James 4:17

Although this verse may be regarded as standing independent of what has preceded, and as being in the form of a more or less inexact quotation, it is quite permissible to take it with what has gone before. Those to whom the words have been addressed had, to some extent, erred through thoughtlessness; now that things have been made quite plain to them, they are in a position to know how to act; if, therefore, in spite of knowing now how to act aright, the proper course is neglected, then it is sinful. This seems to be the point of the words of this verse. The words are perhaps an echo of Luke 12:47, ἐκεῖνος δὲ ὁ δοῦλος ὁ γνοὺς τὸ θέλημα τοῦ κυρίου αὐτοῦ καὶ μὴ ἑτοιμάσας ἢ ποιήσας πρὸς τὸ θέλημα αὐτοῦ δαρήσεται πολλάς. With καλὸν ποιεῖν cf. Galatians 6:9, τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐνκακῶμεν. ἁμαρτία αὐτῷ ἐστιν : for the converse of this, namely, doing what is wrong in ignorance in which case it is excusable see Acts 3:17, “And now, brethren, I wot that in ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers”; 1 Timothy 1:13, “… howbeit, I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief”. It is, however, quite possible that we have in these words the enunciation of the principle that sins of omission are as sinful as those of commission; when our Lord says, “… these things ought ye to have done, and not to have left the other undone” (Matthew 23:23), it is clear that the sins of omission are regarded as wilful sin equally with those of commission, cf. Matthew 25:41-45. There is always a tendency to reckon the things which are left undone as less serious than actually committed sin; this was certainly, though not wholly so, in Judaism. It is exceptional when we read, for example, in 1 Samuel 12:23, “God forbid that I should sin against the Lord in ceasing to pray for you”; as a rule sins of omission are regarded as venial, according to the Jewish doctrine, and are not punishable. The conception of sin according to Rabbinical ideas is well seen in what is called the ‘Al Chêt (i.e., “For the sin,” from the opening words of each sentence in the great Widdui [“Confession”] said on Yom Kippur [“the Day of Atonement”]); in the long list of sins here, mention is made only of committed sins. In the Jerusalem Talmud (Yoma, viii. 6) it is said that the Day of Atonement brings atonement, even without repentance, for sins of omission; in Pesikta, 7 b the words in Zephaniah 1:12, “I will search Jerusalem with candles, and I will punish the men …,” are commented on by saying, “not by daylight, nor with the torch, but with candles, so as not to detect venial sins,” among these being, of course, included sins of omission. Although this is, in the main, the traditional teaching, there are some exceptions to be found, e.g., Shabbath, 54 b; “ ‘Whosoever is in a position to prevent sins being committed by the members of his household, but refrains from doing so, becomes liable for their sins.' The same rule applies to the govenour of a town, or even of a whole country” (see Jewish Encycl., xi. 378).

Having regard to the very Jewish character of our Epistle, it is quite possible that in the verse before us the reference is to this subject of sins of omission.