1 John 2

1 John 2:1

II. THE REMEDY FOR SIN AND THE SIGN THAT IT IS EFFECTUAL (ii. 1—6).

Having dealt with the fact of sin and the false pleas by which man endeavours to do away with its significance, St John states

1 The divine remedy for sin (vv. 1, 2). 2 The sign that the remedy is effectual in any particular case (vv. 3—6).

The first sub-section answers to the counter-statements made in relation to the first two pleas of men (i. 7, 9), but it has a prominent distinctness of form, as giving the complete answer to the problem raised in i. 5—10. The assurance of the forgiveness of sin when combined with the fact of its universality might lead some to underrate its evil. In order to remove the last semblance of support for such an error, St John shews that the nature of the remedy for sin is such as to move men most powerfully to shrink from all sin and to help them to avoid it.

This connexion is partly indicated by Augustine: Male vis esse securus, sollicitus esto. Fidelis enim est et justus ut dimittat nobis delicta nostra si semper tibi displices et muteris donec perficiaris. Ideo quid sequitur? Filioli mei, hæc scribo vobis ut non peccetis.

1. The divine remedy for sin (ii. 1, 2).

¹ My little children, these things I write to you that ye may not sin. And if anyone sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ, the righteous; ² and himself is a propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the whole world.

The fact of sin as something which is irreconcileable with God and fruitful in consequences raises the questions of propitiation and mediation.

How, it may be asked, is that forgiveness, that cleansing, already spoken of (i. 7, 9), brought about? The answer is given in the summary description of Christ’s work. Christ is a universal propitiation for sins; and He is an advocate for the Christian. He has accomplished a work on earth for all: He is accomplishing a work in heaven for those who are united with Him. Both in Person (righteous) and in work (propitiation) He is fitted to fulfil the office which our necessities require. These thoughts are treated in the inverse order, because the apostle approaches the subject from the side of believers (we have).

It has been already noticed that the third plea (i. 10, we have not sinned) is not treated exactly as the two former. Symmetry would have required a clause answering to the assertion ‘we have not sinned.’ St John might, for example, have continued: ‘if we sin…’ But he shrinks naturally from regarding sin as a normal element in the Christian life; and therefore he changes the mode of dealing with the subject. Before touching on the fact of sin, as indeed part of the believer’s experience to the last, he asserts the end of his teaching, which is sinlessness. This is the end; and even if it cannot be gained by the believer’s effort and directly, it can be gained through the Saviour’s work. That which is true of the past (i. 9) is true throughout.

1. τεκνία μου] filioli mei V., my little children. The form adopted in i. 7, 9 is changed for one more direct and personal. The thought of sin as a reality for each one moves the apostle to address with the utmost tenderness those to whom he stands in the relation of a father. The title τεκνία occurs in John xiii. 33 and c. ii. 12, 28; iii. 7, 18; iv. 4; v. 21 (Gal. iv. 19 τεκνία μου is uncertain). The full title τεκνία

τητε. καὶ ἐάν τις ἀμάρτη, παράκλητον ἔχομεν πρὸς μου is found only here (c. iii. 18 is a false reading). A commentary on St John’s use of the word is given by the story (μῦθος οὐ μῦθος) of the young Robber (Euseb. H. E. iii. 23).

ταῦτα γράφω] these things I write, not only all that has been already said as to the nature of God and as to the reality, the nature, and the fact of sin (i. 5—10), but, as i. 4, all that is present to the mind of the apostle as the substance of his letter, though indeed the preceding section includes all by implication.

The use of the singular, I write (vv. 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 21, 26; v. 13; contrast i. 4) follows from ‘my dear children.’ ἵνα μὴ ἀμάρτητε] ut non peccetis V., that ye may not sin. The phrase is absolute. The thought is of the single act (ἀμάρτητε) not of the state (ἀμαρτάνητε); and the tense is decisive against the idea that the apostle is simply warning his disciples not to draw encouragement for licence from the doctrine of forgiveness. His aim is to produce the completeness of the Christ-like life (v. 6).

The difference of the aor. and pres. conj. in connexion with ἵνα is well illustrated by John v. 20, 23; vi. 28 f.

καὶ ἐάν τις…] sed et si quis V., i.e. ἐὰν δὲ καὶ, si quis Aug., and if any… The declaration of the remedy for sin is placed as part of the main declaration of St John. It is not set as a contrast (i. 7 ἐὰν δὲ), nor simply as a parallel clause (i. 9 ἐὰν ὁμολογῶμεν); but as a continuous piece of the one message. Here again the thought is of the single act (ἀμάρτη), into which the believer may be carried against the true tenor of his life (i. 7), as contrasted with the habitual state (ἀμαρτάνει iii. 6, 8, 9; v. 18). Nothing is said in one direction or the other of the possibility of a Christian life actually sinless.

The change of construction in the sentence is remarkable. St John writes if any one…we… and not if ye sin…ye…, nor yet if we sin…we…or if any one…he…, in order to bring out the individual character of the offence, and then to shew that he is speaking of the Christian body with which he identifies himself, and to which Christ’s promises are assured. This is forcibly pointed out by Augustine: Non dixit habetis, nec me habetis dixit, nec ipsum Christum habetis dixit; sed et Christum posuit non se, et habemus dixit non habetis. Maluit se ponere in numero peccatorum ut haberet advocatum Christum quam ponere se pro Christo advocatum et inveniri inter dammandos superbos.

ἔχομεν] we have as a divine gift. Comp. ii. 23; v. 12; 2 John 9.

παράκλητον] advocatum V., an advocate. This is the uniform rendering of the Latin and English Versions in this place, and is unquestionably correct, although the Greek fathers give to it, as in the Gospel, an active sense, ‘consoler,’ ‘comforter.’ Christ as Advocate pleads the cause of the believer against his ‘accuser’ (κατήγωρ Apoc. xii. 10; comp. Zech. iii. 1; ἀντίδικος 1 Pet. v. 8). In this work the ‘other Advocate’ (John xiv. 16), the Spirit of Christ, joins (Rom. viii. 26, 34).

One aspect of the Advocate’s office was foreshadowed by the entrance of the High Priest into the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement (Heb. ix. 11 ff., 24; vii. 25).

For the meaning of the term παράκλητος in the Gospel of St John (xiv. 16, 26; xv. 26; xvi. 7) see note on xiv. 16.

It will be noticed that in the context of the passage in which the Lord promises ‘another Advocate’ (John xiv. 16) he sets forth his own advocacy (xiv. 12 ff.).

Augustine applies the legal image in a striking parallel: Si aliquando in hac vita committit se homo disertæ linguæ et non perit, committis te Verbo et periturus es?

The reference to the Advocate implies that the Christian on his part has effectually sought His help. This is assumed, and indicated by the change of person (see Christians hace).

Clement of Rome (i. 36) speaks of the Lord under a corresponding title: …εὕρομεν τὸ σωτήριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν, τὸν ἀρχιερέα τῶν προσφορῶν ἡμῶν, τὸν προστάτην (patronum) καὶ βοηθὸν τῆς ἀσθενείας ἡμῶν.

πρὸς τὸν πατέρα] apud patrem V., ad patrem Aug. (apud deum patrem Tert.), with the Father, not simply in His Presence, but turned toward Him, addressing Him with continual pleadings. Comp. c. i. 2; John i. 1.

Christ’s advocacy of man is addressed to God in that relation of Fatherhood which has been fully revealed in the Son who has taken manhood to Himself (πρὸς τὸν πατέρα not πρὸς τὸν θεόν).

Comp. i. 2 ἦν πρὸς τὸν πατέρα; i. 3 μετὰ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ; ii. 14 ἐγνώκατε τὸν πατέρα; ii. 15 ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ πατρός; ii. 16 οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ τοῦ πατρός; ii. 22 ὁ ἀρνούμενος τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὸν υἱόν; ii. 23 ὁ ὁμολογῶν τὸν υἱὸν καὶ τὸν πατέρα ἔχει; ii. 24 ἐν τῷ υἱῷ καὶ [ἐν] τῷ πατρί; iii. 1 δέδωκεν ἡμῖν ὁ πατήρ; iv. 14 ὁ πατήρ ἀπέσταλκεν τὸν υἱόν.

In every case this special conception is important for the fulness of the argument. See Additional Note on i. 2.

And on the other side man’s Advocate is described by that compound name Jesus Christ, which presents Him in His humanity and also as the promised Saviour and King of mankind, the Son of man, and the Son of David. See Additional Note on iii. 23.

δίκαιον] the righteous. The adjective is not a simple epithet but marks predicatively (‘being as he is righteous’) that characteristic of the Lord which gives efficacy to His advocacy of man.

This rests (so to speak) not on His divine nature as Son of God, but on His human character (comp. 1 Pet. iii. 18).

He has Himself fulfilled and pleads for the fulfilment of that which is right according to the highest law. He is not an advocate who wishes to set aside the law but to carry it out and apply it. In Him the idea of manhood has obtained its absolute satisfaction, and in turn He claims that the virtue of this satisfaction be extended to all in fellowship with Himself.

The righteousness of Christ as presented here answers to the righteousness of the Father brought forward in i. 9: He accomplishes perfectly all that is set forth in the revelation of the Father’s Nature. By this righteousness He fulfils in fact the conditions which the High Priest fulfilled in symbol. Comp. Heb. vii. 26.

The thought of righteousness as a divine attribute belongs peculiarly to St John: John xvii. 25 πατήρ δίκαιε; c. i. 9; ii. 29; iii. 7. Comp. Rom. iii. 26.

Nothing is said of the manner of Christ’s pleading: that is a subject wholly beyond our present powers. It is enough that St John represents it as the act of a Saviour still living (Heb. vii. 25) and in a living relation with His people. His work for them continues as real as during His earthly life (Lc. xxii. 32; xxiii. 34; John xvii. 24), though the conditions of it are changed. He is still acting personally in their behalf, and not only by the unexhausted and prevailing power of what He has once done. He Himself uses for His people the virtue of

2 D. ἐστιν NBC: ἐστ. D. A vg. Rom. iii. 29.

μόνον NAC vg: μόνον B me the; comp.

that work which He accomplished on earth.

Bede says well: Unigenito Filio pro homine interpellare est apud co- æternum Patrem se ipsum hominem demonstrare; eique pro humana natura rogasse est candem naturam in divinitatis suæ celsitudine suscepisse. Interpellat ergo pro nobis Dominus non voce sed miseratione, quia quod damnare in electis noluit suscipiendo servavit.

1 John 2:2

2. καὶ αὐτός…] et ipse V., and He, or rather, and He Himself (Matt. i. 21). The emphatic pronoun enforces the thought of the efficacy of Christ’s advocacy as ‘righteous.’ He who pleads our cause, having fulfilled the destiny of man, is at the same time the propitiation for our sins. Comp. v. 25; c. i. 7; iv. 10, 19 (3 John 10); John ii. 25; iv. 44; v. 20; vi. 6 (xii. 49); 1 Pet. ii. 24.

The ideas of ‘advocacy’ and ‘propitiation’ are distinct, and yet in close connexion. The latter furnishes the basis of the former: the latter is universal, while the former, so far as it is revealed, is exercised for believers. It is to be noticed further that the ‘propitiation’ itself is spoken of as something eternally valid (He is) and not as past (He was; comp. iii. 16 τὴν ψυχὴν ἴθηκεν).

ἰλασμός] propitiatio V., a propitiation. Comp. iv. 10. The Latin renderings are unusually numerous. Besides propitiatio which prevailed, exoratio, deprecatio, placatio are found, and also the verbal renderings (ipse) exorat, interpellat, postulat pro… And Augustine has in some places propitiator. Christ is said to be the ‘propitiation’ and not simply the ‘propitiator’ (as He is called the ‘Saviour’ iv. 14), in order to emphasise the thought that He is Himself the propitiatory offering as well as the priest (comp. Rom. iii. 25). A propitiator might make use of means of propitiation outside himself. But Christ is our propitiation, as He is ‘our life’ (Col. iii. 4), our ‘righteousness, sanctification and redemption’ (1 Cor. i. 31). He does not simply guide, teach, quicken: He is ’the Way, the Truth, the Life’ (John xiv. 6). It follows that the efficacy of His work for the individual depends upon fellowship with Him. See Additional Note.

Qui per humanitatem interpellat pro nobis apud Patrem idem per divinitatem propitiatur nobis cum Patre (Bede ad loc.).

περὶ τῶν ὄμ. ἡ] pro peccatis nostris V., peccatorum nostrorum Aug., for our sins. The privilege of Christians (ἡμῶν) is noticed first. And it is natural that in the first case the stress is laid on ‘sins’ (περὶ τῶν ὄμ. ἡμῶν) and in the second case on ‘our’ (περὶ τῶν ἡμετέρων).

The propitiation of Christ is here described as being ‘for,’ ‘in the matter of (περὶ) our sins’ (comp. ܕܰܕܰܐ), and not as ‘in behalf of us’ (ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν). On the phrases περὶ (ὑπὲρ) ἁμαρτίας (-ιῶν) see Hebr. xiii. 11 note.

οὐ π. τ. ἡ. δέ] The particle (δέ) marks the clause as guarding against error, not merely adding a new thought.

περὶ ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου] pro totius mundi [se. peccatis] V., sed et totius mundi Aug., for the whole world. The variation in the construction (for our sins…for the whole world) is full of meaning (comp. Heb. ix. 7). Christians as such are holy but still not

³ Καὶ ἐν τούτῳ γινώσκομεν ὅτι ἐγνώκαμεν αὐτόν, ἐὰν

3 Aug. reads simply et in hoc cognoscimus eum. φυλάξωμεν (for τηρῶμεν) ℵ*.

unstained by sins contracted ‘in the walk of life’ (John xiii. 10); the world, all outside the Church, as such is sinful (c. v. 19). But for all alike Christ’s propitiation is valid. The propitiation extends as far as the need of it (l. c.), through all place and all time. Comp. iv. 14 (John iv. 42; xii. 32; xvii. 22—24).

The supposition that περὶ ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου is an elliptical expression for περὶ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου (so Latt.) is not justified by usage, and weakens the force of the passage.

Philo in a noble passage (de Monarch. ii. 6, ii. p. 227 M.) contrasts the special offerings of other forms of worship with the universal intercession of the Jewish High-priest: ὁ τῶν Ἰουδαίων ἀρχιερεὺς οὐ μόνον ὑπὲρ ἅπαντος ἀνθρώπων γένους ἀλλὰ καὶ ὑπὲρ τῶν τῆς φύσεως μερῶν, γῆς ὕδατος ἀέρος καὶ πυρός, τὰς τε εὐχὰς καὶ τὰς εὐχαριστίας ποιεῖται, τὸν κόσμον, ὅπερ ἐστι ταῖς ἀληθείας, πατρίδα εἶναι ἑαυτοῦ νομίζων, ὑπὲρ ἧς ἱκεσίας καὶ λιταῖς εἴωθεν ἐξευμενίζειν τὸν ἡγεμόνα παντίνωμενος τῆς ἐπιεικῶς καὶ ἴλεω φύσεως αὐτοῦ μεταδιδόναι τῷ γενομένῳ.

2. The signs of the personal efficacy of the divine remedy for sin (ii. 3—6).

³ And in this we perceive that we know him, if we observe his commandments, ‘He that saith I know him and observeth not his commandments, is a liar, and in this man the truth is not; but whosoever observeth his word, verily in this man the love of God hath been perfected.

The first two verses of the chapter declare the nature of the divine remedy for sin; in these next four St John indicates the sign of its personal efficacy. The sign is twofold, and corresponds with two aspects of the spiritual life; there is the sign of knowledge (vv. 3—5 a); and there is the sign of union (vv. 5 b, 6). The sign of knowledge is (shortly) obedience; and the sign of union is imitation.

Additional Note on ii. 2. The use of Ἰλασμός and cognates in the Greek Scriptures.

The word Ἰλασμός occurs in the N.T. only here and in a parallel passage IV. 10.

In the LXX. it is found with the corresponding ἐξιλασμός more frequently, where one or other of the two words is the usual representative of כְּפָרִים : LXX.

Lev. XXV. 9 ἡ ἡμέρα τοῦ Ἰλασμοῦ.

— XXIII. 27 f. ἡ ἡμέρα τοῦ ἐξιλασμοῦ.

Exod. XXIX. 36 ἡ ἡμέρα τοῦ καθαρισμοῦ.

Vat. A. Σ. Θ. ἐξιλασμοῦ.

Vat. A. ἐξιλασμοῦ.

The two words used also for חַטָּאת :

Comp. Ezek. xliii. 23 (Amos viii. 14 is a false rendering of אֲשֶׁמָּה).

2 Macc. iii. 33 ποιουμένου τοῦ ἀρχιερέως τὸν Ἰλασμόν (the sacrifice offered for the recovery of Heliodorus).

2 Macc. xii. 45 περὶ τῶν τεθνηκότων τὸν ἐξιλασμὸν ἐποιήσατο τῆς ἁμαρτίας ἀπολυθῆναι.

In Ps. cxxix. (cxxx.) 4 and Dan. ix. 9 Ἰλασμός (-οἱ) is used to translate סְלִיחָה.

The words are always used absolutely without any addition to mark the person to or for whom, or the offence for which the propitiation is offered.

In Ecclus. xviii. 12 ἐπλήθυνε (κύριος) τὸν ἐξιλασμὸν αὐτοῦ the sense is that of Ps. cxxix. 4 ‘mercifulness.’ Comp. c. xvi. 11 ἐξιλασμοί.

The corresponding verb Ἰλάσκομαι is found twice in the N.T.:

Use of Ἰλάσκομαι.

(1) With the dat. of person sinning,

Luke xviii. 13 Ἰλάσθητί μοι τῷ ἁμαρτωλῷ.

(2) With the accus. of the sin,

Ἰλάσκομαι is comparatively rare in the LXX. It occurs as a translation of כְּפָר :

(1) With accus. of the sin,

Ps. lxiv. 3 Ἰλάσῃ τὰς ἀσεβείας.

(2) With dat. of the sin,

Ps. lxxvii. 38 Ἰλάσεται ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις.

— lxxviii. 13 Ἰλάσθητι ταῖς ἁμ.

It occurs also as a translation of כָּלָה for which ἵλεως εἶναι is commonly used:

(1) With the dat. of person, 4 (2) K. v. 18 ἱλάσεται [ἱλασθήσεται] τῷ δούλῳ. (2) With the dat. of the sin, Ps. xxiv. 12 ἱλάσθητι τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ. (3) Absolutely, Lam. iii. 42 οὐχ ἱλάσθης. Dan. ix. 19 ἱλάσθητι.

The compound ἐξιλάσκομαι, which is the usual representative of כַּפָּר, is more common. This is found

(1) With the accusative

(a) of the object cleansed: Ezek. xliii. 26 τὸ θυσιαστήριον. — xlv. 18 τὸ ἅγιον. — xlv. 20 τὸν οἶκον. — xliii. 20, 22 τὸ θυσιαστήριον (חָטָא).

(b) and specially of sin, Dan. ix. 24 τοῦ ἐξιλάσασθαι ἀδικίας. Ecclus. iii. 30 ἁμαρτίας.

Comp. Ps. lxiv. 4.

In this case the subject (he who expiates, atones, cleanses) may be either

(a) God, Ecclus. v. 6 πλῆθος ἁμαρτιῶν. — xxxi. (xxxiv.) 23 οὐδὲ ἐν πλῆθει θυσιῶν ἐξιλάσκεται ἁμαρτίας, or

(b) the human agent, Ecclus. iii. 3 ὁ τιμῶν πατέρα ἐξιλάσεται ἁμαρτίας. — xx. 28, xxviii. 5.

So also the word is found in the passive, 1 Sam. iii. 14 εἰ ἐξιλασθήσεται ἡ ἀδικία…ἐκ θυσίας (יִתְכַּפֵּר).

Comp. Deut. xxi. 8 ἐξιλασθήσεται αὐτοῖς τὸ αἷμα.

(2) With περὶ gen.

(a) of the sin, Ex. xxxii. 30, &c. or

(b) of the person sinning, Lev. i. 4. — iv. 20, &c.

Comp. Ecclus. xvi. 7 οὐκ ἐξιλάσατο περὶ τῶν ἀρχαίων γιγάντων.

So also with ὑπέρ, Ezek. xlv. 17.

The word is also used absolutely, Lev. xvi. 17. Comp. Lam. iii. 42; Dan. ix. 19.

(3) Passive with ἀπὸ,

(4) The accusative of the person ‘propitiated’ is found only,

Gen. xxxii. 20 (כִּפֶּר) ἐξιλάσομαι τὸ πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ ἐν τοῖς δώροις (for ἐν comp. Levit. vi. 37; 1 Sam. iii. 14).

Zech. vii. 2 (הַלָּה) ἐξιλάσασθαι τὸν κύριον.

These constructions stand in remarkable contrast with the Classical and Hellenistic¹ usage in which the accus. of the person propitiated is the normal construction from Homer downwards; a usage which prevails in patristic writers.

They shew that the scriptural conception of ἱλάσκεσθαι is not that of appeasing one who is angry, with a personal feeling, against the offender; but of altering the character of that which from without occasions a necessary alienation, and interposes an inevitable obstacle to fellowship. Such phrases as ‘propitiating God’ and God ‘being reconciled’ are foreign to the language of the N. T. Man is reconciled (2 Cor. v. 18 ff.; Rom. v. 10 f.). There is a ‘propitiation’ in the matter of the sin or of the sinner. The love of God is the same throughout; but He ‘cannot’ in virtue of His very Nature welcome the impenitent and sinful: and more than this, He ‘cannot’ treat sin as if it were not sin.

This being so, the ἱλασμός, when it is applied to the sinner, so to speak, neutralises the sin. In this respect the idea of the efficacy of Christ’s propitiation corresponds with one aspect of the Pauline phrase ‘in Christ.’ The believer being united with Christ enjoys the quickening, purifying, action of Christ’s ‘Blood,’ of the virtue of His Life and Death, of His Life made available for men through Death.

