B ib l io t h e c a S a c r a 170 (July-September 2013): 344-60

J a m e s 4:5 and
the J e a l o u s S pir it
J. William Johnston

HE IDENTITY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT TEXT that James ap-

T pears to cite in James 4:5 remains a vexing problem for in-

terpreters. This is because its solution requires answers to
multiple related problems. First, the sentence division or punctua-
tion of verse 5 is especially difficult, since the prepositional phrase
προς φθόνον (“toward envy”), which is between λέγει (“says”) and
έπιποθει (“desires”) can relate to either (“says toward envy” or “de-
sires toward envy”). Second, the neuter gender of πνεύμα (“spirit”)
permits it to be taken as either the nominative subject or the accu-
sative object of the verb έπιποθει (“desires”). Third, does πνεύμα
refer to the Holy Spirit or the human spirit? Fourth, how far does
Jam es’s question run, and did he ask more than one question?
More than a hundred years ago Friedrich Spitta insisted that
προς φθόνον (“toward envy”) should be taken with λέγει (“says”)
rather than with έπιποθει (“desires”).1 This has been largely dis-
missed or ignored. However, an examination of Jam es’s anthropol-
ogy may lend support to Spitta’s suggestion. This seems preferable
because (1) it helps clarify whether there is an Old Testament quo-
tation in 4:5; (2) it makes better sense of an asyndeton in 4:5b; and
(3) it settles the referent of πνεύμα in a more satisfactory way.
This study proposes that James 4:5 introduces a direct quota-
tion of Proverbs 3:34 that appears in verse 6. This interpretation in
turn clarifies the referent of πνεύμα as the human spirit. The text
should thus read as follows:

J. William Johnston is Associate Professor of New Testament Studies, Dallas Theo-

logical Seminary Houston Campus.
1 Friedrich Spitta, Der Brief des Jakobus (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,
1896), 118.
 James 4:5 and the Jealous Spirit 345

4:5 ή δοκβιτε οτι κ6νώς ή Or do you think that the Scripture

γραφή λέγει προς φθόνον;
6πιποθ6ι τό πν6υμα δ
κατωκισεν έν ήμίν,
speaks uselessly in reference to
jealousy?
The [human] spirit, which [God]
caused to dwell in us, inordinately
desires.

4:6 μ 6 ι£ ο ν α δ6 διδωσιν χα- But he [God] gives greater grace.

ριν. διό λέγει‫־‬ Therefore [Prov. 3:34] says:

ό Oeoç ύπβρηφάνοις αντί- God opposes the proud, but gives

τάσσεται, ταπεινοΐς‫ ־‬Sè grace to the humble.
διδωσιν χάριν.

R h e t o r ic a l a n d G r a m m a t ic a l D if f ic u l t ie s

Disagreement among translations and commentators reveals the

difficulty of determining the structure of verse 5.2 Three major
views of the structure of this verse dominate the discussion:
View A: One question: Or do you think that the Scripture
speaks to no purpose: “He jealously desires the Spirit which He has
made to dwell in us”?3
View B: Two questions: Do you think the Scripture speaks to
no purpose? Does the Spirit/spirit lust to envy?4
View C: Question plus a statement: Or do you think that the
Scripture speaks to no purpose? He jealously desires the Spirit
which He has made to dwell in us.5

2 J. Harold Greenlee, An Exegetical Summary of James (Dallas: Summer Institute

of Linguistics, 1993), 170.
3 So NASB; RSV; NIV; and NET. See also James Adamson, Commentary on the
Epistle of James, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976), 173; Martin Dibelius, James: A Commentary on the Epis-
tie of James, 2nd ed., rev. Heinrich Greeven (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976), 207;
Ralph P. Martin, James, Word Biblical Commentary (Waco, TX: Word, 1988), 140;
Bo Reicke, The Epistles of James, Peter, and Jude, 2nd ed., Anchor Bible (Garden
City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1964), 44; and R. V. G. Tasker, The General Epistle of James:
An Introduction and Commentary, Tyndale New Testament Commentary (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957), 91.
4 For example, Sophie Laws, A Commentary on the Epistle of James, Harper’s
New Testament Commentary (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1980), 167.
5 D. Edmond Hiebert, The Epistle of James: Tests of a Living Faith (Chicago:
Moody, 1979), 256. More recently Craig B. Carpenter advances something like this
view (“James 4.5 Reconsidered,” New Testament Studies 47 [2001]: 189-205).
346 B ib l io t h e c a S a c r a / July-September 2013

Since the neuter πνεύμα can be be either nominative or accusa-

tive, “spirit” can be either the subject or the object of the verb
έπιποθει. If it is the object of the verb, then there must be an un-
derstood subject “God” or “He.” Some take “God” to be the under-
stood subject of the verb and “spirit” as the object:

RSV Or do you suppose it is in vain that the scripture says,

“He yearns jealously over the spirit which he has made
to dwell in us”?

NASB Or do you think that the Scripture speaks to no pur-

pose: “He jealously desires the Spirit which He has
made to dwell in us”?

On the other hand some translations have πνβΰμα as the sub-

ject of the verb:

KJV Do ye think that the scripture saith in vain, The spirit

that dwelleth in us lusteth to envy?

