserves punishment. A man does not need to rob twenty times before a court calls him guilty. If he is proved to have robbed even once, he faces punishment as a lawbreaker. And is God less just than man?

Modernised from H. H. SnellOriginal wording

The only complete obedience

If nothing partial can stand, the verse points us away from ourselves.

Is this not the only obedience that can be acceptable with God? "Whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it." True righteousness must be complete. Everything else is partial, and only "filthy rags." That holds even for giving away all one's goods to feed the poor, or giving one's body to be burned. Here, as everywhere, everything calls aloud for Christ. He is the only One who could undertake such obedience and glorify God.

Modernised from Samuel RidoutOriginal wording

Summary

- One chain. The law is one whole, not a list of separate items. Break one link and you have broken the chain.

- One voice. One Lawgiver stands behind every command. The same God forbade adultery and murder, so offending in one point defies His authority.

- One failure. You need not break every command to stand condemned. No one has to rob twenty times before we call him a thief.

- One target. James aims this at favouritism. Showing special favour to the rich is not a small slip. It breaks the royal law of love.

- One remedy. Only complete righteousness can stand, so the verse leaves us with Christ. He alone could render that obedience.

James 2:11 · Darby

For he who said, Thou shalt not commit adultery, said also, Thou shalt not kill. Now if thou dost not commit adultery, but killest, thou art become transgressor of [the] law.

James has just said that a person who keeps the whole law but trips on one point is guilty of all. This verse is his proof. The ban on adultery and the ban on murder came from the same mouth. So why does keeping one of them earn no credit when you break the other?

One voice behind both commands

The weight of the argument sits in three words: "he who said." Both commands come from one authority, not two. So the man who avoids the first sin and commits the second has still defied the same God.

The law is one, though of course expressed in ten commandments: if one link of a chain is broken, then the chain is broken. It is the same God who forbids both adultery and murder. A man may not be guilty of one of these. But if he is guilty of the other, he is guilty of disobedience to the same God: he has broken the law.

Modernised from Leslie M. GrantOriginal wording

The law is a whole, not a shelf of separate rules

Our instinct is to keep a score sheet, item by item. That treats the commandments as separate objects, not as one connected whole.

We have to remember however that the law is treated as a whole, one and indivisible. An errand boy carrying a basket of bottles may slip and break one bottle in his fall. His employer cannot fairly accuse him of breaking all of them, because every bottle is separate from the others. But suppose the boy carried the basket hung from his shoulder by a chain. If in his fall he also broke one link of that chain, his master could fairly tell him he had broken the chain.

Modernised from F. B. HoleOriginal wording

What a single breach exposes

A person may avoid most sins because he never wanted them or never had the chance. The one sin he does commit shows where his will stands.

The authority of God is attached to His law. So when God's authority meets the desires of man, and man breaks that law in one thing, he has overthrown the claim of God's authority, and so has broken the whole law… Suppose you had forbidden your child to do three things. He was not inclined to do two of them, or had no chance to. Would his not having done those two make you hold him guiltless? No. You would say he was not inclined to do them, or he would have done them had he found the occasion.

Modernised from J. N. DarbyOriginal wording

Violence and corruption weighed alike

James pairs two very different sins. One is a sin of corrupt desire, the other a sin of violence. True obedience would hate both alike.

Here it is the law that crushes self-righteousness. The law is God's own law, so it must be inflexible, and it refuses every excuse men make… If there were true obedience, one claim of God would be as binding as another, and violence would be as hateful to us as corruption.

Modernised from William KellyOriginal wording

No mild terms for small sins

Behind the argument lies a comfortable hope that many men carry about the God who gave the law at Mount Sinai.

They imagine that a little sin here and there, now and then, will meet with mild dealing, so that there is no need to be over-righteous… No idea was more insulting to the authority of Him who had spoken at Sinai. None was more destructive of the law itself, which must be inflexible. If it is broken in a single point, righteousness under it is gone, and the honour of the whole is compromised.

Modernised from William KellyOriginal wording

Where the argument lands

If no one passes this test, what standard will we face at the judgment? James answers in the next verse. His answer turns back to the poor man at the start of the passage.

We stand before God and will be judged on the basis of the "law of liberty." That phrase means the revelation of God's will which has reached us in Christ… We stand in the light of the supreme display of God's mercy in Christ, so we are responsible to show mercy ourselves. This brings us back to the matter the paragraph started with. Their treatment of "the poor man in shabby clothing" had not been according to the mercy shown in the Gospel.

