Henry Krabbendam - James - World Evangelical Alliance

what definitely has a tentative presence in the heart, the mind, the will or the
emotions. Also, the use of rote phrases may appear threadbare, stilted and at
times even pompous. James’ main message is clear. What counts is, that the
believers keep the principle fixed in their minds that nothing occurs without
God’s permission, whether it is expressed or not. In other words, do not leave
God out of the picture, and brag about it (Moo, 1885, 157)!
A second commentator is also of the opinion that verbalization is not an
indispensable necessity. It is the attitude that counts. He refers to Paul who at
times uses the phrase, “if God wills” (Acts 18:21; 1 Cor. 4:19; 16:7; Phil.
2:19, 24; see also Heb. 3:6), but similar to John (3 John 10) at other times allegedly
does not (Rom. 15:24) (Keddie, 148-149). The Romans 15 reference,
however, is not at all compelling. The sentence construction, to which Paul
resorts, contains a Greek particle that indicates contingency. Therefore he
meets the standard James lays down. In fact, he invariably meets this standard.
The John reference with its conditional sentence structure is not compelling
either (See also Moo, 1985, 157, and his reference to Acts 18:21;
Rom. 1:10; 1 Cor. 4:19; 16:7; Heb. 6:3).
The deepest problem is, indeed, that of attitude. Does the heart surrender
to God’s providence across the board or does it not? Failure to do so, spells
sin. However, this does not make the verbalizing of that surrender insignificant
or basically optional. In fact, James insists on it. Without it, it is unclear
where the speaker stands. That would precipitate the charge of proud presumption.
If the formula James recommends turns into an empty phrase, that
is hardly his problem. Divine sovereignty is such an awesome reality that the
heartfelt expression of man’s utter dependence is simply a universal must.
God’s supremacy must be acknowledged, even if its verbalization runs the
risk of the “horror of hypocrisy” (Tasker, 104). Furthermore, there are various
acceptable substitutes, such as “I aim,” “I intend,” “I plan,” “I hope,” etc. All
in all, it is not only the better part of wisdom always to acknowledge the uncertain
and transitory character of life (Moo, 158) and its contingency under
God, but a mandated necessity, also as a testimony to the world around. If
pre-Christian, pagan philosophers already are careful to express plans for the
future in conditional sentences (Manton, 392), how much more should Christians
rise to the occasion, as they acknowledge from the heart the vapor like
existence of life (Ps. 146:4). Our aspirations, wishes and plans do not control
the counsel of God. So we better defer to his providence as the final determinant
(Rom. 1:10; 15:32).
723