NIV Or do you think Scripture says without reason that the

(1984) spirit he caused to live in us envies intensely?
NET Or do you think the scripture means nothing when it
says, ‘The spirit that God caused to live within us has
an envious yearning”?
Wuest Or, do you think that the scripture says in an empty
manner and to no purpose, The Spirit [Holy Spirit]
who has been caused to make His permanent home in
us has a passionate desire [to control us] to the point of
envy [of any control indwelling sin may have over us]?6

T h e U n k n o w n S o u r c e o f t h e Q u o t a t io n in V e r s e 5

The designation unde? (Latin for “where?”) in the margin of Novum

Testamentum Graece telegraphs the difficulty of identifying the
source of the possible quotation or allusion in James 4:5b. Davids
calls it “one of the thorniest problems in the epistle.”7 Commenta-
tors seem to agree that the “citation” includes προς φθόνον έπιποθβι

6 Kenneth S. Wuest, The New Testament: An Expanded Translation (Grand Rap-

ids: Eerdmans, 1961), James 4:5 (bracketed additions his).
7 Peter Davids, The Epistle of James, New International Greek Testament Com-
mentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), 162.
 James 4:5 and the Jealous Spirit 347

το πν6ϋμα δ κατψκισβν έν ήμΐν. No passage corresponding to this

wording appears in the currently known Greek versions of the Old
Testament. This fact is puzzling, because when James quoted the
Old Testament at other times in his letter, he did so fairly explicit-
ly. Though James cannot be required to quote the Scriptures the
same way invariably, what can be said of his practice elsewhere in
the letter does seem to make it difficult to ascertain the meaning in
4:5. The issue becomes even more difficult to resolve if James was
alluding to one or more texts rather than directly quoting an Old
Testament text. The source of the allusion remains elusive; there is
no consensus on that score.

T h e D is a p p o in t in g S e a r c h fo r a S o u r c e in t h e O ld T e s t a m e n t

Without a specific wording for προς φθόνον έπιποθβι τό πν6υμα ο

κατωκισεν έν ήμιν the search for possible sources seems neverend-
ing. On the idea of sense allusion, perhaps the interpreter should
look to texts relating either to God’s jealousy or to the human spir-
it’s emotions. Again one’s judgment varies depending on identifying
τό πν6ΰμα (“the Spirit” or “the spirit”) and the subject of έπιποθβι
(“desires”). If God is the subject of the verb, then the Old Testa-
ment imagery of God longing for His people the way a jealous hus-
band longs for his wife8 (and the loose sense of Old Testament texts
such as Exodus 20:5; 34:14; and Zechariah 8:2) is in view. On the
other hand, if human longing is meant, then perhaps Psalms 42:1
and 84:2 (LXX, 83:3) are in view.9
The discussion of James 4:5 often rages over whether James
paraphrased an Old Testament text or quoted from a lost extrabib-
lical source.10 Hort offers the explanation that James’s possible use
of a Greek paraphrase—similar to the Aramaic Targums of the Old
Testament—accounts for the text being so obscure.11 Other schol-
ars look to apocryphal books for a source. Mussner and others ar-
gue for a source in the Apocalypse of Moses 31.12 Still others are

Douglas J. Moo, The Letter of James: An Introduction and Commentary, Tyndale

New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985), 144.
9 Martin, James, 149; Sophie Laws, “Does Scripture Speak in Vain? A Reconsid-
eration of James iv.5,” New Testament Studies 20 (1974): 215.
10 Davids, The Epistle of James, 162.
11 Fenton J. A. Hort, “The Epistle of St. James,” in Expository and Exegetical Stud-
ies: Compendium of Works Formerly Published Separately (reprint, Minneapolis:
Klock & Klock, 1980), 94.
12 Dibelius, Jam es, 222; Franz Mussner, Der Jakobusbrief, 4th ed., Herders Theo-
348 B ib l io t h e c a S a c r a / July-September 2013

content to leave the question of a source unanswered. Reicke calls

it “a proverb of unknown origin,”13 and Townsend says, “We are
forced to concede, however reluctantly, that we simply have no idea
where James found his ‘scripture.’”14
The difficulty lies in the wording ή γραφή Xéyei, after which a
quotation ordinarily would be expected. Yet since an obvious quota-
tion (of Prov. 3:34) appears in James 4:6, it is wise to ask whether
there is a quotation in verse 5 at all, even if it is against the norm.
If there is a quotation in verse 5, it would mean that verse 6 possi-
bly has a double introduction. Laws dismisses this idea as “syntac-
tically too difficult . . . [and] superfluous.”15 But such a judgment is
perhaps too hasty. This would not be too difficult syntactically if
the syntax of the sentence offers another solution; options for the
source of the “quotation” in verse 5 are unsatisfactory.
QUOTATIONS IN JAMES
James referred in 2:25 to the Rahab narratives and in 5:11 to Job
1:21—22. These allusions are not couched in the same way as 2:23,
which quotes Genesis 15:6 explicitly. Laws points out that in three
other passages in James (2:8, 11, 23) scriptural quotations are in-
troduced in a manner similar to that of 4:6.16 James 2:8 quotes Le-
viticus 19:18 verbatim from the Septuagint. Verse 11 quotes Exo-
dus 20:13-14 and Deuteronomy 5:17-18 from the Septuagint, in
which the prohibition of adultery precedes that of murder (revers-
ing the order in the Masoretic Text). James 2:23 quotes Genesis
15:6, but adds καί φίλος Θ6 0 ϋ έκλήθη (“and he was called a friend of
God”), perhaps drawing on Isaiah 41:8 or 2 Chronicles 20:7.17 Laws
concludes (while admitting that four passages are not enough to
draw solid conclusions) that when James quoted from the Old Tes-
tament, he used the Septuagint quite closely, and that one should
not expect a loose quotation from Jam es.18
Peter Davids reasons that James’s audience must have been
familiar with interpretive traditions about the Old Testament lu-
minaries Abraham, Rahab, Job, and Elijah. As readers thought of

logischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament (Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 1964),

184.
13 Reicke, The Epistles of Peter, James, and Jude, 46.
14 Michael J. Townsend, The Epistle of James (London: Epworth, 1994), 79.
15 Laws, “Does Scripture Speak in Vain,” 210.
16 Ibid., 210-15.
17 Ibid., 211.
18 Ibid., 212.
 James 4:5 and the Jealous Spirit 349

Abraham, for instance, they would have had in mind his entire
life.19 So possibly James’s expectation of his readers’ understanding
went beyond his immediate references. But Davids rejects the idea
that there is a loose citation of Scripture in James 4:5, since the
-formula ή γραφή λέγ6ι20 “in every other case in the NT . . . intro
-duces a direct quotation, not a sense quotation, allusion, or refer
ence to scripture in general. . . . It is this last point which is fatal
not only to Laws’s thesis . . . but also to those who see a loose sense
quotation of scripture .”21
But this still leaves the rather uncomfortable situation of a
question serving as an introduction to a quotation. Lenski expects
that James would have added another phrase, such as “saying,” to
introduce a quotation.22 So it seems unlikely James would have
”.summarized the Old Testament after saying, “the Scripture says
So solutions that propose that James summarized or loosely cited
Scripture usually end up failing to account for this difference from
Jam es’s other use of Scripture .23
?THE BOOK OF ELDAD AND MEDAD
Bauckham recently proposed an extracanonical text as the source
of James’s quotation.24 This view differs from others that take the
-source as something from the intertestamental literature. Examin
ing renderings of έπιποθέω (“I desire”) in the Septuagint to discover
-the Hebrew verbs it translates. Bauckham focuses on the rare He
brew verb ‫תאב‬, which occurs in Psalm 119:40, 174 (“I longed for
your salvation,” έπβπόθησα τό σωτήριόν σου), and in Amos 6:8. In
Amos 6:8, the LXX reads βδβλύσσομαι 6γώ πάσαν τήν ύβριν Ιακώβ

19 Peter Davids, “Tradition and Citation in the Epistle of James,” in Scripture,

Tradition, and Interpretation, ed. W. Ward Gasque and William S. LaSor (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978), 115.
20 See, for example, John 13:18; 19:24, 28, 37; Romans 4:3; 9:17; 10:11; 11:2; Gala-
tians 4:30; 1 Timothy 5:18; and James 2:23.
21 Davids, The Epistle of James, 162. See also Martin, James, 149.
22 Richard C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the
Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 631.
23 Incidentally it can be noted here that γραφή in the singular in the New Testa-
ment usually refers to specific passages of Scripture, and in the plural to the collec-
tion of the Scriptures (J. William Johnston, The Use of Πας in the New Testament,
Studies in Biblical Greek [New York: Lang, 2004], 179).
24 Richard Bauckham, “The Spirit of God in Us Loathes Envy: James 4:5,” in The
Holy Spirit and Christian Origins: Essays in Honor of James D. G. Dunn, ed. Gra-
ham N. Stanton, Bruce W. Longenecker, and Stephen C. Barton (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2004), 270-81.
350 B i b l io t h e c a S a c r a / July-September 2013

)‫״‬I abhor all the pride of Jacob‫(״‬, virtually requiring the participle
‫ מתעב‬in place of ‫מתאב‬, the MT reading. The more common Hebrew
verb ‫ תעב‬-means “to abhor.”25 From this evidence, Bauckham sug
gests the original of James’s source contained either ‫ תאב‬or ‫תעב‬,
which might have been regarded as the same verb with a range of
meaning,26 and this range of meaning might in translation Greek
and then in Hellenistic-Jewish use) have been transferred back to(
έπιποθέω.27 So Bauckham concludes that the correct sense of James
-4:5b is “The Spirit [or spirit] God made to dwell in us abhors en
-vy.”28 This idea he relates to the prominence of jealousy in the sto
ry of Eldad and Medad in Numbers 11:29 and ultimately in the
Book of Eldad and Medad. The link between James and Eldad and
-Medad is the Shepherd of Hermas, which (in Herrn. Vis. 2:3:4) spe
cifically cites it.29 With Bauckham the identification of a source has
come full circle: Friedrich Spitta offered Eldad and Medad as the
source of the supposed quotation more than a century ago.30 But
-scholars such as Oepeke, though still seeing James 4:5 as a quota
tion, rejected this identification.31 Though the links between The
Shepherd of Hermas and James are well known,32 the case is still
.too tenuous for Bauckham’s thesis to hold much weight