Compare additional note on i. 9.

1 John 2:3

3. The new form of false doctrine which St John meets corresponds with and grows out of the first of those which he has already analysed. Some claimed a knowledge of God, as some claimed fellowship with God (i. 6), irrespective of a Christ-like life. Knowledge no less than fellowship involves real likeness (comp. John viii. 32; c. iii. 7).

vv. 3—5 a. The sign of knowledge. The sign of knowledge is developed characteristically by the Apostle. He first states generally that it lies in obedience (v. 3), and then follows out this statement further negatively and positively, shewing the issues of the want of obedience (v. 4), and of the activity of obedience (v. 5 a).

3. Under one aspect this verse is connected with i. 5. But between the declaration of God’s nature and man’s knowledge of Him there comes in the episode of sin. This fatal interruption breaks the natural development of thought. The connexion of i. 1, 3, 5 (καί), ii. 3 (καί), corresponds with that of John i. 1, 14.

ἐν τούτῳ γινώσκομεν] in hoc scimus V., in hoc cognoscimus Aug., in this we perceive. The phrase ‘in this’ is characteristic of the Epistle and occurs with slight variations of form.

(1) In this (ἐν τούτῳ) we perceive (γινώσκομεν): ii. 5; iii. 24; iv. 13; v. 2 and so also ‘in this we know (ἐγνώκαμεν)’ iii. 16; and ‘in this we

shall know (γνωσόμεθα) iii. 19; and ‘in this ye perceive’ (γνωσκετε) iv. 2. Comp. John xiii. 35 (xv. 8; xvi. 30).

(2) From this (ἐκ τούτου) we perceive: iv. 6.

(3) Whence (ὅθεν) we perceive: ii. 18.

Generally ‘this’ (τοῦτο) marks something which has been already expressed, though it is further developed in what follows (comp. e.g. διὰ τοῦτο… ὅτι, iii. 1; John v. 16, 18; vi. 65; viii. 47; x. 17; xii. 18; xvi. 15). But here the reference appears to be to that which is clearly apprehended in the mind of the Apostle and present to him, though it has not yet been brought forward; in this…namely if … Perhaps however even here the ‘this’ really rests upon the whole relation of the Christian to Christ which is implied in ex. 1, 2. That relation furnishes the test of knowledge; if the relation be vital it will include obedience. Comp. v. 2.

The experience to which the Apostle appeals here and in the parallel passages (γνωσκομεν) is present and immediate, confirmed from moment to moment in the actual course of life. So far it is distinguished from the knowledge of an absolute fact (οἴδαμεν, iii. 2 note).

ἐγνώκαμεν…] cognosimus V., know Him, or, more exactly, have come to a knowledge of Him. Knowledge of a person involves sympathy (c. iii. 1 n. 2) and in this particular case includes the striving after conformity with Him who is known. To know God as God is to be in vital fellowship with Him, to love Him, to fulfil that relation towards Him for which we are born. And conversely to be known by God, to be the object of His knowledge, is to be in harmony with Him. Comp. Gal. iv. 9; 1 Cor. viii. 2; xiii. 12; John x. 14 f.; and negatively Matt. vii. 23; 2 Cor. v. 21.

This knowledge of God gained by experience (γνωσκειν), and so contrasted with the knowledge which is immediate and absolute (οἶδα), is presented in its different stages in the Gospel and Epistles of St John. It is regarded

(1) In reference to the point of acquisition (ἔγνων John i. 10; x. 38; xvi. 3; xvii. 8, 25; c. iii. 1; iv. 8).

(2) As a result of the past realised in the present (ἔγνωνα, John viii. 55; xiv. 9; xvii. 7; ve. 4, 13, 14; iii. 6, 16; 2 John 1). And

(3) As being actually realised at the moment (γνωσκω, John viii. 43; x. 14 f., 27, 38; xiv. 7, 17; xvii. 3, 23; c. iv. 2, 6, 7; v. 20).

These three aspects of the knowledge of God offer a view of the beginning, the strength and the aim of life.

It is worthy of remark that St John nowhere uses γνῶσις (St Luke, St Paul, St Peter), nor the compound forms ἐπιγνωσκειν (Sym., Acts, St Paul, 2 Peter), ἐπίγνωσις (St Paul, Heb., 2 Peter). He confines himself, as he does almost exclusively in dealing with faith (πιστεύειν εἰς), to the simple verb. This form of expression brings out most distinctly the personal character of the energy.

In this context it is not clearly defined to Whom the pronoun (ἐγν. αὐτοῦ) refers. The Divine Being fills the apostle’s vision, but the Person is not distinctly named. It has been supposed that the reference is to Christ, the main subject of the preceding verses. In favour of this view it is urged that in i. 6 ff. the αὐτοῦ refers to the last subject of i. 5, and that the construction of this section is similar; that the occurrence of the phrase the love of God in v. 5 implies a reference of the preceding αὐτοῦ to the Son and not to the Father; that Christ Himself speaks of the ‘keeping of His Commandments’ as the proof of love (John xiv. 15, &c.). On the other hand it is said that in this Epistle ’the Commandments’ referred to are always the Commandments of God (i.e. the Father) as iii. 22, 24; v. 2, 3; and that God is the great under-

⁴ ὁ λέγων ὅτι ΝΔΒ syrr: - ὅτι 5°C. - καὶ ἐν τ. Α.

• καὶ ἐν τ. Α.

lying subject of all, the ‘He’ (αὐτός) which is self-defined; so that in point of fact αὐτός generally refers to ‘God,’ while ἐκεῖνος always refers to Christ (v. 6 note).

The sense remains substantially the same in both cases. It is in the Son that the Father is known (John xiv. 9). And perhaps it is best to suppose that St John assumes a general antecedent ‘Him to whom we turn as God’ without special distinction of Persons. In other places he does not seem to draw any sharp distinction between the Father and the Son, but in the One God looks now to the revelation of the Father in the Son and now to the revelation of the Son (comp. iii. 1-3, 5, 6; v. 20).

ἐάν…τηρῶμεν] si obserremus V., si servaverimus Aug., if we keep his commandments. Comp. v. 4; iii. 22, 24; v. 3; John xiv. 15, 21; xv. 10; Apoc. xii. 17; xiv. 12. The phrase (τηρεῖν τὰς ἐντολὰς) is only found elsewhere in New Testament in Matt. xix. 17; 1 Tim. vi. 14 (τηρεῖν τὴν ἐντ.). Comp. 1 Cor. vii. 19. It appears to be distinguished from the phrase which follows ‘keep his word’ as being an observance of definite instructions, while that is the observance of a principle which is ever taking a new embodiment in the very process of life.

The phrase ποιεῖν τὰς ἐντολὰς, which is found in the common text of Apoc. xxii. 14, is a false reading.

The idea of τηρεῖν, as distinguished from φυλάσσειν in this connexion (John xii. 47; Matt. xix. 20; Luke xi. 28) appears to be that of watchful heed to an object which claims, so to speak, a living observance, a service not of the letter but of the spirit. A definite, unchangeable, deposit is ‘guarded’ (φυλάσσεται, 1 Tim. vi. 20): a vital, growing, word is ‘observed’ (τηρεῖται, John xiv. 22). The two verbs occur in juxtaposition in John xvii. 12 (note).

1 John 2:4

4. ὁ λέγων] He that saith. This individualising of the statement stands in contrast with the comprehensive form cited before If we say (i. 6, 8, 10) and that used in v. 5. It occurs again vv. 6, 9.

Ἔγνωκα αὐτόν] se nosse eum V., quia cognocit (cogmoci) eum Aug., I know him. The direct personal assertion (ὁ λέγων ὅτι) is bolder in form than the oblique construction in vv. 6, 9 (ὁ λέγων μένειν, εἶναι). Comp. Hos. viii. 2.

In the words which follow St John significantly takes up again phrases which he has used already in connexion with the three false pleas in regard to sin (ψεύστης ἐστίν || ψεύσεται v. 6; ἐν τούτῳ ἢ ἀλ. οὐκ ἔστιν || ἡ ἀλ. οὐκ ἔστιν ἐν ἡμῖν v. 8; (ὃς δ’ ἂν τηρῇ) αὐτοῦ τὸν λόγον || ὁ λόγος αὐτοῦ (οὐκ ἔστιν ἐν ἡμῖν v. 10).

ψεύστης…οὐκ ἔστιν] a liar…in this man. The whole character is false. See i. 10 note. The clause is very similar to i. 6 b, but differs from it in being general while that is special. Here we have two characteristics of a permanent state (is a liar, the truth is not in him), and there two separate manifestations of the state (we lie, we do not the truth).

ἐν τούτῳ…οὐκ ἔστιν] in him the truth is not. Or more literally in this man thus definitely characterised and brought before us. See v. 5. This use of the demonstrative pro-

αὐτοῦ τὸν λόγον, ἀληθῶς ἐν τούτῳ ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ θεοῦ noun is characteristic of St John (John v. 38; i. 2 note); and the emphatic order adds to its force.

The truth is said to be in a man as an active principle within him regulating his thoughts and judgments (c. i. 8; John viii. 44; comp. John viii. 32); and again a man is said to be in the truth, as the sphere in which he moves (2 John 4; 3 John 3, 4; John viii. 44; comp. John xvii. 17).

1 John 2:5

5. ὃς δ’ ἂν τηρῇ…] qui autem servat V., qui a. servaverit Aug., but who-soccer keepeth. The indefinite form (iii. 17; iv. 15) marks the breadth of the assertion. The apostle does not here, as before and after, either single out a special example (ὁ λέγων, v. 4), or join himself with others (ἐὰν εἴπωμεν, i. 6). He makes the statement in the most general terms.

It will be noticed that the opposite to the vain assertions of false claimants to the Christian name is not given in a counter assertion but, as always, in action (i. 7 if we walk; i. 9 if we confess; v. 10 he that loveth).

τηρῇ αὐτοῦ τὸν λόγον] keepeth his word. The phrase expresses not only the fulfilment of specific injunctions (keep his commandments, v. 3) but also the needful regard to the whole revelation made by Christ as a living and active power, of which the voice is never silent. The unity of the many ‘commandments’ is not in a ’law’ but in a ‘word’: it answers to the spirit and not to the letter. Comp. John viii. 51 f., 55; xiv. 23; xv. 20; xvii. 6. The passage John xiv. 21-24 is of singular interest as illustrating the full meaning of the phrase.

The position of the pronoun here (αὐτοῦ τὸν λόγον), as contrasted with that which it has in v. 3 (τὰς ἐντολὰς αὐτοῦ), emphasises the personal idea. The main thought is that the word is His word, the word of God. There is emphasis also on the ‘keeping’ ὃς δ’ ἂν τηρῇ contrasted with ὁ…τὰς ἐντ. μὴ τηρῶν).

ἀληθῶς ἐν τούτῳ] verily in him, in this man, v. 4 note.

In the description of the state of the watchful believer the form of expression is changed significantly. St John does not say of him (v. 4) that ‘he is true and the truth is in him’; but he rather regards his character from the divine side, and points out not what such a man is, but what such a man has received from Him who is unchangeable: in this man the love of God hath been perfected. By doing this he passes at the same time from that which may be a part of life to the fulness of life. Truth may be only a right conception realised in thought: love is the Truth realised in a personal relation. The love which God gives (iii. 1) becomes an active, divine power in the man who welcomes it.

ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ θεοῦ] caritas Dei V., dilectio Dei Aug., the love of God. The phrase, which occurs in the Epistle first here and henceforth throughout it, is ambiguous and may mean, according as the gen. is taken subj. or obj., either (1) the love which God shews, or (2) the love of which God is the object. It may also mean more generally (3) the love which is characteristic of God whether it is regarded as shewn by God or by man through His help. Generally the genitive after ἀγάπη in the N. T. is subj., and defines those who feel or shew love: 1 Thess. iii. 6; 2 Thess. i. 3; Phil. i. 9; Col. i. 8; Philem. 5, 7; Apoc. ii. 4, 19. Once it marks the object of love: 2 Thess. ii. 10 ἡ ἀγ. τῆς ἀληθείας. But the object is more commonly expressed by εἰς: 1 Thess. iii. 12; Col. i. 4; 1 Pet. iv. 8. Comp. Ign. Mart. 1; [Clem. R.] fragm. 1 (Jacobson).

In St Paul ’the love of God,’ with

5 ἐν τούτῳ…ἐσμέν: Aug. reads in hoc cognoscimus quia in ipso sumus si in ipso perfecti fuerimus.

the doubtful exception of 2 Thess. iii. 5, always means the love which is shewn by God, which comes from God: 2 Cor. viii. 14; Rom. v. 5; viii. 39; Eph. ii. 4; and so also ’the love of Christ’ is the love which Christ has shewn and shews: 2 Cor. v. 14; Rom. viii. 35; Eph. iii. 19. Comp. Ign. ad Trall. 6; ad Rom. inser. In like manner ’the love of the Spirit’ (Rom. xv. 30) is that love which the Spirit kindles and sustains. The phrase ’the love of God’ does not occur in the LXX.

The usage of St John is less simple than that of St Paul. In 1 John iv. 9 ’the love of God’ is evidently the love which God has shewn (comp. c. v. 9 ἡ μαρτυρία τοῦ θεοῦ), and this love is declared to be the spring of all love. ‘His love’ (v. 12) becomes effective in man. This conception of the love of God as communicated by God to man is plainly expressed in 1 John iii. 1 the Father hath given to us love (comp. c. iv. 7, 16). Love such as God Himself feels—‘divine love’—becomes therefore an endowment of the Christian. In this sense ’the love of God’ in the believer calls for deeds of love to the brethren (c. iii. 17). At the same time God is Himself the object of the love of which He is the source and the rule: c. v. 3 (comp. John xiv. 15, 31); ii. 15 (ἡ ἀγ. τοῦ πατρός).

It appears therefore most probable that the fundamental idea of ’the love of God’ in St John is ’the love which God has made known, and which answers to His nature.’ This love communicated to man is effective in him towards the brethren and towards God Himself. But however it may be manifested the essential conception that it is a love divine in its origin and character is not lost. Comp. John xv. 9 f.

According to this interpretation the phrase corresponds with the ‘righteousness of God’ (Rom. i. 17, &c.), the ‘peace of God’ (Phil. iv. 7).

The phrase occurs twice only in the Gospels: Luke xi. 42; John v. 42. In each case the rendering ’love to God’ is admissible, but this rendering does not seem to exhaust the meaning (comp. Clem. R. 1 Cor. 49).

In the present passage there can be little doubt that c. iv. 9 defines the meaning. ‘The love of God’ is God’s love towards man welcomed and appropriated by man. The thought of action is throughout connected with the thought of what God has done. The Christian ‘knows the love of God and it becomes in him a spring of love, attaining its complete development in human life through vital obedience.

On the use of ἀγάπη by St John see additional note on c. iii. 16.

ἀληθῶς] vere V., verily, in very truth, and not in word only (c. iii. 18). Comp. John i. 47 (48); viii. 31. The word qualifies the whole clause which follows. This practical result is contrasted by implication with the idle assertions of false Christians.

The perfection of love is conditioned by the completeness of obedience.

τετελείωται] perfecta est V., consummata est Lucf., hath been perfected. Comp. c. iv. 12 (note), 17, 18 where the thought is presented in different lights. Comp. Clem. R. 1 Cor. 50 οἱ ἐν ἀγάπῃ τελειωθέντες. Doctr. Apost. x. 5 μνήσθητι, κύριε, τῆς ἐκκλησίας σου…τελειῶσαι αὐτὴν ἐν τῇ ἀγάπῃ σου. The potential fulfilment of the love of God in the Christian lies in his absolute readiness to learn and to do God’s will (comp. Rom. xiii. 10). Each Christian according to his

6 καὶ αὐτὸς περιπ. AB vg the: καὶ αὐτ. + οὕτως’ περιπ. 5NC me syr hcl.

measure is perfected as a member of Christ (Eph. iv. 16). He receives from Christ what Christ has Himself received. Comp. John xvii. 25 f. On this idea of ‘perfection,’ ‘consummation,’ see Heb. ii. 10; ix. 9; xii. 23 and notes. Contrast τελεῖται 2 Cor. xii. 9.

Both τελειοῦν and ἐπιτελεῖν are used of Christian action (Phil. iii. 12; Gal. iii. 3). But in τελειοῦν there is the idea of a continuous growth, a vital development, an advance to maturity (τελειότης, Heb. v. 13; vi. 1). In ἐπιτελεῖν the notion is rather that of attaining a definite end (τέλος). Contrast James ii. 22 ἐκ τῶν ἔργων ἡ πίστις ἐτελειώθη with 2 Cor. vii. 1 ἐπιτελοῦντες ἀγιωσύνην, and Acts xx. 24 τελειῶσαι τὸν δρόμον with 2 Tim. iv. 7 τὸν δρόμον τετέλεκα. In 2 Cor. xii. 9 τελειοῦται has been substituted in later authorities for τελεῖται.

v. 5 b, 6. The sign of union. The sign of union with God is found in the imitation of Christ. As the sign of knowledge is to be seen in the keeping of the divine commandments in their unity (v. 3) and in the keeping of the divine word in its unity (v. 5), so the sign of fellowship is to be seen in the copying the divine life.

In this we perceive that we are in him: ‘he that saith he abideth in him, ought himself also to walk even as he walked.

‘Ἐν τούτῳ] Hereby, in this, in the realisation of this spirit of obedience which is the gift of love: v. 3 note.

γινώσκομεν] Comp. v. 3; c. v. 2 notes. ἐν αὐτῷ ἐσμέν] are in Him. The idea finds a full expression in Acts xvii. 28 ἐν αὐτῷ ζῶμεν καὶ κινούμεθα καὶ ἐσμέν. It is prominent in St John’s writings in its spiritual form, and is presented under several different aspects. The fellowship of believers with God is accomplished in Christ (John xiv. 20; xvii. 21, 23). They have in Him the unity and foundation of their being, even as ’the world’ ’lies in the evil one’ (c. v. 19 f.). The connexion finds a twofold fulfilment in ‘heaven’ and on ’earth,’ ‘we in Him and He in us’ (iv. 15 note).

For the phrase ‘being in God’ St John more commonly, as in the following clause, uses the phrase ‘abiding in God,’ which adds the conception of personal determination and effort: vv. 24, 27, 28; iii. 6, 24; iv. 12 f.; 15 f. John vi. 56 note; xv. 4 ff.

Thus there is a progressive closeness of relation in the three phrases used in this section: ἐγνωκέναι αὐτόν, εἶναι ἐν αὐτῷ, μένειν ἐν αὐτῷ (‘cognitio, communio, constantia,’ Bengel).

1 John 2:6

6. ὁ λέγων] he that saith. v. 4. The open, personal profession carries with it a paramount obligation.

ἐν αὐτῷ μένειν] v. 5 note.

The construction of λέγω with the infin. occurs again in v. 9. Comp. 2 Tim. ii. 18; and v. 4 note.

ὀφείλει] debet V., ought, is bound. The obligation is represented as a debt (Luke xvii. 10). The life which is from God and in God must be manifested after the pattern of the divine life which has been shewn upon earth. As contrasted with δεῖ, an obligation in the nature of things (John xx. 9), which is not found in the Epistles of St John, though it is not unfrequent in the Gospel (c. iii. 14 note) and the Apocalypse, ὀφείλειν expresses a special, personal obligation.

Comp. c. iii. 16; iv. 11; 3 John 8.

The image is frequent in St Paul. Comp. Rom. i. 14; Gal. v. 3.

καθὼς ἐκεῖνος] even as he, i.e. Christ. The pronoun ἐκεῖνος occurs iii. 3, 5, 7, 16; iv. 17, and is always used of Christ. He stands out as the one figure seen in full perfection of His humanity. Comp. John i. 18; 2 Tim. ii. 13. For the omission of οὕτως see c. iv. 17 note.

περιεπάτησεν] walked, i. 6 note. Even in the contemplation of the loftiest thoughts St John fixes a practical standard. The divine fellowship to which he points is realised on earth in corresponding action.

The pattern of Christ, as set before us in the New Testament, is in every case a pattern of humiliation, suffering, sacrifice. Comp. Matt. xi. 29; John xiii. 15; Rom. xv. 2f.; Eph. v. 1 ff.; Phil. ii. 5 ff.; 1 Pet. ii. 21; Heb. xii. 2.

Augustine points out that ‘walking’ may be ‘bearing’ only: [Christus] fixus in cruce erat et in ipsa via ambulabat: ipsa est via caritatis.

1 John 2:7

III. OBEDIENCE IN LOVE AND LIGHT IN ACTUAL LIFE (ii. 7—11).

The declaration of the test of knowledge of God and fellowship with God, which St John has given in vv. 3—6, leads to a view of the practical fulfilment of the test indicated already in v. 6. The Life of Christ, a Life of complete love, of complete self-sacrifice, is the type of the Christian’s Life; and the significance of Christ’s Life in this aspect is gathered up in the one commandment of love, which expresses what is meant by ‘keeping His commandments’ (v. 3) and ‘walking even as He walked’ (v. 6). This commandment is first set forth in its twofold character as old and yet new (vv. 7, 8); and then traced out in its issues (vv. 9—11).

1. The Commandment old and new (ii. 7, 8).

The commandment, which is the rule of the Christian Life, is as old as the first message of the Gospel and yet as new as the latest realisation of its power. It lies included in what we first hear, and is illuminated by the growing experience of life.

7 Beloved, it is no new commandment I write to you, but an old commandment which ye had from the beginning: the commandment, the old commandment, is the word which ye heard.

8 Again, a new commandment I write to you, even that which is true in him and in you, because the darkness is passing away and the light, the true light, already shineth.

The ‘commandment’ to which the apostle refers has not been formally stated, but it is implied in the ‘ought’ (‘is bound’ ὀφείλει) of v. 6. The idea of the imitation of Christ is identical with the fulfilment of love. And the word ὀφείλει carries us back to the Lord’s interpretation of His example: John xiii. 14 (ὑμεῖς ὀφείλετε). We have already seen that the many ‘commandments’ (v. 3) are included in ’the word’ (v. 5). Now the ‘commandments’ are summed up in the one ‘commandment’ (John xiii. 34; comp. c. iii. 22 f.).

