James 3: The tongue controls the whole body

Wed, 14/05/2008 - 09:35 -- James Oakley

1 Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness. 2 For we all stumble in many ways, and if anyone does not stumble in what he says, he is a perfect man, able also to bridle his whole body. 3 If we put bits into the mouths of horses so that they obey us, we guide their whole bodies as well. 4 Look at the ships also: though they are so large and are driven by strong winds, they are guided by a very small rudder wherever the will of the pilot directs. 5 So also the tongue is a small member, yet it boasts of great things. How great a forest is set ablaze by such a small fire!” (James 3:1-5)

James’ point is not just that the tongue is small compared to the rest of the body. His point is more specific: The rest of the body is controlled by controlling the tongue.

I have always read this to be referring to the individual. So, it is not just hard for me to control my speech; doing so is the key to disciplining my whole body. If I can control what I say, I can control how I see things; after all, thoughts are just unarticulated speech. So if I want to live in a God-honouring way, I must learn to speak in a God-honouring way.

This may be what James is saying. I don’t change my mind easily. But reading it again another option struck me. What if James is using something akin to Paul’s “body metaphor” of Romans 12 and 1 Corinthians 12?

So: Within the church are teachers (verse 1). We should be reluctant to be such. Why? Because God will judge them more strictly. Why? Because, verses 3-5, what the tongue in the body (the teacher in the church) says directs the whole body (the whole church). So God will hold the church’s teachers to account for the direction the church goes in. Like a ship or a horse, every church is travelling somewhere. The responsible part is the rudder or the bit. That is like the tongue in the body, so God will hold the teachers to account.

That had never occured to me before, and I don’t remember reading it anywhere. But it’s another option for James 3 that I want to think some more about.

Blog Category: 

Comments

Steve Jeffery's picture
Submitted by Steve Jeffery on

... I was looking at this very passage yesterday.

See Davids (NIGTC) and Martin (WBC).

I'm not sure it excludes the former meaning; but it's certainly suggestive of another level of significance. It makes sense of the connection to 3:1-2, certainly.

Add new comment

Additional Terms