A N e g l e c t e d P r e p o s it io n a l P h r a s e

An element often neglected in the discussion is the prepositional

phrase προς φθόνον (“toward envy”), for it is almost universally re -

Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of 25
the Old Testament, trans. M. E. J. Richardson, rev. ed. (Leiden: Brill, 2001 (,
.s.v ,2:1765-66
Ibid., 2:1672-73, which lists I 26 ‫תאב‬: to desire and II ‫תאב‬: make repulsive, desecrate
and mentions ‫ תעב‬.as a possible original
Bauckham, “The Spirit Abhors 27,‫ ״‬27 7 -78 .
Ibid 28., 278 .
Ibid 29., 280 .
Spitta, Der Brief des Jakobus, 121—22. The rabbinic texts refer to Moses’ concern 30
about stirring up jealousy among Israel’s tribes as he contemplated choosing the
;seventy elders (Num. Rab. 15:19). Also of interest are Sifre Num. 95; b. Sanh. 17a
-Tg. Ps.-Jon. Num. 11:26; Tg. Neof. Num. 11:26. This list of texts is cited by Bauck
ham (“The Spirit Abhors,” 279 n . 36(.
,Albrecht Oepke, “κρύπτω et al.” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament 31
ed. Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich, trans. and ed. Geoffrey W. Bromiley
Grand Rapids: Zondervan (, 1965 (, 3:991 .
See, for instance, Oscar J. F. Seitz, “Relationship of the Shepherd of Hermas to 32
the Epistle of James,” Journal of Biblical Literature ) 1944 (: 131-40 .
 James 4:5 and the Jealous Spirit 351

garded as modifying 6πιποθ6ι (“desires”). But if προς φθονον modi-

fies Xeyei, this simple change provides a more sensible reading of
the text.
Προς φθόνον WITH Έπιποθβΐ
The few instances of the verb έπιποθέω in biblical Greek generally
have a positive connotation.33 Lenski maintains that the word nev-
er has a negative meaning.34 But since the word itself indicates
only strong inclination or longing, whether that desire is negative
or positive must be determined by the context.35 A connection to
προς φθόνον might give έπιποθεΐ a negative connotation in James
4:5. Yet this sense is already present in the context and need not be
attributed primarily to προς φθόνον.
Among the examples of a negative context Sirach 25:21 stands
out: μή προσπέσης έττί κάλλος γυναικός καί γυναίκα μή έπιποθήσης
(“Do not fall down upon a woman’s beauty, and do not yearn after a
woman36.(‫ ״‬The idea of strong desire in the context of the warning
portrays the desire in a negative light. So also the context of James
4 pushes the sense of έπιποθέω in the negative direction.
ANTHROPOLOGY OF JAMES: Δίφυχος
Because both the referent (Holy Spirit or human spirit?) and the
grammatical function (subject or object?) of τό πνεύμα are obscure,
the way to validate a more satisfying punctuation of 4:5 is found in
understanding 6πιποθ6Ϊ as an indicator of Jam es’s negative as-
sessment of the human condition. James is the only New Testa-

33 The verb έπιποθέω and its cognate ποθέω occur infrequently in biblical Greek (a
total of 28 combined usages of both verbs in the New Testament and the Septua-
gint). In the New Testament the word occurs in Romans 1:11; 2 Corinthians 5:2;
9:14; Philippians 1:8; 2:26; 1 Thessalonians 3:6; 2 Timothy 1:4; James 4:5; 1 Peter
2:2. In Rahlfs’ Septuagint, έπιποθέω or ποθέω appears in Deuteronomy 13:9; 32:11;
Esther 13:2; Psalms 41:2; 61:11; 83:3; 118:20, 131, 174; Odes Sol 2:11; Proverbs
7:15; Wisdom 4:2; 6:11; 8:8; 15:5-6, 19; Sirach 25:21; and Jeremiah 13:14.
34 Lenski, The Interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of
James, 631.
35 Another question is what James meant by the “greater” grace that God gives. If
έπιποθεΐ has a positive sense, the overall emphasis would be that God gives greater
grace than the human spirit can desire—on the idea perhaps that people do not
really know what is best for them.
On the other hand if έπιποθει has a negative sense, the greater grace God gives
would be seen in light of its counteraction of human envy. This is the more satisfac-
tory view. The solution proposed by this study does not, however, require a negative
sense for έπιποθβΐ, but it certainly seems more likely here.
36 Albert Pietersma and Benjamin G. Wright, eds., A New English Translation of
the Septuagint (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007).
352 B ib l io t h e c a S a c r a / July-September 2013