This commandment is spoken of as ’not new but old.’ In this connexion ‘old’ may mean either (1) old relatively: one which belonged to the first stage of the Christian Church, while perhaps as yet it was unseparated from the old order: one of which believers had been in possession from the beginning, from the first origin of their faith; or (2) old absolutely: one which was included in the very constitution of man from the beginning: one which the Jew had recognised in the injunctions of the Law, and the Gentile in the promptings of his heart.

The clause which immediately follows, and the identification of the commandment with ’the word’ which the disciples heard, seem to determine that the first sense is undoubtedly right.

7 Ἀγαπητοί, οὐκ ἐντολὴν καινὴν γράφω ὑμῖν, ἀλλ’ ἐντολὴν παλαιὰν ἦν εἴχετε ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς· ἡ ἐντολὴ ἡ Ἀγαπητοί ἌΛΒC vg the me syrr : ἀδελφοί 5.

7. Ἀγαπητοί] Carissimi V., Dilectissimi Aug., Beloved. This is the first occurrence of the title. It is suggested by the thought of the last few verses, just as the paternal address My little children (v. 1) was suggested by i. 10. The love of God and the love of Christ calling out man’s love presents Christians in their new relation one to another. St John while enforcing the commandment of love gives expression to love. Comp. iii. 2, 21; iv. 1, 7 note, 11; and in the sing. 3 John 2, 5, 11. In each case the use of the title illustrates the apostle’s thought. So also the title ἀδελφοί brings out the point of his teaching in the one place where he adopts it: iii. 13.

With ἀγαπητοί contrast ἠγαπημένοι Col. iii. 12; 1 Thess. i. 4; 2 Thess. ii. 13. Comp. Eph. i. 6.

οὐκ ἐντ. κ. γ.] Comp. 2 John 5 οὐχ ὡς ἐντ. γράφων σοι κ.

ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς] ab initio V., from the beginning. The words are, as has been already indicated, ambiguous. The phrase is used both absolutely and relatively.

1. It is used absolutely: c. iii. 8 ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς ὁ διάβολος ἁμαρτάνει, when first the present order of being is disclosed.

vv. 13, 14 ὁ ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς.

Matt. xix. 4, 8 ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς. || Mc. x. 6 ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς κτίσεως. 2 Pet. iii. 4.

2. Again it is used relatively in different connexions:

John xv. 27 ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς μετ’ ἐμοῦ ἐστέ, from the beginning of my public ministry. Comp. ἐξ ἀρχῆς John vi. 64, xvi. 4; Acts xxvi. 4 τὴν ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς γενομένην [βίωσιν] from the beginning of my life.

Luke i. 2 οἱ ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς αὐτοπταί. Comp. Acts i. 22.

c. ii. 24 ὁ ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς ἠκούσατε, from the beginning of your Christian faith. Comp. c. iii. 11; 2 John 6.

These last passages, which are closely parallel, decide that the reference here is to the beginning of the Christian faith of the readers.

Comp. Is. lxiii. 16 (lxx.).

The article is omitted as in the corresponding phrases ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου, πρὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου. See c. i. 1 note.

ἡ ἐντολὴ…ἠκούσατε] the commandment, the commandment of which I speak, the old commandment, is the word which ye heard. The form of expression used emphasises the two thoughts which have gone before (the commandment, the old commandment). Comp. i. 2, ii. 25 ἡ ζωὴ ἡ αἰώνιος (the life, the eternal life); i. 3 ἡ κοινωνία ἡ ἡμετέρα (the fellowship of which I speak, the fellowship which is our blessing); v. 8 τὸ φῶς τὸ ἀληθινόν; iv. 9 ὁ υἱὸς ὁ μονογενής: 2 John 11 τοῖς ἔργοις αὐτοῦ τοῖς πονηροῖς: 13 τῆς ἀδελφῆς σου τῆς ἐκλεκτῆς.

On the other hand St John writes c. iv. 18 ἡ τελεία ἀγάπη: 3 John 4 τὰ ἐμὰ τέκνα.

ὁ λόγος] The old commandment, the commandment of love, was included in the ‘Gospel’ which the apostles proclaimed. The record of the Lord’s work, the word of life, was a continuous call to love.

ὃν ἠκούσατε] which ye heard, v. 24, iii. 11. Contrast the perfect: i. 1, 3, 5, iv. 3. The change of tenses in εἴχετε, ἠκούσατε, is significant. The commandment was a continuous power: the hearing of the word was at once final in its obligation.

8 ἀλ. καὶ ἐν αὐτῷ Ν:

ἐν ὑμῖν NBC vg the me syrr : ἐν ἡμῖν A syr hel mg (lat).

1 John 2:8

8. πάλιν] iterum V., again. The apostle has given one side of the Truth : he now turns to the other. The πάλιν answers exactly to our ‘again’ when we enter on a new line of argument or reflection, starting afresh. Comp. John xvi. 28 ; 1 Cor. xii. 21 ; 2 Cor. x. 7 ; xi. 16.

ἐντολὴν καινὴν] mandatum novum V., a new commandment. Comp. John xiii. 34. The commandment of love was new to the disciples who had followed Christ when He gave it them on the eve of the Passion in a new form and with a new sanction. It was new also to the believers whom St John addressed in proportion as they were now enabled to apprehend with fresh power the Person and Life of Christ. The ’newness’ is relative to the position of those to whom St John writes. While life advances the Gospel must be always new. Contrast Hebr. viii. 13.

ὃ ἐστιν ἀληθὲς…] quod verum est… V., even that which is true… The whole sentence admits of several different translations : (1) As a new commandment I write unto you that which is true… (2) A new commandment write I unto you, namely, that which is true… (3) A new commandment write I unto you, a fact (i.e. that it is new as well as old) which is true… The symmetry of the structure seems to be decisive against (1) : Ἐντολὴν καινὴν γράφω cannot but be strictly parallel to οὐκ ἐντολὴν καινὴν γράφω—‘a new commandment do I write,’ ’not a new commandment do I write.’ It is more difficult to decide between (2) and (3). If (2) be taken the sense will be : ‘A new commandment write I unto you, new no less than old, new in its shape and in its authority, even that which, while it was enjoined upon us from the first, has been found to correspond more closely than we then understood with the facts of Christ’s Life, with the crowning mystery of His Passion, and with the facts of the Christian life.’ If on the other hand (3) be taken then we have this line of thought : ‘A new commandment write I unto you, new, I say, as well as old, an assertion which is proved true in Christ, so far as His works and words have become more fully known ; and in you, so far as the actual experience of life has shewn this duty of love in a new light, more comprehensive and more constraining.’

On the whole the second interpretation appears to fall in best with the context and with the reason which follows (because…the true light already shineth). That which gave novelty to the commandment was found in the larger and deeper views of Christ’s Person and of the work of the Church which had been unfolded since ’the beginning.’ Old words, St John could affirm, and appeal to his readers for the confirmation of the statement, had become new. Comp. 2 Cor. v. 17.

ὅτι ἡ σκοτία…] because the darkness… The apostle justifies his paradox by calling attention to the change which had taken place in the face of the world since the Gospel was first preached. The outward establishment of the Church gave a clearer distinctness to the Christian character. It had become possible to point to that which was openly before men’s eyes. At the same time the Person of Christ Himself, with its infinite significance, was illuminated by the experience of believers. The meaning of ’the word’

(for example) was made clearer than before by the Gospel of St John as compared with the earlier Gospels.

The clause may be taken as an explanation of the reason for which the apostle is repeating the command, even that it was the ’last hour.’ But this interpretation appears improbable.

παράγεται…φαινει] transierunt… lucet V., is passing away…already shineth. The change is pictured as in process. The darkness is being withdrawn (παράγεται) as a curtain from the face of the world, and the light is beginning (ἤδη) to have free course.

For παράγεται see v. 17. The in-trans. παράγει occurs 1 Cor. vii. 31; Ps. exliv. (exliii.) 4. The idea seems to be that God is removing the veil in order to lay open the better things which it conceals.

τὸ φῶς τὸ ἀληθινόν] verum lumen V., lux vera Aug., the light, the true light. The addition of the epithet ἀληθινόν (c. v. 20) which is found only here and John i. 9 (note) with φῶς, marks the light as that which fulfilled all that had been promised by the preparatory, partial, even fictitious, lights which had existed in the world before. If we endeavour to fix the meaning of ’the light’ here it can be best done by the help of the parallel John i. 9. Before the Incarnation ’the Word,’ ’the true Light’ was ever ‘coming into the world.’ Now by the mission of the Holy Spirit, sent in His name, He was shining with a steady beam. The darkness had not eclipsed it. In the Christian Society, seen in the midst of the world, there was an evident manifestation of the light defining the lines of Christian conduct.

God ‘is light’ absolutely (i. 5): the revelation of God in Christ by the

Spirit is ’the light, the true light’ for men; and in His light the believer is enabled to see all things.

φαινει] lucet V., shineth. Comp. John i. 5 (note). The idea is of a luminary giving out its brightness: Apoc. i. 16, viii. 12, xxi. 23; 2 Pet. i. 19.

For the image generally compare Rom. xiii. 11 ff.; Tit. ii. 11; iii. 4.

2. The issues of the commandment of love (ii. 9—11).

The fulfilment of the commandment of love is regarded in its general nature (v. 9) and then more in detail in the effects of love and hatred (vv. 10, 11). A state of love is the condition of being in light; and this state carries with it a clear certainty of right action which is otherwise unobtainable. Hatred on the other hand involves complete ignorance of the way and of the end of life. This must be so; for dwelling in darkness destroys the very power by which the light is discerned.

⁹He that saith he is in the light and hateth his brother is in the darkness until now. ¹⁰He that loveth his brother abideth in the light, and there is none occasion of stumbling in him; ¹¹but he that hateth his brother is in the darkness, and walketh in the darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth, because the darkness hath blinded his eyes.

1 John 2:9

9. The link of transition lies in the last words of v. 8. The thought of ’the light already shining’ naturally suggests the question, Who then is in the light? St John’s account of the obligations and issues of love explains this and is an answer to the false claims of knowledge separated from the action which embodies it (comp. v. 4).

Ὁ λέγων…] He that saith. v. 4. It

⁹ μισῶν: + ψεύστης ἐστὶν καὶ ✕ Cypr Lefr.

is always easy to mistake an intellectual knowledge for a spiritual knowledge of the Truth. Real knowledge involves, at least potentially, corresponding action.

ἐν τῷ φωτὶ εἶναι] is in the light, surrounded, as it were, by an atmosphere of divine glory. Comp. i. 7 (iv. 15 note).

μισῶν…] hateth… Indifference is impossible. Comp. Luke xi. 23. There is no twilight in this spiritual world. ‘The brother’ stands in a relation towards us which makes some feeling on our part inevitable. In such a case there is a simple choice between ‘for’ and ‘against,’ that is essentially between ’love’ and ‘hatred.’ ‘Hatred’ is the expression of a want of sympathy. Where sympathy exists hatred is impossible (John vii. 7); where sympathy does not exist hatred is inevitable (John xv. 18 ff., xvii. 14, iii. 20).

There is however a certain ambiguity in the word ‘hate’ for it serves as the opposite both to the love of natural affection (φιλεῖν), and to the love of moral judgment (ἀγαπᾶν). In the former case ‘hatred,’ which may become a moral duty, involves the subjection of an instinct (John xii. 25, xv. 18 f.; comp. Luke xiv. 26); in the latter case ‘hatred’ expresses a general determination of character (c. iii. 15, iv. 20; comp. Matt. v. 43, vi. 24; Eph. v. 28 f.).

τὸν ἀδελφόν] his brother, that is, his fellow-Christian, and not more generally his fellow-man. It is only through the recognition of the relation to Christ that the wider relation is at last apprehended. The idea of brotherhood under the new dispensation (comp. Acts ii. 37, iii. 17, vi. 3, ix. 30, &c.: Rom. i. 13, &c.) is normally thus limited (yet see Acts xxii. 1, xxviii. 17; Rom. ix. 3). ‘Brethren’ are those who are united together in Christ to God as their Father (John xx. 17, xxi. 23; comp. Matt. xii. 50). The title occurs significantly in the first record of the action of the Church (Acts i. 15 ἐν μέσῳ τῶν ἀδελφῶν; comp. ix. 30, &c.) and then throughout the apostolic writings (1 Thess v. 26; Gal. i. 2; 1 Cor. v. 11; Rom. xvi. 14 &c.; 1 Tim. vi. 2; James i. 9; 1 Pet. v. 12 &c.; c. iii. 14, 16; 3 John 3, 5, 10.

The singular is characteristic of this epistle (vv. 10, 11, iii. 10, 15, 17, iv. 20 f., v. 16). Comp. Rom. xiv. 10 ff.; 1 Cor. viii. 13. Compare Additional Note on c. iii. 14.

There is, as far as it appears, no case where a fellow-man, as man, is called ‘a brother’ in the N. T. Such passages as Matt. v. 22 ff., Luke vi. 41 ff., presuppose a special bond of ‘brotherhood.’ The ’love of the brotherhood’ (φιλαδελφία· 1 Thess. iv. 9; Rom. xii. 10; Heb. xiii. 1; 1 Pet. i. 22 (iii. 8); 2 Pet. i. 7) leads up to ’love’ (ἀγάπη). But this widest love is expressly assigned in its full extent only to God (John iii. 16, c. iv. 10 f.).

Augustine makes a striking application of the words to the Donatists: Offendit te nescio quis sive malus, sive ut tu putas malus, sive ut tu fingis malus, et deseris tot bonos? Qualis dilectio est fraterna? Qualis apparuit in istis [Donatistis]. Cum accusant Afros deseruerunt orbem terrarum.

And again he points out the ground of the Christian’s love of enemies: Sic dilige inimicos ut fratres optes. Sic dilige inimicos ut in societatem tuam vocentur. Sic enim dilexit ille qui in cruce pendens ait Pater ignosce illis, quia nesciunt quid faciunt.

10 ὁ ἀγαπῶν τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ ἐν τῷ φωτὶ μένει, καὶ σκάνδαλον ἐν αὐτῷ οὐκ ἔστιν· 11 ὁ δὲ μισῶν τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ ἐστὶν καὶ ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ περιπατεῖ,

10 ἐν αὐτῷ οὐκ ἔστιν B vg: οὐκ ἔστιν ἐν αὐτῷ RAC (mc) the.

ἐν τῇ σκ. ἐστίν] is in the darkness. Comp. i. 6 note. The assertion is not simply characterised as false (i. 6 we lie) or as revealing a false nature (v. 4 he is a liar): it involves the existence of a moral state the exact opposite of that which is claimed.

ἴως ἄρτι] usque adhuc V., until now, though the light is actually shining, and he affirms that he is in it, yea even that he has been in it from the first.

Additional Note on ii. 9. St John’s view of the state of man.

St John assumes that the actual state of man and of the world is known by experience, from what we see about us and from history and from consciousness.

Naturally ‘darkness’ (comp. c. i. 5, note) is the sphere in which man abides (John xii. 46; 1 John ii. 9 ἕως ἄρτι) until it is dispelled. (Comp. John viii. 12; 1 Pet. ii. 9; Eph. vi. 12; Col. i. 13.) Under one aspect this darkness has wrought its work, and the crisis is past (c. ii. 11, ἐτύφλωσεν, note). Under another aspect there are times when the darkness falls afresh over men with a thicker gloom (John xii. 35, ἵνα μὴ σκ. ὑ. καταλάβῃ). Viewed from a different point of sight this darkness is death (John v. 24).

¹ E.g. Clem. ad Cor. i. 7 οἱ δὲ (the Ninevites) μετανοήσαντες ἐπὶ τοῖς ἁμαρτήμασιν ἐξιλάσαντο τὸν θεὸν ἱκετεύσαντες. Herm. Vis. i. 2 πῶς ἐξιλάσομαι τὸν θεὸν περὶ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν μου τῶν τελείων; Test. xii. Patr. Levi 3 οἱ ἄγγελοι…οἱ λειτουργοῦντες καὶ ἐξιλασκόμενοι πρὸς Κύριον ἐπὶ πᾶσαις ταῖς ἀγνοίαις τῶν δικαίων. Philo, de plantat. § 39 (i. 354) εὐξάμενοι καὶ θυσίας ἀναγαγόντες, καὶ ἱλασάμενοι τὸ θεῖον. Comp. Leg. Alleg. iii. § 61 (i. 121 M).

Man by nature in darkness and death.

This state due to external influence.

This present state of man is due to a mysterious interruption of the Divine plan which is noticed abruptly (John i. 5) and came from another order (c. iii. 8). It is not due to a physical or metaphysical necessity, and is foreign to the essence of man. As the creature of God man was made good not absolutely but relatively. Sin has disturbed his normal development (c. iii. 4). Nothing however is said by St John of the Fall; nor does he mention Adam (yet comp. Apoc. xii. 9 ff.; xx. 2 ὁ ὄφις ὁ ἀρχαῖος). The sin of Cain, the manifestation of sin in the realm of human life, and not the sin of Adam, is treated as the archetypal sin (c. iii 12).

Man failed to see God.

As a necessary consequence of his state, man failed of himself to gain a knowledge of God in the way of nature (John i. 10; comp. iii. 3), though he was not left unvisited (John i. 4, 9).

The mission of the Son of God revealed man to himself.

Under these circumstances God sent His Son to save the world, giving in this the measure of His love (John iii. 16 f.; c. iv. 10). But the coming of Christ was in effect a judgment, shewing to men what they had become (John ix. 39; comp. Apoc. iii. 17 ff.; Luke ii. 34 f.). For they were not without the power of recognising this Divine revelation (John xv. 22, 24; v. 36). The will to recognise God and not the capacity was wanting (John v. 40; vii. 17; viii. 44; xii. 48 ἔχει τὸν κρίνοντα; comp. iii. 18; vi. 67; ix. 41). The manifestation of love called out, as a necessary consequence, the opposition of selfishness, hatred (John iii. 19 f.; vii. 7; xv. 18 f., 23 f.; xvii. 14; comp. c. ii. 9, 11; iii. 10, 15; iv. 20). But this hatred was in despite of man’s real nature. It is true still that if he violates moral law he ’lies,’ and ‘deceives himself’ (c. i. 6, 8; ii. 4, 22; iv. 20).

The actual state of man shewn in contrasts.

These several traits combine to give a striking view of the grandeur and powerlessness of man (‘un roseau pensant’). He is made for God: he is unable of himself to attain to God: God claims his concurrence with the activity of Divine love. And it is most worthy of notice that St John simply declares the antithetic facts in their simple solemnity. He shews no desire to resolve the discords which he accentuates. He leaves them for a state of fuller knowledge and larger life.

Man is in darkness and death (John v. 24; c. iii. 14). On the other side the true Light shineth (John i. 5; xii. 36; c. ii. 8); and Christ offers ‘His flesh for the life of the world’ (John vi. 51).

The world ’lieth in the Evil One’ (c. v. 19). On the other side ’the Prince of the world’ is judged and cast out (John xii. 31; xvi. 11; comp. xiii. 40; c. v. 4 ἡ νίκη ἡ νικήσασα). There is a human will which is responsible and therefore in that sense ‘free’ (John v. 40; iii. 19 ff.; vii. 17). On the other side there is a Divine will which we cannot conceive to be finally ineffective (vi. 44 ff., 65; v. 21).

In the opening of the Gospel, John i. 12 f., these contrasts find a concurrent affirmation. On the one side the human element is seen in ἔλαβον, πιστεύονσιν, γενέσθαι. On the other side the Divine element is seen in ἐγεννήθησαν, ἔδωκεν ἐξουσίαν, τέκνα θεοῦ. Comp. John vi. 27 ff. (ἐργάζεσθε, δώσει).

The wide extent of these contrasts.

The same clear assertion of truths which appear to be in opposition extends to other parts of the region of Divine and human relations. There is one absolute message (John xii. 48); and yet concessions are made that men may embrace it more readily (John v. 34; comp. viii. 17). There is a group whom Christ speaks of as His own (John x. 27, 4); and yet He appeals generally to all, for the image of thirst expresses a universal want which Christ alone can satisfy (John vii. 37). A new birth is necessary for the perception of the Divine Kingdom and entrance into it (John iii. 3 ff.); and yet there are, as still without it, those who ‘are of the truth’ (John xviii. 37), who ‘do the truth’ (iii. 21), who are ‘children of God’ (xi. 52).

In part we can see perhaps where the reconciliation of these statements can be found. In part they finally go back to the fundamental antithesis of the finite and infinite before which our present powers fail. The teaching of St John helps us to see that it is enough that we hold the fulness of the truth as it is presented to us in complementary fragments.

1 John 2:10

10. ὁ ἀγαπῶν…] He that loveth… The reality of the fact is set against the assertion in v. 9 (He that saith…). Comp. vv. 4, 5 note.

ἐν τῷ φωτὶ μένει] abideth (and not simply is as in v. 9) in the light. The idea of stability is added to that of simple ‘being’ (comp. vv. 5, 6). The position of the false brother and of the true brother is referred to the initial point of faith. Love testifies to the continuance of a divine fellowship on man’s part but does not create it: the absence of love shews that the fellowship has never been realised. For the use of ‘abide’ in various connexions see v. 6, iii. 14, iv. 16; 2 John 9; John xii. 46.

By love the disciple ‘follows’ his Master and has ’the light of life’ (John viii. 12).

σκάνδαλον…ἔστιν] scandalum in eo non est V., there is none occasion of stumbling in him. The image occurs elsewhere in St John’s writings in John vi. 61, xvi. 1; Apoc. ii. 14; comp. John xi. 9 f. It is at first sight doubtful whether the occasion of stumbling is that which may be in the way of others or in the way of the believer himself. A man may cause others to fall through want of love or he may by the same defect create difficulties in his own path.