Modernised from F. B. HoleOriginal wording

Summary

- One Speaker. Both commands come from the same God. Keep one and break the other, and you have still defied Him.

- One law. The commandments are links in a chain, not bottles in a basket; snap one link and the chain itself is broken.

- One breach. The sin a person commits shows his will. Where God's authority crosses his desire, he pushes that authority aside, and the whole law with it.

- One standard. God weighs violence and corruption alike. The law will not bend, so the hope of mild treatment for small sins collapses.

- One mercy. We are judged by the law of liberty — God's will made known in Christ. Those who stand in the light of such mercy must show mercy, starting with the poor man in shabby clothing.

James 2:12 · Darby

So speak ye, and so act, as those that are to be judged by [the] law of liberty;

James has just closed every escape route: break the law at one point and you stand guilty of all. Now he names a different standard for how a believer speaks and acts. He calls it a law of liberty — two words that sound like they pull against each other.

Which Law James Has in View

Which law does James mean? One writer finds three laws in this letter. Only the last of them appears in this verse.

He speaks of three laws, or of law in three ways. First, the law as such — here, if you are guilty in one point, you are guilty of all. We have despised the authority of the law God gave, at the very point where lust was active. We are wholly guilty. Second, the royal law of inward perfection: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." That is doing well. Third, the perfect law of liberty that I look into. It is the revelation of the path of the divine nature, which God has made me share in. Revelation shows me the perfection of it; the divine nature gives me the delight in it. I am blessed in the doing of it as a present thing.

Modernised from J. N. DarbyOriginal wording

Why a Law Can Be Called Liberty

A rule only feels like bondage when it cuts against what you want. The phrase holds together because God gives a nature that wants what He commands.

This law stands in contrast with the law of Moses, the law of bondage. What God lays on His child is a law of liberty. How is this? Because the new nature desires above all things to do the will of God. So when He tells us what that will is, the heart goes fully with it. There is of course need of prayer, and of watchfulness against the flesh. Satan may raise as many hindrances as he can muster. But once we know what our Father lays upon us, we judge any reluctance as evil, and we treasure His will as a law of liberty.

Modernised from William KellyOriginal wording

Darby illustrates it with a child:

If I command my child to go where he longs to go, and tell him the way, it is obedience — but it is the law of liberty.

Modernised from J. N. DarbyOriginal wording

The Pattern of That Obedience

One life shows what this nature looks like when it is lived out in full.

The law of liberty is the ruling principle of a new nature, born from the word of God. Christ Himself is the perfect example of this nature. Its standard is a spontaneous, wholehearted, willing obedience.

Modernised from Leslie M. GrantOriginal wording

Speech and Conduct Together

The verse joins what we say to what we do.

This letter urges speaking and doing, and they cover a very large part of our practical life. But it defines both with care. Each was to suit people who are to be governed by a law of liberty. That law is a principle of the inner man. Those who have no faith cannot read it, for they have no new life from God and no knowledge of His grace.

Modernised from William KellyOriginal wording

Judged — and Judging Ourselves

This law measures us by the life God has put within us. That removes a favourite excuse: the flesh made me do it.

"Judged by the law of liberty," that is, according to the nature which has been communicated to us. This nature is holy. We ought to speak and act in keeping with this nature, and also to judge ourselves. Woe to the man who says, to excuse evil, "I do what I do not want to do," for though the flesh is in us, we owe it nothing.

Modernised from The Bible TreasuryOriginal wording

Mercy Received, Mercy Shown

The light we stand in is fuller, not dimmer. And it takes us back to the failure James opened the chapter with — how they treated a poor visitor.

We stand before God and will be judged on the basis of the "law of liberty." That expression means the revelation of God's will that has reached us in Christ... We shall have to answer as being in the much fuller light which Christianity brings. Being in the light of the supreme display of God's mercy in Christ, we are responsible to show mercy ourselves... Their treatment of "the poor man in shabby clothing" had not been according to the mercy displayed in the Gospel.

Modernised from F. B. HoleOriginal wording

Summary

- New nature. The law of liberty is the path of the divine nature God has given. Revelation shows how perfect it is; the nature itself gives the delight in it.

- New delight. It is freedom because the command and the desire now run together. The heart goes with God's will instead of straining against it. Prayer and watchfulness are still needed.

- New pattern. Christ lived this nature out in full. So the obedience here is spontaneous and wholehearted, never grudging.