ment author who used διψυχος, and his use of it hints at his under-
standing of πν6υμα in 4:5.
There is no shortage of discussion of the term δί ψυχος4:8 ;1:8) ‫)־‬
and its importance in linking James to the epistles of Clement and
to the Shepherd of Hermas.37 But this study considers the usage of
διψυχος* only in James. The word highlights a natural inner conflict
between being religious and irreligious, between having the right
or the wrong motivation. The point is that James used such an un-
usual word as δίψυχ0 9 to describe the human spirit, a spirit harbor-
ing evil desires that are at odds with God’s will. The antidote for
the evil desire is the wisdom from above (3:17) that God promises
to give to those who ask (1:5).
The letter of James depicts humanity in a less than flattering
light. The ordinary human is a doubter, unstable, driven like
waves of the sea (1:6), and double-minded (1:8). People blame God
for their sins, though their own desires are the real cause (1:13—
15), and they deceive themselves when ensnared by sin (1:16). The
person who does not obey the Word of God is foolishly forgetful
(1:23—24). People are prone to think themselves pious, even though
they lack the essential character of true religion (1:26-27). They
harbor selfish prejudice, currying favor with those who can bestow
benefits and putting down those who have nothing to offer (2:1).
Human wisdom apart from God is wisdom “from below . . .
earthy, soulish, demonic” (3:15). This wisdom produces “every [kind
of] evil deed” (3:16). The self-deceit of a faith without works shows
itself in human reliance on demonic, earthly wisdom. Earthly wis-
dom allies itself with innate human lusts, giving rise to the con-
flicts depicted in chapter 4. Evil desires produce either a stubborn
failure to ask God for anything or the propensity to ask with wrong
motivations. Such motivations make people the friend of the world
and simultaneously the enemy of God (4:3—4). Many people are un-
able to control the tongue (3:2-8), hypocritically using it to bless
and to curse (3:9-10). For James this inconsistency is as unac-
ceptable as a spring producing both fresh and bitter water (3:11).
The double-minded person faces life’s problems without the
confidence of faith. James urged his readers to ask for wisdom to
endure their trials, appealing to God’s mercy and kindness that

37 For δίψυχος see Oscar J. F. Seitz, “Antecedents and Signification of the Term
ΔΙΨΥΧΟΣ,” Journal of Biblical Literature 66 (1947): 211-19; Lewis J. Prockter,
“James 4:4-6: Midrash on Noah,” New Testament Studies 35 (1989): 625-27; Stan-
ley E. Porter, “Is Dipsuchos (James 1:8, 4:8) a ‘Christian’ Word?” Biblica 71 (1990):
469-98. For the use of δίψυχος in the Shepherd of Hermas, see Seitz, “Relationship
of the Shepherd of Hermas to the Epistle of James,” 131-40.
 James 4:5 and the Jealous Spirit 353

they will receive what they need to stand firm (1:5). But a reader
who lacks wisdom must ask without lacking faith in order to re-
ceive it from God (1:6-7). The instability of a person who doubts
(1:6) leads to being easily influenced by any passing force. In the
context of chapter 1 the force is temptation to sin (1:13). In the con-
text of chapter 4 the double-minded person is a sinful friend of the
world and therefore an enemy of God. He is encouraged to purify
his heart from his wickedness. He too does not receive from God,
either because he does not ask (presumably because he doubts that
God can give?) or because he asks God for things that he can lust-
fully consume (4:2-3).
Some might object that on the interpretation advanced here,
the referent of πνεύμα as the human spirit would leave the epistle
of James without any mention of the Holy Spirit. Some argue that
wisdom is the replacement for the Holy Spirit,38 and others deny
this contention.39 James, however, cannot be held to any precon-
ceived notions about what he can, should, or must mention.
So it is reasonable to think έπιποθει τό πνεύμα 0 κατωκισεν εν
ήμίν is a statement about the human spirit and its inclinations.
Here James employs the same irony he did about water springs
and plants to achieve his point. James suggests that humanity’s
tendency to vacillate, if allowed to continue, constitutes an imped-
iment to a relationship with God.
Προς Φθόνον WITH Λέγει
The present study proposes that προς φθόνον modifies λέγει, but
there are other minor issues to consider. Some have suggested that
προς φθόνον be emended to προς τον θεόν (“the spirit . . . longs for
God40.(‫ ״‬But no manuscripts support this contention.41 The sense of
the phrase, if it modifies έπιποθει, would be the idea of motion to-
ward, with the metaphorical idea of “to the point of jealousy.” Ul-

38 J. Andrew Kirk, “Meaning of Wisdom in James: Examination of a Hypothesis,”

New Testament Studies 16 (1969): 24-38; and W. Ralph Thompson, “Epistle of
James: A Document on Heavenly Wisdom,” Wesleyan Theological Journal 13 (1978):
7-12.
39 William R. Baker, “Searching for the Holy Spirit in the Epistle of James: Is
‘Wisdom’ Equivalent?” Tyndale Bulletin 59 (2008): 293-315.
40 This is a conjecture attributed by James Hardy Ropes to a remark in 1730 by
Johann Jacob Wettstein, though it does not appear in the text or apparatus of his
1752 New Testament. See Johann Jacob Wettstein, Novum Testamentum Graecum
(Amsterdam: Dommerian, 1752; reprint Graz: Akademische Druck- u. Verlagsan-
stalt, 1962), 2:675.
41 James Hardy Ropes, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle of St.
Jam es, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: Clark, 1916), 265.
354 B ib l io t h e c a S a c r a / July-September 2013