The parallel in v. 11 favours the second view. Love gives the single eye which commands a clear prospect of the course to be followed, while if love be absent doubts and questionings arise which tend to the overthrow of faith (2 Pet. i. 10). But on the other hand the general use of σκάνδαλον points to the first meaning, and it is quite in St John’s manner to regard love in its twofold working in relation to the man who loves and to others, while he regards hatred only in its subject. The triumph of love is that it creates no prejudice against the Truth. Want of love is the most prolific source of offences.

ἐν αὐτῷ] in him. If the ‘offence’ is that which stands in a man’s own way, then he is regarded as offering in himself the scene of his spiritual advance: his progress, his dangers, are spiritual, internal. If the offence is that which lies in another’s way, then he who gives the offence presents the cause of stumbling in his own person.

1 John 2:11

11. Of the fruits of love it is sufficient to say that ‘he that loveth abideth in the light, and there is none occasion of stumbling in him.’ The issues of hatred are traced in different directions. They are regarded both in respect of present being (is in) and action (walketh in) and in respect of the final goal (knoweth not whither) to which life is directed. He who hates has lost the faculty of seeing, which requires light and love, ‘so that his whole life is a continual error’ (Howe).

ἐστίν…περιπατεῖ…] Comp. i. 7. The

καὶ οὐκ οἶδεν ποῦ ὑπάγει, ὅτι ἡ σκοτία ἐτύφλωσεν phrase πορεύεσθαι ἐν σκότει is used in a different sense in Is. l. 10.

οὐκ οἶδεν…] knoweth not… John xii. 35; Prov. iv. 19. On the other hand that which was true of Christ (John viii. 12, xiii. 3) is true also of the believer (comp. John xiv. 4, 5). He knows what is the end of life.

ὑπάγει] goeth. The idea is not that of proceeding to a definite point (πορεύεσθαι), but of leaving the present scene.

ἐτύφλ. τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς] The image comes from Is. vi. 10 (John xii. 40), which is the fundamental description of God’s mode of dealing with the self-willed. Comp. Rom. xi. 10 (Ps. lxix. 24); and for the opposite Eph. i. 18 πεφωτισμένους τοὺς ὀφθ. τῆς καρδίας. (Clem. 1 Cor. 36.)

ἐτύφλωσεν] The English idiom will not bear the exact rendering blinded. The original tense (comp. 2 Cor. iv. 4 and contrast John xii. 40) marks the decisive action of the darkness at the fatal moment when it once for all ‘overtook’ the man (John xii. 35 ἵνα μὴ καταλάβῃ, i. 5 οὐ κατέλαβεν). This darkness not only hindered the use of vision but (as darkness does physically) destroyed the spiritual organ.

IV. ii. 12—17. THINGS TEMPORAL AND ETERNAL.

Hitherto St John has stated briefly the main scope of his Epistle. He has shewn what is the great problem of life, and how the Gospel meets it with an answer and a law complete and progressive, old and new. He now pauses, as it were, to contemplate those whom he is addressing more distinctly and directly, and to gather up in a more definite form the charge which is at once the foundation and the end of all he writes.

The section is divided into two parts. The apostle first gives the ground of his appeal (vv. 12—14); and then he gives the appeal itself (15—17).

1. The ground of the appeal (ii. 12—14).

The ground of the apostle’s appeal lies in the character and position of those whom he is addressing. He regards his readers first under their common aspect as all alike believers, and then under a twofold aspect as ‘fathers’ and ‘young men,’ separated one from another by the length of their Christian experience. This he does twice, first in respect of the actual work in which he is at the moment engaged, and then again in respect of a work looked upon as finished and complete. He shews with an impressive iteration that from first to last, in all that he writes or has written, one unchanging motive is supreme. Because his readers are Christians and have in part experienced the power of their faith he moves them to nobler efforts; his object is that their ‘joy may be fulfilled’ (c. i. 4).

The exact relation of γράφω to ἔγραψα has been variously explained. It may be a reference to some other writing which has not been preserved, or, as some think, to the Gospel (comp. 3 John 9; 1 Cor. v. 9; 2 Cor. ii. 3 f., vii. 12); but the use of ἔγραψα in vv. 21, 26 is unfavourable to this view.

It may mark a contrast between the former part of the letter, and that part which the apostle is now writing, as if he resumed his work after an interval and looked back upon the words already written (comp. 1 Cor. ix. 15; Rom. xv. 15).

Or it may indicate simply a change of mental position in accordance with which St John transfers himself to the place of his readers, and regards the whole letter as they would do, as belonging to a past date.

Or yet again, to put this mode of

¹² Γράφω ὑμῖν, τεκνία, explanation in another form, St John may look at his letter first as it is in the process of transcription still incomplete (1 Cor. xiv. 37; 2 Cor. xiii. 10), and then as it is ideally complete. This appears to be the true explanation of the ’epistolary aorist.’ Comp. vv. 21, 26, v. 13; 2 John 12; 1 Pet. v. 12; Gal. vi. 11; Philem. 10, 21.

The Latin renderings of γράφω and ἔγραψα are alike scribo.

The symmetry of the corresponding clauses is remarkable.

(1) I write to you, little children (τεκνία), because your sins are forgiven you for His name’s sake.

(α) I write to you, fathers, because ye know Him that is from the beginning.

(β) I write to you, young men, because ye have overcome the evil one.

(2) I have written (I wrote) to you, little ones (παῦλα), because ye know the Father.

(α) I have written (I wrote) to you, fathers, because ye know Him that is from the beginning.

(β) I have written (I wrote) to you, young men, because ye are strong and the word of God abideth in you and ye have overcome the evil one.

The common title of address is different in the two cases (1) little children; (2) little ones. And in correspondence with this the aspect of the common ground of addressing those who are thus designated is also different (1) because your sins are forgiven for His name’s sake; (2) because ye know the Father. The special ground of addressing ’the fathers’ is the same in each case:

that of addressing ’the young men’ is not changed in the second case but more fully developed.

The causes of these variations will appear as we examine the text.

Augustine, like many others, supposes that three classes of readers are addressed. On this assumption he characterises them vigorously:

Filii sunt, patres sunt, juvenes sunt. Filii quia nascuntur: patres quia principium agnoscunt: juvenes, quare? Quia vicistis malignum. In filiis nativitas, in patribus antiquitas, in juvenibus fortitudo.

1 John 2:12

12. Γράφω] I write. Compare v. 1, and contrast i. 4 (we write). For the present tense compare Gal. i. 20; 1 Cor. xiv. 37; 2 Cor. i. 13; 1 Tim. iii. 14.

τεκνία] filioli V., little children. Comp. v. 1 my little children. The simple title occurs again v. 28 (iii. 7), iv. 4, v. 21. The word which expresses fellowship of nature is connected with that which is the sign of it, the forgiveness of sins. Comp. John iii. 5. Both from the symmetry of the structure (little children, fathers, young men), and from the general scope of the passage, it is evident that the title (here as elsewhere) is addressed to all St John’s readers and not to a particular class of children in age.

ὅτι] quoniam V., quia Aug., because. There can be no doubt that the particle is causal (because) and not declarative (that). St John does not write to make known the privileges of Christians, but to enforce the duties which follow from the enjoyment of them.

ἀφίονται ὑ. αἱ ἀμ.] remittuntur robis peccata V., your sins are forgiven, i.e. have been forgiven. The present of the Latin is misleading though the past forgiveness of sin carries with it the constant applica-

tion of the grace to which it was due: John xiii. 10. In parallel narratives, it may be added, ἀφέωνται is used by St Matthew (ix. 2, 5) and St Mark (ii. 5, 9), and ἀφέωνται by St Luke (v. 20, 23). In Luke vii. 47 f. ἀφέωνται is practically undisturbed. The reading in John xx. 23 is somewhat doubtful (ἀφέωνται, ἀφέωνται).

The proclamation of the forgiveness of sins was the message of the Gospel: Luke xxiv. 47; Acts xiii. 38. This includes potentially the fulfilment of man’s destiny as man. Comp. i. 9 note. For Christ’s sake the Father (v. 14) forgives those who are united with Him.

διὰ τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ] propter nomen ejus V., per n. e. Aug., for his name’s sake. There is no direct antecedent; but from v. 6 the thought of Christ as the perfect exemplar of divine love has been present to the mind of the apostle; and the pronoun clearly refers to Him. Forgiveness is granted to men because Christ is indeed what He is revealed to be and what His ’name’ expresses. It is of course assumed that Christians acknowledge Him as being what He is (Matt. xxviii. 19).

Redemption is referred to Christ as He has been made known, both in respect of the fact that that revelation contains the force through which as the means (διὰ gen.) and the ground for the sake of which as the cause (διὰ acc.) it is accomplished. See c. iv. 9 ζήσωμεν δι’ αὐτοῦ; John vi. 57 ζήσει δι’ ἐμέ. The latter construction is very rare. Comp. John xv. 3 καθαροί ἐστε διὰ τὸν λόγον; Apoc. xii. 11 ἐνίκησαν διὰ τὸ αἷμα τοῦ ἀρνίου.

For διὰ τὸ ὄνομα see Matt. x. 22, xxiv. 9 and parallels; John xv. 21; Apoc. ii. 3.

διὰ τοῦ ὀνόματος Acts iv. 30, x. 43; 1 Cor. i. 10.

In two other places of the Epistle ’the name’ of Christ is mentioned as the object of faith in different aspects. The commandment of God is that we believe the name (πιστεύειν τῷ ὄν.) of His Son Jesus Christ (iii. 23), that is, that we accept the revelation conveyed in that full title as true. And again those who believe in the name (πιστεύειν εἰς τὸ ὄν.) of the Son of God (v. 13), who cast themselves wholly upon the revelation, are assured of the possession of life eternal (comp. John i. 12 note). With these passages must be compared John xx. 31, where St John says that the object of his Gospel was that his readers may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and believing may have life in His name (ἐν τῷ ὄν.), in fellowship with Him as He has thus been made known.

The pregnant use of ’the name’ as summing up that which is made known of Christ, explains how it came to be used as equivalent to ’the faith’: 3 John 7 ὑπὲρ τοῦ ὀνόματος ἐξῆλθαν. See Additional Note on iii. 23.

1 John 2:13

13. Believers, who are one in the possession of the gift of forgiveness, are distinguished by the circumstances of life. Differences of experience correspond generally to differences of age. Mature Christians, in a society like that which St John addressed, would be ‘fathers’ in years. The difference of ‘fathers’ and ‘young men’ answers to that of ’the thinkers, and the soldiers in the Christian army,’ to the two main applications of the Faith. It is a spring of wisdom; and it is also a spring of strength. In the natural sequence action is the way to that knowledge through which wisdom comes. Christian wisdom is not speculative but first the fruit of work and then the principle of work.

The characteristic of ‘fathers’ is knowledge, the fruit of experience (ἐγνώκατε): that of ‘young men,’ victory, the prize of strength. St

¹³ γράφω ὑμῖν, πατέρες, ὅτι ἐγνώκατε τὸν ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς· γράφω ὑμῖν, νεανίσκοι, ὅτι νενικήκατε τὸν πονηρόν.

13 τὸ πονηρόν Ν.

John bases his appeal to each class on that which they had severally gained.

πατέρες] The word, like ΣΝ, Abba, pater, papa, is used naturally of those who stand in a position of responsible authority. Thus it is applied in the O. T. to prophets (2 K. ii. 12; vi. 21; xiii. 14), priests (Jud. xvii. 10; xviii. 19), teachers (Prov. i. 8). Comp. Matt. xxiii. 9; (1 Cor. iv. 15;) Acts vii. 2; xxii. 1. Here the natural characteristic of age is combined with that of eminence in the Christian body.

ὅτι ἐγνώκατε] quoniam (quia) cognoxistis V., because ye know… The essence of wisdom lies in the recognition of the unity of purpose which runs through the whole development of being, and of that unity of life which exists in all. This truth is brought home through the deeper understanding of the age-long revelation of God consummated in the Incarnation and interpreted by the Spirit.

For the idea of knowledge see v. 3 note. God can be known only in His Son. The knowledge here spoken of is that which is the result of the past still abiding (ἐγνώκατε) and not that which marked a crisis in growth (ἔγνωτε) or which is still in continuous advance (γινώσκετε).

τὸν ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς] cum qui ab initio (a principio Aug.) est V., Him that is from the beginning, the Word, that is, brought near to us in the Person of Christ Jesus. The title sums up shortly what is expressed in its successive stages in John i. 1—14, the Word through Whom all things were made, and in Whom all things consist, Who, as Life, was the Light of men, Who was ever coming into the world which He made, Who became Flesh. The word of life (c. i. 1) is the record of the revelation of Him that is from the beginning. The whole course of history is, when rightly understood, the manifestation of one will. To know this in Christ is the prerogative of a ‘father,’ and the knowledge is the opportunity for the completest life.

νεανίσκοι] adulescentes V., juvenes Aug., young men in the full vigour of opening life. Comp. Matt. xix. 20; Luke vii. 14.

νενικήκατε] have overcome, not ‘overcame’ simply (c. v. 4 ἡ νίκη ἡ νικήσασα). The past remains effective. The image, based on John xvi. 33, is characteristic of the Apocalypse (ii. 7 ff., xii. 11, xxi. 7) and of this Epistle: v. 14, iv. 4, v. 4 f.

τὸν πονηρόν] malignum V., the evil one, v. 14, iii. 12, v. 18 f.; John xvii. 15; Matt. vi. 13, xiii. 19, 38 (v. 37, 39). The personal aspect of the Christian conflict on its spiritual side is naturally brought out now. Darkness has its prince: John xii. 31, xiv. 30, xvi. 11. It is assumed that a conflict is inevitable unless men passively yield to the power of evil (c. v. 19). Comp. Eph. ii. 2, vi. 12. The abruptness with which the idea of ’the evil one’ is introduced shews that it was familiar. See Additional Note.

Additional Note on ii. 13. The powers of evil.

St John speaks comparatively little of subordinate spiritual powers in his Gospel and Epistles. The ministry of angels is essential to the whole structure of the Apocalypse, which contains also characteristic references to ’the Serpent,’ ’the ancient Serpent,’ ’the dragon’ (xii. 3 ff.; xiii. 2 ff.; xvi. 13; xx. 2), ‘who is called the Devil and Satan’ (xii. 9); compare also ix. 20 (τὰ δαιμόνια); xvi. 14 (πν. δαιμονίων). But into these notices we do not now inquire.

The only references to angels in the Gospel are in i. 51 (52); xx. 12 (v. (3) 4, embodies an early tradition, but is no part of the original text). They have no place in the Epistles. In the Gospel ‘demons’ are only spoken of by the Jews or in direct reference to their words (vii. 20; viii. 48 ff.; x. 20 f.). In the first epistle ‘spirits’ of antichrist are described as influencing men (c. iv. 2 ff. note, 6).

But the notices of the representative power of evil are of great importance. He is spoken of as ’the Devil’ (ὁ διάβολος John viii. 44; xiii. 2; c. iii. 8, 10), the false accuser (John vi. 70 note); ‘Satan’ (ὁ Σατανᾶς John xiii. 27), the adversary (comp. ὁ κατήγωρ Apoc. xii. 10); ’the evil one’ (ὁ πονηρός xvii. 15, note; c. ii. 13 f.; iii. 12; v. 18 f.); ’the ruler of this (the) world’ (ὁ ἄρχων τοῦ κόσμου τούτου John xii. 31; xvi. 11; ὁ τοῦ κ. ἄρχ. John xiv. 30).

Of his origin nothing is specially said. But enough is laid down to exclude the notion of two coordinate or absolute or original beings, good and evil. He was originally good, but ‘he stood not (John viii. 44 οὐκ ἔστηκεν, note) in the truth.’ This is all that we are concerned to know. For the rest he appears ‘from the beginning’ on the scene of human activity (c. iii. 8). Thus he stands in opposition to the Word (c. i. 1), and finally to the Incarnate Son (c. iii. 8 note; v. 18 f.; John xiv. 30 f.).

In this respect he is directly at variance with Christ in His essential character. Christ is ’the truth’ (John xiv. 6): the devil is a liar (John viii. 44; comp. c. ii. 22). Christ is ’the life’ (John xiv. 6): the devil is a murderer (John viii. 44; comp. c. iii. 15). In each case a personal an-

His present influence on men.

Already overthrown.

tagonist is set over against the absolute idea. In relation to the reality of things, and in relation to human fellowship: in the regions of thought, feeling, action; the devil conflicts with the Son of God.

For the present, as the title ’the ruler of this world’ implies, the devil exercises a wide influence over men (c. iii. 8 ff.; John viii. 44; xiii. 2, 27). They may become his ‘sons,’ his ‘children’ (c. iii. 10 note); they may be ‘of him’ (c. iii. 8). But they are never said to be ‘born of him,’ as they are born of God (c. ii. 29 &c). And in relation to the work of Christ he is already finally defeated (John xvi. 11; xii. 31; xiv. 30; c. v. 4, 18). It remains to secure the fruits of the victory.

1 John 2:14

14. At the close of v. 13 there is a pause in thought if not a break in the composition of the letter. Looking back on the record of his purpose the apostle appears to resume the thread of his argument: ‘I write, yea I have written, because you have had experience of the Faith.’ παῖδια] infantes V., pueri Aug., little ones. This title, little ones, which like τεκνία is applied to the whole

14 ἔγραψα ὑμῖν, παιδία, ὅτι ἐγνώκατε τὸν πατέρα· ἔγραψα ὑμῖν, πατέρες, ὅτι ἐγνώκατε τὸν ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς· ἔγραψα ὑμῖν, νεανίσκοι, ὅτι ἰσχυροί ἐστε καὶ ὁ λόγος

14 ἔγραψα ὑ. π. NABC the me syrr: γράφω ὑ. π. 5. τὸ ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς B. ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ NAC vg syrr: — τοῦ θεοῦ B the.

Christian body, differs from little children by emphasising the idea of subordination and not that of kinsmanship. St John speaks not as sharing the nature of those to whom he writes, but as placed in a position of authority over them. Comp. v. 18 (John xxi. 5).

In correspondence with this difference in the address St John gives a different reason for his writing: because ye know the Father.

The sense of an immediate personal relationship to God (comp. John xiv. 7) gives stability to all the gradations of human authority. In this respect ‘knowing the Father’ is different from ‘knowing Him that is from the beginning.’ The former involves a direct spiritual connexion: the latter involves besides an intellectual apprehension of the divine ‘plan.’ The knowledge ‘of the Father’ is that of present love and submission: the knowledge of Him ’that is from the beginning’ is sympathy with the Divine Thought which is fulfilled in all time.

At the same time the two titles ’little children,’ ’little ones,’ indicate a twofold spiritual position. As ’little children’ we are all bound one to another by the bond of natural affection: as ’little ones’ we all recognise our equal feebleness in the presence of the One Father. It may be added that the relation of the readers of the letter to the Apostle really determined their relation to God (c. i. 3).

There is a difference in the general ground for writing (v. 12 because your sins are forgiven…, v. 14 because ye

know the Father), but in writing to ’the fathers’ specially there is no change, no development, in St John’s language. The knowledge of Christ as the Word, active from the beginning of Creation, includes all that we can know. At the same time this knowledge is regarded in two different aspects corresponding to the two general ideas of forgiveness and Fatherhood (vv. 12, 14); even as the Incarnation satisfies man’s need of redemption and his need of consummation.

In writing to ’the young men’ St John makes no change in his reason (because ye have overcome the evil one) but he develops what he has said. He adds the twofold permanent ground of the Christian’s victory to the assertion of the fact which he made before. The young soldier is ‘strong’ (ἰσχυρός comp. Eph. vi. 10; Matt. xii. 29) as having the personal qualifications for his work; and ’the word of God abideth in him,’ so that he is in living contact with the source of life. The natural endowment of energetic vigour is consecrated to a divine end by a divine voice.

ὁ λόγος…μένει…] the word…abideth… Comp. vv. 24, 27; John xv. 7 (v. 3). The converse thought occurs John viii. 31. Comp. c. i. 10 note.

2. The appeal (ii. 15—17).

In the preceding verses St John has set forth the privileges of Christians both generally in their sense of forgiveness and of a Divine Fatherhood, and specially in the far-reaching wisdom of the old, and the victorious strength of the young: he now goes

[τοῦ θεοῦ] ἐν ὑμῖν μένει καὶ νενικήκατε τὸν πονηρόν.

on to enforce the consequence which is made possible. A great ’love not’ follows on the command to love.

The structure of the passage is simple and regular. The prohibition (15 a) is followed by a view of its overwhelming necessity. The love of the world is incompatible with the love of the Father (15 b), for the objects of love determine its character (16). And further: there is between them the contrast of time and eternity, of transition and abiding (17).

¹⁵ Love not the world nor the things in the world. If any one love the world, the love of the Father is not in him: ¹⁶ because all that is in the world, the desire of the flesh, and the desire of the eyes, and the rainglory of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. ¹⁷ And the world is passing away, and the desire thereof, but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.

The three false tendencies under which St John ranges ‘all that is in the world’ cover the whole ground of worldliness, of the temptation to set up the creature as an end. They offer typical tests of man’s real state as to himself, as to things external, and (specially) as to his fellow-men. Or, if we follow the division suggested by the words (ἐπιθυμία, ἐπιθυμία, ἀλαζονία), they indicate prevailing false views in regard to want and to possession. We desire wrongly and we glory wrongly in what we have.

The ‘wants’ which man feels can be divided into two great classes. Some things he desires to appropriate personally: some things he desires to enjoy without appropriation. The desire of the flesh embraces the one class (e.g. gratification of appetites); the desire of the eyes the other (e.g. pursuit of art as an end).

The wrong use of possession lies in the empty and ostentatious assertion of advantages which are placed in a wrong light. A superiority is asserted on external grounds which cannot be justified in the face of the true issues of life. The ἀλάζων is in this case ‘one who lays claim to blessings which are not truly his for the sake of renown’ (comp. Theophr. Char. § 23; [Plat.] Def. p. 416 ἀλαζονεία ἕξις προσποιητικὴ ἀγαθοῦ ἢ ἀγαθῶν τῶν μὴ ὑπαρχόντων.