- New scope. Speech and action cover most of practical life. Both are to match an inner principle that people without faith cannot read.

- New test. That nature is our measure, so we judge ourselves first. The flesh is no excuse. And the mercy we received in Christ becomes mercy we show to the poor man.

James 2:13 · Darby

for judgment [will be] without mercy to him that has shewn no mercy. Mercy glories over judgment.

James ends his rebuke of favouritism with two short sentences. They pull in opposite directions: a warning and a promise. Which one fits you? The answer shows up in how you treat other people.

Where the Warning Lands

The verse is not an isolated saying. It answers what James has just said about the poor man in shabby clothing.

We stand before God, and He will judge us on the basis of the "law of liberty." That phrase means God's will as it has now reached us in Christ. We must answer in the much fuller light that Christianity brings. Standing in the light of God's mercy shown at its highest in Christ, we are responsible to show mercy ourselves. Their treatment of "the poor man in shabby clothing" had not matched the mercy displayed in the Gospel. They set themselves up as "judges with evil thoughts," but they would find themselves under judgment.

Modernised from F. B. HoleOriginal wording

Judgment Without Mercy

Why should God be so severe about a hard heart? Because mercy is the very thing His children claim to have received.

Mercy is the source of everything we profess as God's children. So God is angry when it is missing in people who, by grace, claim to belong to His family. Of all people, they are responsible to delight in mercy and to show it in word and action. They live under a law of liberty, not of slavery, and they will be judged by it.

Modernised from William KellyOriginal wording

Another writer tests the claim of being forgiven against Jesus' parable of the unforgiving servant:

Huge numbers of people claim to have received His pardon. "I believe in the forgiveness of sins" is what crowds say every day. But conduct alone proves whether the grace of God has really penetrated the soul. Where it has, the forgiven person walks thankfully in the spirit of grace towards everyone... People who settle for saying "Lord, Lord," while not doing what He says, will end up in the place of the wicked servant in that parable... Our God will be satisfied with nothing less than reality in those who have to do with Him.

Modernised from W. W. FeredayOriginal wording

The Force of "Triumphs Over"

The second half of the verse turns. Older translations read "mercy rejoices against judgment" or "mercy glories over judgment." One writer links that wording to the same expression in Exodus, quoted here from an older version:

"Mercy rejoices against judgment" — the same expression as in Exodus 8:9, "Glory over me."

Modernised from J. N. DarbyOriginal wording

Notice which word James used:

Notice that the last phrase of verse 13 is not, "Mercy rejoices against justice," but, "against judgment." Divine mercy goes hand in hand with righteousness, and thereby it triumphs against the judgment that otherwise had been our due.

Modernised from F. B. HoleOriginal wording

Where Mercy Won

Mercy's boast over judgment is not a floating idea. It has a place where God proved it once for all.

Mercy is God's usual work, the work that suits Him. Judgment is His strange work, though completely righteous, against those who need mercy most and yet despise it — above all when it comes in the Lord of glory. Yet He has shown and proved that mercy in its richest and most moving form: emptying Himself, yes, the true God humbling Himself, to save His ungodly enemies... Beyond doubt "mercy glories over judgment" in Jesus Christ and Him crucified. But are not we who bear His name responsible to have it bright within us?

Modernised from William KellyOriginal wording

Mercy in Our Own Dealings

How God Himself acts before judging sets the pattern for us.

Even God does not judge until He has used every way by which He can righteously show mercy. If that is so, what about us? We are given no position as judges at all, and we have received the immeasurably wonderful mercy of God, though we deserved nothing of the kind.

Modernised from Leslie M. GrantOriginal wording

One writer applies this to those who profess faith:

God delights to show mercy. If we profess the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ and show no mercy, we are not acting in line with the new nature, which delights to show mercy rather than judgment. Failing in mercy may bring God's discipline on us in the way He governs our lives.

Modernised from Hamilton SmithOriginal wording

Summary

- Received. Mercy is the source of everything a believer professes. It reached us in Christ first.

- Reflected. Mercy received must show. Conduct proves whether grace has really penetrated the soul.

- Refused. Withhold mercy, and judgment comes back the same way: merciless to the merciless.

- Righteous. Mercy triumphs over judgment, not over justice. It walks hand in hand with righteousness, and it won at the cross.

- Restraining. God Himself uses every righteous way of showing mercy before He judges. That leaves the forgiven no seat as judge.