timately this approach ends up taking προς φθόνον as an adverb,

which turns out to be the equivalent of φθονβρώς (“jealously”).42
The rejection of the view that God is the subject of επιποθει
sometimes turns on the distinction between φθόνος and ζτ\λος, and
some point out that while ίήλος might be used for divine zeal (Gen.
6:3; Zech. 1:14), φθόνος is wholly inappropriate because of its nega-
tive connotations in Hellenistic Greek.43 The subject of the passage
(3:13-4:10) is evil human motivation, of which jealousy is one par-
ticularly heinous example. According to Johnson the passage con-
sists of two parts: an indictment in 3:13-4:6, and the response in
4:7-10.44 The citation of Proverbs 3:34 sets up the application.
James 4:5 thus serves as a rhetorical indictment of the readers
that introduces the quotation in verse 6. Johnson writes, “The
whole exposition comes down to the validity of the scriptural wit-
ness. Is all that the Scripture says in vain? Is envy really the prop-
er sort of longing for the spirit God put in humans? . . . Looked at
in this way, the thematic importance of envy appears obvious, for
the climactic question concerns φθόνος.”45
Johnson compares James with Hellenistic moralists, who dis-
cussed jealousy along with a host of other social and political vices.
Plutarch, for instance, said that “envy is the only 4unspeakable’
sickness of the soul.”46 Envy brings with it several other terrible
attitudes, particularly ambition (φιλοτιμία) and arrogance
(ύπ^ρηφανία). James brought these close together at 4:5-6.47 The
word φθόνος is comparatively rare in the Septuagint, but it seems
to be used in much the same way it is in other Hellenistic litera-
ture. As examples Johnson lists Sirach 14:10; Tobit 4:4, 16; and
1 Maccabees 8:16 (where φθόνος and ίήλος are used interchangea‫־‬
bly). Wisdom 2:24 says that it was through envy (φθόνος) that
death came into the world. Though envy and murder are not men-
tioned in the Cain narratives, it is said that Cain “was greatly
hurt” (6λύπησ6ν λίαν, Gen. 4:5). Johnson points out that the ancient

42 See for instance Mussner, Der Jakobusbrief, 181.

43 Laws, “Does Scripture Speak in Vain,” 213; and Bauckham, “The Spirit Abhors,”
273.
44 Luke Timothy Johnson, “James 3:13—4:10 and the Topos π6ρι φθόνου,” Novum
Testamentum 25 (1983): 333.
45 Ibid.
46 Plutarch, De Invidia et Odio 537E; see also Johnson, “James 3:13—4:10 and the
Topos περί φθόνου,” 335.
47 Johnson, “James 3:13—4:10 and the Topos π6ρΙ φθόνου,” 335.
 James 4:5 and the Jealous Spirit 355

moralists said that envy was a kind of λύπη (“pain”).48 Since jeal‫־‬
ousy and arrogance are brought together, James cited Proverbs
3:34 to say that God opposes the proud: God makes war on those
who make themselves His enemies by their being jealous.
James used rhetorical questions (3:13; 4:1, 4-5). Accusations or
further explanations follow the questions.49 Wisdom is manifest in
the life of one who lives in a peaceful way. In 3:13-14 bitter jeal-
ousy shows a lack of wisdom. In 3:15-16 the kind of wisdom that
produces such evil behavior is not wisdom from above (divine wis-
dom), but wisdom from below (devilish wisdom). In 3:17-18 James
turned again to the wisdom that characterizes a good life (καλής
αναστροφής, 3:13), wisdom that results in righteousness and peace.
James reminded his readers that the Word of God has some-
thing to say about jealousy with the pointed rhetorical question:
“Or do you suppose that the Scripture speaks in vain against jeal-
ousy?” This thought summarizes his indictment: “you desire to
have [ίηλοϋτβ] and you cannot obtain” (4:2). His next statement
contrasts the irony of the situation: God gave mankind the human
spirit, but the readers are acting in a manner inconsistent with
divinely given human life. “The [human] spirit which God caused
to dwell in us desires intensely [έπιποθβΐ].” Here έπιποθει becomes
a synonym of £ηλοϋτβ and έπιθυμβιτβ from 4:2.50 James argued that
this kind of desire is inconsistent with Scripture, which speaks
against jealousy. The conjunction Sé in 4:6 emphasizes the disjunc-
tion between the evil desire of humanity and the grace that God
gives: “The [human] spirit which God caused to dwell in us desires
intensely (έπιποθ6ΐ), but he [God] gives greater grace [than humans
can lust after].” Seen in this light the flow of thought makes more
sense with τό πν6ΰμα as the subject of έπιποθει.
Returning to the phrase προς φθόνον, a more detailed examina-
tion of the senses of προς is in order. The phrase can be taken as an
expression of opposition or reference. Taken this way, the preposi-
tional phrase modifies λέγει rather than έπιποθβι. As an expression
of opposition, προς φθόνον would mean, “against jealousy.” As an
expression of reference, προς φθόνον would mean, “with reference to
jealousy.” Either would be appropriate with λέγβι. Thus, the ap-
propriate sense of James 4:5a is, “Or do you suppose that the Scrip-
ture speaks in vain with reference to/against jealousy?”