The three tendencies naturally recall the three Temptations of the Lord, with which they have obvious points of contact. The first Temptation corresponds to the first and most elementary form of ἐπιθυμία τῆς σαρκὸς, the desire of the simplest support of natural life. A divine word is sovereign over this: the means which God uses are not limited to one form (Luke iv. 4). The offer of the kingdoms of the civilized world (τῆς οἰκουμένης) and their glory, which is placed second in St Luke’s order seems to answer in the loftiest shape to ἐπιθυμία τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν, the power of commanding all that is fairest and most attractive in the world. Here also Scripture shews that no aim however true and noble can be allowed to trench on the absolute homage due to God (Luke iv. 8). And again the call to claim an open manifestation of God’s protecting power touches the root of ἀλαζονία τοῦ βίου, in which endowments and gifts are used arbitrarily for personal ostentation. Such use is a tempting of God from Whom man dares to isolate himself (Luke iv. 12).

It has been felt no less natural to look for some correspondence between the threefold worldly tendencies of St John and the three master vices which occupy a prominent place in ancient and mediæval ethics, φιληδονία, πλεονεξία, φιλοδοξία, voluptas, avaritia, superbia.

¹⁵ Μὴ ἀγαπᾶτε τὸν κόσμον μηδὲ τὰ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ. ἐάν τις ἀγαπᾷ τὸν κόσμον, οὐκ ἔστιν ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ πατρὸς

15 ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ πατρὸς RB vg syrr the me: ἡ ἄγ. τοῦ θεοῦ AC.

The correspondence is so far real, though not direct, that the germs of these special vices lie in the feelings which St John characterises. Comp. Just. M. Dial. 82, p. 308 D διὰ δεὸς οὖν [Ezech. iii. 17 ff.] καὶ ἡμεῖς σπουδάζομεν ὁμιλεῖν κατὰ τὰς γραφάς, οὐ διὰ φιλοχρηματίαν ἢ φιλοδοξίαν ἢ φιληδοσίαν ἐν οὐδενὶ γὰρ τούτων ἐλέγξαι ἡμᾶς ὄντας δύναται τις.

The enumeration does not include spiritual sins. These are not, under the present aspect, ‘of the world’ or ‘in the world.’ St John has dwelt before on the relation of man to man—love and hatred; and he dwells afterwards on the relation of man to true opinion. Here he is considering the relation of man to the κόσμος as an external system which has lost its true character: Rom. viii. 19 f.

1 John 2:15

15. Μὴ ἀγαπᾶτε] Nolite diligere V., Love not. The command is not given to any particular class (as to the young) but to all. That which man may not do, being what he is, God can do, John iii. 16 (ἡγάπησεν τὸν κόσμον). God looks through the surface of things by which man is misled to the very being which He created.

τὸν κόσμον] mundum V., the world, the order of finite being regarded as apart from God. The Roman empire with its idolatry of the Emperor as the representative of the State, presented the idea in a concrete and impressive form. See Essay I.

The system as an organised whole (κόσμος) is in other places considered as the dominant form of life, the age (ὁ αἰὼν οὗτος, ὁ νῦν αἰών). Comp. Rom. xii. 2; 2 Tim. iv. 2.

For the use of κόσμος see John i. 10 note.

With ’the world’ are joined ’the things in the world,’ all, that is, which finds its proper sphere and fulfilment in a finite order and without God. ‘To be in the world’ is the opposite to ‘being in God.’ The question is not of the present necessary limitations of thought and action but of their aim and object. Whatever is treated as complete without reference to God is so far a rival to God. This thought is brought out in the words which follow.

Augustine illustrates the idea in respect of the love of nature: Non te prohibet Deus amare ista sed non diligere ad beatitudinem, sed ad hoc probare et laudare ut ames creatorem. Quemadmodum…si sponsus faceret sponsæ suæ annulum et illa acceptum annulum plus diligeret quam sponsum qui illi fecerit annulum; nonne in ipso dono sponsi anima adultera deprehenderetur quamvis hoc amaret quod dedit sponsus?

ἐάν τις…] There can be but one supreme object of moral devotion. All secondary objects will be referred to this. The love of the finite as an absolute object necessarily excludes the love of the Creator (the Father). Comp. Rom. i. 25; James iv. 4 (ἡ φιλία τοῦ κόσμου). Unum cor duos tam sibi adversarios amores non capit: Matt. vi. 24 (Bede, ad loc.).

Here as elsewhere St John places the contrast before his readers in its ultimate essential form, as of light and darkness, love and hatred. He assumes that there cannot be a vacuum in the soul. So Augustine writes: Noli diligere mundum. Exclude malum amorem mundi ut implearis amore Dei. Vas es sed adhuc plenus es; funde quod habes ut accipias quod non habes.

It will be observed also that he speaks here of the love of the Father

ἐν αὐτῷ· ¹⁶ ὅτι πᾶν τὸ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ· ἡ ἐπιθυμία τῆς and not of the love of God (c. ii. 5 note). The phrase is unique (comp. Col. i. 12 f.), and suggests as the object of man’s love God as He has been pleased to bring Himself within the range of man’s knowledge (John xiv. 9; comp. c. i. 2 note). Thus it expresses primarily the love of ’the children’ of God to God; but this love answers to and springs out of the love shewn to them by ’the Father’ whom ’they know’ (v. 14.)

By the ’love of the world, and of the things in the world’ the sense of the personal relationship to God is lost, and not merely the sense of a divine presence. Of the man who is swayed by such a passion it must be said that the love of the Father is not in him as an animating, inspiring power (c. i. 10). This phrase expresses more than ’the loveth not God’ or ‘he loveth not the Father.’ That form of expression would describe a simple fact: this presents the fact as a ruling principle. The exact order of the Greek is remarkable: ’there exists not, whatever he may say, the love of the Father in him.’ Comp. c. i. 5; iv. 16 f.; John v. 45; vi. 45; vii. 28; viii. 44, 50, 54; ix. 16; x. 12, 34; xiii. 10, 16.

The thought finds a striking expression under the imagery of St John in a fragment of Philo quoted by John of Damascus (Parall. Sacra A, Tit. xxx. p. 370): ἀμήχανον συνυπάρχειν τὴν πρὸς κόσμον ἀγάπην τῇ πρὸς τὸν θεὸν ἀγάπῃ, ὡς ἀμήχανον συνυπάρχειν ἀλλήλοις φῶς καὶ σκότος.

1 John 2:16

16. ὅτι…] because… In moral and spiritual things there is a law of equilibrium. Nothing rises higher than its source. The desire of things earthly as ends in themselves comes from the world and is bounded by the world. It is therefore incompatible with the love of the Father.

The point of sight from which ‘all that is in the world’ is regarded here is more distinctly defined than in v. 15. In themselves all finite objects, ’the things that are in the world,’ are ‘of the Father.’ It is the false view of them which makes them idols. Hence St John defines ’that which is in the world,’ that which, as now regarded, finds its consummation ‘in the world,’ from the human side. The feeling which misuses the object determines and shews by its misuse what there is defective in the object which gives occasion to the wrongdoing.

This general aspect of the question determines the exact form of language. St John writes πᾶν τὸ ἐν τ. κ. and not πάντα τὰ ἐν τ. κ. He looks at ‘all’ in its unity in relation to the feeling man. Comp. c. v. 4: Eph. v. 13 (πάντα, πᾶν). The world as such has nothing more to offer than what is summed up in the three typical phrases by which πᾶν is defined. This thought has been made wrongly the main thought of the sentence by the Latin versions: omne quod in mundo est concupiscentia (desiderium) carnis est et…

ἡ ἐπιθυμία τῆς σαρκὸς] concupiscentia (desiderium Aug.) carnis V., the desire of the flesh, the desire of which the flesh is the seat. The genitive with ἐπιθυμία is in the N. T. characteristically subjective (John viii. 44; Rom. i. 24; Apoc. xviii. 14). Comp. Gal. v. 16, 24; Eph. ii. 3; 1 Pet. ii. 11 (αἱ σορκικαὶ ἐπιθυμίαι), Rom. xiii. 14; 1 Pet. iv. 2 (ἀνθρώπων ἐπιθυμίαι); Tit. ii. 12 (αἱ κοσμικαὶ ἐπιθυμίαι).

Under this category are included all desires which involve the appropriation of the object to which they are directed. By the separate mention of οἱ ὀφθαλμοί the sense of σάρξ is proportionately limited.

In St John generally σάρξ is used to express humanity under the present

σαρκὸς καὶ ἡ ἐπιθυμία τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν καὶ ἡ ἀλαζονία τοῦ βίου, οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ τοῦ πατρός, ἀλλὰ ἐκ τοῦ κόσconditions of life (c. iv. 2; 2 John 7; John i. 14; vi. 51-55; xvii. 2). Once the θέλημα σαρκός is set by the side of θέλημα ἀνδρός as distinct from it (John i. 13); twice σάρξ is opposed to πνεῦμα (John iii. 6; vi. 63); and once κατὰ τὴν σάρκα is used to describe a judgment which is external, superficial, destitute of moral insight (John viii 15). The desire of the σάρξ as σάρξ is necessarily for that which is like itself. It cannot include any spiritual element.

Compare Additional Note on iii. 19. ἡ ἐπιθ. τῶν ὀφθ.] concupiscentia (desiderium Aug.) oculorum V., the desire of the eyes, the desire of which the eyes are the organ: not the pleasure of the miser only or characteristically (Eccles. iv. 8; v. 11), but all personal vicious indulgence represented by seeing. The desire of appropriation enters into ’the desire of the flesh’: the ‘desire of the eyes’ is satisfied by enjoyment which comes under the general form of contemplation. So far it is true that in the former the thought of physical pleasure is dominant, as the object of desire, while in the latter forms of mental (‘psychical’) pleasure find place. The ’eyes’ are the typical example of the organs to which art ministers.

Augustine gives a singular illustration of what he holds to be ’the desire of the eyes,’ which is worth quoting as giving a vivid trait in the Christian feeling of his time: Aliquando tentat etiam [curiositas] servos Dei, ut velint quasi miraculum facere: tentare utrum exaudiat illos Deus in miraculis. Curiositas est; hoe est desiderium oculorum; non est a patre.

ἡ ἀλαζ. τοῦ βίου] superbia vitæ V., ambitio sacculi Aug. (other Latin authorities give jactantia hujus vitæ, vitæ humanæ), the vainglory of life, the vainglory which springs out of and belongs to our visible earthly life. The genitive is subjective, as in the two other cases. The ἀλάζων (comp. Rom. i. 30; 2 Tim. iii. 2) is closely connected with the ὑπερήφανος; but his vice centres in self and is consummated in his absolute self-exaltation, while the ὑπερήφανος shews his character by his overweening treatment of others. ‘The ἀλάζων sins most against truth: the ὑπερήφανος sins most against love.’ Ἀλαζόνεια (-ία) may be referred to a false view of what things are in themselves, empty and unstable: ὑπερηφανία to a false view of what our relations to other persons are. Comp. Mk. vii. 22; Luke i. 51; James iv. 6; 1 Pet. v. 5. See also Wisd. v. 8; xvii. 7; 2 Macc. ix. 8, xv. 6; Prov. xxv. 6.

Such ‘vainglory,’ such a false view of the value of our possessions, belongs to life (ὁ βίος) in its present concrete manifestation and not to life in its essential principle (ἡ ζωή). Comp. Luke viii. 14 (ἡδοναὶ τοῦ βίου); 1 Tim. ii. 2 (βίον διάγειν); 2 Tim. ii. 4 (ταῖς τοῦ βίου πραγματείας); (in 1 Pet. iv. 3 τοῦ βίου is an addition, but βιώσαι occurs in v. 2). Hence ὁ βίος is used for ’the means of life’: Mk. xii. 44; Luke [viii. 43], xv. 12, 30; c. iii. 17. Compare also βίωσις, Acts xxvi. 4; and βιωτικός, Luke xxi. 34; 1 Cor. vi 3 f.

These characteristic feelings of want and of wealth, the desire of the flesh and the desire of the eyes, and the vainglory of life, are said to be, as man now is naturally, of the world (c. iv. 5 note; John xv. 19; xvii. 14, 16; xviii. 36). The declaration marks the false position into which man has come. In his original

μου ἐστίν· ¹⁷καὶ ὁ κόσμος παράγεται καὶ ἡ ἐπιθυμία [αὐτοῦ], ὁ δὲ ποιῶν τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ μένει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα.

17 ἡ ἐπίθ. αὐτοῦ: — αὐτοῦ A. Many Latin authorities and (in sense) the Thebaic version add: quomodo (sicut et) deus (ipse) manet in æternum.

constitution the desire was good, because it was directed consciously towards the fulfilment of his office in regard to the whole order and to God: the exultation was good, because it was an acknowledgment of divine bounty. Now the desire is suggested by the creature and not by the Creator, by the object separated from the Living Author of all, not by the Living Author to whom the child should look (ἐκ τοῦ πατρός not simply ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ). Thus each typical false tendency is the corruption of a noble instinct, the longing for support and for beauty, the joy of thankfulness.

The phrase εἶναι ἐκ (v. 21; iii. 19; iv. 5) to be of is characteristic of St John expressing derivation and dependence. Compare John iii. 31 note; and Additional Note on iii. 1.

1 John 2:17

17. This clause contains a second ground for the prohibition in v. 15. Not only is the love of the world irreconcileable with the love of the Father; but also, yet further, the fate of the world is included in its essential character. The world—the external system which occupied the place of God—was already when St John wrote in the act of dissolution and vanishing.

The words can also be taken as a second proof of the antagonism of the love of the Father and of the love of the world, so far as these are at variance in their issue no less than in their source. But this connexion appears to be less natural than the other.

παράγεται] is passing away: see v. 8. The word describes not the general character of the world as transitory but its actual condition in the face of the church, ’the Kingdom of God.’ The whole sum of finite things, regarded in itself as complete, is (as it were) a screen which hides the presence of God. By the declaration of the Truth this was in St John’s time beginning to be removed. Compare v. 8; 1 Cor. vii. 31; and contrast the ideal view from the divine side: τὰ ἀρχαῖα παρῆλθεν, ἰδοὺ γέγονεν καίνα (2 Cor. v. 17: comp. Apoc. xxi. 4).

In the thanksgiving after the Eucharist in The Doctrine of the Apostles the clause occurs: ἐλθέτω χάρις καὶ παρελθέτω ὁ κόσμος οὗτος (c. x. 6).

ἡ ἐπιθυμία αὐτοῦ] concupiscentia (desideria Aug.) ejus V., the desire thereof, the desire which belongs to it and which it stimulates. Comp. Tit. ii. 12 αἱ κοσμικαὶ ἐπιθυμία. The gen. is subjective as in v. 16, though it is true that the desire which the world fosters is in turn directed to the world as its object. A verb corresponding to παράγεται must be supplied. The world which is the source and the object of the desire is shewn to be by itself unsubstantial and evanescent. The desire therefore is shewn in its utter vanity (καταργεῖται). But the desire remains as an aching void.

The contrast to this ‘desire’ which is earth-born and empty is ’the will of God.’ That alone is permanent of which this will is the ground.

ὁ δὲ ποιῶν…μένει…] qui autem facit (fecerit Aug.) V., but he that doeth…abideth… While the fabric of ’the world’ is being removed the Christian suffers no disturbance. The present in this sense is eternal. When

all else changes the obedience of love continues unchanged. This abides in the new order to which indeed it properly belongs. The contrast to the world converted into an idol is not God, but the believer who in action strives to do God’s will. Hence St John does not say ‘he that loveth God,’ which might have been suggested by v. 15, but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever. Such a one is truly akin to the Son of man: Mk. iii. 35.

Compare John iv. 34; vi. 38; vii. 17; ix. 31.

The will of God expresses the true end of all things, and is opposed to ’the desire’ which springs from a finite source as its ultimate origin. At the same time ’the will of God’ includes the right use of all natural powers, faculties, instincts, which in their essential nature answer to it: Apoc. iv. 11. Compare 1 Thess. iv. 3.

In speaking of the divine will St John says ’the will of God’ and not ’the will of the Father’ as might seem to be suggested by v. 16. Stress is laid upon the divine majesty rather than upon the divine love. ‘The will of the Father’ is found only in St Matthew (vi. 10 our Father, vii. 21: xii. 50 my Father; comp. xviii. 14; xxvi. 42). The will of our God and Father occurs Gal. i. 4 (comp. Eph. i. 5, 9, 11). The will of God is not unfrequent: 1 Pet. ii. 15; iii. 17; iv. 19; Rom. i. 10; xii. 2; Heb. x. 36. In the Gospel of St John the phrase which is always used by the Lord is the will of Him that sent me: iv. 34; v. 30; vi. 38 ff. (vii. 17).

μένει εἰς τ. αλ.] abideth for ever. Comp. John viii. 35; xii. 34; 2 Cor. ix. 9 (LXX); 1 Pet. i. 25 (LXX). The absolute use of μένειν is not unfrequent: John xv. 16; 1 Pet. i. 23; Heb. x. 34.

εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα] in æternum V. This is the only form in which αἰών occurs in the Epistles (here and 2 John 2)

and Gospel (12 times) of St John, except the correlative ἐκ τοῦ αἰῶνος (John ix. 32). The phrase occurs independently of the LXX (1 Pet. i. 25; 2 Cor. ix. 9; Hebr. v. 6; vi. 20; vii. 17 ff.) only (with negative) in Matth. xxi. 19||Mk. xi. 14; Mk. iii. 29; 1 Cor. viii. 13 (Jude 13 εἰς αἰῶνα). [1 Pet. i 23 and 2 Pet. ii. 17 are false readings.] It is very common in the LXX. as the rendering of עולם, לעולם, עֲרֵי עוֹלָם. The thought contained in the words here is given by the addition which is found in Theb. and Old Lat. ‘as God also abideth for ever’ (sicut et ipse manet in æternum). Augustine reads the addition and remarks on the whole passage: Voluit te amor mundi, tene Christum. Propter te factus est temporalis ut tu fias æternus; quia et ille sic factus est temporalis ut maneret æternus.

And again: Terram diligis, terra eris. Deum diligis: quid dicam, Deus eris? Non audeo dicere ex me: scripturas audiamus Ego dixi, dii estis et filii altissimi omnes.

Additional Note on ii. 17. St John’s teaching on creation.

St John’s conception of creation.

The main conception of creation which is present in the writings of St John is expressed by the first notice which he makes of it: ‘all things came into being (ἐγένετο) through [the Word]’ (John i. 3). This statement sets aside the notions of eternal matter and of inherent evil in matter. ‘There was when’ the world ‘was not’ (John xvii. 5, 24); and, by implication, all things as made were good. The agency of the Word ‘who was God’ again excludes both the Gnostic idea of a Demiurge, a creator essentially inferior to God; and the idea of an abstract Monotheism, in which there is no living relation between the creature and the Creator; for as all things come into being ’through’ the Word, so they are supported ‘in’ Him (John i. 3 ὁ γέγ. ἐν αὐτῷ ζωὴ ἦν note; comp. Col. i. 16 f.; Heb. i. 3). And yet more the use of the term ἐγένετο, ‘came into being,’ as distinguished from ἐκτίσθη ‘were created,’ suggests the thought that Creation is to be regarded (according to our apprehension) as a manifestation of a Divine law of love. Thus Creation (πάντα ἐγένετο δι’ αὐτοῦ) answers to the Incarnation (ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο). All the unfolding and infolding of finite being to the last issue lies in the fulfilment of His will Who is love.

An order unfolded in spite of the irruption of darkness. A Divine ‘must.’

The irruption of darkness, however, has hindered the normal progress of the counsel of God. This is obvious in ’the world’ which falls within the range of man’s observation. But in spite of the violation of the Divine order by man there is still a fulfilment of the counsel of God in the world. This is seen most distinctly in the record of the Lord’s work. In the accomplishment of this there is a Divine necessity, a ‘must’ and a ‘cannot’ in the very nature of things; and also a Divine sequence in the unfolding of its parts.

This Divine ‘must’ (δεῖ) extends to the relation of the Forerunner to Christ (iii. 30); to the fulfilment of the work of God during an allotted time (ix. 4); to the Passion and Exaltation (iii. 14; xii. 34); to the Rising again (xx. 9); to the execution of a wider office (x. 16) (comp. Apoc. i. 1; iv. 1; xxii. 6; xvii. 10; xx. 3).

A Divine ‘cannot.’

On the other hand there is also a ‘cannot,’ a moral, and not an external or arbitrary, impossibility in life. This defines, while it does not limit, the action of the Son: v. 19, 30 comp. Mark vi. 5. And so also it fixes the conditions of discipleship (iii. 5; vi. 44, 65; vii. 34, 36; viii. 21 f.; comp. xiii. 33, 36); of understanding (iii. 3; viii. 43 f.; xiv. 17); of faith (xii. 39; comp. v. 44); of fruitfulness (xv. 4 f.); of progress (xvi. 12); of character (1 John iii. 9).

These terms (‘must,’ ‘cannot’) lay open the conditions (so to speak) of A Divine the Lord’s life. The Divine sequence in the course of its events is no less ‘hour.’ distinctly marked by the term ‘hour.’ The crises of the manifestations of the Lord are absolutely fixed in time (ii. 4; comp. xi. 9 f.; ix. 4). Till this hour comes His enemies are powerless (vii. 30; viii. 20). When it has come He recognises its advent (xii. 27; xvii. 1); and it is appointed with a view to the issue to which it leads (xii. 23; xiii. 1 ἵνα).

Compare iv. 21, 23; v. 25, 28; 1 John ii. 18; Apoc. xiv. 7, 15 (ὥρα); John vii. 6, 8 (καιρός); Eph. i. 10 τὸ πλήρωμα τῶν καιρῶν; Gal. iv. 4 τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου.

