Teachers and the Tongue

We flap our lips more than we listen.

Download discussion questions:  James 2:24-3:12
Jump to beginning of James Discussion Group Blog

I encourage you to look at the passage in James before you read this Blog entry.  What do you see in the text yourself?  What questions come to your mind?  How would you interpret what the writer says?  After even a few minutes examining and thinking about the text you will be much better prepared to evaluate the comments in the Blog.

Our discussion began with a brief review of the previous portion of the letter of James.  This survey of an earlier conversation brought up to speed several folks who were not able to join us last week.  In addition, the blog summarizing that discussion had not been published. (It was a busy week for all of us.)  Most importantly, we all needed a bit of a refresher to see how James transitioned from his juxtaposition of faith and works to warnings about teachers and the tongue.

Faith and Works

The summary of the previous dialog focused on the inseparable quality of genuine faith and sincere works.  As one member commented, “Works just are.”  Works naturally flow out of real faith.  Expressions of a relationship with God are spontaneous actions rather than obligations or artificial add-ons.  Others recalled that works are not only the “big-ticket items,” like the examples of Abraham or Rahab (James 2:21-25), but they include simply trusting God in terrible circumstances (the quality that Abraham and Rahab shared).  Someone mentioned the works of talking to a lonely stranger or making an awkward phone call.

We also discussed the unfortunate but frequent response to the passage, the guilt or shame when we feel our works don’t measure up, that we need to try harder, that we should do better.  Going back to our earlier study in Hebrews, the solution is not to beat ourselves up and try to manufacture works out of self-reproach.  The key is to draw near to God (which another person pointed out is an exhortation of James himself later in his letter (4:8).  As one participant summarized, “Our relationship with God is not points-based.”

With that refresher, we were ready to see where James takes us next.

Too Many Teachers?

On the surface, James’s next statement seems like a new tangent.  Remember, originally first-century letters had no verse numbers or chapter divisions, maybe not even paragraphs:

For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead. Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness.

Sometimes chapter and verse numbers (added in later centuries) are helpful and make sense, but it is always a good practice to consider how the divisions may mask the author’s flow of thinking.

We considered whether or not James was starting a new, unrelated topic arbitrarily, or if he was intentionally expanding an important principle into an application.  Our consensus was that he had a method and was deliberate in his development of topics.[1]  With that in mind, we explored the possible connections from James’s instruction about faith and works into the topic of teachers.  From there, he immediately resumes on the theme of the tongue.

Someone pointed out that James has already “teed up” the topic of the tongue.  In 1:26 he cites failure to bridle the tongue as a mark of spiritual self-deception.  Even earlier he exhorts his readers to be slow to speak as well as quick to hear (1:19).  Clearly the careless or inappropriate speech and the misuse of the tongue link to form a continuing thread through the letter.

One suggestion in our group was that some “teachers” were too quick to speak, too hasty to share their opinion about complicated topics, including faith and works.  James offers little explanation about his restriction on teachers, other then the warning of “stricter judgment” (v. 1).  A member thought that severe judgment might result from teaching that leads others off track. (More on this came later in the conversation about the metaphors James uses.)  Another person looked ahead only a few sentences to the concern James expresses about “bitter jealousy and selfish ambition” (v. 14).  The problem could be self-seeking persons presumptuously taking on the task of teaching to gain popularity or recognition, or simply to boost their ego.  Whatever the particular problem, our group concluded that “some people were teaching who shouldn’t be.”

Teachers’ Tongues (and Ours)

Whatever the misguided motive of those would-be teachers, James focuses on the tongue as the primary issue.  He immediately shifts the emphasis, not to their doctrine or their motivation, but to their speech.  His shift also broadens the scope to “we all” (v. 2).  Teachers are not unique in sins of speech, but “they provide a ‘convenient jumping off point’ for the general warning about the tongue…. because they regularly engage in that activity which is hardest to keep from sin – one’s speech.” [2]  Perhaps teachers are just the most obvious example of why the “stumbling” we all experience is a serious matter.

We noted the strong language James uses for the potential effects of the tongue:  a destructive fire (v. 6a), staining or defiling life (v. 6b), like an untamable beast (v. 8), a restless evil (v. 8), full of deadly poison (v. 8; θανατηφόρος, thanatēphoros, lit., “carrying death” or “death-bearing”[3]).  His description moves from the innocuous sounding “stumble” to a shocking sequence of ugly and hurtful effects.  From there he becomes more specific, noting the inconsistency the tongue reveals, blessing and cursing.

James highlights the ultimate irony of cursing people – those people are made in the likeness of God when God is the object of blessing by the same tongue.  One person reminded us of the moving illustration C. S. Lewis offers of that image of God.