48 Ibid., 339.
49 Ibid., 333.
50 As Spitta suggests (.Der Brief des Jakobus, 118).
356 B ib l io t h e c a S a c r a / July-September 2013

Spitta insists that προς φθόνον “can only belong to λέγει: ‘The
Scripture speaks with regard to jealousy/ . . . This connection
agrees completely with the context.51‫ ״‬Though Spitta made his con-
tention in 1898, Wettstein’s much earlier Novum Testamentum
Graecum appears to make this a possibility also. In the apparatus
to James 4:5, Wettstein prints the words ή γραφή λέγει προ? φθόνον
with a list of verses (Matt. 10:5; Luke 20:19; Gal. 5:17; Col. 4:13;
Acts 19:38; Wis. 6:9; Rev. 13:6; Eph. 6:11; Heb. 12:4; Acts 26:14).52
However, not all these examples, even in the Textus Receptus, sup-
port this contention, and it seems the list is more directed at ex-
ploring the sense of προς.
Many scholars have overlooked or rejected the connection.
Martin considers Spitta’s suggestion a viable alternative, though
he tries to grapple with the passage without it.53 Franz Mussner
rejects Spitta’s view (1) because then the supposed citation in
James 4:5 would no longer be a citation, and (2) because προς
would stand in place of περί.54 But this latter objection is prescrip‫־‬
tive in its approach and can be answered.
Dibelius briefly considers and rejects a position close to Spit-
ta’s suggestion, namely, that verse 5 is a midrash in preparation
for the citation in verse 6. According to this view, Dibelius says,
“the quotation in v 6 is introduced solely for the sake of the final
words in that verse.”55 But he says that the question in verse 5
does not make sense unless it is followed by a quotation. “There-
fore, any interpretation which wants to get by without a quotation
in v 5 runs up against difficulties which are all but insuperable.”56
Yet Dibelius wants to have his interpretive cake and eat it too
when he claims, “Large portions of Jas reveal no continuity in

51 Spitta, Der Brief des Jakobus, 118 (my translation). Spitta also mentions Codex
Alexandrinus and “several Minuscules” as support for his contention, though he
does not explain its nature. Examination of photographs of a facsimile of Alexan-
drinus available from the Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts
(http://images.csntm.org/Manuscripts/GA_02/GA_ 02_0080b.jpg) seems to confirm
this contention. For James 4:5 there appears to be a gap of about a half letter space
and a dot between φθόνον and έπιποθβι though it is difficult to determine whether
the “dot” has bled through from the opposite side or is an erasure. At other points in
the same column of text there are sense break gaps (e.g., between 4:1 and the pre-
ceding verse) and/or dots (e.g., between 4:3 and 4:4, or in 4:2 after πολ6μ6Ϊτ6).
52 Novum Testamentum Graecum, 2:675.
53 Martin, James, 141.
54 Mussner, Der Jakobusbrief, 181.
55 Dibelius, James, 222.
56 Ibid.
 James 4:5 and the Jealous Spirit 357

thought whatsoever.”57 The quotation of Proverbs 3:34 in James 4:6

has a real purpose introduced by James 4:5. Hence, a quotation in
verse 5 is not as foregone a conclusion as Dibelius would like to
believe.
Ropes also rejects Spitta’s view, saying, “There has been no
previous mention of φθόνος in this paragraph to account for the
introduction of such a quotation relating to it.”58 This much is obvi-
ous, but it is not a fatal blow. True, James made no direct mention
of the word, but the concept is surely present in the passage. In
fact Johnson argues that the entire passage of 3:13-4:10 is a po-
lemic against jealousy.59 And readers can sense from the verb
£ηλοϋτ6 in 4:2 that James has engaged the topic.
New Testament examples amply demonstrate the feasibility of
Spitta’s contention that προς φθόνον modifies Xéyei. With a verb of
saying, προς simply means “to,” as a replacement of the dative
case. One such example is Acts 18:6, eiTTev προς αυτούς (“he said to
them‫)״‬. Προς can mean against in a hostile sense60 (Mark 12:12;
Luke 20:19; 12:41; 18:1) or “indicate a connection,‫ ״‬as in “with ref-
erence to.” The meaning “because of/with reference to” appears in
Matthew 19:8; 27:14; Mark 10:5 (cf. Rom. 10:21a); Luke 14:6; Acts
24:16; and Hebrews l:7 -9 .61 Romans 8:31 ( t l ούν έροΰμ6ν προς
ταυτα, “What then shall we say with reference to these things?”)
illustrates the “reference” sense. Wallace lists opposition as one of
the categories of the usage of προς.62 Blass and Debrunner list
“with reference to” and “hostile and friendly relationships.”63 Mark
12:12 (in parallel with Luke 20:19) says, βγνωσαν γάρ ότι προς
αύτούς την παραβολήν 6ίπ6ν (“for they perceived that he had told
the parable against them”). The Matthean parallel to this passage
(21:45) reads π6ρί αυτών (“with reference to them”) instead of προς
αύτούς. In spite of criticisms from later scholars, Spitta’s conten-
tion remains viable.