Under this same aspect the ‘works’ of the Lord are said to have been ‘given’ to Him (v. 36; xvii. 4). The circumstances which furnished the occasion for them are shewn to enter into the scheme of providence (ix. 3 ἵνα; xi. 4 ἵνα). Even unbelief was a necessity in regard of the history of mankind (xii. 38; xiii. 18; xv. 25; xvii. 12). This being so, Christ knew all ’the things that were coming upon Him’ (xviii. 4; comp. xiii. 1, 11; vi. 64; comp. xviii. 9, 32). He laid down His life ‘in order to take it again’ (x. 17). This was His Father’s will.

The whole life of Christ was thus a ‘fulfilment,’ ‘a bringing to a perfect accomplishment’ of all that had been shadowed forth or begun¹.

The same Divine appointment is extended to the discipline of the Church. The extremity of persecution is part of the revelation of the counsel of God (John xvi. 2 ἵνα, note), as even was the failure of the disciples at their Master’s suffering (John xvi. 32 ἵνα, note). The birth of the Church has a real correspondence with the birth of the man (John xvi. 21 ff.). And in the work of service there is an appointed difference of function with a common end (John iv. 36 ff.).

The life of Christ and the life of the Church, as presented by St John, thus become revelations of a perfect order even in the disorder of the world lying beneath the surface of things, and veiled by suffering and by the workings of evil. In the same way he seems to indicate that below the transitory appearances of nature there is that which is Divine and abiding. ‘The world passeth away (παράγεται) and the desire thereof’ (1 John ii. 17, 8), but at the same time he looked for a new heaven and a new earth (Apoc. xxi. 1).

He recognised most sharply the difference between the natural and the unnatural in what we call Nature as a whole, and saw in the complete

The life of Christ, and the life of the Church according to law.

A true nature underneath appearances.

¹ The use of the two words πληρόω, τελειόω is worth study:

Of Holy Scripture and Divine words: ἵνα πληρωθῇ xii. 38; xiii. 18; xv. 25; xvii. 12; xviii. 32; xix. 24, 36. Comp. Apoc. vi. 11.

Of Holy Scripture: xix. 28 ἵνα τελ. ἡ γρ. Comp. τετέλεσται, xix. 28, 30; and Apoc. x. 7.

destruction of the unnatural, the restoration of Nature. In this position he stands alike removed from the Hellenic worship of nature and from the Gnostic degradation of nature. (Comp. Lutterbeck, Lehrb. d. Apost. ii. 270 f.)

1 John 2:18

B. THE CONFLICT OF TRUTH AND FALSEHOOD WITHOUT AND WITHIN (ii. 18—iv. 6).

The broad contrast which has been drawn in the last section between things temporal and eternal, between the world and the Church, leads to the central subject of the Epistle, the great conflict of life, which is treated of in ii. 18—iv. 6. In this the hostile power is seen to arise from within the Christian society. The world has found expression in an anti-Christian system which lays claim to spiritual endowment and authority. False prophetic power (Apoc. xiii. 1 ff.) takes its place by the side of the imperial power (Apoc. xii. 1 ff.). These false teachers, this ‘spirit of anti-christ,’ are ‘of the world’ (iv. 4 f.).

Characteristic marks of this conflict appear throughout: ἀντίχριστος ii. 18,

20; τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ ἀντιχρίστου iv. 3; ψευδοπροφῆται iv. 1; οἱ πλανῶντες ii. 26, comp. iii. 7; τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς πλάνης iv. 6. And underneath the false spiritual teaching lies ’the hatred’ of the world: iii. 13. The question is no longer of false opinion or vicious practice within the Church, but of temptations to yield allegiance to a rival power.

The view which St John gives of the Christian conflict falls into four sections:

I. THE REVELATION OF FALSEHOOD AND TRUTH (ii. 18-29). II. THE CHILDREN OF GOD AND THE CHILDREN OF THE DEVIL (iii. 1-12). III. BROTHERHOOD IN CHRIST AND THE HATRED OF THE WORLD (iii. 13-24). IV. THE RIVAL SPIRITS OF TRUTH AND ERROR (iv. 1-6).

Step by step the strength of the Christian is shewn in his firm hold upon the Truth, in the consciousness and the character of Sonship, in the activity of Love, in the power of Spiritual Discernment. So the conflict passes to victory.

I. THE REVELATION OF FALSEHOOD AND TRUTH (ii. 18-29).

This section is separable into three parts:

1. Antichrists and Christians (18-21). 2. The essence and the power of the Truth (22-25). 3. Abiding in the Truth (26-29).

The progress of thought is simple. The fact of apostasy from the Christian body is recognised as a characteristic of the crisis. This fact serves to remind Christians of the gift which they have received for the discernment of the Truth. The essence of the Truth lies in the acknowledgment of the Messiahship of Jesus. The confession of the Son gives fellowship with the Father; issuing in the life eternal. This knowledge of God then Christians have to keep firmly, that they may face their Lord at His appearance. And true knowledge has the seal of righteousness, likeness to God, the mark of divine sonship.

1. Antichrists and Christians (18-21).

The necessity of conflict which has been laid down on general grounds in vv. 15-17 is enforced by the special circumstances of the age. It is ‘a last hour,’ and as such marked by divisions, errors, temptations in the Christian society itself (18, 19). At the same time, as answering to this special peril, Christians have a gift of spiritual discernment which it is their privilege to use as a decisive criterion of error (20, 21).

¹⁸ My little ones, it is a last hour, and as ye heard that Antichrist cometh, even now many Antichrists have arisen; whence we perceive that it is a last hour. ¹⁹ They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out that they may be made manifest that they all are not of us. ²⁰ And ye have an unction from the Holy One; and ye all know—²¹ I have not written to you because ye know not the faith, but because ye know it, and because no lie is of the truth.

18. Παιδία] Filioli (Pueri) V., My little ones. See v. 14. The apostle addresses his readers with the authority of age and experience, and not as dwelling on the thought of spiritual kinship (τεκνία).

In the sentence which precedes he had spoken of ’the world’ as ‘passing away.’ He now points out the decisive sign of the coming change in the con-

dition of the Christian society. It is ‘a last hour.’

The conception of ‘a last time,’ ‘a last season,’ the ’last days,’ rests upon the O. T., in which the phrase אַחֲרֵי הַיָּמִים is used for the distant future, on which the prophet’s eye is fixed. Thus in Gen. xlix. 1; Num. xxiv. 14 (ἐπ’ ἐσχάτων [-του] τῶν ἡμερῶν) it points to the time when Israel had entered upon the possession of Canaan, the first stage in the fulfilment of the divine promise. In Is. ii. 2; Mic. iv. 1; Hos. iii. 5; Jerem. xxiii. 20; xxx. 24; xlviii. 47; xlix. 39, it describes the time when Zion shall be restored and the people shall fear and obey the Lord. In Ezek. xxxviii. 16 it regards some particular season of signal deliverance. Thus the phrase in its biblical sense includes in part the notion of ’the age to come’ and the immediate preparation for it.

In post-biblical times ’the age to come’ was sharply distinguished from the period of trial by which it was to be ushered in; and ’the latter days’ came to be regarded as a season of conflict and suffering through which the divine victory should be accomplished. This appears to be the ruling idea of the phrase in the N.T.: Acts ii. 17 ἐν ταῖς ἐσχ. ἡμ. (Joel iii. 1, ἐσχάται being an explanatory gloss); James v. 3 ἐν ἐσχ. ἡμ.; 1 Pet. i. 20 ἐπ’ ἐσχάτων τῶν χρόνων.

But in this interpretation the successive partial dawnings of ’the age to come’ give a different force to the words ’the last days’ which usher in the age according to the context in which they occur. In one sense ’the age to come’ dated from Pentecost; in another from the destruction of Jerusalem; in another it was still the object of hope. So also ’the last days’ are found in each of the seasons of fierce trial which precede the several comings of Christ. The age in which we live is, under one aspect, ’the last days,’ and in another it is ’the age to come,’ which was prepared by the travail-pains of the old order. As we look forward a season of sore distress separates us from that which is still to be revealed (2 Tim. iii. 1; 2 Pet. iii. 3; Jude 18; 1 Pet. i. 5, contrast v. 20): as we look back we have entered on an inheritance now though struggles of ‘a last time.’

But while the great counsel of God goes forward to fulfilment the date of the consummation is not revealed: Acts i. 7; Matt. xxiv. 36.

The calculation which Severus (Cramer, Cat. in loc.) makes is interesting in the face of our present knowledge of the world’s history: πεντακισχιλίων ἐνιαυτῶν παραδραμόντων ἐξ οὗ γέγονεν ὁ κόσμος…καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς Χριστοῦ παρουσίας οὔπω πεπληρωμένων ἐξακοσίων ἠγοῦν ἐπτακοσίων ἢ χιλίων ἐτῶν, δῶμεν γὰρ οὕτω, πῶς [οὐκ] (dele) ἔξω λόγου φανήσεται τῶν ἐξακοσίων ἐτῶν ἢ χιλίων, εἰ τύχοι, τὰς ἡμέρας πρὸς τὰς τῶν πεντακισχιλίων παρεξεταζομένας ἐσχάτας καλεῖν;

In this passage the anarthrous phrase ἐσχάτη ὥρα, novissima hora V., seems to mark the general character of the period and not its specific relation to ’the end.’ It was a period of critical change ‘a last hour,’ but not definitely ’the last hour.’ The exact phrase is not found elsewhere in the N.T. (comp. 1 Pet. i. 5; 2 Tim. iii. 1). The use of ‘hour’ recalls that in the Gospel: iv. 21, 23; v. 35, 38; xvi. 2, 4, 25, 32. Compare ii. 4; vii. 30; viii. 20; xii. 23, 27; xiii. 1; xvii. 1; and the idea of ‘a last hour’ corresponds with the characteristic phrase of St John ’the last day’ (vi. 39 f., 44, 54; xi. 24; xii. 48). The definiteness of this latter phrase (ἡ ἐσχ. ἡ.) justifies the wider sense given to the former (comp. iv. 17, ἡ ἡμέρα τῆς κρίσεως note). Comp. Ign. ad Ephes. c. 11. The true reading in 1 Thess. v. 2 (ἡμ. not ἡ ἡμ.) illustrates ἐσχ. ὥρα here.

καθὼς ἠκούσατε] as ye heard in general terms as part of the evangelic message (Mk. xiii. 6 ff.; Matt. xxiv. 5,

18 ὅτι Ἄντ.: — ὅτι Α.

24), and in the teaching of apostles (Acts xx. 30). Comp. 1 Tim. iv. 1. These general predictions of false Christs and false teachers were concentrated in the thought of a typical adversary: 2 Thess. ii. 3.

Ἀντίχριστος] The term Antichrist is peculiar to St John in the N.T. It occurs again v. 22; iv. 3 and 2 John 7. The absence of the article shews that it had become current as a technical (proper) name.

The word means far more than simply ‘an adversary of Christ.’ As far as the form is concerned it may describe ‘one who takes the place of Christ’ (ἀντιβασιλεύς, ἀντιταμίας, ἀνθύπατος), or ‘one who under the same character opposes Christ’ (ἀντιδιδάσκαλος, ἀντιστρατιώτης). There is a similar ambiguity in the word ἀντιστράτηγος, which means both ‘one who occupies the place of στρατηγός, proprietor,’ and also ‘an opposing general.’ It seems to be most consonant to the context to hold that Ἀντίχριστος here describes one who assuming the guise of Christ opposes Christ. In this sense it embodies an important truth. That hostility is really formidable in which the adversary preserves the semblance of the characteristic excellence which he opposes (comp. 2 Cor. xi. 13; Apoc. ii. 2). The Antichrist assails Christ by proposing to do or to preserve what He did while denying Him (comp. John v. 43). The false Christ on the other hand (ψευδόχριστος Matt. xxiv. 24) is simply a pretender to the Messianic office. In St John’s use of ‘Antichrist’ it will be seen that the sense is determined by the full Christian conception of ‘Christ’ and not by the Jewish conception of the promised Saviour.

Under one aspect it may be said that the work of the Incarnation was to reveal the true divine destiny of man in his union with God through Christ; while the lie of Antichrist was to teach that man is divine apart from God in Christ.

The passages in which the term occurs are not decisive as to St John’s teaching in regard to the coming of one great Antichrist, of which the others were preparatory embodiments. As far as his words are concerned ‘Antichrist’ may be the personification of the principle shewn in different antichrists, or the person whose appearance is prepared by these particular forms of evil. The former is however the most natural interpretation: v. 22; 2 John 7. The spirit of evil comes in those whom he inspires. Contrast 2 Thess. ii. 3 ff.

The essential character of ‘Antichrist’ lies in the denial of the true humanity of Messiah (v. 22 ὁ ἀρνούμενος ὅτι Ἰησοῦς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ χριστός. iv. 3 πν. ὁ μὴ ὁμολογεῖ (λύει) τὸν Ἰησοῦν. 2 John 7 οἱ μὴ ὁμολογοῦντες Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν ἐρχόμενον ἐν σαρκί).

This denial involves the complete misunderstanding of Christ’s past and future work, and takes away the knowledge of the Father, which is brought to us by the Incarnate Son. The teaching of Antichrist leaves God and the world still ununited. The proclamation of the union is the message of the Gospel.

It may be added that St John’s description of ‘Antichrist’ (c. iv. 3) is made use of by Polycarp (ad Phil. 7); and Iremeus, the disciple of Polycarp, first developed the teaching. The word does not occur in the other Apostolic Fathers, or Justin Martyr, who does however refer to ὁ τῆς ἀνομίας ἄνθρωπος (Dial. 32, p. 250 A ὁ τῆς ἀποστασίας ἄνθρωπος Dial. 110, p. 336 D). It appears therefore to be characteristic of the school of St John. See Additional Note.

19 ἐξ ἡμῶν ἦσαν (2°) BC syrr me the: ἦσαν ἐξ ἡμῶν 5·ΝΑ vg.

ἔρχεται] venit (sit venturus) V., cometh. The same term is used of Christ and of His adversary. Comp. c. iv. 3; John xiv. 3; xxi. 22 f.; Apoc. xxii. 20. In both cases it implies something more than one advent, though it includes this. The rival power finds a personal expression as often as Christ comes. Comp. v. 6 note.

καθώς…καὶ νῦν] as…even so now. Comp. John xv. 9; xvii. 18; xx. 21.

γεγόνασιν] facti sunt V., have arisen, and fulfilled the expectation. The use of a different word for their advent (γεγόνασιν not ἐληλύθασιν) connects their appearance with the actual conditions of the development of the Church. Comp. Heb. ii. 17 note. The use is the more remarkable as the verb is not used elsewhere in the epistle (yet 3 John 8). The tense shews that these antichrists are spoken of as being still active. They are not simple types of Antichrist but revelations of him in many parts : c. iv. 3.

For the absolute use of γίνεσθαι see 2 Pet. ii. 1; John i. 6; Mk. i. 4.

ὅθεν γινώσκομεν…] whence we perceive… because this form of trial is connected with each critical conflict which comes before an end. A full manifestation of (good and) evil is the condition of a divine judgment.

Ὅθεν is found here only in the writings of St John. It is characteristic of the Epistle to the Hebrews (see ii. 17 note), but is not found in the Epistles of St Paul.

Additional Note on ii. 18. Antichrist.

Elements in the conception of Antichrist.

Different elements entered into the conception of ‘Antichrist’ in early patristic literature. Of these the chief were Dan. vii. 7 ff.: Matt. xxiv. 23 ff.; 2 Thess. ii. 3 ff.; Apoc. xiii.

But the aspects under which the opposing power is presented by St Paul and St John (Epistle) are distinct. The portraiture in St Paul is based on that of Daniel and presents a single adversary claiming personal worship, while St John dwells upon the spiritual element in his claims, and the spiritual falsehood which gave him the semblance of strength.

IRENÆUS.

IRENÆUS, the earliest writer who treats of the subject in detail, combines the name of Antichrist with the description in 2 Thess. ii. 3 ff. and the cognate passages in Daniel, St Matthew and the Apocalypse (Iren. v. 25 ff.; compare iii. 6, 4; 7, 2; 16, 5, 8; 23, 7).

ORIGEN.

CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA is silent on Antichrist. But the teaching on Antichrist attracted the attention of CELSUS, though Origen says that he had not read what was said of him by Daniel or Paul (c. Cels. vi. 45). In reply to Celsus ORIGEN explains his own view, which is briefly that the Son of God and the son of the evil one, of Satan, of the devil, stand at the opposite poles of humanity, presenting in direct opposition the capacity of man for good and for evil. Elsewhere Origen draws out at length a comparison of Christ and Antichrist. All that Christ is in reality Antichrist offers in false appearance (Comm. Ser. in Matt. § 27); and so all false teaching which assumes the guise of truth, among heretics and even among heathen, is in some sense ‘Antichrist’ (id. § 47).

TERTULLIAN.

TERTULLIAN speaks several times of Antichrist and Antichrists. Quoting 2 Thess. ii. 3 he writes ‘homo delinquentiæ, id est, antichristus’ (de Res. carnis, 24; cf. 27). Again referring to Matt. xxiv. 24, he asks: ‘qui pseudoprophetæ sunt nisi falsi predicatores? qui pseudapostoli nisi adulteri evangelizatores? qui antichristi nisi Christi rebelles? (de præser. hær. 4). And again in reference to 1 John ii. 18 he writes: in epistola sua eos maxime antichristos vocat qui Christum negarent in carne venisse, et qui non putarent Jesum esse filium dei. Illud Marcion, hoc Ebion vindicavit (id. 33).

Balaam.

One feature in the conception of Antichrist ought not to be overlooked. Just as Moses was the type of the Christ in His prophetic character, Balaam, ’the anti-Moses,’ was regarded as a type of the Antichrist. This explains the enigmatic references in Apoc. ii. 14 (6); Jude 11; 2 Pet. ii. 15.

Armillus.

In late Rabbinic traditions an Antichrist (Armillus, Armalgus) was represented as killing the Messiah of the stock of Ephraim, and then himself slain by the Messiah of the stock of David (Targ. on Is. xi. 4; comp. 2 Thess. ii. 8).

The Epistles to the Seven Churches form a commentary on the idea of The Apocalypse. the many antichrists.

Apoc. ii. 2 (Ephesus) τοὺς λέγοντας ἑαυτοὺς ἀποστόλους. id. 6 τὰ ἔργα τῶν Νικολαϊτῶν.

ii. 9 (Smyrna) τῶν λεγόντων Ἰουδαίους εἶναι.

ii. 20 (Thyatira) Ἰεζέβελ, ἡ λέγουσα ἑαυτὴν προφῆτιν. 24 τὰ βαθέα τοῦ Σατανᾶ (cf. 1 Cor. ii. 10).

iii. 8 f. (Philadelphia) τῆς συναγωγῆς τοῦ Σατανᾶ, τῶν λεγόντων ἑαυτοὺς Ἰουδαίους εἶναι.

1 John 2:19

19. ἐξ ἡμ. ἐξ.] Ex nobis prodierunt (exierunt) V., They went out from us they proceeded from our midst. They belonged at first to our outward communion and shared all our privileges. Till the moment of separation they were undistinguishable from the rest of the Christian society; but they were not of us, they did not draw their life from our life (c. i. 3) and so form living members of the body. Comp. Heb. vi. 4 ff.

The change in the position of ἐξ ἡμῶν in the successive clauses varies the emphasis: ‘From us, it is true, they went out, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us really…’ For εἶναι ἐκ see v. 16 note.

The phrase ἐξελθεῖν ἐξ may describe either removal (Apoc. xviii. 4; John viii. 59) or origin (Apoc. ix. 3; xiv. 13 ff.; xix. 5, 21; John iv. 30). The correspondence with οὐκ ἦσαν ἐξ ἡμῶν decides here in favour of the latter sense (comp. Acts xx. 30), though it necessarily leads to the other. This trait in the Antichrists indicates one ground of their influence. They professed to speak with the voice of the Christian Body. Διὰ τί ἀπὸ τῶν τοῦ Κυρίου μαθητῶν οἱ ἀντίχριστοι; ἵν’ ἔχομεν τὸ πιστὸν τοῖς πλανωμένοις κομίζειν ὡς ἀπὸ τῶν μαθητῶν ὄντες… (Theophlet.)

εἰ γὰρ…] If they had in the truest sense shared our life, the life would have gone forward to its fruitful consummation (μεμενήκεισαν ἂν permansissent utique V.). The fact of separation revealed the imperfection of their fellowship. The words will not admit of any theoretical deductions. The test of experience is laid down as final. Non audio quid sonet, Augustine says, sed video quid vivat. Opera loquuntur; et verba requirimus?

Here, looking upon the manifest apostasy, St John denies the truth of the life; from another point of sight, in regard to the uncertain future, the

ἡμῶν ἦσαν, μεμενήκεισαν ἂν μεθ’ ἡμῶν· ἀλλ’ ἵνα φανερωlife is presented as real, but liable to an abrupt close (John xv. 1 ff.). The two views are perfectly harmonious. The end of life is fruitfulness. The life which is barren or worse than barren is not life and yet potentially it was life.

Thus Augustine can say truly in reference to the actual Church: Si antequam exirent non erant ex nobis, multi intus sunt, non exierunt, et tamen Antichristi sunt. And again: Sic sunt in corpore Christi quomodo humores mali. Compare also the striking language of Ignatius, ad Trall. 11 οὗτοι οὐκ εἰσὶ φυτεία πατρὸς ἀλλ’ ἔγνονα κατηρομένα. πᾶσα δέ, φησὶν ὁ κύριος, φυτεία ἦν οὐκ ἐφύτευσεν ὁ πατήρ μου ὁ ἐπουράνιος ἐκριζωθήτω. εἰ γὰρ ἦσαν τοῦ πατρὸς κλάδοι οὐκ ἂν ἦσαν ἐχθροὶ τοῦ σταυροῦ τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἀλλὰ τῶν ἀποκτείνων τῶν τῆς δόξης κύριον.