It is a serious thing to live in a society of possible gods and goddesses, to remember that the dullest and most uninteresting person you talk to may one day be a creature which, if you saw it now, you would be strongly tempted to worship, or else a horror and a corruption such as you now meet, if at all, only in a nightmare.  All day long we are, in some degree, helping each other to one or other of these destinations.  It is in the light of these overwhelming possibilities, it is with the awe and the circumspection proper to them, that we should conduct all our dealings with one another, all friendships, all loves, all play, all politics.  There are no ordinary people.[4]

Perhaps a person who blesses God and curses people (v. 9) is an example of James’s previous warning about “dead faith,” a profession of belief that lacks even the work of bridling the tongue.  James reminds his readers that the targets of the tongue are image bearers of the Living God.  That alone should convince all of us that sins of the untamed tongue are not trivial.

Bits and Rudders

Our discussion turned to the images James uses for the tongue and its effects.  Why does he include such a varied list?  Wouldn’t one good illustration be enough?  Our group experienced a practical answer to that question.

As someone pointed out, he just wrote that “we all stumble,” and his goal is to communicate his stern warning as broadly as possible.  Perhaps James was scattering the images to connect with different people, farmers experienced with horses or sailors who knew about boats.  The images are clear even without such specialized knowledge, but better insights are available from those who have related real-life experiences.

One member of our group was an alternate for a past Olympic rowing team, and another knew about horses.

The function of a small rudder on a big ship was clear to all of us.  But the rower pointed out that the person controlling the rudder, the coxswain, has a great responsibility.  The rudder indeed controls the steering, but that also means that the rudder can change the direction of everyone in the boat.  Or if the rudder is uncontrolled, then the boat (and everyone in it) really is at the mercy of the “strong winds” just as James says (v. 4).  Several in our group commented how that warning can apply particularly to teachers, who can steer an entire congregation off course.  Others observed that the concern applies equally to each individual.  As someone commented, it doesn’t matter whether preaching to thousands or a one-on-one conversation.  An uncontrolled tongue can allow us and those around us to be driven by the strong winds of emotions. On the other hand, controlling the rudder, or the tongue, can counteract those strong winds and keep us on course.

Another individual in our conversation commented on the other metaphor James uses.  Horses don’t like bits.  Based on this person’s experience, getting the bit into the horse’s mouth can be a challenge at first.  But after a few times, the horse begins to recognize that the bit is actually a good thing, because it means going for a ride.  The key, from this first-hand experience, is when the wild beast learns to submit and accept the bit and welcome the rewarding result.  Once again, the imagery came alive from those insights.  We don’t like bits any more than horses like them.  But submitting to God and His work in us to bridle our tongue moves us in the direction of James’s earlier incentive, to be “perfect and complete, lacking in nothing” (James 1:4).

Untamable

James is very blunt about the problem: “No human being can tame the tongue” (v. 8).

A person remarked that “taming” must mean more than “biting my tongue” and not saying out loud what I’m thinking.  Jesus made it clear that sin in the heart (like anger or lust) is comparable to outward actions (like murder or adultery) in Matthew 5:21-30.  Not speaking may spare the harm to the other person, but silence does not deal with the cumulative consequences in our own heart.  Consider the explanation offered by C. S. Lewis about the Christian’s comments on “sins of thought.”

They talk about mere sins of thought as if they were immensely important ….But I have come to see that they are right. What they are always thinking of is the mark which the action leaves on that tiny central self which no one sees in this life but which each of us will have to endure—or enjoy—forever. One man may be so placed that his anger sheds the blood of thousands, and another so placed that however angry he gets he will only be laughed at. But the little mark on the soul may be much the same in both. Each has done something to himself which, unless he repents, will make it harder for him to keep out of the rage next time he is tempted, and will make the rage worse when he does fall into it.[5]

Likewise, whether we speak or not, our angry or sarcastic or bitter thoughts will leave those “marks.” That disturbing prospect adds to the motivation to tame our tongues.  But James has further sobering words about those attempts.

Consider carefully what James says in his contrast with every variety of animal.

For every kind of beast and bird, of reptile and sea creature, can be tamed and has been tamed by mankind, but no human being can tame the tongue. (James 3:7-8a)

His contrast is between what is and what is not humanly possible.  Taming wild animals is an accomplished fact (“has been tamed”).  The problem is not that the tongue is uniquely untamable, but that no human can accomplish that task.  The key, as discussed in the summary at the beginning of our discussion and in previous weeks, is our relationship with God, drawing near to Him.

Submitting to Taming

Bridling the tongue (continuing James’s imagery) depends on drawing near to God.  The horse’s submission to the bit pictures our submission to God, trusting Him in difficult circumstances.  Trusting in His loving, wise providence means I don’t have to respond to rudeness to defend my dignity or use sarcasm or humor to answer a challenging remark.  God-obsessed trust can begin to tame a self-protective tongue.