57 Ibid., 6.
58 Ropes, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle of St. James, 263.
59 Johnson, “James 3:13-4:10 and the Topos πβρι φθόνου,” 327-47.
60 Walter Bauer, William F. Arndt, and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexi-
con of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed., rev. Freder-
ick W. Danker (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 874, s.v. 3.d.a.
61 Ibid., 875, 3.e.a.
62 Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of
the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 380.
63 Friedrich Blass, Albert Debrunner, and Robert W. Funk, A Greek Grammar of
the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, ed. Robert W. Funk, 10th
ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961), §239.5, 6, p. 124.
358 B ib l io t h e c a S a c r a / July-September 2013

R esultant A sy nd eto n

If προς φθόνον is thus to be taken with λέγει so that the question

ends after φθόνον, the resultant text is ή δοκ6ΐτ6 ότι κένώς* ή γραφή
λέγ6ι προς φθόνον (“Or do you suppose that the Scripture speaks
vainly about/against/in regard to jealousy?”). In this construction
two items become clearer. The first is that the ότι clause following
δοκβιτΕ is an ordinary indirect discourse statement. The second is
the lack of a conjunction (or asyndeton if done for deliberate effect)
before έπιποθεί, which would ordinarily be unusual, but natural
following a question.

CRAIG CARPENTER’S INDIRECT STATEMENT THEORY

Carpenter argues that verse 5 does not include a citation of any

kind and is preparatory to the quotation in verse 6.64 While this is
the present study’s conclusion as well, Carpenter arrives at this
view by another path. He suggests that λέγβι introduces indirect
discourse rather than—as many interpreters expect—direct dis-
course. He gives the following as examples: Mark 14:14; John 1:20;
3:28; 4:1; 2 Corinthians 13:6; and Jude 18.
These passages are all good examples of double indirect dis-
course, and Carpenter has done a service in pointing them out. He
maintains that in James 4:5 προς φθόνον έπιποθβι τό ττνβϋμα ό
κατωκισεν 6ν ήμιν is an indirect statement in a constructio ad sen-
sum. The result is a parallelism that makes a strong argument for
his case, as his table illustrates:65

Indirect Statement Proverbs 3:34 Citation

4.5b: God jealously desires the 4.6c: The Lord opposes the
spirit which he has caused to proud
dwell in us

4.6a: but He gives greater 4.6d: but he gives grace to the

grace humble.

64 Carpenter, “James 4:5 Reconsidered,” 189-205.

65 Ibid., 203, figure 1.

 James 4:5 and the Jealous Spirit 359

But to make his indirect discourse examples parallel to James 4:5

Carpenter must claim that “the second ότι is possibly sup-
pressed”66 in some of the examples. Though some of the manu-
scripts omit the second οτι in the above examples, the Nestle-Aland
Novum Testamentum Graece (28th edition)67 still regards them
(except Jude 18) as the preferable reading. James 4:5 is a different
example, because there is no οτι following Xéyei. Also against Car-
penter’s view are the arguments cited above for rejecting φθόνος as
an expression of divine jealousy. Though by far the best answer yet
proposed for this problem, Carpenter’s solution requires some mod-
ification if it is to work. Indirect discourse is in the passage. But
δοκ6ΐτ6 rather than Xéyei introduces an object clause. The verb
Xeyei is thus not itself followed by either direct or indirect dis-
course. Its function is to summarize the application of the antici-
pated citation of Proverbs 3:34 in the following verse.
CLARIFICATION OF CONTRAST

Ultimately this solution has two important contributions. The first

is to see a closer parallel between ούκ 0 ϊδατ 6 οτι (v. 4) and δοκ^ΐτ6
οτι (ν. 5). Second, and more importantly, it enables a more satisfac-
tory clarification of the contrast between verse 5b and the thrust of
the quotation in verse 6.
It is important to notice {contra Prockter)68 that James does
not identify the (human) spirit here with a divinely implanted evil
inclination, as some rabbinic sources allegedly describe. Though a
potentially helpful connection with Jam es’s mostly negative por-
trayal of human desire, the “evil inclination” theory would fall
short on consideration of James’s theology elsewhere. For James
clearly states in 1:13 that God cannot be said to be the source of
evil. For James the source of evil desires is the human heart. Thus
4:5b-6 answers the question of verse 1 regarding the source of con-
flict between Christians by blaming jealousy in the human spirit,
and addresses its effects with the promise and warning of Proverbs
3:34.

C o n c l u s io n

What is different about the solution this study proposes is the rela-
tionship of προς φθόνον to its context. If it belongs with Xeyei, then

66 Ibid., 201.
67 Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2012.
68 Prockter, “James 4:4-6: Midrash on Noah,” 625-27.
360 B ib l io t h e c a S a c r a / July-September 2013

Johnson’s understanding of this passage as a topos on the subject

of jealousy makes even more sense. Carpenter’s clear articulation
of why there is no citation of any kind in 4:5 is also—to a degree—
upheld.
The human condition apart from God and His wisdom is given
over to evil desires. Jealousy, motivated and empowered by earthly
wisdom, is the source of strife among believers. Scripture speaks
against jealousy, because jealousy is connected with arrogance.
God gives greater grace; the Spirit and the wisdom from above that
He provides. This greater grace counteracts the effects of earthly
wisdom, converting the attitude from arrogance to humility. Hu-
mility enables one to endure life’s trials, which in turn qualifies the
humble believer to maintain friendship with God.
Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(sV express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission
from the copyright holder( s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of ajournai
typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS®) collection contains electronic versions of previously

published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American
Theological Library Association.