It may be added that γὰρ, for, is very rarely used in the Epistles; c. iv. 20; v. 3; 2 John 11; 3 John 3, 7. As distinguished from ὅτι, because, it will be seen that γὰρ expresses a reason or explanation alleged (subjective), while ὅτι marks a distinct fact (objective) which is itself an adequate cause or explanation of that with which it is connected. Comp. c. v. 3, 4; John ii. 25; iii. 16—21; iii. 23 f.; ix. 22, &c.

μεθ’ ἡμῶν] It might have been expected that St John would have written ἐν ἡμῖν, according to his characteristic usage which is all but universal in his Epistles; but the thought is not of absolute unity in one body but of personal fellowship one with another: John xiv. 16; Luke xxiv. 29.

ἀλλ’ ἵνα…] but they went out (or this separation came to pass) that they may be made manifest (ut manifesti sint [manifestarentur] V.), that they all are not of us i.e. that none of them are of us. For this ellipse see John i. 8; ix. 3; xiii. 18; xiv.

31; xv. 25. The departure of these false teachers after a temporary sojourn in the Christian society was brought about that they might be shewn in their true character, and so seen to be not of it. The last clause is rather irregular in form. The πάντες is inserted as it were by an afterthought; ’they went out that they may be made manifest that they are not, no not in any case, however fair their pretensions may be, of us.’

The separation of these teachers from the Christian Body was, without exception, a decisive proof that they did not belong truly to it. The clear revelation of their character was a divine provision for the avoidance of further evil. By ‘going out’ they neutralised the influence which they would otherwise have exercised. Comp. 1 Cor. xi. 19.

When the πᾶς is separated by the verb from the οὐ the negation according to the usage of the New Testament, is always universal (all…not), and not partial (not all). Comp. c. 21; iii. 15; Apoc. xxii. 3; Matt. xxiv. 22 (οὐ…πᾶς); Luke i. 37 (οὐ πᾶς); Acts x. 15; Rom. iii. 20 (οὐ…πᾶς); Gal. ii. 16 (οὐ…πᾶς); Eph. v. 5; and in dependent negations, John iii. 16 (πᾶς…μὴ); vi. 39 (πᾶς…μὴ); xii. 46 (id.); 1 Cor. i. 29 (μὴ…πᾶς); Eph. iv. 29 (πᾶς…μὴ). Comp. Apoc. xxi. 27 (οὐ μὴ…πᾶς).

On the other hand see Matt. vii. 21; Rom. ix. 6; 1 Cor. x. 23; xv. 39 (οὐ πᾶς).

In the face of this usage it is impossible to translate the words ’that they may be made manifest themselves, and that it may be made manifest in them that not all who are outwardly united with the Church are of us, in true fellowship with Christ.’

For φανερ. ὅτι οὐκ εἰσίν compare 2 Cor. iii. 3 φανερούμενοι ὅτι ἐστέ.

1 John 2:20

20. Even without this revelation

20 οἴδατε πάντες: καὶ οἴδατε πάντα 5. See Additional Note.

in outward fact, the readers of the Epistle had the power of discerning the real character of ‘Antichrists.’ ‘Christians’ are themselves in a true sense ‘Christs,’ anointed ones, consecrated to God as ‘prophets,’ ‘priests,’ and ‘kings’ (1 Pet. ii. 5 (9); Apoc. i. 6; v. 10; xx. 6); and in virtue of that consecration endowed with corresponding blessings. So Severus (Cramer, Cat. in loc.) writes: χριστοὶ εἰσὶν οὐχ οἱ προφῆται μόνον… ἀλλ’ ἐξαιρέτως καὶ πάντες οἱ εἰς τὸν μέγαν καὶ μόνον καὶ ἀληθῇ Χριστὸν καὶ σωτῆρα Θεὸν πιστεύσαντες… καὶ ἐν τῷ θείῳ… βαπτίσμαι συμβολικῶς τῷ μύρῳ χριόμενοι…

καὶ ὑμεῖς…] Sed (et) vos… V., And further you yourselves, in virtue of your position as contrasted with them, have an unction (comp. v. 27 χρίσμα ὁ ἐλάβετε) from the Holy One. Comp. vv. 24, 27; iv. 4.

χρίσμα] unctionem V. (unguentum Hier.), an unction. The word, which expresses not the act of anointing, but that with which it is performed (‘anointing oil’ Ex. xxix. 7; xxx. 25; xl. 15 (LXX); comp. Dan. ix. 26), marks the connexion of Christians with their Head. As He was ‘anointed’ for His office (Luke iv. 18 [Is. lxi. 1]; Acts iv. 27 [Ps. ii. 2]; x. 38; Heb. i. 9 [Ps. xlv. 7]); so too are they (2 Cor. i. 21 f.). The verb χρίω (answering to מָשָׁח) in LXX. is employed generally, though not exclusively, of the anointing of things for sacred use. In the New Testament it is found only in the places quoted above, and thus always of the impartment of a divine grace.

Here the outward symbol of the Old Testament—the sacred oil—is used to signify the gift of the Spirit from the Holy One which is the characteristic endowment of Christians. This gift is referred to a definite time (v.

27 ὁ ἐλάβετε); and the narrative of the Acts fixes this normally at the imposition of hands which followed on Baptism (Acts viii. 14 ff.). But the context shews that the word χρίσμα is not to be understood of the material sign, but of the corresponding spiritual reality. There is not indeed any evidence to shew that ’the chrism’ was used at confirmation in the first age. Perhaps, as has been suggested, St John’s language here may have tended to fix the custom, which represented the communication of the divine grace in an outward rite. Tertullian speaks of the custom as habitual in his time: Egressi de lavacro perungimur benedictæ unctione de pristina disciplina, qua ungi oleo de cornu in sacerdotium solebant (de Bapt. 7).

Unctiospiritualis ipse Spiritus Sanctus est cujus sacramentum est in unctione visibili (Bede).

This ‘unction,’ this gift of the Spirit, is said to come finally (ἀπὸ see c. i. 5, note) from the Holy One. The title is chosen with direct reference to the gift, for all hallowing flows from ’the Holy One,’ but in itself it is ambiguous, and has been understood of God (the Father) and of Christ. In support of the former view reference is made to 1 Cor. vi. 19; John xiv. 16; but ὁ ἅγιος seems to be more naturally referred to Christ; Apoc. iii. 7; John vi. 69; Acts iii. 14; iv. 27, 30; and Christ Himself ‘sends’ the Paraclete (John xvi. 7).

οἴδατε πάντες] ye all know, i.e. the Truth. If this reading be adopted the statement must be taken in close connexion with the clause which follows: ‘ye all know—I have not written to you because ye do not know—the Truth.’ With οἴδατε τὴν ἂλ. contrast 2 John 2 οἱ ἐγνωκότες τὴν ἂλ.

21 - πᾶν C.

The common reading καὶ οἴδατε πάντα gives an explanation of the actual force of χρίσμα ἔχετε: ‘ye have an unction, and, in virtue of that gift of the Holy Spirit, ye know all things; ye have potentially complete and certain knowledge: no false teaching can deceive you if ye are faithful to yourselves.’ Comp. v. 27; Jude 5 (εἰδότας ἅπαξ πάντα); John xiv. 26, xvi. 13.

See Additional Note.

Additional Note on the reading of ii. 20.

There is a remarkable variety of readings in the last words of this verse:

AC MSS mss

Memph Vulg.

The Syriac reads πάντα but translates it as if it were masc. (and know every man).

Hesych. Presb. (sæc. vii) in Lev. i. 5 ff. (Migne P. Gr. xciii. p. 796) Et vos unctionem habetis a sancto et scitis omnes.

(3) οἴδατε πάντες B Theb.

The rendering which is given without variation in the Discourses of Augustine (ad loc.) ut ipsi vobis manifesti sitis can hardly be correct. His comment suggests πάντες: hanc unctionem Christi dicit omnes qui habent cognoscere malos et bonos; nec opus esse ut doceantur quia ipsa unctio docet eos.

The Latin translation of Irenæus, in a continuous quotation of vv. 18—22, omits v. 20 and part of v. 21: …sed ut manifestarentur quoniam non sunt ex nobis. Cognoscite ergo quoniam omne mendacium extraneum est et non est de veritate. Quis est mendax…(Iren. iii. 16. 5).

The combination for πάντες ℵBP 9 Theb. is very strong; and the shorter reading without καί readily explains how the others arose. When once the connexion of οἴδατε with τὴν ἀλήθειαν was lost, the insertion of καί and the change of πάντες to πάντα was almost inevitable, especially with the apparent parallel in v. 27 περὶ πάντων.

The occurrence of 9 (Cambr. Univ. Libr. Kk. vi. 4) in the small group of authorities which have preserved the main element of the true reading may serve as an excuse for directing attention to that remarkable MS, which has been strangely overlooked.

It was pointed out by Porson and Marsh that this MS is that marked ἐγ’ in Stephens’ edition of 1550; and apparently the capricious selection of readings quoted from it by Stephens has been the limit of the knowledge of the MS preserved by later editors. Mill’s generalisations from the readings in Stephens (Prolog. 1170) might well have caused it to be more carefully examined.

The following readings in 1 John are worthy of notice:

— 4 ἡμῶν.

ii. 1 γράφομεν.

— 8 ἐν ἡμῖν.

iii. 1 ἔδωκεν.

— 7 τέκνα.

v. 4 ὑμῶν.

The title of the Epistle is ἐπιστολὴ Ἰωάννου ἃ and the subscription τοῦ ἁγίου ἀπ. Ἰῶ ἐπιστολὴ ἃ.

1 John 2:21

21. The object of the apostle in writing was not to communicate fresh knowledge, but to bring into active and decisive use the knowledge which his readers already possessed. For ἔγραψα see vv. 14 note, 26.

ἀλλ’ ὅτι…καὶ ὅτι…] sed quasi scientibus…et quoniam…sed quia… quia V., but because…and because… The ὅτι in the second clause appears to be coordinated with that in the first clause. St John gives two grounds for his writing:

1. Because his readers know the truth.

2. Because no lie is of the truth.

The first witnesses to the necessary sympathy between writer and readers: the second explains the occasion of the particular warning.

The second ὅτι can however also be translated ’that’ thus defining a second feature in Christian knowledge: ‘ye know the truth and know that no lie is of the truth.’ In this case the words indicate the practical consequences which follow from the revelation of the antichrists.

According to both views the absolute irreconcileableness of any falsehood with ’the Truth’ is laid down as a clear rule for the protection of Christians in the presence of seductive teachers. It was, on the other hand, the office of the Paraclete to guide them ‘into all the Truth’ (John xvi. 13).

πᾶν ψ…οὐκ ἔστιν] see v. 19 note.

ψεῦδος] mendacium V. Error is regarded in its positive form as part of ’the lie’ (τὸ ψεῦδος) which is the opposite of ’the Truth.’ Compare John viii. 44; 2 Thess. ii. 11; Rom. i. 25; Eph. iv. 25. See also Apoc. xxi. 27, xxii. 15.

ἐκ τῆς ἀλ. ἔστιν] c. iii. 19; John xviii. 37. See v. 16 note. The source of falsehood is marked in John viii. 44.

2. The essence and the power of the Truth (22-25).

The mention of ’lies’ in v. 21 leads directly to the question as to the essential character of him who maintains them, and by contrast of him who holds the Truth (22, 23). Then follows the portraiture of the power of the Truth firmly held, which brings fellowship with God, even eternal life (24, 25).

Who is the liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? This is the Antichrist, even he that denieth the Father and the Son. Every one that denieth the Son hath not even the Father: he that confesseth the Son hath the Father also. As for you, let that which ye heard from the beginning abide in you. If that abide in you which ye heard from the beginning, ye also shall abide in the Son and in the Father. And this is the promise that he himself promised us, even the life eternal.

1 John 2:22

22. τίς ἐστιν…] Quis est mendax …? V. Who is the liar…? The abrupt question (comp. c. v. 5) corresponds with a brief mental pause after

νοῦμενος ὅτι Ἰησοῦς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ χριστός; οὗτός ἔστιν ὁ ἀντίχριστος, ὁ ἀρνοῦμενος τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὸν c. 21. ‘I have spoken of lies: what, nay rather, who is their source? Who is the liar?’ The abruptness of vv. 22 f. is remarkable. Clause stands by clause in stern solemnity without any connecting particles.

ὁ ψεύστης] the liar, who offers in his own person the sum of all that is false; and not simply ‘a liar’ who is guilty of a particular sin. The denial of the fact ‘Jesus is the Christ’ when grasped in its full significance—intellectual, moral, spiritual—includes all falsehood: it reduces all knowledge of necessity to a knowledge of phenomena: it takes away the highest ideal of sacrifice: it destroys the connexion of God and man.

τίς…εἰ μὴ] c. v. 5; 1 Cor. ii. 11; 2 Cor. ii. 2, &c.

ὁ ἀρνοῦμενος ὅτι…οὐκ ἔστιν] that denieth that… The insertion of the negative in the original (preserved in the Old Latin, qui negat quod Jesus non est Christus) gives a positive, aggressive, character to the negation. The adversary denies that Jesus is the Christ when the claim is made; and on his own part he affirms that He is not. Comp. Luke xx. 27; Gal. v. 7; Heb. xii. 19. For the converse see John i. 20.

The phrase by which St John describes the master-falsehood as the ‘denial that Jesus is the Christ,’ itself marks the progress of Christian thought. In the earliest stage of the Church the words would have expressed a denial of the Messiahship of Jesus from the Jewish point of view (Acts v. 42, ix. 22, xvii. 3, xviii. 28). They now answer to a later form of opinion. A common ‘Gnostic’ theory was that ’the æon Christ’ descended upon the man Jesus at His Baptism, and left Him before the Passion. Those who held such a doctrine denied that ‘Jesus was the Christ’; and in so denying, denied the union of the divine and human in one Person. This heresy then St John signalises here, the direct contradiction to the fundamental truth which he proclaimed, the Word became flesh.

οὗτος] this liar, this maintainer of the central falsehood in regard to revelation, as to God and man, is the antichrist, even he that denieth the Father and the Son. The denial of the personal union of true manhood and true Godhead in Christ involves the denial of the essential relations of Fatherhood and Sonship in the Divine Nature. The conception of this relation in the immanent Trinity prepares the way for the fact of the Incarnation; and conversely, the fact of the Incarnation gives reality to that moral conception of God as active Love without which Theism becomes a formula.

ὁ ἀντίχριστος] The term expresses the embodiment of a principle, and is not to be confined to one person. The character of ’the antichrist’ is described in the words which follow (even he that…Son), which are not simply a resumption of οὗτος.

ὁ ἀρνοῦμενος τ. π.] To deny the Father is to refuse to acknowledge God as Father. Comp. Matt. x. 33; Acts iii. 13 f.; 2 Tim. ii. 12; 2 Pet. ii. 1; Jude 4.

τὸν πατέρα] The title the Father occurs in the Epistles of St John, as in the Gospel, in connexion with ’the Son’ (vv. 22, 23, 24, i. 3, iv. 14; 2 J. 3, 9), and in relation to men (ii. 1, 14, 15 f., iii. 1; 2 J. 4) in virtue of the revelation of Christ. It is used also in relation to ’the Life’ (i. 2 note).

The title always stands in the Epistles in its simple form. ‘His Father’

23 ὁ ὁμολ… ἔχει NABC me syrr. om 5. Other conjunctions are inserted in versions.

24 ὑμεῖς NABC vg: ὑμ. + οὖν 5.

or ‘our Father,’ or ’the Father in heaven’ do not occur. See additional note on i. 2.

τὸν υἱόν] By the use of the absolute term the Son (comp. John v. 19 note), which occurs in the Epistle first here (comp. iv. 14, v. 12), St John brings out distinctly what is involved in the fact that the Christ and Jesus are personally one. There is no passage in the mind of the Apostle from one personality to another, from the human to the divine, nor yet from the conception of ’the man Christ Jesus’ to that of ’the Word’: the thought of ’the Son’ includes both these conceptions in their ideal fulness.

1 John 2:23

23. πᾶς ὁ ἀρν. τ. υἱ…] Qui negat Filium nec Patrem habet V. The original is compressed: Every one that denieth the Son hath not even the Father (οὐδὲ τ. π. ἑ.) or, according to our idiom, No one that denieth the Son hath even the Father. Such a one hath not the Son, whom he rejects, nor yet the Father, whom he professes to regard. The translation quoted by Augustine completes the sentence: qui negat Filium nec Filium nec Patrem habet.

The ‘denial of the Son’ expresses in another form that which has been more fully described before as ’the denial of Jesus as the Christ.’

The denial of the Son involves the loss of the Father, not only because the ideas of sonship and fatherhood are correlative, but because the Son alone can reveal the Father (Matt. xi. 27; John xiv. 9), and it is, in other words, only in the Son that we have the revelation of God as Father.

The οὐδὲ retains its full force ‘has not even the Father,’ though this result may seem to be against expectation, and contrary to the claim of the false teachers. Comp. John v. 22, viii. 42; Gal. ii. 3; 1 Tim. vi. 7.

For the use of πᾶς ὁ ἀρν. in place of the simple ὁ ἀρν. see c. iii. 3 note.

οὐδὲ ἔχει… ἔχει] hath not even… hath… The second clause in each case is more than a simple repetition of the first. It is not said of him ’that denieth the Son’ that he denieth the Father also; but that he ‘hath not even the Father.’ Such a man might shrink from denying the Father in words, and even claim to do Him honour, but yet St John says ‘he hath not even the Father,’ as one who enjoys the certain possession of a living Friend. And conversely he ’that confesseth the Son’ not only confesses the Father in an act of faith, but also lives in conscious communion with Him.

ἔχει] Comp. v. 12; 2 John 9.

Augustine has an interesting discussion on the application of the test to Catholics and Donatists. His conclusion is: ‘Quisquis factis negat Christum Antichristus est,’ adding the words quoted on v. 19. And Bede says of this confession: confessionem hic cordis vocis et operis inquirit qualem querebat Paulus (1 Cor. xii. 3).

ὁ ὁμολογῶν τὸν υἱόν] qui confitetur Filium V., he that confesseth the Son, he that openly acknowledges that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. The constructions of ὁμολογεῖν in N.T. are numerous. The simplest are those with the infin. and with ὅτι which serve for the affirmation of a definite fact past, present or future (infin. c. iv. 2; Tit. i. 16; Matt. xiv. 7; ὅτι c. iv. 15; John i. 20; Acts xxiv. 14; Heb. xi. 13). From the construction with the infin. that with the accus.

ἡκούσατε ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς, ἐν ὑμῖν μενέτω· ἐὰν ἐν ὑμῖν μείνη ὁ ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς ἠκούσατε, καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐν τῷ υἱῷ καὶ [ἐν]

ἀκηκδατε (bis) ℵ. ὁ ἀπ’ ἀρχ. ἀκηκ. ℵ (vg) mg the. ἐν τῷ π. ℵAC: - ἐν B vg. ἐν τῷ π. καὶ ἐν τῷ υἱῷ ℵ syr vg.

follows, either a simple accus. Acts xxiii. 8 (comp. c. i. 9); or an accus, with a secondary predicate 2 John 7; John ix. 22. Here and in c. iv. 3 the predicate which gives the substance of the confession is supplied from the context. Elsewhere the verb is used absolutely: John xii. 42; with cogn. accus. 1 Tim. vi. 12; with the substance of the confession added in the direct: Rom. x. 9 (Κύριος Ἰησοῦς). More remarkable is the construction with ἐν Matt. x. 31 f.; Luke xii. 8, which suggests the idea of an acknowledged fellowship.

To know the Son as Son is to have such knowledge as we can have at present of the Father (John xiv. 7 ff.). Hence he that confesseth the Son hath the Father also as well as the Son whom he directly acknowledges.

24 f. The view of the true nature of the confession and denial of Christ is followed by a view of the power of the confession. The knowledge to which it witnesses carries with it eternal life.

1 John 2:24

24. Ἐμεῖς…] As for you… The pronoun stands at the head of the sentence in contrast with the false teachers of whom the apostle has spoken (v. 22): comp. Matt. xiii. 18. For the irregular construction see v. 27; John vi. 39; vii. 38; xiv. 12; xv. 2; Luke xxi. 6, &c.

The construction is broken, because the thought of St John is turned from that which the disciples had to do to that which was done for them. ‘As for you, do you keep’ is changed to ‘As for you, let that abide in you.’ The final strength of the Christian lies not in his own effort, but in the Truth by which he is inspired. That is the power of life which he is charged not to hinder. Comp. John xv. 7. For the double divine fellowship, ‘God in us, we in God,’ see iv. 15 note.

ὁ ἠκούσατε…] that which ye heard…(v. 7). The first simple message of the Gospel apprehended in its unity (ὅ not ā; comp. John xiv. 23). This ‘word’ taken into the heart becomes a power fashioning the whole man (John viii. 31 f.; xv. 7).

ἐν ὑμῖν μενέτω] let that…abide in you. The Gospel is described both as a medium in which the believer lives (John viii. 31), and as a quickening spirit which dwells in him (Col. iii. 16; 2 John 2).

ὁ ἦκ. ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς…ὁ ἀπ’ ἀρχ. ἦκ…] The change of order marks a change of emphasis. In the first clause the stress lies on the fact that the readers had received a divine message (ye heard): in the second, on the coincidence of that message in time with the origin of their faith (from the beginning). Comp. iii. 8 note.

καὶ ὑμεῖς…] ye also…i.e. ’then ye on your side…’ not ‘ye as well as others…’ The presence of the divine life carries with it of necessity the possession of divine fellowship. Thus one fact is correlative to the other (comp. i. 3). This correlation is made clearer by the correspondence in the pronouns: ἐὰν ἐν ὑμῖν…καὶ ὑμεῖς. Comp. iii. 24.

For the use of καὶ to mark a corresponding issue, see iv. 11.

ἐν τῷ υἱῷ καὶ ἐν τ. π.] The order, as contrasted with that in v. 22 (τ. π. καὶ τ. υἱ.) is significant. Here the thought is that of rising through the confession of the Son to the knowledge of the Father; there the thought is of the issue of denial culminating in the denial of the Father.

25 ἡμῖν: ὑμῖν B (lat).

26 ταῦτα + δέ & syryg.

1 John 2:25

25. καὶ αὕτη ἐστίν…] And this is… The pronoun may refer either to that which precedes or to that which follows. The promise may be that of abiding communion with the Father and the Son (John xvii. 21), which is explained by the words added in apposition ’the life eternal’; or it may be simply ’the life eternal.’ In either case ’the life eternal’ consists in union with God by that knowledge which is sympathy (John xvii. 3), so that there is no real difference of sense in the two interpretations. The usage of St John in the Epistle is decidedly in favour of the second view (i. 5, iii. 23, v. 11, 14), nor is there any sufficient reason for departing from it.

ἐπαγγελία] repromissio V., pollicitatio Aug. This is the only place where the word occurs in the writings of St John (not c. i. 5). Contrast ἐπάγγελμα (promissum V.) 2 Pet. i. 4; iii. 13.

ἦν αὐτός…] that He… He himself, Christ our Master. The nom. (αὐτός) is always emphatic: see v. 2 note. There is not any special saying of the Lord recorded in which this promise is expressly contained (yet comp. James i. 12; Apoc. ii. 10); but it was the whole aim and scope of His teaching to lead men to seek ’life.’ And a divine charge is a divine promise.

τὴν ζ. τὴν αἱ.] See c. i. 2 note. For the attraction compare Phil. iii. 18. Winer, p. 665.

3. Abiding in the Truth (ii. 26—29).

The view which St John has given of the nature and power of the Truth is followed by a fresh application of the teaching to the readers of the Epistle. An affirmation (μένετε, indic., v. 27) leads to a command (μένετε, imper., v. 28). Thus the paragraph falls into two parts which deal (1) with the divine teaching as permanent and progressive (vv. 26 f.) and (2) with human effort directed to the future (vv. 28 f.).

²⁶ These things have I written to you concerning them that would lead you astray. ²⁷ And as for you, the unction which ye received from him abideth in you, and ye have no need that any one teach you; but as his unction teacheth you of all things (and it is true and is no lie), and even as it taught you, ye abide in him.

²⁸ And now, little children, abide in him, that, if he shall be manifested, we may have boldness and not shrink in shame from him at his presence. ²⁹ If ye know that he is righteous, know (notice) that every one that doeth righteousness hath been begotten of him.

26 f. In the preceding verses (vv. 24 f.) St John had appealed to the original apostolic message which his readers had received (ὁ ἠκούσατε) in contrast with all false teaching. He now appeals to the inward voice of the Spirit whose first teaching (ἐδίδαξεν) and whose present teaching (διδάσκει) is one.

1 John 2:26

26. Ταῦτα] These things, the clear unfolding of the true character and significance of the false teachers in relation to the church (vv. 18—25).

ἔγραψα] See v. 14 note.

τῶν πλανώντων] qui seducunt vos V., them that would lead you astray. who are actively engaged in the effort: c. iii. 7; Apoc. xiii. 14, xii. 9.

St John has spoken of the false

27 χρίσμα (1): χάρις μα Β. μέν. ἐν ὑμ. ΝΑΒC vg me the: ἐν ὑμ. μέν. 5: μενέτω vg. ἀλλ’ ὡς ΝΑC vg the: ἀλλὰ Β. τὸ αὐτοῦ ΝΒC vg the syr hl.: τὸ αὐτό 5Α me. χρίσμα (2): πνεῦμα Ν°me (χρεῖσμα Β).

teachers under their spiritual aspect as ‘antichrists’; he now speaks of them under their outward aspect as leading men away from the fellowship of the Christian Society.

1 John 2:27

27. καὶ ὑμεῖς…] And as for you… The construction is like that in v. 24. The pronoun is set at the head of the sentence in order to bring out sharply the contrast between believers and their adversaries.

τὸ χρίσμα] v. 20 note.

ὁ ἐλάβ. ἀ. αὐ.] which ye received from Him ’the Holy One’ (v. 20), even Christ (v. 25). The gift which before (v. 20) was simply described as a possession (ἔχετε) is now referred to its source. The personal relation to which it witnesses is a ground of confidence.

ἐλόβ. ἀπ’ αὐ.] The use of ἀπό to mark the source in this connexion has been already touched on (c. i. 5). The distinction of the ‘source’ (ἀπό) and the ‘giver’ (παρά) is illustrated by the combination of the prepositions ἀπό and παρά with different verbs:

(1) λαμβάνειν παρά John v. 41, 44; x. 18; 2 John 4; Apoc. ii. 27; Mk. xii. 2; Acts ii. 33; iii. 5; xvii. 9; xx. 24; James i. 7; 2 Pet. i. 17. λαμβάνειν ἀπό 1 John iii. 22; 3 John 7; Matt. xvii. 25.

(2) παραλαμβάνειν παρά 1 Thess. ii. 13; iv. 1; 2 Thess. iii. 6; Gal. i. 12. παραλαμβάνειν ἀπό 1 Cor. xi. 23.

(3) ἔχειν παρά Acts ix. 14. ἔχειν ἀπό c. ii. 20; iv. 21; 1 Tim. iii. 7. ἔχειν ἐκ 1 Cor. vii. 7; 2 Cor. v. 1.

For ἀκούειν παρά, ἀπό see c. i. 5 note.

μένει] abideth. The apostle so writes as looking at the divine side of the truth. The gifts of God are sure on His part.

οὐ χρείαν ἔχ…] ye have no need… The outpouring of the Spirit, the characteristic of the last days (Jer. xxxi. 34; Joel ii. 28; Heb. viii. 11; Acts ii. 17 ff.), gave to each one who received it a sure criterion of truth. Christians needed not fresh teaching even from apostles, still less from those who professed to guide them into new ‘depths.’ οὐ χρ. ἔχ. ἵνα…] non necesse habetis ut V., non habetis necessitatem ut Aug. The same construction occurs in John ii. 25, xvi. 30. The phrase χρείαν ἔχειν is used absolutely in several places: Mk. ii. 25; Acts ii. 45, iv. 35; 1 Cor. xii. 24; Eph. iv. 28, as in this Epistle c. iii. 17. This usage supplies a probable explanation of the construction: ‘Ye are not in need such that you require…’ ἀλλ’ ὡς…καὶ καθὼς…ἐν αὐτῷ] but as His unction teacheth you…and even as it taught you, ye abide in Him. These words serve to establish the statement just made. ‘You need no one to teach you, but on the contrary you remain firm in that direct divine fellowship established by the teaching which you are continually receiving and which at first you received once for all.’ Impatience drives men to look without for the guidance which in due time will be recognised within. Such impatience is the opposite to the steadfastness of the Christian.

But while so much is clear the construction of the sentence is uncertain. The last clause (and even as…in Him) may be either a resumption or

27 ἀληθῆς ℵ.

rather a continuation of the former words (as His…no lie), or a new and distinct clause. In the latter case the first apodosis will be in the words ‘so is it true and no lie,’ ‘but as His unction teacheth you, even so is it true and no lie.’ This use of καὶ in the apodosis is however rare in St John; nor does there appear to be any special force in making the affirmation of the perfect truth of the divine teaching a substantive conclusion. It is therefore more natural to suppose that there is only one apodosis (ye abide in Him), and that the sentence as originally shaped (but, on the contrary, as His unction teacheth you concerning all things, ye abide in Him) was afterwards enlarged by the addition of the reflection ‘and it is true and is no lie,’ which again led to the further statement that the present progressive teaching is essentially the same as the first teaching as His unction teacheth…and even as it taught you, ye abide in Him.

The reading of B gives a plain and simple sense, but it is difficult to understand how it could have been altered if it had been the original reading.

το αὖ. χρ.] His unction, the unction which ye received from Christ. Comp. John xvi. 7.

The most unusual order τὸ αὖ. χρ. (for τὸ χρ. αὖ.) throws a strong emphasis on the pronoun. Comp. 1 Thess. ii. 19 (contrast 1 Cor. xv. 23; 2 Cor. vii. 7); Rom. iii. 24 (in 2 Pet. iii. 7 τῷ αὐτοῦ λ. is probably a false reading). As might be expected this is the normal order with ἐκεῖνος: John v. 47; 2 Pet. i. 16; 2 Cor. viii. 9, 14; 2 Tim. ii. 26; Tit. iii. 7.

διδ. ὑ. π. π.] teacheth you of all things. The application and interpretation of the truth is continuous.

The Spirit of Truth sent in Christ’s name (John xiv. 26), sent, that is, to make the meaning of the Incarnation fully known, is ever bringing out something more of the infinite meaning of His Person and Work, in connexion with the new results of thought and observation (περὶ πάντων). Comp. John xvi. 13 f.

καὶ ἀληθὲς ἐστιν…] and it is true… The ‘unction,’ the gift of the Spirit, is now identified with the results of the gift. The Spirit is the Spirit of Truth (John xiv. 17); and its teaching is true, and admits no element of falsehood (v. 21).

Parenthetical reflections like this are found elsewhere in St John’s writings. Comp. c. i. 2 note.

οὐκ ἔ. ψεῦδος] non est mendacium V., is no lie. By the use of ψεῦδος (not ψευδές) St John implies that the false teachers practically represented the Gospel as ‘a lie’ in its concrete form, and not simply as ‘false’ (comp. v. 21 note).

The combination of the positive and negative is characteristic of St John: i. 5 note.

καὶ καθὼς ἐδίδαξεν…] and even as it taught… The first teaching contained implicitly all that is slowly brought to light in later times (comp. ii. 7). The believer abides in Christ as the Spirit makes Him known, and even as it made Him known in the simple Gospel ‘Jesus is the Christ.’ This clause excludes all ‘developments’ of teaching which cannot be shewn to exist in germ in the original message; and at the same time leaves no room for the inventions of fanaticism. That which was taught first is the absolute standard.

The use of καθὼς marks this idea of a definite and fixed standard: ve. 6, 18, iii. 2, 3, 7, 12, &c.

28 - καὶ νῦν…αὐτῷ Ἄ.

ἵνα ἐὰν ἈABC the: ἵνα ὅταν 5 syrr.

μένετε ἐν αὐτῷ] ye abide in Him, i.e. Christ. The verb may be indicative or imperative (as in v. 28, so Vulg. manete in eo), but the parallelism with μένει (the unction abideth…ye abide) is decisive in favour of the indicative. In this verse St John assumes the fulfilment of the conditions which he presses upon his readers in v. 28.

For the general thought compare John vi. 56, xv. 4 ff. Elsewhere the Christian is said to ‘abide in God’: iii. 24, iv. 12 ff. So in vv. 28 f. ‘Christ’ and ‘God’ are treated as interchangeable.

At first sight it might appear most natural to take ἐν αὐτῷ of the ’teaching of the Spirit’ (χρίσμα) as is done by the Latin translation used by Augustine (permanete in ipsa sc. unctione) according to John viii. 31; but the personal reference cannot be questioned in v. 28, and that must decide the interpretation here. Christ—God in Christ—is the subject constantly present to the mind of the Apostle.

Augustine contrasts finely the human and divine teachers: Sonus verborum nostrorum aures percutit, magister intus est. Nolite putare quemquam hominem aliquid discere ab homine. Admonere possumus per strepitum vocis nostræ; si non sit intus qui doceat inanis fit strepitus noster… Magisteria forinsecus adjutoria quædam sunt et admonitiones. Cathedram in cælo habet qui corda docet.

28 f. St John turns from the ideal view of the believer to the practical enforcement of duty: ‘I have said that God’s gift is unchangeable; and that the Christian continues living in that which he received, and so abides in his Lord; and now, in the face of your enemies, realise your life: do you abide in Him, and prove your fellowship by your action.’

The verses serve also to prepare the way for the next section, introducing ideas which are afterwards developed (φανεροῦσθαι, παρρησίαν ἔχειν, ποιεῖν τὴν δίκ., γεγεννῆσθαι ἐξ αὐτοῦ).

1 John 2:28

28. καὶ νῦν…] And now… For this connexion see John xvii. 5; 2 John 5; Acts iii. 17, x. 5, xiii. 11, xx. 25, xxii. 16.

τεκνία] filioli V., my little children. The tenderness of the address (τεκνία) commends the charge.

ἐν αὐτῷ] in Him, i.e. in Christ, v. 27. ἐὰν φανερωθῇ] cum apparuerit V., cum manifestatus fuerit Aug., if he shall be manifested, c. iii. 2. The hypothetic form does not throw doubt upon the fact in itself (see v. 29), but marks the uncertainty of the circumstances under which the fact will be realised: the manifestation might be while they all still lived. Comp. John xxi. 22 f.; c. iv. 17 ἐν τῇ ἡμ. τῆς κρίσεως.

The same word φανερωθῆναι is used for the first manifestation of the Lord in the flesh (c. i. 2, iii. 5, 8; 1 Tim. iii. 16; 1 Pet. 1. 20); and for that manifestation which is still looked for (c. iii. 2; Col. iii. 4; 1 Pet. v. 4). It is used also for the manifestations of the Risen Lord ([Mark] xvi. 12, 14; John xxi. 14 (1)), and for His ‘manifestation to Israel’ (John i. 31: comp. vii. 4).

It is worthy of notice that St John nowhere uses ἀποκαλύπτεσθαι of the revelation of Christ.

σχῶμεν παρρ.] we may… St John again identifies himself with his

28 ἐν τῇ παρ. ἀ. ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ Ν. 29 εἰδῆτε NBC vg syrr: ἔδητε A me. -ὅτι πᾶς B me syr hl: ὅτι+καὶ πᾶς NAC the syr vg.

children: comp. v. 1. All form one body. It is possible to understand the words as referring to the Apostle’s joy in the crown of his work (comp. 1 Thess. ii. 19 f.; Phil. iv. 1). The parallel with 1 Thess. ii. 19 f. is certainly close; but it seems to be more natural to suppose that the apostle made himself one with those who shared his life, and the absence of the personal pronoun seems to exclude the notion of any contrast between him and them.

The use of ἔχειν παρρησίαν (c. iii. 21, iv. 17, v. 14; comp. Heb. iii. 6, x. 19; Phil. 8) in connexion with the manifestation of Christ suggests St Paul’s thought of the judgment-seat of Christ (2 Cor. v. 10) or of God (Rom. xiv. 10), where man must ‘render account’ (Rom. xiv. 12) of his life. The idea of open, unreserved utterance is never lost. See John vii. 4 note. The difference in order here (σχ. παρρ.) and in iii. 21, iv. 17 (παρρ. ἔχειν) indicates a different emphasis on the elements of the phrase: comp. Eph. iii. 12.

μὴ αἰσχυνθῶμεν ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ] non confundamur ab eo V., not shrink with shame from Him, ‘as a guilty thing surprised.’ The same thought of separation is found more plainly expressed 2 Thess. i. 9. The construction αἰσχύνεσθαι ἀπό is used in the same sense in the LXX: Is. i. 29; Jer. ii. 36, xii. 13 (בְּנֵי כֵן); Ecclus. xxi. 22, xli. 17 ff.

παρουσίαν adventu V., presence (coming). The word does not occur elsewhere in St John’s writings. Its single occurrence here, where it might easily have been omitted, in exactly the same sense as it bears in all the other groups of apostolic writings (Matt., James, 2 Peter, 1, 2 Thess., 1 Cor.) is a signal example of the danger of drawing conclusions from the negative phenomena of the books of the New Testament. The fact is the more worthy of notice as the subject of eschatology falls into the background in the Gospel and Epistles of St John. Comp. John xxi. 22.

It may be added that St John does not use the Pauline word ἐπιφάνεια (2 Thess., 1, 2 Tim., Tit.).

1 John 2:29

29. ἐὰν εἰδῆτε…γινώσκετε…] si scitis …scitote (Vig. Taps. scitis)… V. If ye know…perceive, observe, notice… Knowledge which is absolute (εἰδῆτε) becomes the basis of knowledge which is realised in observation (γινώσκετε). Comp. John ii. 24 note. The distinction is lost in the Latin and can hardly be preserved in an English version.

The second verb (γινώσκετε) may be either indicative or imperative. Both renderings are found in early Latin authorities. In favour of the imperative it is urged that it stands between two imperatives (μένετε, and iii. 1 ἴδετε). On the other hand it is said that v. 29 contains a general reason for the command in v. 28. ‘Abide in Him in fruitful well-doing, for the first article of your faith teaches you that right action is the sign of a divine birth.’

A decision is difficult; but upon the whole the general structure of vv. 28 f. favours the imperative. It seems to be more in accordance with the context that St John should here charge his readers to apply practi-

cally the truth which they had inwardly mastered, than that he should appeal to them as having done thus.

The use of ἐάν with the subj. (ἐάν εἰδῆτε), when there is no intention of questioning the fact or treating it as uncertain, often serves to turn the thoughts of the hearer or reader upon it in the way of self-interrogation: ‘if, as I assume to be the case, as you profess, as by silent inquiry you can assure yourselves…’ Comp. c. iv. 12 (v. 15); John xiv. 15.

δίκαιος… ἐξ αὖ. γεγένν.] He is righteous…begotten of Him… Great difficulty has been felt in determining whether the pronoun refers to ‘God’ or to ‘Christ.’ There can be no doubt that Christ is the subject in v. 28 (abide in Him…at His presence). It is therefore most natural to suppose that He is the subject in this verse also, unless the context makes such an interpretation impossible. This probability is strengthened by the fact that no personal pronoun is introduced in v. 29. And there is a further presumption that the same subject is continued from the fact that in iii. 1 a new subject is distinctly named (the Father). The application of the epithet ‘righteous’ to Christ is supported by v. 1. But it is argued on the other side that the Christian cannot be said ’to be born of Christ.’ It is certainly true that the exact phrase does not occur elsewhere, while ’to be born of God’ (who is called ‘righteous’ c. i. 9) is a characteristic phrase of St John (γενν. ἐκ θεοῦ John i. 13, γενν. ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ c. iii. 9; iv. 7; v. 1, 4, 18). But this argument does not seem to be conclusive. Christians are said equally to ‘abide in God’ and to ‘abide in Christ’ (v. 27). They are also said to be ‘born of the Spirit’ (John iii. 6, 8). The word of Christ is in them as a quickening power (comp. 1 Pet. i. 23; James i. 18). There is then nothing against the tenour of Scripture in saying that Christians are ‘born of

Christ,’ who is ‘God only-begotten’ (John i. 18).

The true solution of the difficulty seems to be that when St John thinks of God in relation to men he never thinks of Him apart from Christ (comp. c. v. 20). And again he never thinks of Christ in His human nature without adding the thought of His divine nature. Thus a rapid transition is possible from the one aspect of the Lord’s divine-human Person to the other. Here the passage is from ‘Christ’ to ‘God’ (ἐὰν φανερωθῇ, ἐν τῇ παρονοίᾳ αὐτοῦ, δίκαιος ἐστιν, ἐξ αὐτοῦ γεγέννηται); and conversely in iii. 1—4 the passage is from ‘God’ to ‘Christ’ (τέκνα θεοῦ, οὐκ ἔγνω αὐτόν, ἐὰν φανερωθῇ, ὅμοιοι αὐτῷ ἐσόμεθα, καθὼς ἐκεῖνος), yet without any change of Person.

This appears to be the view of Augustine who writes: ex ipso natus est, ex Deo, ex Christo. Bede writes simply ‘id est, ex Christo.’

δίκαιος] righteous. The epithet is used of Christ ii. 1; iii. 7. Comp. Acts iii. 14, vii. 52, xxii. 14; and of God (the Father) c. i. 9 (see note); John xvii. 25; Apoc. xvi. 5.

ὅτι πᾶς…γεγέννηται] that every one…hath been begotten of Him. The presence of righteous action is the sure sign of the reality of the divine birth. We are often tempted, according to our imperfect standards of judgment, to exclude some (comp. v. 23 πᾶς ὁ ἀρν. note), but the divine law admits no exception. It must be further observed that righteousness is not the condition but the consequence of Sonship. God is the one source of righteousness. Apart from God in Christ there is no righteousness. It follows therefore that the presence of active righteousness is the sign of the divine Sonship, and the sign of that abiding power of Sonship which brings final confidence. Other tests of Sonship are offered in the Epistle: ’love’ (iv. 7) and belief ’that Jesus is the

Christ’ (v. 1). Each one, it will be found, includes the others. See v. 1 note.

The apostle’s argument might have appeared more direct if the clauses had been inverted: ‘know (take note of the fact) that every one that is born of God doeth righteousness.’ But the present order includes a promise, and leaves the power of Sonship in its amplitude. The outwardly witnessed fact of righteousness points to the reality of a relation which includes blessings not yet fully grasped.

ὁ ποιῶν τὴν δικ.] qui facit justitiam V., who doeth righteousness, who realises in action little by little the righteousness which corresponds with the Divine Nature (τὴν δικ. compare c. iii. 7 note). The tense (ποιῶν) is full of meaning, as Theophylact observes: ἐπισημαντέον ὅτι οὐκ εἶπε Πᾶς ὁ ποιήσας δικαιοσύνην ἢ, Ὁ ποιήσων ἀλλ’ Ὁ ποιῶν. πρακτικαὶ γὰρ [αἱ] ἀρεταὶ καὶ ἐν τῷ γίνεσθαι ἔχουσι τὸ εἶναι· παυσόμεναι δὲ ἢ μέλλουσαι οὐδὲ τὸ εἶναι ἔχουσι.

Bede thus marks the beginning and the end of this realisation of righteousness: Cœpisti non defendere peccatum tuum, jam inchoasti justitiam. Perficietur autem in te quando te nihil aliud facere delectabit.

Compare also ποιεῖν τὴν ἀλήθειαν c. i. 6 note.

ἐξ αὐτοῦ γεγένηται] ex ipso natus est V., is begotten of Him. Comp. c. iii. 9 note. The phrase occurs here first in the Epistle. The order emphasises the fact that such a one has God for his Father, and not that he has a new life. Compare iii. 9 b; iv. 7; v. 1; John i. 13.