A member of our group brought up another of James’s earlier exhortations that contributes to the taming process.  Being “quick to hear” (1:19) is not our natural practice.  More likely, as expressed by another person, we “flap our lips more than we listen.”  As a result, we frequently fail the next admonition, “slow to speak.”  We respond (or react) before carefully hearing the other person.  At that point, the “strong winds” of emotion drive us off of the “slow to anger” course.  (Please excuse my metaphorical excess.  James’s pictures make it hard to resist.)

We talked about thinking ahead to conversations we expect to be difficult, planning not to take offense and not to let emotion drive us into unbridling our tongue.

Humility means there’s so much less at stake, so much less to protect. You’ll become difficult to offend simply because there’s so much less of you to defend. When you are headed into a stressful social situation, with difficult, offensive people, and you decide in advance, “I’m not going to let these people offend me; I’m forgiving them in advance,” you are dying to yourself. You are sacrificing yourself on their behalf. You are making yourself less. You’re willingly giving up your own interests and desires, because of your conviction about who Jesus is.[6]

Praying before and during any conversation is essential.  And we agreed that as helpful as it might be, no amount of planning (“if he says that, I’ll say this”) substitutes for a heart tuned to the Spirit, part of drawing near to God.

[A CAUTION:  Drawing near to God is not a means to the end of better behavior.  Our relationship with God is not about “socializing our sin” to avoid embarrassing outbursts or inappropriate responses to others.  God is not a vending machine[7] that we manipulate to get what we want.  Drawing near to Him is the end goal.  Our tongue may be more bridled, like other “works” that are the spontaneous overflow of that growing relationship with Him.]

Predictable or Arbitrary?

We considered the final illustrations James uses in this section:  springs and trees and ponds.

The common trait is the quality of unmistakable certainty.  Fig trees don’t produce mostly figs and a few olives.  Water is either fresh or salt.

We explored what springs and trees and ponds have in common.  The conclusion was that they each, in their natural state, are incapable of contradictory condition – different fruits or unreliable water, sometimes fresh, sometimes salt.  Springs and trees and ponds are predictable.  These illustrations contrast with the tongue, highlighting its unnatural, arbitrary behavior.  That behavior is unnatural in the sense that we are fallen from God’s perfect intention for us to be His image bearers.  It is arbitrary in its unpredictability, a pendulum that swings from blessing God to cursing people.  As James says simply, “These things ought to be so” (v. 10b).

That is his only instruction in this passage about solving the sins of the tongue.  As one person observed, James is raising awareness of the seriousness of this universal human problem.  He intends to address this and other issues later in his letter.

The outcome of this study should not be guilt or shame over our frequent failures.  Nor should it be merely increased intentions to “do better” or to “try harder.”  Two preferable responses came out of our discussion.  First, we can think about our level of trust in God during difficult conversations and how drawing near to Him might increase that trust.  Second, we can explore (individually but especially in the soul-care context of community), why we struggle in particular situations.  What self-protective fear drives us to inappropriate speech as we relate to others?

No human is able to tame the tongue.  By the Spirit of God working through the community of His people, we may stumble less in our speech as we display God’s transforming work in us.


[1] It should be noted that some scholars suggest that James “moves quickly from topic to topic, and the logical relationship of the topics is often not at all clear…. the letter has no obvious structure”
Douglas Moo, The Letter of James (Grand Rapids, Michigan:  William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 2000), 7;
While the letter as a whole may not have an overall “clearly defined theme” (ibid.), usually there does seem to be a logical flow from one topic to the next.

[2] Douglas Moo, The Letter of James (Grand Rapids, Michigan:  William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 2000), 147, 150.

[3] W. E. Vine, Merrill F. Unger, William White, Jr., “article,” Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (Nashville:  Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1996), 148;
https://studybible.info/vines/Deadly

[4] C.S. Lewis, “The Weight of Glory,” The Weight of Glory and Other Addresses (New York: HarperOne, 1980), 45.

[5] C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, C.S. Lewis Signature Classics (New York: HarperCollins Publishers Inc., 2021) Kindle Edition, location 1243, page 92.

[6] Brant Hansen, Unoffendable:  How Just One Change Can Make All of Life Better (Nashville:  W Publishing Group, 2015), 191.

[7] Larry Crabb, Shattered Dreams (Colorado Springs, Colorado:  WaterBrook Press, 2001), 91;
Larry Crabb, The Pressure’s Off:  There’s A New Way to Live (New York:  Waterbrook, 2018), 169;
Jonathan Morris, The Promise (New York:  HarperCollins Publishers Inc., 2008) Kindle Electronic Edition:  Location 391.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *