Text -- 1 John 1:5--2:2 (NET)

God Is Light, So We Must Walk in the Light

1:5 Now this is the gospel message we have heard from him and announce to you: God is light, and in him there is no darkness at all. 1:6 If we say we have fellowship with him and yet keep on walking in the darkness, we are lying and not practicing the truth. 1:7 But if we walk in the light as he himself is in the light, we have fellowship with one another and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. 1:8 If we say we do not bear the guilt of sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. 1:9 But if we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous, forgiving us our sins and cleansing us from all unrighteousness. 1:10 If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar and his word is not in us. 2:1 (My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin.) But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous One, 2:2 and he himself is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for our sins but also for the whole world.

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Robertson: 1Jo 1:5

And ( kai ).

Mutual fellowship depends on mutual knowledge (Westcott).

Robertson: 1Jo 1:5

Message ( aggelia ).

Old word (from aggelos , messenger), in N.T. only here and 1Jo 3:11, and note ap' autou (from God like apaggellō in 1Jo 1:3) and anaggellomen , to announce, to disclose, here as in Joh 4:25.

Robertson: 1Jo 1:5

God is light ( ho theos phōs estin ).

Precisely so the Logos is light (Joh 1:4-9) and what Jesus claimed to be (Joh 8:12). John repeats it in negative form as he often does (Joh 1:3).

Robertson: 1Jo 1:6

If we say ( ean eipōmen ).

Condition of third class with ean and second aorist (ingressive, up and say) active subjunctive. Claiming fellowship with God (see 1Jo 1:3) involves walking in the light with God (1Jo 1:5) and not in the darkness (skotos here, but skotia in Joh 1:5). See 1Jo 2:11 also for en tēi skotiāi peripateō .

Robertson: 1Jo 1:6

We lie ( pseudometha ).

Present middle indicative, plain Greek and plain English like that about the devil in Joh 8:44.

Robertson: 1Jo 1:6

Do not the truth ( ou poioumen tēn alētheian ).

Negative statement of the positive pseudometha as in Joh 8:44. See Joh 3:21 for "doing the truth,"like Neh 9:33.

Robertson: 1Jo 1:7

If we walk ( ean peripatōmen ).

Condition of third class also with ean and present active subjunctive (keep on walking in the light with God).

Robertson: 1Jo 1:7

As he ( hōs autos ).

As God is light (1Jo 1:5) and dwells in light unapproachable (1Ti 6:16).

Robertson: 1Jo 1:7

One with another ( met' allēlōn ).

As he has already said in 1Jo 1:3. But we cannot have fellowship with one another unless we have it with God in Christ, and to do that we must walk in the light with God.

Robertson: 1Jo 1:7

And the blood of Jesus his Son cleanseth us from all sin ( kai to haima Iēsou tou huiou autou katharizei hēmās apo pāsēs hamartias ).

This clause with kai in true Johannine style is coordinate with the preceding one. Walking in the light with God makes possible fellowship with one another and is made possible also by the blood of Jesus (real blood and no mere phantom, atoning blood of the sinless Son of God for our sins). John is not ashamed to use this word. It is not the mere "example"of Jesus that "cleanses"us from sin. It does cleanse the conscience and life and nothing else does (Heb 9:13.; Tit 2:14). See in 1Jo 1:9 both forgiveness and cleansing. Cf. 1Jo 3:3.

Robertson: 1Jo 1:8

If we say ( ean eipōmen ).

See 1Jo 1:6.

Robertson: 1Jo 1:8

We have no sin ( hamartian ouk echomen ).

For this phrase see Joh 9:41; Joh 15:22, Joh 15:24. That is, we have no personal guilt, no principle of sin. This some of the Gnostics held, since matter was evil and the soul was not contaminated by the sinful flesh, a thin delusion with which so-called Christian scientists delude themselves today.

Robertson: 1Jo 1:8

We deceive ourselves ( heautous planōmen ).

Present active indicative of planaō , to lead astray. We do not deceive others who know us. Negative statement again of the same idea, "the truth is not in us."

Robertson: 1Jo 1:9

If we confess ( ean homologōmen ).

Third-class condition again with ean and present active subjunctive of homologeō , "if we keep on confessing."Confession of sin to God and to one another (Jam 5:16) is urged throughout the N.T. from John the Baptist (Mar 1:5) on.

Robertson: 1Jo 1:9

Faithful ( pistos ).

Jesus made confession of sin necessary to forgiveness. It is God’ s promise and he is "righteous"(dikaios ).

Robertson: 1Jo 1:9

To forgive ( hina aphēi ).

Sub-final clause with hina and second aorist active subjunctive of aphiēmi .

Robertson: 1Jo 1:9

And to cleanse ( kai hagiasēi ).

So again with hina and the first aorist active subjunctive of katharizō (1Jo 1:7).

Robertson: 1Jo 1:10

If we say ( ean eipōmen ).

As in 1Jo 1:6, 1Jo 1:8.

Robertson: 1Jo 1:10

We have not sinned ( ouch hamartēkamen ).

Perfect active indicative of hamartanō . This is a denial of any specific acts of sin, while in 1Jo 1:8 we have the denial of the principle of sin. David Smith observes that the claim to personal perfectionism has two causes, one the stifling of conscience in making God a liar (pseustēn , the word used of the devil by Jesus in Joh 8:44), and the other ignorance of God’ s word, which is not in us, else we should not make such a claim.

Robertson: 1Jo 2:1

My little children ( teknia mou ).

Tender tone with this diminutive of teknon (child), again in 1Jo 2:12; 1Jo 3:18, but paidia in 1Jo 2:14. John is now an old man and regards his readers as his little children. That attitude is illustrated in the story of his visit to the robber to win him to Christ.

Robertson: 1Jo 2:1

That ye may not sin ( hina mē hamartēte ).

Purpose (negative) clause with hina mē and the second aorist (ingressive, commit sin) active subjunctive of hamartanō , to sin. John has no patience with professional perfectionists (1Jo 1:8-10), but he has still less with loose-livers like some of the Gnostics who went to all sorts of excesses without shame.

Robertson: 1Jo 2:1

If any man sin ( ean tis hamartēi ).

Third-class condition with ean and second aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive again, "if one commit sin."

Robertson: 1Jo 2:1

We have ( echomen ).

Present active indicative of echō in the apodosis, a present reality like echomen in 2Co 5:1.

Robertson: 1Jo 2:1

An advocate ( paraklēton ).

See note on Joh 14:16, and Joh 14:26; and note on Joh 15:26; and Joh 16:7 for this word, nowhere else in the N.T. The Holy Spirit is God’ s Advocate on earth with men, while Christ is man’ s Advocate with the Father (the idea, but not the word, in Rom 8:31-39; Heb 7:25). As dikaios (righteous) Jesus is qualified to plead our case and to enter the Father’ s presence (Heb 2:18).

Robertson: 1Jo 2:2

And he ( kai autos ).

He himself in his own person, both priest and sacrifice (Heb 9:14).

Robertson: 1Jo 2:2

The propitiation ( hilasmos ).

Late substantive from hilaskomai (Luk 18:13; Heb 2:17), in lxx, Philo, Plutarch, in N.T. only here and 1Jo 4:10. Christ himself is the means of propitiation for (peri concerning) our sins. See hilastērion in Rom 3:15.

Robertson: 1Jo 2:2

For the whole world ( peri holou tou kosmou ).

It is possible to supply the ellipsis here of tōn hamartiōn (the sins of) as we have it in Heb 7:27, but a simpler way is just to regard "the whole world"as a mass of sin (1Jo 5:19). At any rate, the propitiation by Christ provides for salvation for all (Heb 2:9) if they will only be reconciled with God (2Co 5:19-21).

Vincent: 1Jo 1:5

This then is ( καὶ αὕτη ἐστὶν )

Rev., correctly and literally, and this . According to the proper reading the verb stands first in order (ἐστὶν αὕτη ), with emphasis, not merely as a copula, but in the sense " there exists this as the message." For a similar use of the substantive verb, see 1Jo 5:16,1Jo 5:17; 1Jo 2:15; Joh 8:50.

Vincent: 1Jo 1:5

Message ( ἐπαγγελία )

This word, however, is invariably used in the New Testament in the sense of promise . The best texts read ἀγγελία , message , which occurs only at 1Jo 3:11; and the corresponding verb, ἀγγέλλω , only at Joh 10:18.

Vincent: 1Jo 1:5

We have heard of Him ( ἀκηκόαμεν ἀπ ' αὐτοῦ )

A form of expression not found elsewhere in John, who commonly uses παρ ' αὐτοῦ . See on Joh 6:46. The phrase here points to the ultimate and not necessarily the immediate source of the message. Not only John, but others in earlier times had heard this message. Compare 1Pe 1:10, 1Pe 1:11. Ἁπό points to the source παρά to the giver . Thus, Joh 5:41, " I receive not honor from (παρά ) men." They are not the bestowers of honor upon me." Joh 5:44, " How can ye believe which receive honor from (παρά ) one another;" the honor which men have to give , " and seek not the honor that cometh from (παρά ) God;" the honor which God alone bestows . On the other hand, 1Jo 3:22, " Whatsoever we ask we receive from (ἀπό ) Him," the ultimate source of our gifts. So Mat 17:25 : " Of (ἀπό ) whom do the kings of the earth take custom - of (ἀπό ) their own children or of (ἀπό ) strangers?" What is the legitimate and ultimate source of revenue in states?

Vincent: 1Jo 1:5

Declare ( ἀναγγέλλομεν )

Compare the simple verb ἀγγέλλειν to bring tidings , Joh 20:18, and only there. Ἀναγγέλλειν is to bring the tidings up to (ἀνά ) or back to him who receives them. Ἀπαγέλλειν is to announce tidings as coming from (ἀπό ) some one, see Mat 2:8; Joh 4:51. Καταγγέλλειν is to proclaim with authority , so as to spread the tidings down among (κατά ) those who hear. See Act 17:23. Found only in the Acts and in Paul.

Vincent: 1Jo 1:5

God is Light ( Θεὸς φῶς ἐστὶν )

A statement of the absolute nature of God. Not a light, nor the light, with reference to created beings, as the light of men , the light of the world , but simply and absolutely God is light , in His very nature. Compare God is spirit , and see on Joh 4:24 : God is love , 1Jo 4:8, 1Jo 4:16. The expression is not a metaphor. " All that we are accustomed to term light in the domain of the creature, whether with a physical or metaphysical meaning, is only an effluence of that one and only primitive Light which appears in the nature of God" (Ebrard). Light is immaterial, diffusive, pure, and glorious. It is the condition of life.

Physically, it represents glory ; intellectually, truth ; morally, holiness . As immaterial it corresponds to God as spirit ; as diffusive, to God as love ; as the condition of life, to God as life ; as pure and illuminating, to God as holiness and truth . In the Old Testament, light is often the medium of God's visible revelations to men. It was the first manifestation of God in creation. The burning lamp passed between the pieces of the parted victim in God's covenant with Abraham. God went before Israel in a pillar of fire, descended in fire upon Sinai, and appeared in the luminons cloud which rested on the mercy-seat in the most holy place. In classical Greek φῶς light , is used metaphorically for delight , deliverance , victory , and is applied to persons as a term of admiring affection, as we say that one is the light of our life , or the delight of our eyes . So Ulysses, on seeing his son Telemachus, says, " Thou hast come, Telemachus, sweet light (γλυκερὸν φάος )" (Homer, " Odyssey," xvi., 23). And Electra, greeting her returning brother, Orestes, " O dearest light (φίλτατον φῶς )" (Sophocles, " Electra," 1223). Occasionally, as by Euripides, of the light of truth (" Iphigenia at Tauris," 1046). No modern writer has developed the idea of God as light with such power and beauty as Dante. His " Paradise" might truthfully be called a study of light. Light is the only visible expression of God. Radiating from Him, it is diffused through the universe as the principle of life. This key-note is struck at the very opening of " the Paradise."

" The glory of Him who moveth everything

Doth penetrate the universe, and shine

In one part more and in another less.

Within that heaven which most His light receives

Was I."

" Paradiso ," i ., 1-5 .

In the final, beatific vision, God Himself is imagined as a luminous point which pours its rays through all the spheres, upon which the spirits gazed, and in which they read the past, the present, and the future.

" O grace abundant, by which I presumed

To fix my sight upon the Light Eternal,

So that the seeing I consumed therein!

I saw that in its depth far down is lying

Bound up with love together in one volume,

What through the universe in leaves is scattered;

Substance, and accident, and their operations,

All interfused together in such wise

That what I speak of is one simple light."

" Paradiso ," xxxiii ., 82-90 .

" In presence of that light one such becomes,

That to withdraw therefrom for other prospect

It is impossible he e'er consent;

Because the good, which object of will,

Is gathered all in this, and out of it

That is defective which is perfect there."

" Paradiso ," xxxiii ., 100-105 .

" O Light eterne, sole in thyself that dwellest,

Sole knowest thyself, and, know unto thyself

And knowing, lovest and smilest on thyself!

" Paradiso xxxiii ., 124-126 .

Light enkindles love.

" If in the heat of love I flame upon thee

Beyond the measure that on earth is seen,

So that the valor of thine eyes I vanquish,

Marvel thou not thereat; for this proceeds

From perfect sight, which, as it apprehends,

To the good apprehended moves its feet.

Well I perceive how is already shining

Into thine intellect the eternal Light,

That only seen enkindles always love."

" Paradiso ," v ., 1-9

See also " Paradiso," cantos xxx., xxxi.

Vincent: 1Jo 1:5

In Him is no darkness at all ( καὶ σκοτία οὐκ ἔστιν ἐν αὐτῷ οὐδεμία )

It is characteristic of John to express the same idea positively and negatively. See Joh 1:7, Joh 1:8, Joh 1:20; Joh 3:15, Joh 3:17, Joh 3:20; Joh 4:42; Joh 5:24; Joh 8:35; Joh 10:28; 1Jo 1:6, 1Jo 1:8; 1Jo 2:4, 1Jo 2:27; 1Jo 5:12. According to the Greek order, the rendering is: " And darkness there is not in Him, no, not in any way." For a similar addition of οὐδείς not one , to a complete sentence, see Joh 6:63; Joh 11:19; Joh 19:11. On σκοτία darkness , see on Joh 1:5.

Vincent: 1Jo 1:6

If we say ( ἐὰν εἴπωμεν )

The subjunctive mood puts the case as supposed , not as assumed .

Vincent: 1Jo 1:6

Walk in the darkness

The phrase occurs only in John's Gospel and First Epistle. Darkness here is σκότος , instead of σκοτία (1Jo 1:5). See on Joh 1:5. Walk (περιπατῶμεν ), is, literally, walk about ; indicating the habitual course of the life, outward and inward. The verb, with this moral sense, is common in John and Paul, and is found elsewhere only in Mar 7:5; Act 21:21.

Vincent: 1Jo 1:6

We lie and do not the truth

Again the combination of the positive and negative statements. See on 1Jo 1:5. The phrase to do the truth occurs only in John's Gospel and First Epistle. See on Joh 3:21. All walking in darkness is a not doing of the truth. " Right action is true thought realized. Every fragment of right done is so much truth made visible" (Westcott).

Vincent: 1Jo 1:7

We walk in the light ( ἐν τῷ φωτὶ περιπατῶμεν )

The phrase occurs only in the First Epistle. Walk, as above. In the light , having our life in God, who is light.

Vincent: 1Jo 1:7

He is in the light

God is forever and unchangeable in perfect light. Compare Psa 104:2; 1Ti 6:16. We walk , advancing in the light and by means of the light to more light. " The path of the just is as the shining light, that shineth more and more unto the perfect day" (Pro 4:18).

Vincent: 1Jo 1:7

One with another ( μετ ' ἀλλήλων )

Not, we with God and God with us , but with our brethren . Fellowship with God exhibits and proves itself by fellowship with Christians. See 1Jo 4:7, 1Jo 4:12; 1Jo 3:11, 1Jo 3:23.

Vincent: 1Jo 1:7

Of Jesus Christ His Son

Omit Christ . The human name, Jesus , shows that His blood is available for man. The divine name, His Son , shows that it is efficacious. I shall be rendering a service to students of John's Epistles by giving, in a condensed form, Canon Westcott's note, classifying the several names of our Lord and their uses in the Epistles.

The name in John, as in the Bible elsewhere, has two distinct, but closely connected meanings.

1. The Revelation of the Divine Being by a special title.

2. The whole sum of the manifold revelations gathered up so as to form one supreme revelation.

The latter sense is illustrated in 3Jo 1:7, where " the name" absolutely includes the essential elements of the Christian creed, the complete revelation of Christ's work in relation to God and man. Compare Joh 20:31; Act 5:41.

In 1Jo 2:12, the term is more limited, referring to Christ as He lived on earth and gave Himself for " the brethren." In 1Jo 3:23; 1Jo 5:13, the exact sense is defined by what follows.

Actual Names Used.

(I.) His Son Jesus Christ . 1Jo 1:3; 1Jo 3:23; 1Jo 5:20. The divine antecedent is differently described in each case, and the difference colors the phrase. In 1Jo 1:2-3, the Father (compare John 3). In 1Jo 3:23, God . In 1Jo 5:20, He that is true . Thus the sonship of Christ is regarded in relation to God as Father, as God, and as satisfying the divine ideal which man is able to form. The whole phrase, His Son Jesus Christ , includes the two elements of the confessions which John makes prominent.

1. Jesus is the Son of God (Joh 4:15; Joh 5:5).

2. Jesus is the Christ (Joh 2:22; Joh 5:1).

The constituents of the compressed phrase are all used separately by John.

(1.) Jesus . 1Jo 2:22; 1Jo 5:1; 1Jo 4:3 (where the correct reading omits Christ). The thought is that of the Lord in His perfect historic humanity.

(2.) Christ . 2Jo 1:9. Pointing to the preparation made under the old covenant.

(3). Jesus Christ . 1Jo 2:1; 1Jo 5:6; 2Jo 1:7. Combining the ideas of true humanity and messianic position.

In 1Jo 4:15, the reading is doubtful: Jesus or Jesus Christ .

On 1Jo 4:2, see note.

(4.) The Son . 1Jo 2:22, 1Jo 2:23, 1Jo 2:24; 1Jo 4:14; 1Jo 5:12. The absolute relation of Sonship to Fatherhood.

(5.) The Son of God . 1Jo 3:8; 1Jo 5:10, 1Jo 5:12, 1Jo 5:13, 1Jo 5:20. Compare His Son (1Jo 4:10; 1Jo 5:9), where the immediate antecedent is ὁ Θεός God ; and 1Jo 5:18, He that was begotten of God . Combination of the ideas of Christ's divine dignity and divine sonship.

(6.) Jesus His (God's) Son . 1Jo 1:7. Two truths. The blood of Christ is available and efficacious .

(7). His (God's) Son , His only Son . 1Jo 4:9. The uniqueness of the gift is the manifestation of love.

The Son in various forms is eminently characteristic of the First and Second Epistles, in which it occurs more times than in all Paul's Epistles.

Κύριος Lord , is not found in the Epistles (omit from 2Jo 1:3), but occurs in the Gospel, and often in Revelation.

The expression, the blood of Jesus His Son , is chosen with a profound insight. Though Ignatius uses the phrase blood of God yet the word blood is inappropriate to the Son conceived in His divine nature. The word Jesus brings out His human nature, in which He assumed a real body of flesh and blood, which blood was shed for us.

Vincent: 1Jo 1:7

Cleanseth ( καθαρίζει )

See on Mar 7:19. Not only forgives but removes . Compare Tit 2:14; Heb 9:13 sq.; Heb 9:22 sq.; Eph 5:26 sq.; Mat 5:8; 1Jo 3:3. Compare also 1Jo 1:9, where, forgive (ἀφῇ ) and cleanse (καθαρίσῃ ) occur, with an obvious difference of meaning. Note the present tense cleanseth . The cleansing is present and continuous . Alexander (Bishop of Derry) cites a striking passage from Victor Hugo (" Le Parricide" ). The usurper Canute, who has had a share in his father's death, expiring after a virtuous and glorious reign, walks towards the light of heaven. But first he cuts with his sword a shroud of snow from the top of Mt. Savo. As he advances towards heaven, a cloud forms, and drop by drop his shroud is soaked with a rain of blood.

Vincent: 1Jo 1:7

All sin ( πάσης ἁμαρτίας )

The principle of sin in all its forms and manifestations; not the separate manifestations. Compare all joy (Jam 1:2); all patience (2Co 7:12); all wisdom (Eph 1:8); all diligence (2Pe 1:5).

Vincent: 1Jo 1:8

That we have no sin

Ὅτι that , may be taken merely as a mark of quotation: " If we say, sin we have not ." On the phrase to have sin , see on Joh 16:22, and compare have fellowship , 1Jo 1:3. Sin (ἁμαρτίαν ) is not to be understood of original sin, or of sin before conversion , but generally . " It is obvious that this ἔχειν ἁμαρτίαν ( to have sin ), is infinitely diversified, according to the successive measure of the purification and development of the new man. Even the apostle John does not exclude himself from the universal if we say " (Ebrard).

Heathen authors say very little about sin, and classic paganism had little or no conception of sin in the Gospel sense. The nearest approach to it was by Plato, from whose works a tolerably complete doctrinal statement might be gathered of the origin, nature, and effects of sin. The fundamental idea of ἁμαρτία ( sin ) among the Greeks is physical; the missing of a mark (see on Mat 1:21; see on Mat 6:14); from which it develops into a metaphysical meaning, to wander in the understanding . This assumes knowledge as the basis of goodness; and sin, therefore, is, primarily, ignorance . In the Platonic conception of sin, intellectual error is the prominent element. Thus: " What then, I said, is the result of all this? Is not this the result - that other things are indifferent, and that wisdom is the only good, and ignorance the only evil?" (" Euthydemus," 281). " The business of the founders of the state will be to compel the best minds to attain that knowledge which has been already declared by us to be the greatest of all - they must continue to rise until they arrive at the good" (" Republic," vii., 519). Plato represents sin as the dominance of the lower impulses of the soul, which is opposed to nature and to God (see " Laws," ix., 863. " Republic," i., 351). Or again, as an inward want of harmony. " May we not regard every living being as a puppet of the gods, either their plaything only or created with a purpose - which of the two we cannot certainly know? But this we know, that these affections in us are like cords and strings which pull us different and opposite ways, and to opposite actions; and herein lies the difference between virtue and vice" (" Laws," i., 644). He traces most sins to the influence of the body on the soul. " In this present life, I reckon that we make the nearest approach to knowledge when we have the least possible communion or fellowship with the body, and are not infected with the bodily nature, but remain pure until the hour when God himself is pleased to release us. And then the foolishness of the body will be cleared away, and we shall be pure, and hold converse with other pure souls, and know of ourselves the clear light everywhere, which is no other than the light of truth" (" Phedo," 67).

We find in the classical writers, however, the occasional sense of the universal faultiness of mankind, though even Plato furnishes scarcely any traces of accepting the doctrine of innate depravity. Thus Theognis: " The sun beholds no wholly good and virtuous man among those who are now living" (615). " But having become good, to remain in a good state and be good, is not possible, and is not granted to man. God only has this blessing; but man cannot help being bad when the force of circumstances overpowers him" (Plato, " Protagoras," 344). " How, then: is it possible to be sinless? It is impossible; but this is possible, to strive not to sin" (" Epictetus," iv., 12, 19).

Vincent: 1Jo 1:8

We deceive ourselves ( ἑαυτοὺς πλανῶμεν )

Lit., we lead ourselves astray . See on Mar 7:24; see on Mat 27:63, Mat 27:64; see on Jud 1:13. Not only do we err, we are responsible for it. The phrase only here in the New Testament. For the verb as applied to deceivers of various kinds, see Mat 24:4; Rev 2:20; Rev 13:14; Rev 19:20; Rev 12:9; Rev 20:3. Compare πλάνοι deceivers (2Jo 1:7); πλάνη error (Jud 1:11; 1Jo 4:6).

Vincent: 1Jo 1:8

The truth

The whole Gospel. All reality is in God. He is the only true God (ἀληθινός Joh 17:3; see on Joh 1:9). This reality is incarnated in Christ, the Word of God, " the very image of His substance," and in His message to men. This message is the truth , a title not found in the Synoptists, Acts, or Revelation, but in the Catholic Epistles (Jam 5:19; 1Pe 1:22; 2Pe 2:2), and in Paul (2Co 8:8; Eph 1:13, etc.). It is especially characteristic of the Gospel and Epistles of John. The truth is represented by John objectively and subjectively.

1. Objectively . In the person of Christ. He is the Truth , the perfect revelation of God (Joh 1:18; Joh 14:6). His manhood is true to the absolute law of right, which is the law of love, and is, therefore, our perfect pattern of manhood.

Truth, absolutely existing in and identified with God, was also, in some measure, diffused in the world. The Word was in the world, before as after the incarnation (Joh 1:10. See on Joh 1:4, Joh 1:5). Christ often treats the truth as something to which He came to bear witness, and which it was His mission to develop into clearer recognition and expression (Joh 18:37). This He did through the embodiment of truth in His own person (Joh 1:14, Joh 1:17; Joh 14:6), and by His teaching (Joh 8:40; Joh 17:17); and His work is carried out by the Spirit of Truth (Joh 16:13), sent by God and by Christ himself (Joh 14:26; Joh 16:7). Hence the Spirit, even as Christ, is the Truth (1Jo 5:6). The whole sum of the knowledge of Christ and of the Spirit, is the Truth (1Jo 2:21; 2Jo 1:1). This truth can be recognized, apprehended, and appropriated by man, and can be also rejected by him (Joh 8:32; 1Jo 2:21; Joh 8:44).

2. Subjectively . The truth is lodged in man by the Spirit, and communicated to his spirit (Joh 14:17; Joh 15:26; Joh 16:13). It dwells in man (1Jo 1:8; 1Jo 2:4; 2Jo 1:2), as revelation, comfort, guidance, enlightenment, conviction, impulse, inspiration, knowledge. It is the spirit of truth as opposed to the spirit of error (1Jo 4:6). It translates itself into act. God's true children do the truth (Joh 3:21; 1Jo 1:6). It brings sanctification and freedom (Joh 8:32; Joh 17:17). See on Joh 14:6, Joh 14:17.

Vincent: 1Jo 1:9

Confess ( ὁμολογῶμεν )

From ὁμός , one and the same , and λέγω , to say. Hence, primarily, to say the same thing as another , and, therefore, to admit the truth of an accusation . Compare Psa 51:4. The exact phrase, ὁμολογεῖν τὰς ἁμαρτίας confess the sins , does not occur elsewhere in the New Testament. Compare ἐξομολογεῖσθαι ἁμαρτίας (παραπτώματα ) Mat 3:6; Mar 1:5; Jam 5:16. See on Mat 3:6; see on Mat 11:25; see on Luk 22:6; see on Act 19:18; see on Jam 5:16.

Vincent: 1Jo 1:9

Sins

Note the plural, as compared with the singular, sin , in the previous verse. See note. The plural indicates that the confession is to be specific as well as general . Augustine's words are exactly to the point, but his play upon pardon and confess cannot be reproduced in English. " Vis ut ille ignoscat? Tu agnosce." Do you wish Him to forgive? Do you confess .

Vincent: 1Jo 1:9

Faithful ( πιστός )

True to His own nature and promises; keeping faith with Himself and with man. The word is applied to God as fulfilling His own promises (Heb 10:23; Heb 11:11); as fulfilling the purpose for which He has called men (1Th 5:24; 1Co 1:9); as responding with guardianship to the trust reposed in Him by men (1Co 10:13; 1Pe 4:19). " He abideth faithful. He cannot deny Himself" (2Ti 2:13). The same term is applied to Christ (2Th 3:3; Heb 3:2; Heb 2:17). God's faithfulness is here spoken of not only as essential to His own being, but as faithfulness toward us; " fidelity to that nature of truth and light, related to His own essence, which rules in us as far as we confess our sins" (Ebrard). The essence of the message of life is fellowship with God and with His children (1Jo 1:3). God is light (1Jo 1:5). Walking in the light we have fellowship , and the blood of Jesus is constantly applied to cleanse us from sin, which is darkness and which interrupts fellowship. If we walk in darkness we do not the truth. If we deny our sin the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, " God, by whom we were called unto the fellowship of His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, is faithful " (1Co 1:9) to forgive our sins, to cleanse us from all unrighteousness, and thus to restore and maintain the interrupted fellowship.

Vincent: 1Jo 1:9

Just ( δίκαιος )

Rev., righteous . From δίκη right . The term is applied both to God and to Christ. See Rev 16:5; Joh 17:25; 1Jo 2:1; 1Jo 3:7; 1Pe 3:18. The two words, faithful and righteous , imply each other. They unite in a true conception of God's character. God, who is absolute rightness , must be faithful to His own nature, and His righteous dealing with men who partake of that nature and walk in fellowship with Him, is simply fidelity to Himself. " Righteousness is truth passing into action" (Westcott).

Vincent: 1Jo 1:9

To forgive ( ἵνα ἀφῇ )

See Joh 20:23; 1Jo 2:12. Primarily the word means to send away , dismiss ; hence of sins, to remit , as a debt. Cleansing (1Jo 1:7) contemplates the personal character of the sinner; remission , his acts . See on Mat 6:12; see on Jam 5:15. To forgive is, literally, that he may forgive . On John's use of ἵνα in order that , see on Joh 15:13; see on Joh 14:31. Forgiveness answers to the essential purpose of His faithful and righteous being.

Vincent: 1Jo 1:9

Our sins ( τὰς ἁμαρτίας )

Sin is defined by John as ἀνομία, lawlessness . Compare Rom 6:19. A.V., transgression of the law (1Jo 3:4). It may be regarded either as condition or as act ; either with reference to the normal, divine ideal of manhood, or to an external law imposed upon man by God. Any departure from the normal ideal of man as created in God's image puts man out of true relation and harmony with his true self, and therefore with God and with his fellowman. He thus comes into false, abnormal relation with right, love, truth, and light. He walks in darkness and forfeits fellowship with God. Lawlessness is darkness, lovelessness, selfishness. This false principle takes shape in act . He doeth (ποιεῖ ) or committeth sin. He doeth lawlessness (τὴν ἀνομίαν ποιεῖ ; 1Jo 3:4, 1Jo 3:8). He transgresses the words (ῥήματα , Joh 17:8) of God, and His commandments (ἐντολαί , 1Jo 2:3) as included and expressed in His one word or message (λόγος , 1Jo 2:7, 1Jo 2:14). Similarly the verb ἁμαρτάνειν , to sin , may signify either to be sinful (1Jo 3:6), or to commit sin (1Jo 1:10). Sin, regarded both as principle and act, is designated by John by the term ἁμαρτία . The principle expressed in the specific acts is ἡ ἁμαρτία (Joh 1:29), which occurs in this sense in Paul, but not in the Synoptists, nor in Acts. Many of the terms used for sin by other New Testament writers are wanting in John; as ἀσέβεια ungodliness (see on Jud 1:14); ἀσεβεῖν to be ungodly (2Pe 2:6); παραβαίνειν to transgress ; παράβασις transgression ; παραβάτης transgressor (see on Mat 6:14; see on Jam 2:11); παρανομεῖν to act contrary to the law ; παρανομία breach of law (see on Act 23:3; see on 2Pe 2:16); παράπτωμα trespass (see on Mat 6:14).

Vincent: 1Jo 1:9

To cleanse

See on 1Jo 1:7.

Vincent: 1Jo 1:9

Unrighteousness ( ἀδικίας )

With reference to δίκαιος righteous . The righteous One who calls us into fellowship with Himself, purges away the unrighteousness which is contrary to His nature, and which renders fellowship impossible. The word occurs in John's writings only at Joh 7:18; 1Jo 5:17.

Vincent: 1Jo 1:10

We have not sinned ( οὐχ ἡμαρτήκαμεν )

Committed sins. Sin regarded as an act . The state is expressed by ἁμαρτίαν οὐκ ἔχομεν we have no (or not) sin (1Jo 1:8).

Vincent: 1Jo 1:10

We make Him ( πὸ¹οῦμεν α͠…̓τὸν )

A phrase characteristic of John. See Joh 5:18; Joh 8:53; Joh 10:33; Joh 19:7, Joh 19:12.

Vincent: 1Jo 1:10

His word ( ὁ λόγος αὐτοῦ )

Not the personal Word, as Joh 1:1, but the divine message of the Gospel. See Luk 5:1; Luk 8:11; Act 4:31; Act 6:2, Act 6:7, etc. Compare " the truth is not in us" (1Jo 1:8). The truth is the substance of the word. The word carries the truth. The word both moves the man (Joh 8:31, Joh 8:32) and abides in him (Joh 5:38; Joh 8:37). The man also abides in the word (Joh 8:31).

Vincent: 1Jo 2:1

My little children ( τεκνία μου )

Τεκνίον , little child , diminutive of τέκνον child , occurs in Joh 8:33; 1Jo 2:12, 1Jo 2:28; 1Jo 3:7, 1Jo 3:18; 1Jo 4:4; 1Jo 5:21. This particular phrase is found only here (best texts omit my in 1Jo 3:18). Used as a term of affection, or possibly with reference to the writer's advanced age. Compare Christ's word, παιδία children (Joh 21:5) which John also uses (1Jo 2:13, 1Jo 2:18). In the familiar story of John and the young convert who became a robber, it is related that the aged apostle repaired to the robber's haunt, and that the young man, on seeing him, took to flight. John, forgetful of his age, ran after him, crying: " O my son why dost thou fly from me thy father? Thou, an armed man, - I, an old, defenseless one! Have pity upon me! My son, do not fear! There is still hope of life for thee. I wish myself to take the burden of all before Christ. If it is necessary, I will die for thee, as Christ died for us. Stop! Believe! It is Christ who sends me."

Vincent: 1Jo 2:1

I write

More personal than we write (1Jo 1:4), and thus better suiting the form of address, my little children .

Vincent: 1Jo 2:1

If any man sin, we have

The change from the indefinite third person, any man , to the first person, we have , is significant. By the we have , John assumes the possibility of sinful acts on the part of Christians, and of himself in common with them, and their common need of the intervention of the divine Advocate. So Augustine: " He said, not ' ye have,' nor 'ye have me ,' nor ' ye have Christ himself;' but he put Christ , not himself , and said ' we have,' and not ' ye have.' He preferred to place himself in the number of sinners, so that he might have Christ for his advocate, rather than to put himself as the advocate instead of Christ, and to be found among the proud who are destined to condemnation."

Vincent: 1Jo 2:1

An advocate ( παράκλητον )

See on Joh 14:16.

Vincent: 1Jo 2:1

With the Father ( πρὸς τὸν πατέρα )

See on with God , Joh 1:1. An active relation is indicated. On the terms the Father and my Father, see on Joh 4:21.

Vincent: 1Jo 2:1

The righteous

Compare righteous, 1Jo 1:9. There is no article in the Greek. Jesus Christ righteous . See on 1Jo 1:9.

Vincent: 1Jo 2:2

And He ( καὶ αὐτὸς )

The He is emphatic: that same Jesus : He himself .

Vincent: 1Jo 2:2

The propitiation ( ἱλασμός )

Only here and 1Jo 4:10. From ἱλάσκομαι to appease , to conciliate to one's self , which occurs Luk 18:13; Heb 2:17. The noun means originally an appeasing or propitiating , and passes, through Alexandrine usage, into the sense of the means of appeasing , as here. The construction is to be particularly noted; for , in the matter of (περί ) our sins ; the genitive case of that for which propitiation is made. In Heb 2:17, the accusative case, also of the sins to be propitiated. In classical usage, on the other hand, the habitual construction is the accusative (direct objective case), of the person propitiated. So in Homer, of the gods. Θεὸν ἱλάσκεσθαι is to make a God propitious to one. See " Iliad," i., 386, 472. Of men whom one wishes to conciliate by divine honors after death. So Herodotus, of Philip of Crotona. " His beauty gained him honors at the hands of the Egestaeans which they never accorded to any one else; for they raised a hero-temple over his grave, and they still propitiate him (αὐτὸν ἱλάσκονται ) with sacrifices" (v., 47). Again, " The Parians, having propitiated Themistocles (Θεμιστοκλέα ἱλασάμενοι ) with gifts, escaped the visits of the army" (viii., 112). The change from this construction shows, to quote Canon Westcott, " that the scriptural conception of the verb 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 New Testament. Man is reconciled (2Co 5:18 sqq.; Rom 5:10 sq.). There is a propitiation in the matter of the sin or of the sinner ."

Vincent: 1Jo 2:2

For the sins of the whole world ( περὶ ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου )

The sins of (A. V., italicized) should be omitted; as in Revelation, for the whole world . Compare 1Jo 4:14; Joh 4:42; Joh 7:32. " The propitiation is as wide as the sin" (Bengel). If men do not experience its benefit, the fault is not in its efficacy. Düsterdieck (cited by Huther) says, " The propitiation has its real efficacy for the whole world; to believers it brings life, to unbelievers death." Luther: " It is a patent fact that thou too art a part of the whole world; so that thine heart cannot deceive itself, and think, the Lord died for Peter and Paul, but not for me." On κόσμου see on Joh 1:9.

Wesley: 1Jo 1:5

The Son of God.

Wesley: 1Jo 1:5

The light of wisdom, love, holiness, glory. What light is to the natural eye, that God is to the spiritual eye.

Wesley: 1Jo 1:5

No contrary principle. He is pure, unmixed light.

Wesley: 1Jo 1:6

Either with our tongue, or in our heart, if we endeavour to persuade either ourselves or others. We have fellowship with him, while we walk, either inwardly or outwardly, in darkness - In sin of any kind.

Wesley: 1Jo 1:6

Our actions prove, that the truth is not in us.

Wesley: 1Jo 1:7

In all holiness. As God is (a deeper word than walk, and more worthy of God) in the light, then we may truly say, we have fellowship one with another - We who have seen, and you who have not seen, do alike enjoy that fellowship with God. The imitation of God being the only sure proof of our having fellowship with him.

Wesley: 1Jo 1:7

With the grace purchased thereby.

Wesley: 1Jo 1:7

Both original and actual, taking away all the guilt and all the power.

Wesley: 1Jo 1:8

Any child of man, before his blood has cleansed us.

Wesley: 1Jo 1:8

To be cleansed from, instead of confessing our sins, 1Jo 1:9, the truth is not in us - Neither in our mouth nor in our heart.

Wesley: 1Jo 1:9

Because he had promised this blessing, by the unanimous voice of all his prophets.

Wesley: 1Jo 1:9

Surely then he will punish: no; for this very reason he will pardon. This may seem strange; but upon the evangelical principle of atonement and redemption, it is undoubtedly true; because, when the debt is paid, or the purchase made, it is the part of equity to cancel the bond, and consign over the purchased possession.

Wesley: 1Jo 1:9

To take away all the guilt of them.

Wesley: 1Jo 1:9

To purify our souls from every kind and every degree of it.

Wesley: 1Jo 1:10

Yet still we are to retain, even to our lives' end, a deep sense of our past sins. Still if we say, we have not sinned, we make him a liar - Who saith, all have sinned.

Wesley: 1Jo 1:10

We do not receive it; we give it no place in our hearts.

Wesley: 1Jo 2:1

So the apostle frequently addresses the whole body of Christians. It is a term of tenderness and endearment, used by our Lord himself to his disciples, Joh 13:33. And perhaps many to whom St. John now wrote were converted by his ministry. It is a different word from that which is translated "little children," in several parts of the epistle, to distinguish it from which, it is here rendered beloved children. I write these things to you, that ye may not sin - Thus he guards them beforehand against abusing the doctrine of reconciliation. All the words, institutions, and judgments of God are levelled against sin, either that it may not be committed, or that it may be abolished.

Wesley: 1Jo 2:1

Let him not lie in sin, despairing of help.

Wesley: 1Jo 2:1

We have for our advocate, not a mean person, but him of whom it was said, "This is my beloved son." Not a guilty person, who stands in need of pardon for himself; but Jesus Christ the righteous; not a mere petitioner, who relies purely upon liberality, but one that has merited, fully merited, whatever he asks.

Wesley: 1Jo 2:2

The atoning sacrifice by which the wrath of God is appeased.

Wesley: 1Jo 2:2

Who believe. And not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world - Just as wide as sin extends, the propitiation extends also .

JFB: 1Jo 1:5

First division of the body of the Epistle (compare Introduction).

JFB: 1Jo 1:5

Greek, "announce"; report in turn; a different Greek word from 1Jo 1:3. As the Son announced the message heard from the Father as His apostle, so the Son's apostles announce what they have heard from the Son. John nowhere uses the term "Gospel"; but the witness or testimony, the word, the truth, and here the message.

JFB: 1Jo 1:5

What light is in the natural world, that God, the source of even material light, is in the spiritual, the fountain of wisdom, purity, beauty, joy, and glory. As all material life and growth depends on light, so all spiritual life and growth depends on GOD. As God here, so Christ, in 1Jo 2:8, is called "the true light."

JFB: 1Jo 1:5

Strong negation; Greek, "No, not even one speck of darkness"; no ignorance, error, untruthfulness, sin, or death. John heard this from Christ, not only in express words, but in His acted words, namely, His is whole manifestation in the flesh as "the brightness of the Father's glory." Christ Himself was the embodiment of "the message," representing fully in all His sayings, doings, and sufferings, Him who is LIGHT.

JFB: 1Jo 1:6

Profess.

JFB: 1Jo 1:6

(1Jo 1:3). The essence of the Christian life.

JFB: 1Jo 1:6

In inward and outward action, whithersoever we turn ourselves [BENGEL].

JFB: 1Jo 1:6

Greek, "in the darkness"; opposed to "the light" (compare 1Jo 2:8, 1Jo 2:11).

JFB: 1Jo 1:6

(1Jo 2:4).

JFB: 1Jo 1:6

In practice, whatever we say.

JFB: 1Jo 1:6

(Eph 4:21; Joh 3:21).

JFB: 1Jo 1:7

Compare Eph 5:8, Eph 5:11-14. "WE WALK"; "God is (essentially in His very nature as 'the light,' 1Jo 1:5) in the light." WALKING in the light, the element in which God Himself is, constitutes the test of fellowship with Him. Christ, like us, walked in the light (1Jo 2:6). ALFORD notices, Walking in the light as He is in the light, is no mere imitation of God, but an identity in the essential element of our daily walk with the essential element of God's eternal being.

JFB: 1Jo 1:7

And of course with God (to be understood from 1Jo 1:6). Without having fellowship with God there can be no true and Christian fellowship one with another (compare 1Jo 1:3).

JFB: 1Jo 1:7

As the result of "walking in the light, as He is in the light."

JFB: 1Jo 1:7

Daily contracted through the sinful weakness of the flesh, and the power of Satan and the world. He is speaking not of justification through His blood once for all, but of the present sanctification ("cleanseth" is present tense) which the believer, walking in the light and having fellowship with God and the saints, enjoys as His privilege. Compare Joh 13:10, Greek, "He that has been bathed, needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit." Compare 1Jo 1:9, "cleanse us from all unrighteousness," a further step besides "forgiving us our sins." Christ's blood is the cleansing mean, whereby gradually, being already justified and in fellowship with God, we become clean from all sin which would mar our fellowship with God. Faith applies the cleansing, purifying blood. Some oldest manuscripts omit "Christ"; others retain it.

JFB: 1Jo 1:8

The confession of sins is a necessary consequence of "walking in the light" (1Jo 1:7). "If thou shalt confess thyself a sinner, the truth is in thee; for the truth is itself light. Not yet has thy life become perfectly light, as sins are still in thee, but yet thou hast already begun to be illuminated, because there is in thee confession of sins" [AUGUSTINE].

JFB: 1Jo 1:8

"HAVE," not "have had," must refer not to the past sinful life while unconverted, but to the present state wherein believers have sin even still. Observe, "sin" is in the singular; "(confess our) sins" (1Jo 1:9) in the plural. Sin refers to the corruption of the old man still present in us, and the stain created by the actual sins flowing from that old nature in us. To confess our need of cleansing from present sin is essential to "walking in the light"; so far is the presence of some sin incompatible with our in the main "walking in light." But the believer hates, confesses, and longs to be delivered from all sin, which is darkness. "They who defend their sins, will see in the great day whether their sins can defend them."

JFB: 1Jo 1:8

We cannot deceive God; we only make ourselves to err from the right path.

JFB: 1Jo 1:8

(1Jo 2:4). True faith. "The truth respecting God's holiness and our sinfulness, which is the very first spark of light in us, has no place in us" [ALFORD].

JFB: 1Jo 1:9

With the lips, speaking from a contrite heart; involving also confession to our fellow men of offenses committed against them.

JFB: 1Jo 1:9

God.

JFB: 1Jo 1:9

To His own promises; "true" to His word.

JFB: 1Jo 1:9

Not merely the mercy, but the justice or righteousness of God is set forth in the redemption of the penitent believer in Christ. God's promises of mercy, to which He is faithful, are in accordance with His justice.

JFB: 1Jo 1:9

Greek, "in order that." His forgiving us our sins and cleansing us, &c., is in furtherance of the ends of His eternal faithfulness and justice.

JFB: 1Jo 1:9

Remitting the guilt.

JFB: 1Jo 1:9

Purify from all filthiness, so that henceforth we more and more become free from the presence of sin through the Spirit of sanctification (compare Heb 9:14; and above, see on 1Jo 1:7).

JFB: 1Jo 1:9

Offensive to Him who "is just" or righteous; called "sin," 1Jo 1:7, because "sin is the transgression of the law," and the law is the expression of God's righteousness, so that sin is unrighteousness.

JFB: 1Jo 1:10

Parallel to 1Jo 1:8.

JFB: 1Jo 1:10

Referring to the commission of actual sins, even after regeneration and conversion; whereas in 1Jo 1:8, "we have no sin," refers to the present GUILT remaining (until cleansed) from the actual sins committed, and to the SIN of our corrupt old nature still adhering to us. The perfect "have . . . sinned" brings down the commission of sins to the present time, not merely sins committed before, but since, conversion.

JFB: 1Jo 1:10

A gradation; 1Jo 1:6, "we lie"; 1Jo 1:8, "we deceive ourselves"; worst of all, "we make Him a liar," by denying His word that all men are sinners (compare 1Jo 5:10).

JFB: 1Jo 1:10

"His word," which is "the truth" (1Jo 1:8), accuses us truly; by denying it we drive it from our hearts (compare Joh 5:38). Our rejection of "His word" in respect to our being sinners, implies as the consequence our rejection of His word and will revealed in the law and Gospel as a whole; for these throughout rest on the fact that we have sinned, and have sin.

JFB: 1Jo 2:1

The diminutive expresses the tender affection of an aged pastor and spiritual father. My own dear children, that is, sons and daughters (see on 1Jo 2:12).

JFB: 1Jo 2:1

(1Jo 1:6-10). My purpose in writing what I have just written is not that you should abuse them as giving a license to sin but, on the contrary, "in order that ye may not sin at all" (the Greek aorist, implying the absence not only of the habit, but of single acts of sin [ALFORD]). In order to "walk in the light" (1Jo 1:5, 1Jo 1:7), the first step is confession of sin (1Jo 1:9), the next (1Jo 2:1) is that we should forsake all sin. The divine purpose has for its aim, either to prevent the commission of, or to destroy sin [BENGEL].

JFB: 1Jo 2:1

Connected with the former; Furthermore, "if any man sin," let him, while loathing and condemning it, not fear to go at once to God, the Judge, confessing it, for "we have an Advocate with Him." He is speaking of a BELIEVER'S occasional sins of infirmity through Satan's fraud and malice. The use of "we" immediately afterwards implies that we all are liable to this, though not necessarily constrained to sin.

JFB: 1Jo 2:1

Advocacy is God's family blessing; other blessings He grants to good and bad alike, but justification, sanctification, continued intercession, and peace, He grants to His children alone.

JFB: 1Jo 2:1

Greek, "paraclete," the same term as is applied to the Holy Ghost, as the "other Comforter"; showing the unity of the Second and Third Persons of the Trinity. Christ is the Intercessor for us above; and, in His absence, here below the Holy Ghost is the other Intercessor in us. Christ's advocacy is inseparable from the Holy Spirit's comfort and working in us, as the spirit of intercessory prayer.

JFB: 1Jo 2:1

As our "advocate," Christ is not a mere suppliant petitioner. He pleads for us on the ground of justice, or righteousness, as well as mercy. Though He can say nothing good of us, He can say much for us. It is His righteousness, or obedience to the law, and endurance of its full penalty for us, on which He grounds His claim for our acquittal. The sense therefore is, "in that He is righteous"; in contrast to our sin ("if any man sin"). The Father, by raising Him from the dead, and setting Him at His own right, has once for all accepted Christ's claim for us. Therefore the accuser's charges against God's children are vain. "The righteousness of Christ stands on our side; for God's righteousness is, in Jesus Christ, ours" [LUTHER].

JFB: 1Jo 2:2

Greek, "And Himself." He is our all-prevailing Advocate, because He is Himself "the propitiation"; abstract, as in 1Co 1:30 : He is to us all that is needed for propitiation "in behalf of our sins"; the propitiatory sacrifice, provided by the Father's love, removing the estrangement, and appeasing the righteous wrath, on God's part, against the sinner. "There is no incongruity that a father should be offended with that son whom he loveth, and at that time offended with him when he loveth him" [BISHOP PEARSON]. The only other place in the New Testament where Greek "propitiation" occurs, is 1Jo 4:10; it answers in the Septuagint to Hebrew, "caphar," to effect an atonement or reconciliation with God; and in Eze 44:29, to the sin offering. In Rom 3:25, Greek, it is "propitiatory," that is, the mercy seat, or lid of the ark whereon God, represented by the Shekinah glory above it, met His people, represented by the high priest who sprinkled the blood of the sacrifice on it.

JFB: 1Jo 2:2

Greek, "yet."

JFB: 1Jo 2:2

Believers: not Jews, in contrast to Gentiles; for he is not writing to Jews (1Jo 5:21).

JFB: 1Jo 2:2

Christ's "advocacy" is limited to believers (1Jo 2:1; 1Jo 1:7): His propitiation extends as widely as sin extends: see on 2Pe 2:1, "denying the Lord that bought them." "The whole world" cannot be restricted to the believing portion of the world (compare 1Jo 4:14; and "the whole world," 1Jo 5:19). "Thou, too, art part of the world, so that thine heart cannot deceive itself and think, The Lord died for Peter and Paul, but not for me" [LUTHER].

Clarke: 1Jo 1:5

This then is the message - This is the grand principle on which all depends, which we have heard of απ ’ αυτου, From him; for neither Moses nor the prophets ever gave that full instruction concerning God and communion with him which Jesus Christ has given, for the only-begotten Son, who was in the bosom of the Father, has alone declared the fullness of the truth, and the extent of the blessings, which believers on him are to receive. See Joh 1:18

Clarke: 1Jo 1:5

God is light - The source of wisdom, knowledge, holiness, and happiness; and in him is no darkness at all - no ignorance, no imperfection, no sinfulness, no misery. And from him wisdom, knowledge, holiness, and happiness are received by every believing soul. This is the grand message of the Gospel, the great principle on which the happiness of man depends. Light implies every essential excellence, especially wisdom, holiness, and happiness. Darkness implies all imperfection, and principally ignorance, sinfulness, and misery. Light is the purest, the most subtile, the most useful, and the most diffusive of all God’ s creatures; it is, therefore, a very proper emblem of the purity, perfection, and goodness of the Divine nature. God is to human soul, what the light is to the world; without the latter all would be dismal and uncomfortable, and terror and death would universally prevail: and without an indwelling God what is religion? Without his all-penetrating and diffusive light, what is the soul of man? Religion would be an empty science, a dead letter, a system unauthoritated and uninfluencing, and the soul a trackless wilderness, a howling waste, full of evil, of terror and dismay, and ever racked with realizing anticipations of future, successive, permanent, substantial, and endless misery. No wonder the apostle lays this down as a first and grand principle, stating it to be the essential message which he had received from Christ to deliver to the world.

Clarke: 1Jo 1:6

If we say that we have fellowship - Having fellowship, κοινωνια, communion, with God, necessarily implies a partaking of the Divine nature. Now if a man profess to have such communion, and walk in darkness - live an irreligious and sinful life, he lies, in the profession which he makes, and does not the truth - does not walk according to the directions of the Gospel, on the grace of which he holds his relation to God, and his communion with him

The Gnostics, against whose errors it is supposed this epistle was written, were great pretenders to knowledge, to the highest degrees of the Divine illumination, and the nearest communion with the fountain of holiness, while their manners were excessively corrupt.

Clarke: 1Jo 1:7

But if we walk in the light - If, having received the principle of holiness from him, we live a holy and righteous life, deriving continual light, power, and life from him, then we have fellowship one with another; that is, we have communion with God, and God condescends to hold communion with us. This appears to be the intention of the apostle; and so he was understood by some versions and MSS., which, instead of μετ ’ αλληλων, with each other, have μετ ’ αυτον, with him. Those who are deeply experienced in Divine things converse with God, and God with them. What John says is no figure; God and a holy heart are in continual correspondence

Clarke: 1Jo 1:7

The blood of Jesus Christ - The meritorious efficacy of his passion and death has purged our consciences from dead works, and cleanseth us, καθαριζει ἡμας, continues to cleanse us, i.e., to keep clean what it has made clean, (for it requires the same merit and energy to preserve holiness in the soul of man, as to produce it), or, as several MSS. and some versions read, καθαριει and καθαρισει, will cleanse; speaking of those who are already justified, and are expecting full redemption in his blood

And being cleansed from all sin is what every believer should look for, what he has a right to expect, and what he must have in this life, in order to be prepared to meet his God. Christ is not a partial Savior, he saves to the uttermost, and he cleanses from All sin.

Clarke: 1Jo 1:8

If we say that we have no sin - This is tantamount to 1Jo 1:10 : If we say that we have not sinned. All have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; and therefore every man needs a Savior, such as Christ is. It is very likely that the heretics, against whose evil doctrines the apostle writes, denied that they had any sin, or needed any Savior. In deed, the Gnostics even denied that Christ suffered: the Aeon, or Divine Being that dwelt in the man Christ Jesus, according to them, left him when he was taken by the Jews; and he, being but a common man, his sufferings and death had neither merit nor efficacy

Clarke: 1Jo 1:8

We deceive ourselves - By supposing that we have no guilt, no sinfulness, and consequently have no need of the blood of Christ as an atoning sacrifice: this is the most dreadful of all deceptions, as it leaves the soul under all the guilt and pollution of sin, exposed to hell, and utterly unfit for heaven

Clarke: 1Jo 1:8

The truth is not in us - We have no knowledge of the Gospel of Jesus, the whole of which is founded on this most awful truth - all have sinned, all are guilty, all are unholy; and none can redeem himself. Hence it is as necessary that Jesus Christ should become incarnated, and suffer and die to bring men to God.

Clarke: 1Jo 1:9

If we confess our sins - If, from a deep sense of our guilt, impurity, and helplessness, we humble ourselves before God, acknowledging our iniquity, his holiness, and our own utter helplessness, and implore mercy for his sake who has died for us; he is faithful, because to such he has promised mercy, Psa 32:5; Pro 28:13; and just, for Christ has died for us, and thus made an atonement to the Divine justice; so that God can now be just, and yet the justifier of him who believeth in Jesus

Clarke: 1Jo 1:9

And to cleanse us from all unrighteousness - Not only to forgive the sin, but to purify the heart

Observe here

1.    Sin exists in the soul after two modes or forms

(1.) In guilt, which requires forgiveness or pardon

(2.) In pollution, which requires cleansing

2.    Guilt, to be forgiven, must be confessed; and pollution, to be cleansed, must be also confessed. In order to find mercy, a man must know and feel himself to be a sinner, that he may fervently apply to God for pardon; in order to get a clean heart, a man must know and feel its depravity, acknowledge and deplore it before God, in order to be fully sanctified

3.    Few are pardoned, because they do not feel and confess their sins; and few are sanctified or cleansed from all sin, because they do not feel and confess their own sore, and the plague of their hearts

4.    As the blood of Jesus Christ, the merit of his passion and death, applied by faith, purges the conscience from all dead works, so the same cleanses the heart from all unrighteousness

5.    As all unrighteousness is sin, so he that is cleansed from all unrighteousness is cleansed from all sin. To attempt to evade this, and plead for the continuance of sin in the heart through life, is ungrateful, wicked, and even blasphemous; for as he who says he has not sinned, 1Jo 1:10, makes God a liar, who has declared the contrary through every part of his revelation; so he that says the blood of Christ either cannot or will not cleanse us from all sin in this life, gives also the lie to his Maker, who has declared the contrary, and thus shows that the word - the doctrine of God is not in him

Reader, it is the birthright of every child of God to be cleansed from all sin, to keep himself unspotted from the world, and so to live as never more to offend his Maker. All things are possible to him that believeth; because all things are possible to the infinitely meritorious blood and energetic Spirit of the Lord Jesus. See the notes on the parallel passages in the margin; and particularly in St. John’ s gospel, John 1 note.

Clarke: 1Jo 2:1

My little children - Τεκνια μου· My beloved children; the address of an affectionate father to children whom he tenderly loves. The term also refers to the apostle’ s authority as their spiritual father, and their obligation to obey as his spiritual children

Clarke: 1Jo 2:1

That ye sin not - This is the language of the whole Scripture; of every dispensation, ordinance, institution, doctrine, and word of God. Sin not - do not run into ruin; live not so as to promote your own misery; be happy, for it is the will of God that ye should be so; therefore he wills that ye should be holy: holiness and happiness are inseparable; sin and misery are equally so

Clarke: 1Jo 2:1

And if any man sin - If, through ignorance, inexperience, the violence of temptation, unwatchfulness, etc., ye have fallen into sin, and grieved the Spirit of God, do not continue in the sin, nor under the guilt; do not despair of being again restored to the favor of God; your case, it is true, is deeply deplorable, but not desperate; there is still hope, for -

We have an advocate with the Father - We still have him before the throne who died for our offenses, and rose again for our justification; and there he makes intercession for us. He is the righteous; he who suffered, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God. Do not, therefore, despair, but have immediate recourse to God through him.

Clarke: 1Jo 2:2

And he is the propitiation - ‘ Ἱλασμος· The atoning sacrifice for our sins. This is the proper sense of the word as used in the Septuagint, where it often occurs; and is the translation of אשם asham , an oblation for sin, Amo 8:14. חטאת chattath , a sacrifice for sin, Eze 44:27. כפור kippur , an atonement, Num 5:8. See the note on Rom 3:25, and particularly the note on Luk 18:13. The word is used only here and in 1Jo 4:10

Clarke: 1Jo 2:2

And not for ours only - It is not for us apostles that he has died, nor exclusively for the Jewish people, but περι ὁλου του κοσμου, for the whole world, Gentiles as well as Jews, all the descendants of Adam. The apostle does not say that he died for any select part of the inhabitants of the earth, or for some out of every nation, tribe, or kindred; but for All Mankind; and the attempt to limit this is a violent outrage against God and his word

For the meaning of the word παρακλητος, which we here translate advocate, see the note on Joh 14:16

From these verses we learn that a poor backslider need not despair of again finding mercy; this passage holds out sufficient encouragement for his hope. There is scarcely another such in the Bible, and why? That sinners might not presume on the mercy of God. And why this one? That no backslider might utterly despair. Here, then, is a guard against presumption on the one hand, and despondency on the other.

Calvin: 1Jo 1:5

5.This then is the message, or promise. I do not disapprove of the rendering of the old interpreter, “This is the annunciation,” or message; for though ἐπαγγελία means for the most part a promise, yet, as John speaks here generally of the testimony before mentioned, the context seems to require the other meaning, except you were to give this explanation, “The promise which we bring to you, includes this, or has this condition annexed to it.” Thus, the meaning of the Apostle would become evident to us. ⁶⁰ For his object here was not to include the whole doctrine of the Gospel, but to shew that if we desire to enjoy Christ and his blessings, it is required of us to be conformed to God in righteousness and holiness. Paul says the same thing in the second chapter of the Epistle to Titus, “Appeared has the saving grace of God to all, that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we may live soberly and righteously and holily in this world;” except that here he says metaphorically, that we are to walk in the light, because God is light.

But he calls God light, and says that he is in the light; such expressions are not to be too strictly taken. Why Satan is called the prince of darkness is sufficiently evident. When, therefore, God on the other hand is called the Father of light, and also light, we first understand that there is nothing in him but what is bright, pure, and unalloyed; and, secondly, that he makes all things so manifest by his brightness, that he suffers nothing vicious or perverted, no spots or filth, no hypocrisy or fraud, to lie hid. Then the sum of what is said is, that since there is no union between light and darkness, there is a separation between us and God as long as we walk in darkness; and that the fellowship which he mentions, cannot exist except we also become pure and holy.

In him is no darkness at all This mode of speaking is commonly used by John, to amplify what he has affirmed by a contrary negation. Then, the meaning is, that God is such a light, that no darkness belongs to him. It hence follows, that he hates an evil conscience, pollution, and wickedness, and everything that pertains to darkness.

Calvin: 1Jo 1:6

6.If we say It is, indeed, an argument from what is inconsistent, when he concludes that they are alienated from God, who walk in darkness. This doctrine, however, depends on a higher principle, that God sanctifies all who are his. For it is not a naked precept that he gives, which requires that our life should be holy; but he rather shews that the grace of Christ serves for this end to dissipate darkness, and to kindle in us the light of God; as though he had said, “What God communicates to us is not a vain fiction; for it is necessary that the power and effect of this fellowship should shine forth in our life; otherwise the possession of the gospel is fallacious.” What he adds, and do not the truth, is the same as if he had said, “We do not act truthfully. We do not regard what is true and right.” And this mode of speaking, as I have before observed, is frequently used by him.

Calvin: 1Jo 1:7

7.But if we walk in the light He now says, that the proof of our union with God is certain, if we are conformable to him; not that purity of life conciliates us to God, as the prior cause; but the Apostle means, that our union with God is made evident by the effect, that is, when his purity shines forth in us. And, doubtless, such is the fact; wherever God comes, all things are so imbued with his holiness, that he washes away all filth; for without him we have nothing but filth and darkness. It is hence evident, that no one leads a holy life, except he is united to God.

In saying, We have fellowship one with another, he does not speak simply of men; but he sets God on one side, and us on the other.

It may, however, be asked, “Who among men can so exhibit the light of God in his life, as that this likeness which John requires should exist; for it would be thus necessary, that he should be wholly pure and free from darkness.” To this I answer, that expressions of this kind are accommodated to the capacities of men; he is therefore said to be like God, who aspires to his likeness, however distant from it he may as yet be. The example ought not to be otherwise applied than according to this passage. He walks in darkness who is not ruled by the fear of God, and who does not, with a pure conscience, devote himself wholly to God, and seek to promote his glory. Then, on the other hand, he who in sincerity of heart spends his life, yea, every part of it, in the fear and service of God, and faithfully worships him, walks in the light, for he keeps the right way, though he may in many things offend and sigh under the burden of the flesh. Then, integrity of conscience is alone that which distinguishes light from darkness.

And the blood of Jesus Christ After having taught what is the bond of our union with God, he now shews what fruit flows from it, even that our sins are freely remitted. And this is the blessedness which David describes in Psa 32:0, in order that we may know that we are most miserable until, being renewed by God’s Spirit, we serve him with a sincere heart. For who can be imagined more miserable than that man whom God hates and abominates, and over whose head is suspended both the wrath of God and eternal death?

This passage is remarkable; and from it we first learn, that the expiation of Christ, effected by his death, does then properly belong to us, when we, in uprightness of heart, do what is right and just for Christ is no redeemer except to those who turn from iniquity, and lead a new life. If, then, we desire to have God propitious to us, so as to forgive our sins, we ought not to forgive ourselves. In short, remission of sins cannot be separated from repentance, nor can the peace of God be in those hearts, where the fear God does not prevail.

Secondly, this passage shews that the gratuitous pardon of sins is given us not only once, but that it is a benefit perpetually residing in the Church, and daily offered to the faithful. For the Apostle here addresses the faithful; as doubtless no man has ever been, nor ever will be, who can otherwise please God, since all are guilty before him; for however strong a desire there may be in us of acting rightly, we always go haltingly to God. Yet what is half done obtains no approval with God. In the meantime, by new sins we continually separate ourselves, as far as we can, from the grace of God. Thus it is, that all the saints have need of the daily forgiveness of sins; for this alone keeps us in the family of God.

By saying, from all sin, he intimates that we are, on many accounts, guilty before God; so that doubtless there is no one who has not many vices. But he shews that no sins prevent the godly, and those who fear God, from obtaining his favor. He also points out the manner of obtaining pardon, and the cause of our cleansing, even because Christ expiated our sins by his blood; but he affirms that all the godly are undoubtedly partakers of this cleansing.

The whole of his doctrine has been wickedly perverted by the sophists; for they imagine that pardon of sins is given us, as it were, in baptism. They maintain that there only the blood of Christ avails; and they teach, that after baptism, God is not otherwise reconciled than by satisfactions. They, indeed, leave some part to the blood of Christ; but when they assign merit to works, even in the least degree, they wholly subvert what John teaches here, as to the way of expiating sins, and of being reconciled to God. For these two things can never harmonize together, to be cleansed by the blood of Christ, and to be cleansed by works: for John assigns not the half, but the whole, to the blood of Christ.

The sum of what is said, then, is, that the faithful know of a certainty, that they are accepted by God, because he has been reconciled to them through the sacrifice of the death of Christ. And sacrifice includes cleansing and satisfaction. Hence the power and efficiency of these belong to the blood of Christ alone.

Hereby is disproved and exposed the sacrilegious invention of the Papists as to indulgences; for as though the blood of Christ were not sufficient, they add, as a subsidy to it, the blood and merits of martyrs. At the same time, this blasphemy advances much further among us; for as they say that their keys, by which they hold as shut up the remission of sins, open a treasure made up partly of the blood and merits of martyrs, and partly of the worlds of supererogation, by which any sinner may redeem himself, no remission of sins remains for them but what is derogatory to the blood of Christ; for if their doctrine stands, the blood of Christ does not cleanse us, but comes in, as it were, as a partial aid. Thus consciences are held in suspense, which the Apostle here bids to rely on the blood of Christ.

Calvin: 1Jo 1:8

8.If we say He now commends grace from its necessity; for as no one is free from sin, he intimates that we are all lost and undone, except the Lord comes to our aid with the remedy of pardon. The reason why he so much dwells on the fact, that no one is innocent, is, that all may now fully know that they stand in need of mercy, to deliver them from punishment, and that they may thus be more roused to seek the necessary blessing.

By the word sin, is meant here not only corrupt and vicious inclination, but the fault or sinful act which really renders us guilty before God. Besides, as it is a universal declaration, it follows, that none of the saints, who exist now, have been, or shall be, are exempted from the number. Hence most fitly did Augustine refute the cavil of the Pelagians, by adducing against them this passage: and he wisely thought that the confession of guilt is not required for humility’s sake, but lest we by lying should deceive ourselves.

When he adds, and the truth is not in us, he confirms, according to his usual manner, the former sentence by repeating it in other words; though it is not a simple repetition, (as elsewhere,) but he says that they are deceived who glory in falsehood.

Calvin: 1Jo 1:9

9.If we confess He again promises to the faithful that God will be propitious to them, provided they acknowledge themselves to be sinners. It is of great moment to be fully persuaded, that when we have sinned, there is a reconciliation with God ready and prepared for us: we shall otherwise carry always a hell within us. Few, indeed, consider how miserable and wretched is a doubting conscience; but the truth is, that hell reigns where there is no peace with God. The more, then, it becomes us to receive with the whole heart this promise which offers free pardon to all who confess their sins. Moreover, this is founded even on the justice of God, because God who promises is true and just. For they who think that he is called just, because he justifies us freely, reason, as I think, with too much refinement, because justice or righteousness here depends on fidelity, and both are annexed to the promise. For God might have been just, were he to deal with us with all the rigor of justice; but as he has bound himself to us by his word, he would not have himself deemed just, except he forgives. ⁶¹

But this confession, as it is made to God, must be in sincerity; and the heart cannot speak to God without newness of life. It then includes true repentance. God, indeed, forgives freely, but in such a way, that the facility of mercy does not become an enticement to sin.

And to cleanse us The verb, to cleanse, seems to be taken in another sense than before; for he had said, that we are cleansed by the blood of Christ, because through him sins are not imputed; but now, having spoken of pardon, he also adds, that God cleanses us from iniquity: so that this second clause is different from the preceding. Thus he initiates that a twofold fruit comes to us from confession, — that God being reconciled by the sacrifice of Christ, forgives us, — and that he renews and reforms us.

Were any one to object and say, that as long as we sojourn in the world, we are never cleansed from all unrighteousness, with regard to our reformation: this is indeed true; but John does not refer to what God now performs in us. He is faithful, he says, to cleanse us, not today or tomorrow; for as long as we are surrounded with flesh, we ought to be in a continual state of progress; but what he has once begun, he goes on daily to do, until he at length completes it. So Paul says, that we are chosen, that we may appear without blame before God, (Col 1:22;) and in another place he says, that the Church is cleansed, that it might be without spot or wrinkle. (Eph 5:27.)

If yet any one prefers another explanation, that he says the same thing twice over, I shall not object. ⁶²

Calvin: 1Jo 1:10

10.We make him a liar He goes still further, that they who claim purity for themselves blaspheme God. For we see that he everywhere represents the whole race of man as guilty of sin.

Whosoever then tries to escape this charge carries on war with God, and accuses him of falsehood, as though he condemned the undeserving. To confirm this he adds, and his word is not in us; as though he had said, that we reject this great truth, that all are under guilt.

We hence learn, that we then only make a due progress in the knowledge of the word of the Lord, when we become really humbled, so as to groan under the burden of our sins and learn to flee to the mercy of God, and acquiesce in nothing else but in his paternal favor.

Calvin: 1Jo 2:1

1.My little children It is not only the sum and substance of the preceding doctrine, but the meaning of almost the whole gospel, that we are to depart from sin; and yet, though we are always exposed to God’s judgment, we are certain that Christ so intercedes by the sacrifice of his death, that the Father is propitious to us. In the meantime, he also anticipates an objection, lest any one should think that he gave license to sin when he spoke of God’s mercy, and shewed that it is presented to us all. He then joins together two parts of the gospel, which unreasonable men separate, and thus lacerate and mutilate. Besides, the doctrine of grace has always been calumniated by the ungodly. When the expiation of sins by Christ is set forth, they boastingly say that a license is given to sin.

To obviate these calumnies, the Apostle testifies first that the design of his doctrine was to keep men from sinning; for when he says, that ye sin not, his meaning only is, that they, according to the measure of human infirmity, should abstain from sins. And to the same purpose is what I have already said respecting fellowship with God, that we are to be conformable to him. He is not, however, silent as to the gratuitous remission of sins; for though heaven should fall and all things be confounded, yet this part of truth ought never to be omitted; but, on the contrary, what Christ is ought to be preached clearly and distinctly.

So ought we also to do at this day. As the flesh is inclined to wantonness, men ought to be carefully warned, that righteousness and salvation are provided in Christ for this end, that we may become the holy possession of God. Yet whenever it happens that men wantonly abuse the mercy of God, there are many snarlish men who load us with calumny, as though we gave loose reins to vices. We ought still boldly to go on and proclaim the grace of Christ, in which especially shines forth the glory of God, and in which consists the whole salvation of men. These barkings of the ungodly ought, I repeat it, to be wholly disregarded; for we see that the apostles were also by these barkings assailed.

For this reason he immediately adds the second clause, that when we sin we have an advocate By these words he confirms what we have already said, that we are very far from being perfectly righteous, nay, that we contract new guilt daily, and that yet there is a remedy for reconciling us to God, if we flee to Christ; and this is alone that in which consciences call acquiesce, in which is included the righteousness of men, in which is founded the hope of salvation.

The conditional particle, if, ought to be viewed as causal; for it cannot be but that we sin. In short, John means, that we are not only called away from sin by the gospel, because God invites us to himself, and offers to us the Spirit of regeneration, but that a provision is made for miserable sinners, that they may have God always propitious to them, and that the sins by which they are entangled, do not prevent them from becoming just, because they have a Mediator to reconcile them to God. But in order to shew how we return into favor with God, he says that Christ is our advocate; for he appears before God for this end, that he may exercise towards us the power and efficacy of his sacrifice. That this may be better understood, I will speak more homely. The intercession of Christ is a continual application of his death for our salvation. That God then does not impute to us our sins, this comes to us, because he has regard to Christ as intercessor.

But the two names, by which he afterwards signalizes Christ, properly belong to the subject of this passage. He calls him just and a propitiation. It is necessary for him to be both, that he might sustain the office and person of an Advocate; for who that is a sinner could reconcile God to us? For we are excluded from access to him, because no one is pure and free from sin. Hence no one is fit to be a high priest, except he is innocent and separated from sinners, as it is also declared in Heb 7:26. Propitiation is added, because no one is fit to be a high priest without a sacrifice. Hence, under the Law, no priest entered the sanctuary without blood; and a sacrifice, as a usual seal, was wont, according to God’s appointment, to accompany prayers. By this symbol it was God’s design to shew, that whosoever obtains favor for us, must be furnished with a sacrifice; for when God is offended, in order to pacify him a satisfaction is required. It hence follows, that all the saints who have ever been and shall be, have need of an advocate, and that no one except Christ is equal to undertake this office. And doubtless John ascribed these two things to Christ, to shew that he is the only true advocate.

Now, as no small consolation comes to us, when we hear that Christ not only died for us to reconcile us to the Father, but that he continually intercedes for us, so that an access in his name is open to us, that our prayers may be heard; so we ought especially to beware, lest this honor, which belongs peculiarly to him, should be transferred to another.

But we know that under the Papacy this office is ascribed indiscriminately to the saints. Thirty years ago, this so remarkable an article of our faith, that Christ is our advocate, was nearly buried; but at this day they allow that he is indeed one of many, but not the only one. They among the Papists who have a little more modesty, do not deny that Christ excels others; but they afterwards join with him a vast number of associates. But the words clearly mean that he cannot be an advocate who is not a priest; and the priesthood belongs to none but to Christ alone. In the meantime we do not take away the mutual intercessions of saints, which they exercise in love towards one another; but this has nothing to do with the dead who have removed from their intercourse with men; and nothing with that patronage which they feign for themselves, that they may not be dependent on Christ alone. For though brethren pray for brethren, yet they all, without exception, look to one advocate. There is, then, no doubt but the Papists set up against Christ so many idols as the patrons or advocates they devise for themselves.

We must also notice by the way, that those err very grossly, who imagine that Christ falls on his knees before the Father to pray for us. Such thoughts ought to be renounced, for they detract from the celestial glory of Christ; and the simple truth ought to be retained, that the fruit of his death is ever new and perpetual, that by his intercession he renders God propitious to us, and that he sanctifies our prayers by the odor of his sacrifice, and also aids us by pleading for us.

Calvin: 1Jo 2:2

2.And not for ours only He added this for the sake of amplifying, in order that the faithful might be assured that the expiation made by Christ, extends to all who by faith embrace the gospel.

Here a question may be raised, how have the sins of the whole world been expiated? I pass by the dotages of the fanatics, who under this pretense extend salvation to all the reprobate, and therefore to Satan himself. Such a monstrous thing deserves no refutation. They who seek to avoid this absurdity, have said that Christ ⁶³ suffered sufficiently for the whole world, but efficiently only for the elect. This solution has commonly prevailed in the schools. Though then I allow that what has been said is true, yet I deny that it is suitable to this passage; for the design of John was no other than to make this benefit common to the whole Church. Then under the word all or whole, he does not include the reprobate, but designates those who should believe as well as those who were then scattered through various parts of the world. For then is really made evident, as it is meet, the grace of Christ, when it is declared to be the only true salvation of the world.

Defender: 1Jo 1:5

Since God is light, dwelling in light (1Ti 6:16), He did not have to "create" light, but simply say: "Let there be light." (Gen 1:3). On the other hand, He did create darkness (Isa 45:7) as the initial state of the unformed and uninhabited earth (Gen 1:2). When light appeared to disperse the darkness, it could, thereby, become a model of the shining of spiritual light into a soul born in the darkness of innate sin (2Co 4:6). Physically, God is the light of shining glory, intellectually He is the light of truth, and morally He is the light of holiness. He is also the light of life (Joh 1:4) and of true guidance (Joh 8:12)."

Defender: 1Jo 1:6

Note that the truth is not only something we should believe and teach, but also something we should do."

Defender: 1Jo 1:7

That is, we are in fellowship with the Lord, and, therefore, also with other believers who are in fellowship with Him. Since there is no darkness in God, if we truly walk in His light, there can be no reason for any error, sin or ignorance of His will on our part.

Defender: 1Jo 1:7

As we walk in fellowship with Him, all sin, whether known or unknown, is cleansed by His blood."

Defender: 1Jo 1:8

The heresy of perfectionism - that is, the claim that our sin-nature has been completely eradicated so that we no longer commit sin - is self-deception. It is related to the Gnostic heresy of the time which claimed that the soul had been set free from one's sinful flesh."

Defender: 1Jo 1:9

To "confess" one's sins does not mean merely to confess one's sins in general, but rather to identify specifically, and then to agree with God as to their specific sinful character, thus, in reality, repenting (that is, changing one's mind) about them and viewing them as God does. Since Christ's blood has already been shed to cover them, He is faithful to His Word and provides forgiveness in perfect justice."

Defender: 1Jo 1:10

To say either that we "have no sin" (1Jo 1:8) or "do no sin" (1Jo 1:10) is presumptuous, blasphemous and false. Those who make such claims may deceive themselves, but others can easily discern sin in them."

Defender: 1Jo 2:1

Lest anyone regard the promises of 1Jo 1:7, 1Jo 1:9 as a license to sin, John stresses that these very promises should keep them from a life style of sin. That is, the sacrificial love of their Savior, providing full forgiveness and free salvation, should, by all rights, lead them to hate sin and constrain them to a life of holiness.

Defender: 1Jo 2:1

This refers to a specific sin. This provision is not applicable to a life of habitual sin. The latter would indicate that the sinner has not yet truly been born again (see note on 1Jo 3:6).

Defender: 1Jo 2:1

"Advocate" is the Greek paraclete meaning "one called alongside." It is translated "Comforter" in Joh 14:16."

Defender: 1Jo 2:2

"Propitiation," in this context, means "sacrifice" or "satisfaction" (1Jo 4:10).

Defender: 1Jo 2:2

The value of Christ's blood was infinite, sufficient to cover all the sins of all the men and women of every age of history. The fact that it is efficacious unto eternal salvation only for the elect (a term that includes all and only those who believe on Him) is no argument that its value was thereby limited."

TSK: 1Jo 1:5

the message : 1Jo 3:11; 1Co 11:23

that God : Psa 27:1, Psa 36:9, Psa 84:11; Isa 60:19; Joh 1:4, Joh 1:9, Joh 8:12, Joh 9:5, Joh 12:35, Joh 12:36; 1Ti 6:16; Jam 1:17; Rev 21:23, Rev 22:5

TSK: 1Jo 1:6

If : 1Jo 1:8, 1Jo 1:10, 1Jo 2:4, 1Jo 4:20; Mat 7:22; Jam 2:14, Jam 2:16, Jam 2:18; Rev 3:17, Rev 3:18

fellowship : 1Jo 1:3; Psa 5:4-6, Psa 94:20; 2Co 6:14-16

walk : 1Jo 2:9-11; Psa 82:5; Pro 2:13, Pro 4:18, Pro 4:19; Joh 3:19, Joh 3:20, Joh 11:10, Joh 12:35, Joh 12:46

we lie : 1Jo 1:10, 1Jo 4:20; Joh 8:44, Joh 8:45; 1Ti 4:2

do not : Joh 3:21

TSK: 1Jo 1:7

If we : 1Jo 2:9, 1Jo 2:10; Psa 56:13, Psa 89:15, Psa 97:11; Isa 2:5; Joh 12:35; Rom 13:12; Eph 5:8; 2Jo 1:4; 3Jo 1:4

as : 1Jo 1:5; Psa 104:2; 1Ti 6:16; Jam 1:17

we have : 1Jo 1:3; Amo 3:3

and the : 1Jo 2:1, 1Jo 2:2, 1Jo 5:6, 1Jo 5:8; Zec 13:1; Joh 1:29; 1Co 6:11; Eph 1:7; Heb 9:14; 1Pe 1:19; Rev 1:5, Rev 7:14

TSK: 1Jo 1:8

say : 1Jo 1:6, 1Jo 1:10, 1Jo 3:5, 1Jo 3:6; 1Ki 8:46; 2Ch 6:36; Job 9:2, Job 14:4, Job 15:14, Job 25:4; Psa 143:2; Pro 20:9; Ecc 7:20; Isa 53:6, Isa 64:6; Jer 2:22, Jer 2:23; Rom 3:23; Jam 3:2

we deceive : 1Co 3:18; Gal 6:3; 2Ti 3:13; Jam 1:22, Jam 1:26; 2Pe 2:13

the truth : 1Jo 2:4; 1Ti 6:5; 2Jo 1:2; 3Jo 1:3

TSK: 1Jo 1:9

we confess : Lev 26:40-42; 1Ki 8:47; 2Ch 6:37, 2Ch 6:38; Neh 1:6, 9:2-37; Job 33:27, Job 33:28; Psa 32:5, Psa 51:2-5; Pro 28:13; Dan. 9:4-20; Mat 3:6; Mar 1:5; Act 19:18

he is : Deu 7:9; Lam 3:23; 1Co 1:9; 1Ti 1:15; Heb 10:23, Heb 11:11

just : Isa 45:21; Zec 9:9; Rom 3:26; Heb 6:10; Rev 15:3

and to : 1Jo 1:7; Psa 19:12, Psa 51:2; Jer 33:8; Eze 36:25, Eze 37:23; 1Co 6:11; Eph 5:26; Tit 2:14

TSK: 1Jo 1:10

we say : 1Jo 1:8; Psa 130:3

we make : 1Jo 5:10; Job 24:25

his word : 1Jo 1:8, 1Jo 2:4, 1Jo 4:4; Col 3:16; 2Jo 1:2

TSK: 1Jo 2:1

little : 1Jo 2:12, 1Jo 2:13, 1Jo 3:7, 1Jo 3:18, 1Jo 4:4, 1Jo 5:21; Joh 13:33, Joh 21:5; 1Co 4:14, 1Co 4:15; Gal 4:19

these : 1Jo 1:3, 1Jo 1:4; 1Ti 3:14

that : Psa 4:4; Eze 3:21; Joh 5:14, Joh 8:11; Rom 6:1, Rom 6:2, Rom 6:15; 1Co 15:34; Eph 4:26; Tit 2:11-13; 1Pe 1:15-19, 1Pe 4:1-3

And if : 1Jo 1:8-10

we have : Rom 8:34; 1Ti 2:5; Heb 7:24, Heb 7:25, Heb 9:24

Father : Luk 10:22; Joh 5:19-26, Joh 5:36, Joh 6:27, Joh 10:15, Joh 14:6; Eph 2:18; Jam 1:27, Jam 3:9

the righteous : 1Jo 2:29, 1Jo 3:5; Zec 9:9; 2Co 5:21; Heb 7:26; 1Pe 2:22, 1Pe 3:18

TSK: 1Jo 2:2

he is : 1Jo 1:7, 1Jo 4:10; Rom 3:25, Rom 3:26; 1Pe 2:24, 1Pe 3:18

for the : 1Jo 4:14, 1Jo 5:19; Joh 1:29, Joh 4:42, Joh 11:51, Joh 11:52; 2Co 5:18-21; Rev 12:9

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: 1Jo 1:5

This then is the message which we have heard of him - This is the substance of the announcement ( ἐπαγγελία epangelia ) which we have received of him, or which he made to us. The message here refers to what he communicated as the sum of the revelation which he made to man. The phrase "of him"( απ ̓ αὐτου ap' autou ) does not mean respecting him, or about him, but from him; that is, this is what we received from his preaching; from all that he said. The peculiarity, the substance of all that he said, may be summed up in the declaration that God is light, and in the consequences which follow from this doctrine. He came as the messenger of Him who is light; he came to inculcate and defend the truths which flow from that central doctrine, in regard to sin, to the danger and duty of man, to the way of recovery, and to the rules by which men ought to live.

That God is light - Light, in the Scriptures, is the emblem of purity, truth, knowledge, prosperity, and happiness - as darkness is of the opposite. John here says that "God is light"- φῶς phōs - not the light, or a light, but light itself; that is, he is himself all light, and is the source and fountain of light in all worlds. He is perfectly pure, without any admixture of sin. He has all knowledge, with no admixture of ignorance on any subject. He is infinitely happy, with nothing to make him miserable. He is infinitely true, never stating or countenancing error; he is blessed in all his ways, never knowing the darkness of disappointment and adversity. Compare the Jam 1:17 note; Joh 1:4-5 note; 1Ti 6:16 note.

And in him is no darkness at all - This language is much in the manner of John, not only affirming that a thing is so, but guarding it so that no mistake could possibly be made as to what he meant. Compare Joh 1:1-3. The expression here is designed to affirm that God is absolutely perfect; that there is nothing in him which is in any way imperfect, or which would dim or mar the pure splendor of his character, not even as much as the smallest spot would on the sun. The language is probably designed to guard the mind from an error to which it is prone, that of charging God with being the Author of the sin and misery which exist on the earth; and the apostle seems to design to teach that whatever was the source of sin and misery, it was not in any sense to be charged on God. This doctrine that God is a pure light, John lays down as the substance of all that he had to teach; of all that he had learned from him who was made flesh. It is, in fact, the fountain of all just views of truth on the subject of religion, and all proper views of religion take their origin from this.

Barnes: 1Jo 1:6

If we say that we have fellowship uith him - If we reckon ourselves among his friends, or, in other words, if we profess to be like him: for a profession of religion involves the idea of having fellowship with God, (compare the notes at 1Jo 1:3), and he who professes that should be like him.

And walk in darkness - Live in sin and error. To "walk in darkness"now commonly denotes to be in doubt about our religious state, in contradistinction from living in the enjoyment of religion. That is not, however, probably the whole idea here. The leading thought is, that if we live in sin, it is a proof that our profession of religion is false. Desirable as it is to have the comforts of religion, yet it is not always true that they who do not are not true Christians, nor is it true by any means that they intend to deceive the world.

We lie - We are false professors; we are deceived if we think that we can have fellowship with God, and yet live in the practice of sin. As God is pure, so must we be, if we would be his friends. This does not mean necessarily that they meant to deceive, but that there was an irreconcilable contradiction between a life of sin and fellowship with God.

And do not the truth - Do not act truly. The profession is a false one. Compare the notes at Joh 3:22. To do the truth is to act in accordance with truth; and the expression here means that such an one could not be a Christian. And yet how many there are who are living in known sin who profess to be Christians! How many whose minds are dark on the whole subject of religion, who have never known anything of the real peace and joy which it imparts, who nevertheless entertain the belief that they are the friends of God, and are going to heaven! They trust in a name, in forms, in conformity to external rites, and have never known anything of the internal peace and purity which religion imparts, and in fact have never had any true fellowship with that God who is light, and in whom there is no darkness at all. Religion is light; religion is peace, purity, joy; and though there are eases where for a time a true Christian may be left to darkness, and have no spiritual joy, and be in doubt about his salvation, yet still it is a great truth, that unless we know by personal experience what it is to walk habitually in the light, to have the comforts of religion, and to experience in our own souls the influences which make the heart pure, and which bring us into conformity to the God who is light, we can have no true religion. All else is but a name, which will not avail us on the final day.

Barnes: 1Jo 1:7

But if we walk in the light - Compare the notes at 1Jo 1:5. Walking in the light may include the three following things:

(1)    Leading lives of holiness and purity; that is, the Christian must be characteristically a holy man, a light in the world, by his example.

(2)\caps1     w\caps0 alking in the truth; that is, embracing the truth in opposition to all error of paganism and infidelity, and having clear, spiritual views of truth, such as the unrenewed never have. See 2Co 4:6; 1Co 2:9-15; Eph 1:18.

(3)\caps1     e\caps0 njoying the comforts of religion; that is, having the joy which religion is fitted to impart, and which it does impart to its true friends, Psa 94:19; Isa 57:8; 2Co 1:3; 2Co 13:11. Compare the notes at Joh 12:35.

As he is in the light - In the same kind of light that he has. The measure of light which we may have is not the same in degree, but it is of the same kind. The true Christian in his character and feelings resembles God.

We have fellowship one with another - As we all partake of his feelings and views, we shall resemble each other. Loving the same God, embracing the same views of religion, and living for the same ends, we shall of course have much that is common to us all, and thus shall have fellowship with each other.

And the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin - See the sentiment here expressed fully explained in the notes at Heb 9:14. When it is said that his blood cleanses us from all sin, the expression must mean one of two things - either that it is through that blood that all past sin is forgiven, or that that blood will ultimately purify us from all transgression, and make us perfectly holy. The general meaning is plain, that in regard to any and every sin of which we may be conscious, there is efficacy in that blood to remove it, and to make us wholly pure. There is no stain made by sin so deep that the blood of Christ cannot take it entirely away from the soul. The connection here, or the reason why this is introduced here, seems to be this: The apostle is stating the substance of the message which he had received, 1Jo 1:5. The first or leading part of it was, that God is light, and in him is no darkness, and that his religion requires that all his friends should resemble him by their walking in the light. Another, and a material part of the same message was, that provision was made in his religion for cleansing the soul from sin, and making it like God. No system of religion intended for man could be adapted to his condition which did not contain this provision, and this did contain it in the most full and ample manner. Of course, however, it is meant that that blood cleanses from all sin only on the conditions on which its efficacy can be made available to man - by repentance for the past, and by a cordial reception of the Saviour through faith.

Barnes: 1Jo 1:8

If we say that we have no sin - It is not improbable that the apostle here makes allusion to some error which was then beginning to prevail in the church. Some have supposed that the allusion is to the sect of the Nicolaitanes, and to the views which they maintained, particularly that nothing was forbidden to the children of God under the gospel, and that in the freedom conferred on Christians they were at liberty to do what they pleased, Rev 2:6, Rev 2:15. It is not certain, however, that the allusion is to them, and it is not necessary to suppose that there is reference to any particular sect that existed at that time. The object of the apostle is to show that it is implied in the very nature of the gospel that we are sinners, and that if, on any pretence, we denied that fact, we utterly deceived ourselves. In all ages there have been those who have attempted, on some pretence, to justify their conduct; who have felt that they did not need a Saviour; who have maintained that they had a right to do what they pleased; or who, on pretence of being perfectly sanctified, have held that they live without the commission of sin. To meet these, and all similar cases, the apostle affirms that it is a great elementary truth, which on no pretence is to be denied, that we are all sinners. We are at all times, and in all circumstances, to admit the painful and humiliating truth that we are transgressors of the law of God, and that we need, even in our best services, the cleansing of the blood of Jesus Christ. The fair interpretation of the declaration here will apply not only to those who maintain that they have not been guilty of sin in the past, but also to those who profess to have become perfectly sanctified, and to live without sin. In any and every way, if we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves. Compare the notes at Jam 3:2.

We deceive ourselves - We have wrong views about our character. This does not mean that the self-deception is willful, but that it in fact exists. No man knows himself who supposes that in all respects he is perfectly pure.

And the truth is not in us - On this subject. A man who should maintain that he had never committed sin, could have no just views of the truth in regard to himself, and would show that he was in utter error. In like manner, according to the obvious interpretation of this passage, he who maintains that he is wholly sanctified, and lives without any sin, shows that he is deceived in regard to himself, and that the truth, in this respect, is not in him. He may hold the truth on other subjects, but he does not on this. The very nature of the Christian religion supposes that we feel ourselves to be sinners, and that we should be ever ready to acknowledge it. A man who claims that he is absolutely perfect, that he is holy as God is holy, must know little of his own heart. Who, after all his reasoning on the subject, would dare to go out under the open heaven, at midnight, and lift up his hands and his eyes toward the stars, and say that he had no sin to confess - that he was as pure as the God that made those stars?

Barnes: 1Jo 1:9

If we confess our sins - Pardon in the Scriptures, always supposes that there is confession, and there is no promise that it will be imparted unless a full acknowledgment has been made. Compare Ps. 51; Psa 32:1-11;; Luk 15:18 ff; Luk 7:41 ff; Pro 28:13.

He is faithful - To his promises. He will do what he has assured us he will do in remitting them.

And just to forgive us our sins - The word "just"here cannot be used in a strict and proper sense, since the forgiveness of sins is never an act of justice, but is an act of mercy. If it were an act of justice it could be demanded or enforced, and that is the same as to say that it is not forgiveness, for in that case there could have been no sin to be pardoned. But the word "just"is often used in a larger sense, as denoting upright, equitable, acting properly in the circumstances of the case, etc. Compare the notes at Mat 1:19. Here the word may be used in one of the following senses:

(1)    Either as referring to his general excellence of character, or his disposition to do what is proper; that is, he is one who will act in every way as becomes God; or,

(2)\caps1     t\caps0 hat he will be just in the sense that he will be true to his promises; or that, since he has promised to pardon sinners, he will be found faithfully to adhere to those engagements; or perhaps,

(3)\caps1     t\caps0 hat he will be just to his Son in the covenant of redemption, since, now that an atonement has been made by him, and a way has been opened through his sufferings by which God can consistently pardon, and with a view and an understanding that he might and would pardon, it would be an act of injustice to him if he did not pardon those who believe on him.

Viewed in either aspect, we may have the fullest assurance that God is ready to pardon us if we exercise true repentance and faith. No one can come to God without finding him ready to do all that is appropriate for a God to do in pardoning transgressors; no one who will not, in fact, receive forgiveness if he repents, and believes, and makes confession; no one who will not find that God is just to his Son in the covenant of redemption, in pardoning and saving all who put their trust in the merits of his sacrifice.

And to cleanse us from all unrighteousness - By forgiving all that is past, treating us as if we were righteous, and ultimately by removing all the stains of guilt from the soul.

Barnes: 1Jo 1:10

If we say that we have not sinned - In times that are past. Some perhaps might be disposed to say this; and as the apostle is careful to guard every point, he here states that if a man should take the ground that his past life had been wholly upright, it would prove that he had no true religion. The statement here respecting the past seems to prove that when, in 1Jo 1:8, he refers to the present - "if we say we have no sin"- he meant to say that if a man should claim to be perfect, or to be wholly sanctified, it would demonstrate that he deceived himself; and the two statements go to prove that neither in reference to the past nor the present can anyone lay claim to perfection.

We make him a liar - Because he has everywhere affirmed the depravity of all the race. Compare the notes at Rom. 1; 2; 3. On no point have his declarations been more positive and uniform than on the fact of the universal sinfulness of man. Compare Gen 6:11-12; Job 14:4; Job 15:16; Psa 14:1-3; Psa 51:5; Psa 58:3; Rom 3:9-20; Gal 3:21.

And his word is not in us - His truth; that is, we have no true religion. The whole system of Christianity is based on the fact that man is a fallen being, and needs a Saviour; and unless a man admits that, of course he cannot be a Christian.

Remarks On 1 John 1

(1) The importance of the doctrine of the incarnation of the Son of God, 1Jo 1:1-2. On that doctrine the apostle lays great stress; begins his Epistle with it; presents it in a great variety of forms; dwells upon it as if he would not have it forgotten or misunderstood. It has all the importance which he attached to it, for.

\tx720 \tx1080 (a)\caps1     i\caps0 t is the most wonderful of all the events of which we have any knowledge;

(b)\caps1     i\caps0 t is the most deeply connected with our welfare.

\caps1 (2) t\caps0 he intense interest which true piety always takes in this doctrine, 1Jo 1:1-2. The feelings of John on the subject are substantially the feelings of all true Christians. The world passes it by in unbelief, or as if it were of no importance; but no true Christian can look at the fact that the Son of God became incarnate but with the deepest emotion.

\caps1 (3) i\caps0 t is an object of ardent desire with true Christians that all others should share their joys, 1Jo 1:3-4. There is nothing selfish, or narrow, or exclusive in true religion; but every sincere Christian who is happy desires that all others should be happy too.

\caps1 (4) w\caps0 herever there is true fellowship with God, there is with all true Christians, 1Jo 1:3-4. There is but one church, one family of God; and as all true Christians have fellowship with God, they must have with each other.

\caps1 (5) w\caps0 herever there is true fellowship with Christians, there is with God himself, 1Jo 1:3-4. If we love his people, share their joys, labor with them in promoting his cause, and love the things which they love, we shall show that we love him. There is but one God, and one church; and if all the members love each other, they will love their common God and Saviour. An evidence, therefore, that we love Christians, becomes an evidence that we love God.

\caps1 (6) i\caps0 t is a great privilege to be a Christian, 1Jo 1:3-4. If we are Christians, we are associated with:

\tx720 \tx1080 (a)    God the Father;

(b)\caps1     w\caps0 ith his Son Jesus Christ;

©\caps1     w\caps0 ith all his redeemed on earth and in heaven;

(d)\caps1     w\caps0 ith all holy angels.

There is one bond of fellowship that unites all together; and what a privilege it is to be united in the eternal bonds of friendship with all the holy minds in the universe!

\caps1 (7) i\caps0 f God is "light"1Jo 1:5, then all that occurs is reconcilable with the idea that he is worthy of confidence. What he does may seem to be dark to us, but we may be assured that it is all light with him. A cloud may come between us and the sun, but beyond the cloud the sun shines with undimmed splendor, and soon the cloud itself will pass away. At midnight it is dark to us, but it is not because the sun is shorn of his beams, or is extinguished. He will rise again upon our hemisphere in the fullness of his glory, and all the darkness of the cloud and of midnight is reconcilable with the idea that the sun is a bright orb, and that in him is no darkness at all. So with God. We may be under a cloud of sorrow and of trouble, but above that the glory of God shines with splendor, and soon that cloud will pass away, and reveal him in the fullness of his beauty and truth.

\caps1 (8) w\caps0 e should, therefore, at all times exercise a cheerful confidence in God, 1Jo 1:5. Who supposes that the sun is never again to shine when the cloud passes over it, or when the shades of midnight have settled down upon the world? We confide in that sun that it will shine again when the cloud has passed off, and when the shades of night have been driven away. So let us confide in God, for with more absolute certainty we shall yet see him to be light, and shall come to a world where there is no cloud.

\caps1 (9) w\caps0 e may look cheerfully onward to heaven, 1Jo 1:5. There all is light. There we shall see God as He is. Well may we then bear with our darkness a little longer, for soon we shall be ushered into a world where there is no need of the sun or the stars; where there is no darkness, no night.

(10) Religion is elevating in its nature, 1Jo 1:6-7. It brings us from a world of darkness to a world of light. It scatters the rays of light on a thousand dark subjects, and gives promise that all that is now obscure will yet become clear as noonday. Wherever there is true religion, the mind emerges more and more into light; the scales of ignorance and error pass away.

(11) there is no sin so great that it may not be removed by the blood of the atonement, 1Jo 1:7, "last clause."This blood has shown its efficacy in the pardon of all the great sinners who have applied to it, and its efficacy is as great now as it was when it was applied to the first sinner that was saved. No one, therefore, however great his sins, needs to hesitate about applying to the blood of the cross, or fear that his sins are so great that they cannot be taken away!

(12) the Christian will yet be made wholly pure, 1Jo 1:7, "last clause."It is of the nature of that blood which the Redeemer shed that it ultimately cleanses the soul entirely from sin. The prospect before the true Christian that he will become perfectly holy is absolute; and whatever else may befall him, he is sure that he will yet be holy as God is holy.

(13) there is no use in attempting to conceal our offences, 1Jo 1:8. They are known, all known, to one Being, and they will at some future period all be disclosed. We cannot hope to evade punishment by hiding them; we cannot hope for impunity because we suppose they may be passed over as if unobserved. No man can escape on the presumption either that his sins are unknown, or that they are unworthy of notice.

(14) it is manly to make confession when we have sinned, 1Jo 1:9-10. All meanness was in doing the wrong, not in confessing it; what we should be ashamed of is that we are guilty, not that confession is to be made. When a wrong has been done, there is no nobleness in trying to conceal it; and as there is no nobleness in such an attempt, so there could be no safety.

(15) peace of mind, when wrong has been done, can be found only in confession, 1Jo 1:9-10. That is what nature prompts to when we have done wrong, if we would find peace, and that the religion of grace demands. When a man has done wrong, the least that he can do is to make confession; and when that is done and the wrong is pardoned, all is done that can be to restore peace to the soul.

(16) the "ease"of salvation, 1Jo 1:9. What more easy terms of salvation could we desire than an acknowledgment of our sins? No painful sacrifice is demanded; no penance, pilgrimage, or voluntary scourging; all that is required is that there should be an acknowledgment of sin at the foot of the cross, and if this is done with a true heart the offender will be saved. If a man is not willing to do this, why should he be saved? How can he be?

Barnes: 1Jo 2:1

My little children - Τεκνια μοῦ Teknia mou . This is such language as an aged apostle would be likely to use when addressing a church, and its use in this Epistle may be regarded as one evidence that John had reached an advanced period of life when he wrote the Epistle.

These things write I unto you - To wit, the things stated in 1Jo 1:1.

That ye sin not - To keep you from sin, or to induce you to lead a holy life.

And if any man sin - As all are liable, with hearts as corrupt as ours, and amidst the temptations of a world like this, to do. This, of course, does not imply that it is proper or right to sin, or that Christians should have no concern about it; but the meaning is, that all are liable to sin, and when we are conscious of sin the mind should not yield to despondency and despair. It might be supposed, perhaps, that if one sinned after baptism, or after being converted, there could be no forgiveness. The apostle designs to guard against any such supposition, and to show that the atonement made by the Redeemer had respect to all kinds of sin, and that under the deepest consciousness of guilt and of personal unworthiness, we may feel that we have an advocate on high.

We have an advocate with the Father - God only can forgive sin; and though we have no claim on him, yet there is one with him who can plead our cause, and on whom we can rely to manage our interests there. The word rendered "advocate"( παράκλητος paraklētos - paraclete) is elsewhere applied to the Holy Spirit, and is in every other place where it occurs in the New Testament rendered "comforter,"Joh 14:16, Joh 14:26; Joh 15:26; Joh 16:7. On the meaning of the word, see the notes at Joh 14:16. As used with reference to the Holy Spirit (Joh 14:16, et al.) it is employed in the more general sense of "helper,"or "aid;"and the particular manner in which the Holy Spirit aids us, may be seen stated in the notes at Joh 14:16. As usual here with reference to the Lord Jesus, it is employed in the more limited sense of the word "advocate,"as the word is frequently used in the Greek writers to denote an advocate in court; that is, one whom we call to our aid; or to stand by us, to defend our suit. Where it is applied to the Lord Jesus, the language is evidently figurative, since there can be no literal pleading for us in heaven; but it is expressive of the great truth that he has undertaken our cause with God, and that he performs for us all that we expect of an advocate and counselor. It is not to be supposed, however, that he manages our cause in the same way, or on the same principles on which an advocate in a human tribunal does. An advocate in court is employed to defend his client. He does not begin by admitting his guilt, or in any way basing his plea on the conceded fact that he is guilty; his proper business is to show that he is not guilty, or, if he be proved to be so, to see that no injustice shall be done him. The proper business of an advocate in a human court, therefore, embraces two things:

(1)    To show that his client is not guilty in the form and manner charged on him. This he may do in one of two ways, either,

(a)\caps1     b\caps0 y showing that he did not do the act charged on him, as when he is charged with murder, and can prove an alibi, or show that he was not present at the time the murder was committed; or,

(b)\caps1     b\caps0 y proving that he had a right to do the deed - as, if he is charged with murder, he may admit the fact of the killing, but may show that it was in self-defense.

(2)    In case his client is convicted, his office is to see that no injustice is done to him in the sentence; to stand by him still; to avail himself of all that the law allows in his favor, or to state any circumstance of age, or sex, or former service, or bodily health, which would in any way mitigate the sentence.

The advocacy of the Lord Jesus in our behalf, however, is wholly different from this, though the same general object is pursued and sought, the good of those for whom he becomes an advocate. The nature of his advocacy may be stated in the following particulars:

(1) He admits the guilt of those for whom he becomes the advocate, to the full extent charged on them by the law of God, and by their own consciences. He does not attempt to hide or conceal it. He makes no apology for it. He neither attempts to deny the fact, nor to show that they had a right to do as they have done. He could not do this, for it would not be true; and any plea before the throne of God which should be based on a denial of our guilt would be fatal to our cause.

\caps1 (2) a\caps0 s our advocate, he undertakes to be security that no wrong shall be done to the universe if we are not punished as we deserve; that is, if we are pardoned, and treated as if we had not sinned. This he does by pleading what he has done in behalf of people; that is, by the plea that his sufferings and death in behalf of sinners have done as much to honor the law, and to maintain the truth and justice of God, and to prevent the extension of apostasy, as if the offenders themselves had suffered the full penalty of the law. If sinners are punished in hell, there will be some object to be accomplished by it; and the simple account of the atonement by Christ is, that his death will secure all the good results to the universe which would be secured by the punishment of the offender himself. It has done as much to maintain the honor of the law, and to impress the universe with the truth that sin cannot be committed with impunity. If all the good results can be secured by substituted sufferings which there would be by the punishment of the offender himself, then it is clear that the guilty may be acquitted and saved. Why should they not be? The Saviour, as our advocate, undertakes to be security that this shall be.

\caps1 (3) a\caps0 s our advocate, he becomes a surety for our good behavior; gives a pledge to justice that we will obey the laws of God, and that he will keep us in the paths of obedience and truth; that, if pardoned, we will not continue to rebel. This pledge or surety can be given in no human court of justice. No man, advocate or friend can give security when one is pardoned who has been convicted of stealing a horse, that he will not steal a horse again; when one who has been guilty of murder is pardoned, that he will never be guilty of it again; when one who has been guilty of forgery is pardoned, that he will not be guilty of it again. If he could do this, the subject of pardon would be attended with much fewer difficulties than it is now. But the Lord Jesus becomes such a pledge or surety for us, Heb 7:22, and hence he becomes such an advocate with the Father as we need.

Jesus Christ the righteous - One who is eminently righteous himself, and who possesses the means of rendering others righteous. It is an appropriate feeling when we come before God in his name, that we come pleading the merits of one who is eminently righteous, and on account of whose righteousness we may be justified and saved.

Barnes: 1Jo 2:2

And he is the propitiation for our sins - The word rendered "propitiation"( ἱλασμός hilasmos ) occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, except in 1Jo 4:10 of this Epistle; though words of the same derivation, and having the same essential meaning, frequently occur. The corresponding word ἱλαστήριον hilastērion occurs in Rom 3:25, rendered "propitiation"- "whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood;"and in Heb 9:5, rendered mercy-seat - "shadowing the mercy-seat."The verb ἱλάσκομαι hilaskomai occurs also in Luk 18:3 - God be merciful to me a sinner;"and Heb 2:17 - "to make reconciliation for the sins of the people."For the idea expressed by these words, see the notes at Rom 3:25. The proper meaning of the word is that of reconciling, appeasing, turning away anger, rendering propitious or favorable. The idea is, that there is anger or wrath, or that something has been done to offend, and that it is needful to turn away that wrath, or to appease. This may be done by a sacrifice, by songs, by services rendered, or by bloody offerings. So the word is often used in Homer - Passow. We have similar words in common use, as when we say of one that he has been offended, and that something must be done to appease him, or to turn away his wrath. This is commonly done with us by making restitution; or by an acknowledgment; or by yielding the point in controversy; or by an expression of regret; or by different conduct in time to come. But this idea must not be applied too literally to God; nor should it be explained away. The essential thoughts in regard to him, as implied in this word, are:

(1)\caps1     t\caps0 hat his will has been disregarded, and his law violated, and that he has reason to be offended with us;

(2)\caps1     t\caps0 hat in that condition he cannot, consistently with his perfections, and the good of the universe, treat us as if we had not done it;

(3)\caps1     t\caps0 hat it is proper that, in some way, he should show his displeasure at our conduct, either by punishing us, or by something that shall answer the same purpose; and,

(4)\caps1     t\caps0 hat the means of propitiation come in here, and accomplish this end, and make it proper that he should treat us as if we had not sinned; that is, he is reconciled, or appeased, and his anger is turned away.

This is done, it is supposed, by the death of the Lord Jesus, accomplishing, in most important respects, what would be accomplished by the punishment of the offender himself. In regard to this, in order to a proper understanding of what is accomplished, it is necessary to observe two things - what is not done, and what is.

I. There are certain things which do not enter into the idea of propitiation. They are such as these:

\tx720 \tx1080 (a)    That it does not change the fact that the wrong was done. That is a fact which cannot be denied, and he who undertakes to make a propitiation for sin does not deny it.

(b)    It does not change God; it does not make Him a different being from what He was before; it does not buy Him over to a willingness to show mercy; it does not change an inexorable being to one who is compassionate and kind.

©    The offering that is made to secure reconciliation does not necessarily produce reconciliation in fact. It prepares the way for it on the part of God, but whether they for whom it is made will be disposed to accept it is another question.

When two men are alienated from each other, you may go to B and say to him that all obstacles to reconciliation on the part of A are removed, and that he is disposed to be at peace, but whether B will be willing to be at peace is quite another matter. The mere fact that his adversary is disposed to be at peace, determines nothing in regard to his disposition in the matter. So in regard to the controversy between man and God. It may be true that all obstacles to reconciliation on the part of God are taken away, and still it may be quite a separate question whether man will be willing to lay aside his opposition, and embrace the terms of mercy. In itself considered, one does not necessarily determine the other, or throw any light on it.

II. The amount, then, in regard to the propitiation made for sin is, that it removes all obstacles to reconciliation on the part of God: it does whatever is necessary to be done to maintain the honor of His law, His justice, and His truth; it makes it consistent for Him to offer pardon - that is, it removes whatever there was that made it necessary to inflict punishment, and thus, so far as the word can be applied to God, it appeases Him, or turns away His anger, or renders Him propitious. This it does, not in respect to producing any change in God, but in respect to the fact that it removes whatever there was in the nature of the case that prevented the free and full offer of pardon. The idea of the apostle in the passage before us is, that when we sin we may be assured that this has been done, and that pardon may now be freely extended to us.

And not for our’ s only - Not only for the sins of us who are Christians, for the apostle was writing to such. The idea which he intends to convey seems to be, that when we come before God we should take the most liberal and large views of the atonement; we should feel that the most ample provision has been made for our pardon, and that in no respect is there any limit as to the sufficiency of that work to remove all sin. It is sufficient for us; sufficient for all the world.

But also for the sins of the whole world - The phrase "the sins of"is not in the original, but is not improperly supplied, for the connection demands it. This is one of the expressions occurring in the New Testament which demonstrate that the atonement was made for all people, and which cannot be reconciled with any other opinion. If he had died only for a part of the race, this language could not have been used. The phrase, "the whole world,"is one which naturally embraces all people; is such as would be used if it be supposed that the apostle meant to teach that Christ died for all people; and is such as cannot be explained on any other supposition. If he died only for the elect, it is not true that he is the "propitiation for the sins of the whole world"in any proper sense, nor would it be possible then to assign a sense in which it could be true. This passage, interpreted in its plain and obvious meaning, teaches the following things:

(1)\caps1     t\caps0 hat the atonement in its own nature is adapted to all people, or that it is as much fitted to one individual, or one class, as another;

(2)\caps1     t\caps0 hat it is sufficient in merit for all; that is, that if anymore should be saved than actually will be, there would be no need of any additional suffering in order to save them;

(3)\caps1     t\caps0 hat it has no special adaptedness to one person or class more than another; that is, that in its own nature it did not render the salvation of one easier than that of another.

It so magnified the law, so honored God, so fully expressed the divine sense of the evil of sin in respect to all people, that the offer of salvation might be made as freely to one as to another, and that any and all might take shelter under it and be safe. Whether, however, God might not, for wise reasons, resolve that its benefits should be applied to a part only, is another question, and one which does not affect the inquiry about the intrinsic nature of the atonement. On the evidence that the atonement was made for all, see the 2Co 5:14 note, and Heb 2:9 note.

(See also the Supplementary notes at these passages, for a general review of the argument regarding the extent of atonement.)

Poole: 1Jo 1:5

It being the professed scope and design of his writing, to draw men to a final participation and communion with God in his own blessedness, he reckons nothing more necessary to it, than to settle in their minds a right notion of God. Which, that it might be the more regarded, he introduces with a solemn preface;

This then is the message & c., (though the word also signifies promise, it here more fitly bears this rendering), to notify:

1. That this which follows was not an imagination of his own concerning God, but his true representation of himself.

2. That it was given him in charge to be delivered and communicated to others; a message a man neither hath of himself, nor is to reserve to himself,

we have heard it of him, and declare it to you as (consonantly hereto) he speaks. It is the Divine pleasure it should be published to the world, and that all men should know that as from him, i.e. that he is not a Being of mere power, as some, or of mere mercy, as others, are apt to fancy of him, either whereof were a very maimed and most disagreeable notion of the Deity: power without goodness were apt to run into fury; goodness without wisdom and righteousness would as naturally turn to a supine indifferency, and neglect of distinguishing judicially between good and bad; things neither suitable to the Governor of the world, nor possible to the absolutely perfect Being.

God is light in God all true perfections and excellencies must be understood eminently to concur; and of them more could not have been comprehended under one word, (especially that belong to him considered relatively to his creatures, of which perfections it concerns us to have more distinct, formed, positive conceptions in all our applications to him), than are here some way represented or resembled by light, viz. that he is a Being of most lively, penetrative vigour, absolute simplicity, immutability, knowledge, wisdom, sincerity, righteousness, serenity, benignity, joy, and felicity, and especially of most bright and glorious holiness and purity; and in whom

is no darkness at all nothing contrary or repugnant hereto.

Poole: 1Jo 1:6

Light and darkness are frequently put for holiness and wickedness, Luk 16:8 Rom 13:12 Eph 5:8 1Th 5:5 . The sum then is: That if any pretend to friendship with God, or to have received holy and gracious influences from him, and do yet lead wicked lives, they are liars, even guilty of a practical lie, doing what makes their profession false and insincere.

Poole: 1Jo 1:7

But if we walk which is a continued and progressive motion, i.e. do persevere and improve in holiness.

In the light being transformed into the holy image and likeness of God, and showing themselves the children of light, as he is light, and the Father of lights. We have fellowship one with another; have fellowship with him, met autou , as one copy reads: however, we must comprehend God, and this the contexture of discourse shows.

And the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin kayarizei lest our purity and holiness should be thought to have deserved such a privilege, it is cautiously added,

and the blood & c. is that which alone expiates, or makes atonement for our sins (the proper notion of cleansing here). Our former sinfulness and present imperfect holiness render it impossible God should admit us to communion with him for our own sakes, or without such an intervening sacrifice; kayarmata usually signifying expiations. And if we further extend the notion of cleansing, so as to comprehend internal subjective purification, (which also the word may admit), the further meaning is, that even that purifying influence, whereby we are qualified for present holy walking with God, and for final blessedness in him, we owe to the merit and procurement of the Redeemer’ s blood.

Poole: 1Jo 1:8

In pursance of which scope, he fitly adds: If we should say i.e. either profess it as a principle, or think in our minds, or not bear in our hearts a penitential, remorseful sense, correspondent to the contrary apprehension; such as is implied in confessing, 1Jo 1:9 ; for saying usually signifies the habitual bent and disposition of the heart and practice, Job 21:14 Jer 22:21 .

That we have no sin viz. that we are so innocent creatures as not to need such an expiatory sacrifice as that above mentioned, and such purifying influence thereupon, but that we may be admitted to communion with God upon our own account, and for our worthiness’ sake, without being beholden to the blood of Christ.

We deceive ourselves delude our own souls.

And the truth i.e. the system and frame of gospel doctrine, as 2Jo 1:1,2,4 .

Is not in us cannot be duly entertained, lies not evenly and agreeably with itself in our minds, or hath no place with effect in us, as Joh 8:37 .

Poole: 1Jo 1:9

But on the contrary, if we confess our sins if we apply ourselves to him suitably to the condition of sinners, confessing ourselves such, with that self-abasing sense of sin which may dispose us to accept and apply his offered remedy, (upon which it is implied we will do it),

he is faithful so true to his promise,

and just fidelity being a part of justice; or there is with him that equity and righteousness, (which sometimes signify goodness, or clemency, 1Sa 12:7 Psa 112:9 , and which, more strictly taken, permit him not to exact from us the satisfaction which he hath accepted in the atonement made by his Son, in his own way applied, and upon his own terms to be reckoned unto us), that he will not fail

to forgive us our sins

And to cleanse us from all unrighteousness which may either be added as a further expression of the same thing; or may, moreover, signify his vouchsafing that purifying influence of the Spirit of Christ, (obtained also by his blood), which shall both purge away, and prevent, the defilements that would render us incapable of his own holy communion.

Poole: 1Jo 1:10

If we say that we have not sinned: see 1Jo 1:8,9 .

We make him a liar which they make him that believe not his word, 1Jo 5:10 , expressly charging all men with sin, Rom 3:19,23 .

And consequently, his word or truth as 1Jo 1:8 , which we contradict, is not in us The sum is: That we are not to he received into God’ s holy society and communion under the notion of always innocent and unoffending persons, but as pardoned and purified sinners.

Poole: 1Jo 2:1

1Jo 2:1,2 Christ is our advocate with the Father, and a

propitiation for the sins of the whole world.

1Jo 2:3-6 Rightly to know God is to keep his commandments,

1Jo 2:7-11 the chief of which is, to love one another.

1Jo 2:12-14 The apostle addresseth Christians of all ages severally,

1Jo 2:15-17 and warneth them against an inordinate love of this world,

1Jo 2:18,19 and against deceivers, who were many.

1Jo 2:20-28 He showeth the means they had of knowing the truth,

and of distinguishing false teachers; and pointeth

out their obligation to abide in the truth which they

had been taught,

1Jo 2:29 he that doeth righteousness is born of God.

He endeavours in this to steer them a middle course, that they might neither presume to sin, nor despair if they did; and bespeaks them with a compellation, importing both authority and love; well becoming him as then an aged person, an apostle, their teacher, and who was their most affectionate spiritual father. And lets them know, the first design of what he was now writing (had hitherto written, and was further to write) was: That they might to their uttermost avoid sinning at all: but adds, if, through human frailty, they did sin,

we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous implying our need of Christ for renewed as well as first pardon; and not of his death only, but continual intercession; and represents the advantages Christ hath for success in his interposing for us, in respect both of his relation to God as his Father, (which is put indefinitely,

the Father that the consideration might not be excluded of his being our Father also), and his righteousness, by which he could not but be acceptable to him.

Poole: 1Jo 2:2

And he is the propitiation for our sins: the adding of these words, shows that our Lord grounds his intercession for pardon of sin unto penitent believers, upon his having made atonement for them before; and therefore that he doth not herein merely supplicate for favour, but (which is the proper business of an advocate) plead law and right; agreeably to what is said above, 1Jo 1:9 .

And not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world nor is his undertaking herein limited to any select persons among believers, but he must be understood to be an Advocate for all, for whom he is effectually a Propitiation, i.e. for all that truly believe in him, Rom 3:25all the world over.

PBC: 1Jo 1:5

One of the best ways to test any doctrine with which you are not familiar is to examine its view of God. Error views God inconsistently. You need only examine it carefully to discover the flaw. John introduces us to the basic dishonesty of the Docetic gnostic error in this passage. Those whose teachings he opposed said, " God is both light and darkness." John said God is light only. Remember their essential error in denying that Jesus had a material body. But He " appeared" to have a physical body. The whole of ancient Christian doctrine built itself on the reality of the Incarnation. For them God is not a phantom. He is not a remote uninvolved deity. He is real. He is constantly and intimately involved in the operation of the universe, especially in the lives of His people. The Incarnation proves that to be so. But if in this ultimate act of self-revelation, God worked deceitfully and dishonestly, what does that say about God? He must be both light and darkness. He is involved and He is uninvolved. He is faithful and He is deceptive. At the core, the Docetic god is unpredictable, not to be trusted! If he acted deceptively in his most direct act of self-disclosure, what does that say about his essential character?

John doesn’t simply say that God has light, that He is an " enlightened" being. He says He is light. If He is light, He cannot be darkness too. Light and darkness are opposites. The Docetic god appeared to be human, but Docetists said he was not actually human. He appeared to live in a flesh-body, but they said it was merely appearance, not a real body at all. Reflect on what this means to a believer in such a god. You face a terrible problem and you pray. Your god answers with warm assurances of concern and promises to intervene on your behalf. But the nagging question looms in your mind. Will he follow through with his promise? Or is he playing this deceptive game with you, just as he did in the apparent, but not real, incarnation? How will you leave this encounter with your god? Will you find any comfort? Will you find any relief from your problem? Such a god is worse than no god at all!

In our systematic theology mindset we grab verses here and there, reconstructing the Bible in our neat theological outline of major doctrinal issues. But God didn’t give us the Bible in that form. Systematizing major Bible doctrines serves a valuable purpose. However, for the average believer in the ordinary course of events, the Bible in its real form, the form in which God gave it to us, serves our needs far better. Take this lesson as an example. John begins the letter with the foundational truth of the incarnation. Then he touches on some rather practical implications to our theological perspective. If we reconstruct the Bible in the form of a systematic theology book, we might find one or two of these verses, but not all of them. We’d grasp one truth, but miss others in the context. This approach to Bible study and thinking tends to sterilize important Bible doctrines. They are great brainteasers. They challenge our minds. We find them amazingly interesting. But they contain no essential practical value whatever in the real world where we live! How often have you heard a sermon on a major doctrine of Scripture, but because of the manner in which it was preached, you left the sermon wondering what value that doctrine held for your life? We’ve all heard those sermons. The problem lies with the sermon, not the doctrine. Review the Docetic error. What implications does it have for you? How might it impact your personal discipleship? At first glance, you might think it has little impact at all. As we broaden the context of this passage, John shows us what an amazing impact it really does have on us. Those who worship a god should imitate the object they worship. If the god we worshipped were the Docetic god, we should follow his example. Or should we?

If we say one thing and act differently, we imitate the Doectic god, but we fail miserably to follow the true God of the Bible. If we say we walk in the light, we must actually walk in the light. The true God of Scripture frowns intensely on deceptive conduct. To say you walk in the light while knowingly walking in fact in darkness follows the practice of this false god.

We live in an age where appearance has taken on far more value than substance. In so many circles of human activity nowadays you can safely do whatever you wish so long as no one sees you or discovers what you are doing. Men and women often feel there is no moral problem at all in engaging in affairs as long as their spouse doesn’t discover it. They consider the wrong to be in the discovery, not in the act itself. You can cheat on your spouse, steal from your employer and generally do just about anything you wish; just don’t let anyone know. Then you can go to church on Sunday and put on a grand performance. Pretend to be a pure Christian full of faith. I recently spoke with a very conscientious pastor of a growing church in another denomination. He confessed that he was under a doctor’s care for high blood pressure. It was dangerously high. After a few minutes he revealed the reason. This man’s heart was breaking over the impact of sinful choices among the people to whom he ministers. Do you see this concern in John’s comment? What you actually do, not what you say, carries the day. You may put on the best image and convey the best pretense imaginable. But if your conduct does not walk in honorable stride with you words and pretenses, you deceive yourself, but God knows. And your God is not a dishonest gnostic god. He knows all about you and all about your lifestyle. He cannot be deceived! You may succeed at deceiving those around you, even those in your own church and in your own family. But you will never deceive God. And He does not accept rationalizations for sin.

41

PBC: 1Jo 1:7

If we walk in the light, as he is in the light...

Our walk must match His, if not in perfection, at least in direction and consistency. Try as we might, we will never reach that point of perfection in our walk. The theological question for us becomes so obvious. How will we handle ourselves when we realize acts of sin in our own conduct? We can try to explain it away, but that doesn’t work. God knows the truth. We can try to justify it, but He despises that attitude. It compounds one sin by adding another sin to the list. We can say to ourselves that it isn’t really a sin, but a habit or a sickness. But God has the last word. If He calls it sin, call it what we wish, when we face Him, we must face the grim reality; it is sin.

Our walk in the light will not be uninterrupted and flawless. What do you do when you face the moment of sin? John carefully crafts his words here. We walk in the light, even as He is in the light. We walk the same way He walks. How, you ask, can we as sinners walk in the same way the holy God walks? You can’t. But you can follow John’s intent here. You can maintain consistency in conduct. When you fall into temptation, face it honestly. You can deal with it as God deals with sin. He calls it sin and deals with it. If God could honor His holy nature and play the mind games we play, He could have simply denied that all our sins are in fact sin, and He could have told Jesus the incarnation and atonement were not necessary. But this attitude toward sin is dishonest. God expects us to face our sins honestly when we do fall. He expects us to confess them and call them sins! View your sin just as God views it. That is walking in the light.

The blood of his Son Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin.

Notice the present tense of the verb. Present and ongoing cleansing is the issue. This passage is not a salvation text. It does not describe the once-and-for-all-time cleansing we receive through Christ’s blood in the new birth. It describes the ongoing cleansing that occurs contingent on how we walk! If you face your sins dishonestly, you lose the joyful relief from that conviction and guilty conscience that God provides right now through Christ’s blood. Calling your sins what they really are, sins, invades your pride. But it opens the door of cleansing and relief to you in Christ. As long as you pretend you haven’t sinned, or the questionable action is actually not sin, you shut yourself off from the divine remedy. Like the dishonest employee who steals cash from his employer, every time the auditors come to visit, you sweat and worry. Will they discover your theft? Will you have to face the consequences of your actions? When dealing with God, we should live constantly on the premise that He knows. He will not discover our sin; He knows it! Why live with sweaty palms and a deceived heart when you could resolve the problem through confession and repentance? It is so simple. Why complicate it? Once you begin walking in God’s light and dealing with your sins in His light, Jesus’ blood cleanses, and cleanses, and cleanses.

Would you like to discover that joy? Would it give you sweet peace and relief from your past habit of covering up your sins? Then take your sins out of the shadows of your own deceived darkness immediately. Take them to God and tell Him you agree in every detail with Him and with His holy Word; what you did and have tried to avoid is sin. Tell Him you are tired of hiding it, tired of denying it and tired of living with it. Ask His forgiveness and strength to break the habit and start a new life free of it. He will answer that prayer and you will begin to realize the amazing joy of Christ’s cleansing. You will see that truth move from a theological idea to a living reality in your life. You will discover the joy of fellowship with Him. What better time than right now!

41

PBC: 1Jo 1:8

Denial of the incarnation represents one of the most serious departures from historic Christian faith. It must represent one of, if not, the leading essential doctrine of the historic faith. Why would anyone deny the incarnation or question any of its primary characteristics? Since Jesus came to settle the sin issue, anyone who tampers with the truth of the incarnation must not fully understand his sin problem. This is likely what John was dealing with in these verses. The Docetists denied that Jesus actually possessed a literal human body. If He did not have a human body, He could not suffer as man and die for man’s sins. Did these people deny their own sin? I know of no record that they held to this view, but it appears that John is imposing onto them the obvious consequences of their error.

Often otherwise sincere believers will deny either particular sins they have committed or they will deny some element of their inherent sinful nature. They may not hold to Docetic heresy, but they join the foolish conclusion John imposed on them here.

Mt 1:21 says Jesus was born to "save his people from their sins." 1Jo 1:8 and 1Jo 1:10 seem to deal with somewhat different issues of sin. Some use the singular form of the word sin in the eighth verse to interpret that verse as referring to our original sin or our "sin nature." Then they interpret the tenth verse with sins in the plural as referring to individual acts of sin committed in our lives. It seems a more natural interpretation in the context to notice the two verb tenses. Verse eight speaks of sin in the present tense. Verse ten speaks of sin in the past tense, more precisely in the past perfect tense. This distinction seems more natural to the context than to contrast inherent sin nature with acts of sin. The eighth verse deals with our attitude toward present conduct. Given the dominance of human pride, we might confess to some particular sin in our past, but strongly deny that it poses any problem to us in the present. To acknowledge present sin forces us to ask why we haven’t already dealt with it and repented of it. Rather than face the embarrassment of confronting present conduct, we might be tempted to deny the sin. Simply deny that you have any present sin. How does John deal with this problem? " ... we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us." The cruelest deception we ever perpetrated on anyone is self-deception! Honest confrontation and confession of sin forms a foundational principle of our discipleship. If we refuse to face present sin in our life, confess it and repent, how can we witness to Jesus as our Savior with any degree of credibility?

Our culture has cultivated a self-absorbed worldview so fully that its ideas have penetrated even many sincere believers. They would not think of joining the Docetic heresy; they are altogether orthodox doctrinally. But pride and self-absorption hold them tightly in their grip. To confess to specific sins would require too much honesty and too much loss of pride. They will not do so. They will deny or redefine their conduct so as to justify it. Do anything except confess to it as a real sin. Therein lies the self-deception. But more seriously such a person, according to John, does not have the truth in him. That is a grave question.

The next step John confronts deals with past sins. " If we say that we have not sinned, ..." . It is one thing to deny sin in your present conduct, and John gives this idea no comfort, but it is a far more serious problem to deny that you have ever had a sin problem. Since God said we are all sinners, to deny sin in our past is to contradict God’s conclusion about us. We make Him a liar; our denial of past sin charges God with lying about our sin problem.

Occasionally over the years I’ve confronted people who confess to past sins, but will tell you they now live above sin. When examined carefully in light of Scripture, their conduct will not stand up to their assertion. They apparently have redefined sin so as to justify this excessive pretense of sinless living.

In the midst of bruising our pride in more ways than we could imagine John also reveals to us a far better way to deal with our sins, " If we confess our sins..."  Have you ever discovered sin in your life and dealt with it by saying, " I’ll confess it to God, but it is no one else’s business. I don’t need to confess it to anyone else." Is this correct? Almost certainly it is wrong, a good indicator of pride’s influence in our conscience. Ask yourself one simple question if this attitude surfaces in your mind. Did you actually commit any of those sins in the presence of any other human being? If you did, you should confess that sin in their presence. Otherwise they might fall under your example and begin practicing the same sin because of your example. If you confess the sin in their presence, they quickly understand that you view the conduct as so unacceptable that you refused to allow it to stand in their mind. By confession to them you remove the stumbling block from their pathway.

But John goes beyond our confession to others. "He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins." God honors His nature and character. He responds to our confession by forgiving us! There is nothing in us to deserve that reaction in God. We sinned! But He is faithful to His own nature, and that prompts Him to forgive us. "... and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." Occasionally we will try to adopt a different view of sin than God’s view. Have you ever heard anyone say that God can forgive all sins, but His church cannot, indeed should not? Does it seem a bit strange for someone to justify a different course for the church than the God of the church takes? Never does God tell one of His children, "You can repent of this sin and I’ll forgive you. But even if you repent of that sin, I can’t and won’t forgive you." The promise gloriously extends God’s forgiving hand to His children that open honest confession will be met with His open and honest forgiveness! That is truly good news for sin-sick sinners.

Take note as we conclude our study of this first chapter of John’s epistle that he is writing to children of God, to believers, not to lost sinners. To apply this passage to unsaved sinners is to do it and its Author a terrible injustice. The whole letter is written to children of God, this lesson included. In that light we should notice carefully an ongoing progression in both the confession and in the forgiveness. Confession is not a once-in-a-lifetime event. Every time we become aware of sin in our life we should condition ourselves for immediate, full and genuine confession, both to God and to those impacted by our sinful conduct. I sin today and realize that what I did was sin. Immediately I confess it. I sin again tomorrow and realize the sinfulness of my conduct. Once again I immediately confess the sin. This practice of confession should become a regular habit. However, we should practice the habit with growth and purpose. We should not continually sin and confess the same sin repeatedly! To do that denies repentance. Confession without repentance amounts to dishonest confession. Godly confession includes acknowledgement of the sin and commitment to cease the sin that required confession. To confess with no intent of repenting is not Biblical confession. It is equivalent to a rebellious son being discovered in conduct that dishonors the father. When confronted by the father, the son responds with " Yes I did it and I intend to do it again. What do you plan to do about it?" Is this what you want to tell God when faced with your sin?

The whole process outlined in 1Jo 1:1-10 should form the process of growth and maturity in faith. By confession we learn to face our sins more honestly, more as God faces them. And as we face them in this manner, we remove them from acceptable conduct in our lives. We stop sinning! Thus we slowly remove sinful habits from our life and the nature of our confession changes. It becomes a process of purification or, to use the New Testament term, sanctification.

The joyful encouragement in this passage for sin-sick sinners is amazing. We keep on confessing our sins from a sin-sick heart, and God keeps on forgiving and cleansing us from our sins. His forgiveness and cleansing makes us more sensitive to sin, so the process actually discovers more sins in us, sins we may not have even know as sins before. Once we discover this sin in our improved sensitivity to sin, we promptly confess and seek God’s grace to help us cease the practice. He is always a willing helper in our battle with sin. Try it today!

275

Haydock: 1Jo 1:5

God is light, [3] &c. We cannot have this fellowship with God the Father and his Son Jesus Christ, if we walk in the darkness of sin: we must walk as the children of light. (Witham)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Deus lux est; (John i.) erat lux vera. [that was the true light. (John i. 9.)]

Haydock: 1Jo 1:8

Not that we say or pretend we have no sin; [4] thus truth would not be in us, and we should even make God a liar, who has declared all mankind guilty of sin. We were all born guilty of original sin; we have fallen, and still frequently fall into lesser sins and failings. We can only except from this number our Saviour Christ, who, even as man, never sinned, and his blessed Virgin Mother, by a special privilege, preserved from all kind of sin: and of whom St. Augustine[5] says, "that for the honour of our Lord, when we speak of the holy Virgin Mary, he will have no mention at all made of any sin." (Witham)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Quoniam peccatum non habemus, &c. By which are confuted the errors of the Pelagian heretics, who denied original sin, and pretended that men by their natural strength could and did live free from all sins.

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

St. Augustine, lib. de Nat. et Gra. chap. xxxvii. Excepta S. V. Maria, de qua propter honorem Domini, nullam prorsus, cum de peccato agitur, haberi volo mentionem.

====================

Haydock: 1Jo 2:1

That you may not sin, or lose the grace of God by any considerable sin. ---

But if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ, the eternal Son of the Father, who being made man to redeem us from sin, is our great Advocate, our chief Mediator, and only Redeemer, by whose merits and grace we have been reconciled, after we had lost and forfeited the grace and favour of God by our offences. He is the only propitiation for the sins of the whole world; for, as St. Paul says, (Hebrews x. 14.) Christ, for one oblation on the cross, hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. All remission of sins, all sanctification, is derived from the merits and satisfaction of our Redeemer, Jesus Christ; not but that the Angels and saints in heaven, and virtuous persons upon earth, when they pray to God for us, may be called advocates, mediators, and intercessors (though not redeemers) in a different sense, and in an inferior manner, without any injury, but on the contrary with an honour done to Christ; because what they pray and ask for us, is only begged and hoped for through Christ, and by his merits. St. Augustine[1] in his commentary on this epistle, on these very words, we have an advocate, &c. prevents and answers this very objection of the late pretended reformers: (tom. iii, part 2. p. 831 Nov. Edit.) "Some one will say: therefore the saints do not ask for us, therefore the bishops and governors of the Church do not ask for the people." He denies that this follows, the saints being advocates in a different sense. Though God be our protector and defender from dangers, this does not hinder us from owning the Angels to be our defenders in an inferior manner under God, as the Church of England acknowledges in the common prayer book on the feast of St. Michael, and all Angels, which runs thus: "mercifully grant, that as thy holy Angels always do thee service in heaven, so by thy appointment they may succour and defend us on earth through Jesus Christ, our Lord. Amen." (Witham) ---

The calling and office of an advocate is many things proper to Christ, and in every condition more singularly and excellently applying to him than to any Angel, saint, or living creature, though these also may be truly so called without any derogation from Christ. To him solely it belongs to procure us mercy before God, by the general ransom of his blood for our delivery; hence he is our only advocate of redemption, though others may be and are advocates of intercession. Hence St. Irenæus (lib. iii. chap. 33. and lib. v. post med.) says: "the obedient Virgin Mary is made the advocate of the disobedient Eve." Our Saviour declares that Angels are deputed for the protection of infants; (Matthew xviii.) and frequently are the examples we find in the old Scripture, such as Genesis xlviii. 16.; Tobit v. 27. and xii. 12.; Daniel x. See also the common prayer book, in the collect of Michaelmas day.

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Sed dicet aliquis, says St. Augustine on this place, ergo sancti non petunt pro nobis. Ergo episcopi et præpositi non petunt pro populo; sed attendite scripturas, &c.

Gill: 1Jo 1:5

This then is the message,.... Of God by his Son the Word, or from Christ by his apostles. The Syriac version renders it, "this is the Gospel"; which is good news from a far country, a message sent from the King of kings to sinful men: or this is the annunciation, or declaration; that is, the thing declared, or showed. Some render it, "this is the promise", that whereas God is light, such who walk in the light shall have communion with him, and others shall not:

which we have heard of him; of Christ, who has declared him, that he is light without any mixture of darkness; that is a pure Spirit, and must be worshipped in a spiritual way; and that only spiritual worshippers are such as he seeks, and admits to communion with him. Moreover, they might hear and learn this of Christ, by his telling them that he himself was light, who is the image of the invisible God, insomuch, that he that has seen the Son, has seen the Father also. Wherefore, if the one is light, the other must be likewise; nor is there any coming to the Father, and enjoying communion with him, but through Christ; all which our Lord told his disciples. The Ethiopic version reads, "which ye have heard", very wrongly; for the words regard the apostles, who made a faithful declaration of the message they heard, and had from Christ, which is as follows:

and declare unto you that God is light; that is, God the Father, as distinguished from "him", Christ, of whom they had heard this message, and from Jesus Christ his Son, 1Jo 1:7, what is declared of him, agreeably to the report of Christ, is, that he is "light"; that is, as light is opposed to the darkness of sin; he is pure and holy in his nature and works, and of such pure eyes as not to behold iniquity; and so perfectly holy, that angels cover their times before him, when they speak of his holiness: and as light is opposed to the darkness of ignorance, he is wise and knowing; he knows himself, his own nature, being, and perfections, his Son and Spirit, and their distinct modes of subsisting; he sees clearly all things in himself, all things he could do, or has determined shall be done; he has perfect knowledge of all creatures and things, and the darkness and the light are alike unto him, nor can the former hide from him: he is knowable, and to be discerned; he is clothed with light, and dwells in it; he may be known by the works of creation and providence; even the invisible things of him, his eternal power and Godhead, may be clearly seen and understood by them, and especially in his word, and most clearly in his Son; it is owing to the darkness of men, and not to any in and about God, who is light, that he is so little known as he is: and, like the light, he illuminates others; he is the Father of lights, the author and giver of all light; of the light of reason to men in general; and of grace here, and glory hereafter, to his own people, which are both signified by light; in whose light they see light; and he refreshes and delights their souls with the light of his countenance now, and with his glorious presence in the other world:

and in him is no darkness at all; no darkness of sin; nothing is more contrary to him, or more distant from him: nor any darkness of error and ignorance; what is unknown to men, as the times and seasons; what angels were ignorant of, and even Christ, as man, as the day and hour of Jerusalem's destruction, were known to the Father; in him is no ignorance of anything whatever; nor is there any variableness or shadow of turning in him, as there is in the luminous body of the sun; but God is always the same pure and holy, wise and knowing Being. It is usual with the Cabalistic Jews ^e, to call the supreme Being אור, light the most simple light, hidden light, and infinite light, with respect to his nature, glory, and majesty, and with regard also to his grace and mercy, justice and judgment; though, as R. Sangart says ^f, this is to be understood of him figuratively.

Gill: 1Jo 1:6

If we say that we have fellowship with him,.... The Alexandrian copy reads, "for if we say": that is, if any profess to be partakers of the divine nature, to be like unto God, and to have communion with him, to have the light of his countenance, and the discoveries of his love:

and walk in darkness; in the darkness of sin, ignorance, and unbelief, or are in a state of unregeneracy and blindness; whose understandings are darkened, and they know not God in Christ, nor have any true sight and sense of themselves, their sin and danger; and are ignorant of Christ and his righteousness, and the way of salvation by him; and are strangers to the Spirit of God, and the work of his grace; and are unacquainted with the truths of the Gospel; and not only so, but go on in darkness more and more; prefer it to the light, love it, and the works of it; have fellowship with them, and choose them; take pleasure in the ways of sin and wickedness, and continue, and walk on in them; if such persons pretend to fellowship with God, they are liars:

we lie; it cannot be, it is a contradiction, the thing is impossible and impracticable; what communion hath light with darkness? or what fellowship can the throne of iniquity, or those in whom sin reigns, have with God? for God is light, and were they partakers of him, or like unto him, or had communion with him, they would consequently be in the light, and not in darkness, and much less walk in it; wherefore they are liars,

and do not the truth: they do not say the truth, nor act according to it; they do not act uprightly or sincerely, but are hypocrites, and pretend to that which they have not; and if they did the truth, they would come to the light, and not walk in darkness; see Joh 3:21.

Gill: 1Jo 1:7

But if we walk in the light,.... Are persons enlightened by the Spirit of God, so as to have a true sight and sense of sin, to know Christ, and the way of salvation by him; and are children of the light, and are going on and increasing in spiritual light and knowledge; walk on in Christ, the light, by faith, and in the light and truth of the Gospel, and as becomes it, and as children of light; and as such who are called out of darkness into marvellous light:

as he is in the light; according to the light which he has given, who is light itself, is in it, and dwells in it. This "as" denotes not equality, but likeness: when this is the case, then it is a clear point, that

we have fellowship one with another; not with the saints, with the apostles, and other Christians, but with God: "we have mutual communion", as the Arabic version renders it; God with us, and we with him. Some copies read, "with him", as in 1Jo 1:6; and such a reading the sense requires; and agreeably to this the Ethiopic version renders it, "and we are partakers among ourselves with him"; that is, we all jointly and mutually appear to be like him, and partake of his nature, and have communion with him; and not only so, but with his Son Jesus Christ, as appears from our having a share in the cleansing efficacy of his blood:

and the blood of Jesus Christ, his Son, cleanseth us from all sin: there is a pollution on human nature, which is original, natural, universal, and internal, and is such that nothing can remove but the blood of Christ; not ceremonial ablutions and sacrifices, nor moral duties, nor evangelical performances, or submission to Gospel ordinances, and particularly baptism, which is not the putting away the faith of the flesh; nor even the graces of the Spirit, no, not faith, no otherwise than as it has to do with this blood; for this cleansing is not to be understood of sanctification, for that more properly belongs to the Spirit of God, and besides, does not cleanse from all sin; for notwithstanding this, sin is in the saints: but either of the atonement of sin, by the sacrifice of Christ, and so of a complete justification from it by his blood, which is put for both his active and passive obedience, the one being finished in the other; or rather of the pardon of sin, procured by the blood of Christ, and the application of that blood to the conscience, which purges it from dead works, and which has a continued virtue in it for that purpose. Christ's blood, being applied by the Spirit of God, has been always cleansing from sin; it had this virtue in it, and was of this use, even before it was actually shed, to the Old Testament saints; whence Christ is said to be the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world; and it has the same efficacy now as when first shed, and will have to the end of the world; and being sprinkled upon the conscience, by the Spirit of God, it takes away the sins of believers, and cleanses from them, as fast as the corruption of nature rises, or sins appear; and removes them out of their sight, and speaks peace to their souls; and which is owing, as to the dignity of Christ's person and the value of his sacrifice, so to his continual intercession, advocacy, and mediation; and which reaches to all sin, original and actual, secret and open sins; sins of heart, thought, lip, and life; sins of omission and commission, greater or lesser sins, committed against light and knowledge, grace and mercy, law and Gospel, all but the sin against the Holy Ghost; and in this Christ was the antitype of the scape goat, of which the Jews say ^g, that

"it atoned for all the transgressions of the law, whether small or great, sins of presumption, or of ignorance, known, or not known, which were against an affirmative or negative command, which deserved cutting off (by the hand of God), or death by the sanhedrim.''

The Arabic and Ethiopic versions render it, "from all our sins"; and this must be ascribed to the greatness of his person, as the Son of God; wherefore the emphasis lies on these words, "his Son": the Son of God, who is equal with God, and is truly and properly God: as it must be the blood of man that must, according to the law, be shed, to atone for and expiate sin, and cleanse from it, and that of an innocent man, who is holy, harmless, and without sin; so it must not be the blood of a mere man, though ever so holy, but the blood of one that is God as well as man; see Act 20:28. The divine nature of the Son of God, being in union with the human nature, put virtue into his blood to produce such an effect, which still continues, and will, as long as there is any occlusion for it.

Gill: 1Jo 1:8

If we say that we have no sin,.... Notwithstanding believers are cleansed from their sins by the blood of Christ, yet they are not without sin; no man is without sin: this is not only true of all men, as they come into the world, being conceived in sin, and shapen in iniquity, and of all that are in a state of unregeneracy, and of God's elect, while in such a state, but even of all regenerated and sanctified persons in this life; as appears by the ingenuous confessions of sin made by the saints in all ages; by their complaints concerning it, and groans under it; by the continual war in them between flesh and spirit; and by their prayers for the discoveries of pardoning grace, and for the fresh application of Christ's blood for cleansing; by their remissness in the discharge of duty, and by their frequent slips and falls, and often backslidings: and though their sins are all pardoned, and they are justified from all things by the righteousness of Christ, yet they are not without sin; though they are freed from the guilt of sin, and are under no obligation to punishment on account of it, yet not from the being of it; their sins were indeed transferred from them to Christ, and he has bore them, and took them and put them away, and they are redeemed from them, and are acquitted, discharged, and pardoned, so that sin is not imputed to them, and God sees no iniquity in them in the article of justification; and also, their iniquities are caused to pass from them, as to the guilt of them, and are taken out of their sight, and they have no more conscience of them, having their hearts sprinkled and purged by the blood of Jesus, and are clear of all condemnation, the curse of the law, the wrath of God, or the second death, by reason of them; yet pardon of sin, and justification from it, though they take away the guilt of sin, and free from obligation to punishment, yet they do not take out the being of sin, or cause it to cease to act, or do not make sins cease to be sins, or change the nature of actions, of sinful ones, to make them harmless, innocent, or indifferent; the sins of believers are equally sins with other persons, are of the same kind and nature, and equally transgressions of the law, and many of them are attended with more aggravating circumstances, and are taken notice of by God, and resented by him, and for which he chastises his people in love: now though a believer may say that he has not this or that particular sin, or is not guilty of this or that sin, for he has the seeds of all sin in him, yet he cannot say he has no sin; and though he may truly say he shall have no sin, for in the other state the being and principle of sin will be removed, and the saints will be perfectly holy in themselves, yet he cannot, in this present life, say that he is without it: if any of us who profess to be cleansed from sin by the blood of Christ should affirm this,

we deceive ourselves; such persons must be ignorant of themselves, and put a cheat upon themselves, thinking themselves to be something when they are nothing; flattering themselves what pure and holy creatures they are, when there is a fountain of sin and wickedness in them; these are self-deceptions, sad delusions, and gross impositions upon themselves:

and the truth is not in us; it is a plain case the truth of grace is not in such persons, for if there was a real work of God upon their souls, they would know and discern the plague of their own hearts, the impurity of their nature, and the imperfection of their obedience; nor is the word of truth in them, for if that had an entrance into them, and worked effectually in them, they would in the light of it discover much sin and iniquity in them; and indeed there is no principle of truth, no veracity in them; there is no sincerity nor ingenuity in them; they do not speak honestly and uprightly, but contrary to the dictates of their own conscience.

Gill: 1Jo 1:9

If we confess our sins,.... Not to one other; for though it is our duty to confess our faults to our fellow creatures and fellow Christians which are committed against them, yet are under no obligation to confess such as are more immediately against God, and which lie between him and ourselves; or at least it is sufficient to confess and acknowledge in general what sinful creatures we are, without entering into particulars; for confession of sin is to be made to God, against whom it is committed, and who only can pardon: and a man that truly confesses his sin is one that the Spirit of God has convinced of it, and has shown him its exceeding sinfulness, and filled him with a godly sorrow for it, and given him repentance unto salvation, that needeth not to be repented of; and who, under such a sight and sense of sin, and concern for it, comes and acknowledges it before the Lord, humbly imploring, for Christ's sake, his pardoning grace and mercy; and such obtain it:

he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins: forgiveness of sin here intends not the act of forgiveness, as in God, proceeding upon the bloodshed and sacrifice of Christ, which is done at once, and includes all sin, past, present, and to come; but an application of pardoning grace to a poor sensible sinner, humbled under a sense of sin, and confessing it before the Lord; and confession of sin is not the cause or condition of pardon, nor of the manifestation of it, but is descriptive of the person, and points him out, to whom God will and does make known his forgiving love; for to whomsoever he grants repentance, he gives the remission of sin; in doing of which he is faithful to his word of promise; such as in Pro 28:13; "and just"; in being "true", as the Arabic version adds, to his word; and showing a proper regard to the blood and sacrifice of his Son; for his blood being shed, and hereby satisfaction made to the law and justice of God, it is a righteous thing in him to justify from sin, and forgive the sinner for whom Christ has shed his blood, and not impute it to him, or punish him for it; though the word here used may answer to the Hebrew word צדיק, which sometimes carries in it the notion and idea of mercy and beneficence; hence mercy to the poor is sometimes expressed by righteousness; and the righteous acts of God intend his mercies and benefits unto men; see Dan 4:27; and so forgiveness of sin springs from the tender mercies of our God, and is both an act of justice and of mercy; of justice, with respect to the blood of Christ, and of pure grace and mercy to the pardoned sinner: the following clause,

and to cleanse us, from all unrighteousness, is but the same thing expressed in different words; for all unrighteousness is sin, and to cleanse from sin is to remove the guilt of it, by an application of the blood of Christ for pardon. The antecedent to the relative "he" in the text, is either God, who is light, and with whom the saints have fellowship; or his Son Jesus Christ, who is the nearest antecedent, and who, being truly God, has a power to forgive sin.

Gill: 1Jo 1:10

If we say that we have not sinned,.... Have never sinned, in time past as well as now; deny original sin, and that men are born in sin, but affirm they come into the world pure and holy; and assert that concupiscence is not sin; and so not regarding internal lusts and desires as sinful, only what is external, fancy they have so lived as to have been without sin: but if any of us give out such an assertion,

we make him a liar: that is, God, who in his word declares that the wicked are estranged from the womb, and go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies; that his own people are transgressors from the womb; that all have sinned and come short of his glory; and that there is none that does good, no, not one, but all are under sin, under the power and guilt of it, and become filthy by it, and so obnoxious to the wrath of God:

and his word is not in us; either Christ the Word of God, or rather the word of God which declares these things; no regard is had unto it; it "is not with us", as the Syriac and Ethiopic versions render it; it is not used and attended to as the rule and standard of truth, but is east away and despised; at least it has no place in the hearts of such, nor does it work effectually; for, was this the case, they would have other notions of themselves than that of sinless creatures. The apostle has regard either to the Gnostics, a set of heretics of this age, who fancied themselves pure, spiritual, and perfect, even in the midst of all their impurities, and notwithstanding their vicious lives; or to judaizing Christians, and it may be to the Jews themselves, who entertained such sort of notions as these of being perfect and without sin ^h.

Gill: 1Jo 2:1

My little children,.... The apostle may address the saints under this character, on account of their regeneration by the Spirit and grace of God, in which they were as newborn babes; and on account of his being the instrument of their conversion, and so was their spiritual father, and therefore calls them his own children; and he might the rather use such a way of speaking, because of his advanced age, being now in his old age, and John the elder in age as well as in office; as well as to show his paternal affection for them, and care of them, and that what he had wrote, or should write, was not from any disrespect, but from pure love to them; and it might serve to put them in mind of their weakness in faith, in knowledge, and spiritual strength, that they might not entertain high notions of themselves, as if they were perfect and without infirmities; and it is easy to observe, that this is one of Christ's expressions, Joh 13:33, from whose lips the apostle took it, whose words and phrases he greatly delighted in, as he seems to do in this, by his frequent use of it; see 1Jo 2:18.

These things write I unto you; concerning the purity and holiness of God, who is light itself; concerning fellowship with him, which no one that lives in sin can have; concerning pardon and cleansing from sin by the blood of Christ, and concerning sin being in them, and they not without it. The Ethiopic version reads, "we write", as in 1Jo 1:4;

that ye sin not; not that he thought they could be entirely without it, either without the being of it, or the commission of it, in thought, word, or deed, for this would be to suppose that which is contrary to his own words, in 1Jo 1:8; but he suggests that the end of his writing on these subjects was, that they might not live in sin, and indulge themselves in a vicious course of living, give up themselves to it, and walk in it, and work it with all greediness: and nothing could be more suitably adapted to such an end than the consideration of the holiness of God, who calls by his grace; and of the necessity of light and grace and holiness in men to communion with him; and of the pardoning grace of God and cleansing blood of Christ, which, when savingly applied, sets men against sin, and makes them zealous of good works; and of the indwelling of sin in the saints, which puts them upon their guard against it:

and if any man sin; as every man does, even everyone that is in the light, and walks in it, and has fellowship with God; everyone that believes in Christ, and is justified through his righteousness, and pardoned by his blood; everyone of the little children; for the apostle is not speaking of mankind in general who sin, for Christ is not an advocate for all that sin, but of these in particular; hence the Arabic version renders it, "if any of you sin"; and this, with the following, he says not to encourage in sin, but to comfort under a sense of it:

we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; Christ is an advocate, not for just or righteous persons, for as he came not to call these to repentance, nor to die for them, so such have no need of an advocate, nor is he one for them; but as he came to call sinners, and to save them, and died for them, the just for the unjust, so he is an advocate, and makes intercession for transgressors; and not for all men, though they have all sinned; not for the world, or those so called in distinction from the persons given him by his Father, for these he prays not; but for all the elect, and whatsoever charges are brought against them he answers to them, and for them; and for all that believe in him, be they weak or strong, even for the apostles as well as others; for they were not without sin, were men of like passions as others, and carried about with them a body of sin, and had their daily infirmities, and so needed an advocate as others; and hence John says, "we have an advocate", &c. but then Christ is not an advocate for sin, though for sinners; he does not vindicate the commission of sin, or plead for the performance of it; he is no patron of iniquity; nor does he deny that his clients have sinned, or affirm that their actions are not sins; he allows in court all their sins, with all their aggravated circumstances; nor does he go about to excuse or extenuate them; but he is an advocate for the non-imputation of them, and for the application of pardon to them: he pleads in their favour, that these sins have been laid upon him, and he has bore them; that his blood has been shed for the remission of them, and that he has made full satisfaction for them; and therefore in justice they ought not to be laid to their charge; but that the forgiveness of them should be applied unto them, for the relief and comfort of their burdened and distressed consciences: and for this he is an advocate for his poor sinning people "with the Father"; who being the first Person, and the Son the advocate, and the Spirit sustaining a like character, is only mentioned; and he being God against whom sin is committed, and to whom the satisfaction is made; and the rather, as he is the Father of Christ, and of those for whom he is an advocate; seeing it may be concluded that his pleadings will be with success, since he is not only related to him, and has an interest in him himself, but the persons also, whose patron he is, are related to him, and have a share in his paternal affection and care: moreover, this phrase, as it expresses the distinct personality of Christ from the Father, so his being with him in heaven at his right hand, and nearness to him; where he discharges this office of his, partly by appearing in person for his people in the presence of God; and partly by carrying in and presenting their confessions of sin, and their prayers for the fresh discoveries and applications of pardoning grace, which he offers up to his Father with the sweet incense of his mediation; and chiefly by pleading the virtue of his blood, righteousness, and sacrifice, which are carried within the vail, and are always in sight, and call aloud for peace and pardon; as also by answering and removing the charges and accusations of the court adversary, the accuser of the brethren, the devil; as well as by the declarations of his will, demanding in point of justice, in consideration of his sufferings and death, that such and such blessings be bestowed upon his people, as pardon, righteousness, grace, and supplies of grace, and at last glory; and by applying these benefits to their souls as a "comforter", which the word here used also signifies, and is so rendered, Joh 14:16; and by the Arabic version here. Now the saints have but one advocate, and that is enough for them; the apostle does not say we have advocates, but "an advocate"; not angels, nor saints departed, but Jesus Christ only, who is the one Mediator between God and man, 1Ti 2:5, and he is a continual one, he ever lives to make intercession; his blood is always speaking, and he always pleading; and therefore it is said "we have", not we have had, or we shall have an advocate and he is a prevalent one, he is always heard, he thoroughly pleads the cause he undertakes, and ever carries it; which is owing to the dignity of his person, his interest with his Father, and the virtue and value of his sacrifice: and he every way fit for such a work, for he is "righteous"; not only in his natures, both divine and human, but in his office, as Mediator, which he faithfully and righteously performs; he is a very proper person to plead for guilty persons, which he could not do if he himself was guilty; but he is so holy and righteous that nothing can be objected to him by God; and it need not be doubted by men that he will act the faithful part to them, and righteously serve them and their cause; and it is moreover his righteousness which he has wrought out, and is imputed to them, that carries the cause for them; and therefore this character of Christ fitly added, as is also the following. The Jews ⁱ have adopted the word in the text into their language, but have applied it to a different purpose, to alms deeds, repentance, and good works. Much more agreeably Philo the Jew ^k speaks of the son of perfect virtue, παρακλητω, "as an advocate" for the forgiveness of sins, and for a supply of everlasting good things.

Gill: 1Jo 2:2

And he is the propitiation for our sins,.... For the sins of us who now believe, and are Jews:

and not for ours only; but for the sins of Old Testament saints, and of those who shall hereafter believe in Christ, and of the Gentiles also, signified in the next clause:

but also for the sins of the whole world; the Syriac version renders it, "not for us only, but also for the whole world"; that is, not for the Jews only, for John was a Jew, and so were those he wrote unto, but for the Gentiles also. Nothing is more common in Jewish writings than to call the Gentiles עלמא, "the world"; and כל העולם, "the whole world"; and אומות העולם, "the nations of the world" ^l; See Gill on John 12:19; and the word "world" is so used in Scripture; see Joh 3:16; and stands opposed to a notion the Jews have of the Gentiles, that אין להן כפרה, "there is no propitiation for them" ^m: and it is easy to observe, that when this phrase is not used of the Gentiles, it is to be understood in a limited and restrained sense; as when they say ⁿ,

"it happened to a certain high priest, that when he went out of the sanctuary, כולי עלמא, "the whole world" went after him;''

which could only design the people in the temple. And elsewhere ^o it is said,

"amle ylwk, "the "whole world" has left the Misna, and gone after the "Gemara";''

which at most can only intend the Jews; and indeed only a majority of their doctors, who were conversant with these writings: and in another place ^p,

"amle ylwk, "the whole world" fell on their faces, but Raf did not fall on his face;''

where it means no more than the congregation. Once more, it is said ^q, when

"R. Simeon ben Gamaliel entered (the synagogue), כולי עלמא, "the whole world" stood up before him;''

that is, the people in the synagogue: to which may be added ^r,

"when a great man makes a mourning, כולי עלמא, "the whole world" come to honour him;''

i.e. a great number of persons attend the funeral pomp: and so these phrases, כולי עלמא לא פליגי, "the whole world" is not divided, or does not dissent ^s; כולי עלמא סברי, "the whole world" are of opinion ^t, are frequently met with in the Talmud, by which, an agreement among the Rabbins, in certain points, is designed; yea, sometimes the phrase, "all the men of the world" ^u, only intend the inhabitants of a city where a synagogue was, and, at most, only the Jews: and so this phrase, "all the world", or "the whole world", in Scripture, unless when it signifies the whole universe, or the habitable earth, is always used in a limited sense, either for the Roman empire, or the churches of Christ in the world, or believers, or the present inhabitants of the world, or a part of them only, Luk 2:1; and so it is in this epistle, 1Jo 5:19; where the whole world lying in wickedness is manifestly distinguished from the saints, who are of God, and belong not to the world; and therefore cannot be understood of all the individuals in the world; and the like distinction is in this text itself, for "the sins of the whole world" are opposed to "our sins", the sins of the apostle and others to whom he joins himself; who therefore belonged not to, nor were a part of the whole world, for whose sins Christ is a propitiation as for theirs: so that this passage cannot furnish out any argument for universal redemption; for besides these things, it may be further observed, that for whose sins Christ is a propitiation, their sins are atoned for and pardoned, and their persons justified from all sin, and so shall certainly be glorified, which is not true of the whole world, and every man and woman in it; moreover, Christ is a propitiation through faith in his blood, the benefit of his propitiatory sacrifice is only received and enjoyed through faith; so that in the event it appears that Christ is a propitiation only for believers, a character which does not agree with all mankind; add to this, that for whom Christ is a propitiation he is also an advocate, 1Jo 2:1; but he is not an advocate for every individual person in the world; yea, there is a world he will not pray for Joh 17:9, and consequently is not a propitiation for them. Once more, the design of the apostle in these words is to comfort his "little children" with the advocacy and propitiatory sacrifice of Christ, who might fall into sin through weakness and inadvertency; but what comfort would it yield to a distressed mind, to be told that Christ was a propitiation not only for the sins of the apostles and other saints, but for the sins of every individual in the world, even of these that are in hell? Would it not be natural for persons in such circumstances to argue rather against, than for themselves, and conclude that seeing persons might be damned notwithstanding the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ, that this might, and would be their case. In what sense Christ is a propitiation; see Gill on Rom 3:25. The Jews have no notion of the Messiah as a propitiation or atonement; sometimes they say ^w repentance atones for all sin; sometimes the death of the righteous ^x; sometimes incense ^y; sometimes the priests' garments ^z; sometimes it is the day of atonement ^a; and indeed they are in the utmost puzzle about atonement; and they even confess in their prayers ^b, that they have now neither altar nor priest to atone for them; See Gill on 1Jo 4:10.

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: 1Jo 1:5

¹ tn The καί (kai) at the beginning of 1:5 takes on a resumptive force, indicated by the phrase “heard from him and announce to you,” which echoes similar phrases in 1:2 and 1:3.

² tn The word “gospel” is not in the Greek text but is supplied to clarify the meaning. See the note on the following word “message.”

³ tn The word ἀγγελία (angelia) occurs only twice in the NT, here and in 1 John 3:11. It is a cognate of ἐπαγγελία (epangelia) which occurs much more frequently (some 52 times in the NT) including 1 John 2:25. BDAG 8 s.v. ἀγγελία 1 offers the meaning “message” which suggests some overlap with the semantic range of λόγος (logos), although in the specific context of 1:5 BDAG suggests a reference to the gospel. (The precise “content” of this “good news’ is given by the ὅτι [Joti] clause which follows in 1:5b.) The word ἀγγελία here is closely equivalent to εὐαγγέλιον (euangelion): (1) it refers to the proclamation of the eyewitness testimony about the life and ministry of Jesus Christ as proclaimed by the author and the rest of the apostolic witnesses (prologue, esp. 1:3-4), and (2) it relates to the salvation of the hearers/readers, since the purpose of this proclamation is to bring them into fellowship with God and with the apostolic witnesses (1:3). Because of this the adjective “gospel” is included in the English translation.

⁴ tn The referent of the pronoun “him” is not entirely clear in the Greek text; it could be either (1) God the Father, or (2) Jesus Christ, both of whom are mentioned at the end of v. 3. A reference to Jesus Christ is more likely because this is the nearest possible antecedent, and because God (the Father) is specifically mentioned in the following clause in v. 5.

⁵ tn The key to understanding the first major section of 1 John, 1:5-3:10, is found in the statement in v. 5: “God is light and in him there is no darkness at all.” The idea of “proclamation” – the apostolic proclamation of eyewitness testimony which the prologue introduces (1:2, 3) – is picked up in 1:5 by the use of the noun ἀγγελία (angelia) and the verb ἀναγγέλλομεν (anangellomen), cognate to the verb in 1:3. The content of this proclamation is given by the ὅτι (Joti) clause in 1:5 as the assertion that God is light, so this statement should be understood as the author’s formulation of the apostolic eyewitness testimony introduced in the prologue. (This corresponds to the apostolic preaching elsewhere referred to as κήρυγμα [khrugma], although the term the Apostle John uses here is ἀγγελία.)

sn Following the theme statement in 1:5, God is light and in him there is no darkness at all, the author presents a series of three claims and counterclaims that make up the first unit of 1 John (1:5-2:2). The three claims begin with “if” (1:6, 8, 10) and the three counterclaims begin with “but if” (1:7, 9; 2:1).

NET Notes: 1Jo 1:6

¹ tn The context of this statement in 1:6 indicates clearly that the progressive (continuative or durative) aspect of the present tense must be in view here.

sn The relationship of the phrase keep on walking to if we say is very important for understanding the problem expressed in 1:6. If one should say (εἴπωμεν, eipwmen) that he has fellowship with God, and yet continues walking (περιπατῶμεν, peripatwmen) in the darkness, then it follows (in the apodosis, the “then” clause) that he is lying and not practicing the truth.

² tn Or “living according to…”

NET Notes: 1Jo 1:7

¹ tn Or “purifies.”

² tn BDAG 50 s.v. ἁμαρτία 1 defines this term as “a departure fr. either human or divine standards of uprightness” (see 1 John 5:17 where ἁμαρτία [Jamartia] and ἀδικία [adikia] are related). This word occurs 17 times in 1 John, of which 11 are singular and 6 are plural.

sn From all sin. Sometimes a distinction between singular “sin” and plural “sins” has been suggested: Some would see the singular all sin of 1:7 as a reference to sinfulness before conversion and the plural sins of 1:9 as a reference to sins committed after one became a Christian. This amounts to making 1:7 refer to initial justification and 1:9 to sanctification. But the phrase all sin in 1:7 is so comprehensive that it can hardly be limited to preconversion sins, and the emphasis on “walking” in 1:7 strongly suggests that the Christian life is in view (not one’s life before conversion). In 1 John 1:8 sin appears as a condition or characteristic quality, which in 1:10 is regarded as universal. Apart from forgiveness in Christ it results in alienation from God (2:15) and spiritual death (3:14). But according to 1 John 1:7, cleansing from sin is possible by the blood (representing the sacrificial death) of Jesus.

NET Notes: 1Jo 1:8

¹ tn Grk “say we do not have sin.” The use of ἔχω + ἁμαρτία (ecw + Jamartia) is an expression limited to John and 1 John in the NT. On the analogy with other constructions where ἔχω governs an abstract noun (e.g., 1 John 1:3, 6, 7; 2:28; 3:3, 15, 21; 4:16, 17; 5:12-13), it indicates that a state is involved, which in the case of ἁμαρτία would refer to a state of sin. The four times the expression ἔχω + ἁμαρτία occurs in the Gospel of John (9:41; 15:22, 24; 19:11) all refer to situations where a wrong action has been committed or a wrong attitude has already existed, resulting in a state of sin, and then something else happens which further emphasizes the evil of that action or attitude. Here in 1 John 1:8 the sense is the same. The author is addressing people who have sinned (resulting in a state of sin), warning them that they cannot claim to be free from the guilt of that sin. The context of 1 John does not imply libertinism (where sins are flaunted as a way of demonstrating one’s “liberty”) on the part of the opponents, since the author makes no explicit charges of immoral behavior against his opponents. The worst the author explicitly says is that they have failed to love the brethren (1 John 3:17). It seems more likely that the opponents were saying that things a believer did after conversion were not significant enough to be “sins” that could challenge one’s intimate relationship with God (a relationship the author denies that the opponents have to begin with).

NET Notes: 1Jo 1:9

¹ tn Or “just.”

² tn The ἵνα (Jina) followed by the subjunctive is here equivalent to the infinitive of result, an “ecbatic” or consecutive use of ἵνα according to BDAG 477 s.v. 3 where 1 John 1:9 is listed as a specific example. The translation with participles (“forgiving, …cleansing”) conveys this idea of result.

³ tn Or “purifying.”

NET Notes: 1Jo 2:1

¹ sn My little children. The direct address by the author to his readers at the beginning of 2:1 marks a break in the pattern of the opponents’ claims (indicated by the phrase if we say followed by a negative statement in the apodosis, the “then” clause) and the author’s counterclaims (represented by if with a positive statement in the apodosis) made so far in 1:6-10. The seriousness of this last claim (in 1:10) causes the author to interrupt himself to address the readers as his faithful children and to explain to them that while he wants them not to sin, they may be assured that if they do, they can look to Jesus Christ, as their advocate with the Father, to intercede for them. After this, the last of the author’s three counter-claims in 1:5-2:2 is found in the if clause in 2:1b.

² tn There is some dispute over the significance of the aorist tense of ἁμάρτητε (Jamarthte): (1) F. Stagg (“Orthodoxy and Orthopraxy in the Johannine Epistles,” RevExp 67 [1970]:423-32, esp. 428) holds that the aorist is nondescriptive, saying nothing about the nature of the action itself, but only that the action has happened. This is indeed the normal aspectual value of the aorist tense in general, but there is some disagreement over whether with this particular verb there are more specific nuances of meaning. (2) M. Zerwick (Biblical Greek §251) and N. Turner (MHT 3:72) agree that the present tense of ἁμαρτάνω (Jamartanw) means “to be in a state of sin” (i.e., a sinner) while the aorist refers to specific acts of sin. Without attempting to sort out this particular dispute, it should be noted that certain verbs do have different nuances of meaning in different tenses, nuances which do not derive solely from the aspectual value of the tense per se, but from a combination of semantic factors which vary from word to word.

sn So that you may not sin. It is clear the author is not simply exhorting the readers not to be habitual or repetitive sinners, as if to imply that occasional acts of sin would be acceptable. The purpose of the author here is that the readers not sin at all, just as Jesus told the man he healed in John 5:14 “Don’t sin any more.”

³ tn The description of the Holy Spirit as “Paraclete” is unique to the Gospel of John (14:16, 26; 15:26; and 16:7). Here, in the only other use of the word in the NT, it is Jesus, not the Spirit, who is described as παράκλητος (paraklhto"). The reader should have been prepared for this interchangeability of terminology, however, by John 14:16, where Jesus told the disciples that he would ask the Father to send them ‘another’ paraclete (ἄλλος, allos, “another of the same kind”). This implies that Jesus himself had been a paraclete in his earthly ministry to the disciples. This does not answer all the questions about the meaning of the word here, though, since it is not Jesus’ role as an advocate during his earthly ministry which is in view, but his role as an advocate in heaven before the Father. The context suggests intercession in the sense of legal advocacy, as stress is placed upon the righteousness of Jesus (᾿Ιησοῦν Χριστὸν δίκαιον, Ihsoun Criston dikaion). The concept of Jesus’ intercession on behalf of believers does occur elsewhere in the NT, notably in Rom 8:34 and Heb 7:25. Something similar is taking place here, and is the best explanation of 1 John 2:1. An English translation like “advocate” or “intercessor” conveys this.

⁴ tn Or “Jesus Christ the righteous.”

NET Notes: 1Jo 2:2

¹ tn A suitable English translation for this word (ἱλασμός, Jilasmos) is a difficult and even controversial problem. “Expiation,” “propitiation,” and “atonement” have all been suggested. L. Morris, in a study that has become central to discussions of this topic (The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross, 140), sees as an integral part of the meaning of the word (as in the other words in the ἱλάσκομαι [Jilaskomai] group) the idea of turning away the divine wrath, suggesting that “propitiation” is the closest English equivalent. It is certainly possible to see an averting of divine wrath in this context, where the sins of believers are in view and Jesus is said to be acting as Advocate on behalf of believers. R. E. Brown’s point (Epistles of John [AB], 220-21), that it is essentially cleansing from sin which is in view here and in the other use of the word in 4:10, is well taken, but the two connotations (averting wrath and cleansing) are not mutually exclusive and it is unlikely that the propitiatory aspect of Jesus’ work should be ruled out entirely in the usage in 2:2. Nevertheless, the English word “propitiation” is too technical to communicate to many modern readers, and a term like “atoning sacrifice” (given by Webster’s New International Dictionary as a definition of “propitiation”) is more appropriate here. Another term, “satisfaction,” might also convey the idea, but “satisfaction” in Roman Catholic theology is a technical term for the performance of the penance imposed by the priest on a penitent.

sn The Greek word (ἱλασμός, Jilasmos) behind the phrase atoning sacrifice conveys both the idea of “turning aside divine wrath” and the idea of “cleansing from sin.”

² tn Many translations supply an understood repetition of the word “sins” here, thus: “but also for the sins of the whole world.”

Geneva Bible: 1Jo 1:5

^{( 3 )} This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.

^{( 3 )} Now he enters into a question, by which we may understand that we are joined together with Christ, that is, if we are governed with his light, which is perceived by the ordering of our life. And thus he reasons, God is in himself most pure light, therefore he agrees well with them who are of the light, but with them that are of the darkness he has no fellowship.

Geneva Bible: 1Jo 1:7

But if we walk in the ^{( d )} light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, ^{( 4 )} and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

^{( d )} God is said to be light by his own nature, and to be in light, that is to say, in that everlasting infinite blessedness: and we are said to walk in light in that the beams of that light shine to us in the Word. ^{( 4 )} A digression the matter at hand, to the remission of sins: for this our sanctification who walk in the light, is a testimony of our joining and knitting together with Christ: but because this our light is very dark, we must obtain another benefit in Christ, that is, that our sins may be forgiven us being sprinkled with his blood: and this in conclusion is the support and anchor of our salvation.

Geneva Bible: 1Jo 1:8

^{( 5 )} If we say that we have no sin, we ^{( e )} deceive ourselves, and the ^{( f )} truth is not in us.

^{( 5 )} There is none but need this benefit, because there is none that is not a sinner.

^{( e )} This fully refutes that perfectness of works of supererogation (doing more than duty requires, the idea that excess good works can form a reserve fund of merit that can be drawn on in favour of sinners) which the papists dream of.

^{( f )} So then, John speaks not thus for modesty's sake, as some say but because it is so indeed.

Geneva Bible: 1Jo 1:9

^{( 6 )} If we confess our sins, he is ^{( g )} faithful and just to ^{( h )} forgive us [our] sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

^{( 6 )} Therefore the beginning of salvation is to acknowledge our wickedness and to require pardon from him, who freely forgives all sins, because he has promised to do so and he is faithful and just.

^{( g )} So then our salvation depends on the free promise of God, who because he is faithful and just, will perform that which he hath promised.

^{( h )} Where then are our merits? for this is our true happiness.

Geneva Bible: 1Jo 1:10

^{( 7 )} If we say that we have not sinned, we make him ^{( i )} a liar, and his ^{( k )} word is not in us.

^{( 7 )} A repeat of the former verse, in which he condemned all of sin without exception: so much so that if any man persuade himself otherwise, he does as much as in him lies, make the word of God himself useless and to no effect, yes, he makes God a liar: for to why in times past did we need sacrifices, or now Christ and the gospel, if we are not sinners?

^{( i )} They do not only deceive themselves but are blasphemous against God.

^{( k )} His doctrine shall have no place in us; that is, in our hearts.

Geneva Bible: 1Jo 2:1

My ^{( 1 )} little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an ^{( a )} advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

^{( 1 )} It does not follow that we must give our wicked nature free rein, or sin much more freely, because our sins are cleansed by the blood of Christ, but we must rather much more diligently resist sin, and yet we must not despair because of our weakness, for we have an advocate and a purger, Christ Jesus the Just, and therefore acceptable to his Father.

^{( a )} In that be names Christ, he eliminates all others.

Geneva Bible: 1Jo 2:2

And he is the ^{( b )} propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for [the sins of] the ^{( c )} whole world.

^{( b )} Reconciliation and intercession go together, to give us to understand that he is both advocate and high priest.

^{( c )} For men of all sorts, of all ages, and all places, so that this benefit being not to the Jews only, of whom he speaks as appears in (1Jo 2:7) but also to other nations.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: 1Jo 1:1-10

1 He describes the person of Christ, in whom we have eternal life, by a communion with God;

5 to which we must adjoin holiness of life, to testify the truth of that our communion and profession of faith, as also to assure us of the forgiveness of our sins by Christ's death.

TSK Synopsis: 1Jo 2:1-29

1 He comforts them against the sins of infirmity.

3 Rightly to know God is to keep his commandments;

9 to love our brethren;

15 and not to love the world.

18 We must beware of seducers;

20 from whose deceits the godly are safe, preserved by perseverance in faith, and holiness of life.

Maclaren: 1Jo 1:5

The Message And Its Practical Results

"This then is the message which we have heard of Him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in Him is no darkness at all. 6. If we say that we have fellowship with Him and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: 7. But if we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth us from all sin. 8. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us.'

"My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: 2. And He is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world. 3. And hereby we do know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. 4. He that saith, I know Him, and keepeth not His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. 5. But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in Him. 6. He that saith he abideth in Him ought himself also so to walk, even as He walked.'--1 John 1:5, 2:6.

JOHN is the mystic among the New Testament writers. He dwells much on the immediate union of the soul with God, and he has little to say about institutions and rites. His method is not to argue, but to utter deep, simple propositions which convince by their own light. But he is also intensely eager for plain, practical morality, and in that respect sets the example which, unfortunately, too many of the more mystical types of Christian teaching have failed to follow. To him the outcome and test of all deep hidden union with God is righteousness in life.

The blending of these two elements, which is the very keynote of this letter, is wonderfully set forth in this passage. They would require much more space than we command for their treatment, for every clause is weighty as gold. We can but skim the surface, and try to bring out the salient points.

I. We Have, First, A Wonderful Gathering Up Of The Whole Gospel Message Into One Utterance As To The Essential Nature Of God.

Light is in all languages the symbol of knowledge, of joy, of purity. It is the source of life. Its very nature is to ray itself out into and conquer darkness. Its splendor dazzles every eye; all things rejoice in its beams. Darkness is the type of ignorance, of sorrow, of sin. But, whilst the symbol is thus rich in manifold revelations, probably purity and self-communication are the predominating ideas here.

John has been honoured to give the world the three great revelations that God is spirit, is light, is love. And this profound saying in some sense includes both the others, inasmuch as light, which to the popular mind is most widely apart from matter, may well stand for the emblem of spirit, and, since to radiate is its inseparable quality, does represent in symbol the delight in imparting Himself, which is the very heart of the declaration that God is love. If, then, we grasp these two thoughts of absolute purity and of self-impartation as the very nature and property of God, John tells us that we grasp the kernel of the Gospel.

And he thinks that men never will grasp them certainly unless a message' from God, a definite revelation in historical fact, certifies them. We may hope or doubt, or desire, but we cannot be sure that God is light unless he tells us so by unmistakable act. John knew what act that was--the sending of His only-begotten Son. To the positive statement John, in his usual manner, appends an emphatic negative one: Darkness is not in him, no, not in any way.' He is light, all light, only light.

II. With Characteristic Moral Earnestness, John Passes At Once To The Practical Effects Which The Message Is Meant To Have.

We are not told what God is simply that we may know, but that, knowing, we may do and be. If He is light, two things will follow in those who are in union with Him--they will walk in light, and they will in His light see their own evil. John deals with these two consequences in 1 John 1:6-10--the former in 1 John 1:6-7; the latter in 1 John 1:8-10. The parallelism in the construction of these two sets of verses is striking:

As to the former of these two paragraphs, the underlying thought is that fellowship with God necessarily involves moral likeness to Him. Worship is always aspiration after, and conformity to, the character of the god worshipped, and there can be no true communion with a God who is light unless the worshipper walks in light. In plain language, all high-flying pretensions to communion with God must verify themselves by practical righteousness. That cuts deep into an emotional religion, which has much to say about raptures and the like, but produces little purifying effect on the humble details of daily life.

There are always professing Christians who talk of their blessed experiences, and woefully fail in prosaic virtues. It is a pity that a man should hold his head so high that he does not look to keep his feet out of the mud. Such a profession is for the most part tainted with more or less conscious falsehood, and is always a proof that the truth--the sum of God's revelation--is not operative in the man; that he is not turning his belief into act, as all belief should be. On the other hand, the true relation resulting from the message is that we should walk in the light, as He is in it.

1 John 1:10 seems to be simply a reiteration of the preceding idea, with some intensifying, and that chiefly in the description of the true character of the denial of sin. To make God a liar is worse than to lie or to deceive ourselves; and all ignoring of sin does that, because not only has God declared its universality by the words of revelation, but all His dealings with men are based upon the fact that they are all sinners, and we fly in the face of all His words and works if we deny that which we ourselves are. Therefore the Apostle further varies his expression, and says His word' instead of the truth,' thus bringing into prominence the thought that the truth' is made accessible to us because God has spoken.

III. 1 John 2:1-6 Is In Structure Analogous To The Preceding Section.

As there, so here, the message' is summed up in one great fact,--Christ's work as advocate for believers and as propitiation for the world. As there, so here, two practical consequences follow, which are drawn out on corresponding lines. Observe the repetition, in 1 John 2:3, 5 b, of hereby know we,' and in 1 John 2:4, 6 of He that saith.'

Note, too, the reappearance of is a liar' and of the truth is not in him' in 1 John 2:4. The drift of the section may be briefly put as follows. John's heart melts as he thinks of the possibilities of holiness open to believers, and of the sad actualities of their imperfect lives, and he addresses them by the tender name, my little children.' The impelling and guiding motive of his letter is that they may not sin. Practical righteousness is the end of revelation, and its complete attainment should be the aim of every believer.

But the sad experience of saints' is that they are not yet wholly delivered from its power. Therefore the message' is not only God is light without blending of darkness,' but, we Christians have an Advocate with the Father.' Jesus is to-day carrying on His mighty work of prevalent intercession for all His servants, and that intercession secures forgiveness for their inconsistencies and lapses, because it rests upon Christ's finished work of propitiation,' which is for the whole world, even though it actually avails only for believers.

Such being the power of Christ's work in its twofold aspect of propitiation and of intercession, the same practical issues as in the preceding section were shown to flow from the revealed nature of God are here, in somewhat different form, linked with that work. First, keeping his commandments (which is equivalent to walking in the light') is the test to ourselves, as well as to others, of our really knowing Him with a knowledge which is not mere head work, but the acquaintance of sympathy and friendship, or, in the words of the previous paragraph, having fellowship with Him.

Clearly, the scope of this section requires that His commandments' should here mean Christ's, not the Father's. All professions of knowing Jesus which are not verified by obedience to Him are false. If we do keep His word--not merely the individual commandments,' but the word as one great whole--our love to God reaches its perfection, for it is no mere emotion of the heart, but the force which is to mould and actuate all our acts.

1 John 2:5 b should be separated from the preceding words, for it is really the beginning of the second issue from the work of Christ, and is parallel with hereby know we,' etc., in verse 3. Observe the progress in thought from the assurance that we know (1 John 2:3) to the assurance that we are in Him. The Christian's relation to Jesus is not only that of acquaintance, however intimate, loving, and transforming, but that of actual dwelling in Him. That great truth shines on every page of the New Testament, and is not to be weakened down into metaphor or rhetoric. It is the very heart of the Christian life, and the test that we have attained to it, and that not merely as an occasional, but as a permanent, condition (note that are in Him' is strengthened to abideth in Him') is that our outward life, in its manifold activities, shall be conformed to the pattern of all holiness in the life of Jesus. To walk as He walked is to walk in the light. Profession is nothing, conduct is everything, and we shall only be clear of sin in the measure in which we have Him who is the light of men for the very life of our lives.

Maclaren: 1Jo 1:7

Walking In The Light

If we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth us from all sin.'--1 John 1:7.

JOHN was the Apostle of love, but he was also a son of thunder.' His intense moral earnestness and his very love made him hate evil, and sternly condemn it; and his words flash and roll as no other words in Scripture, except the words of the Lord of love. In the immediate context he has been laying down what is to him the very heart of his message, that God is light, and in Him is no darkness at all.' There are spots in the sun, great tracts of blackness on its radiant disc; but in God is unmingled, perfect purity. That being so, it is clear that no man can be in sympathy or hold communion with Him, unless he, too, in his measure, is light.

So, with fiery indignation, John turns to the people, of whom there were some, even in the primitive Church, who made claims to a lofty spirituality and communion with God, and all the while were manifestly living in the darkness of sin. He will not mince matters with them. He roundly says that they are lying, and the worst sort of lie--an acted lie: They do not the truth.' Then, with a quick turn, he opposes to these pretenders the men who really are in fellowship with God, and in my text lays down the principle that walking in the light is essential to fellowship with God. Only, in his usual fashion, he turns the antithesis into a somewhat different form, so as to suggest another aspect of the truth, and instead of saying, as we might expect for the verbal accuracy of the contrast, If we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we have fellowship with God,' he says, we have fellowship one with another.' Then he adds a still further result of that walk, the blood of Jesus cleanses from all sin.'

Now there are three things: walking in the light, which is the only Christian walk; the companions of those who walk in the light; and the progressive cleansing which is given.

I. Note This Walking In The Light,' Which Is The Only Christian Walk.

In all languages, light is the natural symbol for three things: knowledge, joy, purity. The one ray is broken into its three constituent parts. But just as there are some surfaces which are sensitive to the violet rays, say, of the spectrum, and not to the others, so John's intense moral earnestness makes him mainly sensitive to the symbolism which makes light the expression, not so much of knowledge or of joy, as of moral purity. And although that is not exclusively his use of the emblem, it is predominately so, and it is so here. To walk in the light' then; is, speaking generally, to have purity, righteousness, goodness, as the very element and atmosphere in which our progressive and changeful life is carried on.

Note, too, before I go further, that very significant antithesis: we walk'; He is--God is in the light essentially, changelessly, undisturbedly, eternally; and the light in which He is, His own calm home, His habitation from eternity,' is light which has flowed out from Himself as a halo round the midnight moon. It is all one in substance to say God is in light, or, as the Psalmist has it, He covered Himself with light as with a garment,' and to say, God is light.'

But, side by side with that changeless abiding in the perfect purity, which is inaccessible, the Apostle ventures to put, not in contrast only, but in parallel (as He is), our changing, effortful, active, progressive life in the light (God is); we walk.

So, then, the essential of a Christian character is that the light of purity and moral goodness shall be as the very orb, in the midst of which it stands and advances. That implies effort, and it implies activity, and it implies progress. And we are only Christians in the measure in which the conscious activities of our daily lives, and the deepest energies of our inward being, are bathed and saturated with this love of, and effort after, righteousness. It is vain, says John, to talk about fellowship with God, unless the fellowship is rooted in sympathy with Him in that which is the very heart of His Being, the perfect light of perfect holiness. Test your Christianity by that.

Then, still further, there is implied in this great requirement of walking in the light, not only activity and effort, and progress in purity, but also that the whole of the life shall be brought into relation with, and shall be moulded after, the pattern of the God in whom we pro-less to believe. Religion, in its deepest meaning, is the aspiration after likeness to the god. You see it in heathenism. Men make their gods after their own image, and then the god makes the worshippers after his image. Mars is the god of the soldier, and Venus goddess of the profligate, and Apollo god of the musical and the wise, etc., and in Christianity the deepest thing in it is aspiration and effort after likeness to God. Love is imitation; admiration, especially when it is raised to the highest degree and becomes adoration, is imitation. And the man that lies before God, like a mirror in the sunshine, receives on the still surface of his soul--but not, like the mirror, on the surface only, but down into its deepest depths--the reflected image of Him on Whom he gazes. We all with unveiled face, mirroring glory, are changed into the same image.' So to walk in the light is only possible when we are drawn into it, and our feeble feet made fit to tread upon the radiant glory, by the thought that He is in the light. To imitate Him is to be righteous. So do not let us forget that a correct creed, and devout emotions, ay! and a morality which has no connection with Him, are all imperfect, and that the end of all our religion, our orthodox creed and our sweet emotions and inward feelings of acceptance and favour and fellowship, are meant to converge on, and to produce this--a life and a character which lives and moves and has its being in a great orb of light and purity.

But another thing is included in this grand metaphor of my text. Not only does it enjoin upon us effort and activity and progress in the light and the linking of all our purity with God, but also, it bids us shroud no part of our conduct or our character either from ourselves or from Him. Bring it all out into the light. And although with a penitent heart, and a face suffused with blushes, we have sometimes to say, See, Father, what I have done! it is far better that the revealing light should shine down upon us, and like the sunshine on wet linen, melt away the foulness which it touches, than that we should huddle the ugly thing up in a corner, to be one day revealed and transfixed by the flash of the light turned into lightning. He that doeth the truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest.'

II. So Much, Then, For My First Point; The Second Is: The Companions Of The Men That Walk In The Light.

I have already pointed out that the accurate, perhaps pedantically accurate, form of the antithesis would have been: If we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with God.' But John says, first, we have fellowship one with another.' Underlying that, as I shall have to say in a moment, there is the other thought: We have fellowship with God.' But he deals with the other side of the truth first. That just comes to this, that the only cement that perfectly knits men to each other is their common possession of that light, and the consequent fellowship with God. There are plenty of other bonds that draw us to one another; but these, if they are not strengthened by this deepest of all bonds, the affinity of souls, that are moving together in the realm of light and purity, are precarious, and apt to snap. Sin separates men quite as much as it separates each man from God. It is the wedge driven into the tree that rends it apart. Human society with its various bonds is like the iron hoop that may be put around the barrel staves, giving them a quasi-unity. The one thing that builds men together into a whole is that each shall be, as it were, embedded in the rock which is the foundation, and the building will rise into a holy temple in the Lord. Sin separates; as the prophet confessed, All we like sheep have gone astray, every one to his own way,' and the flock is broken up into a multitude of scattered sheep. Social enthusiasts may learn the lesson that the only way by which brotherhood among men can become anything else than a name, and probably end, as it did in the great French Revolution, in brothers' making hecatombs of their brethren under the guillotine, is that it shall be the corollary from the Fatherhood of God. If we walk in the light, not otherwise, we have fellowship one with another.'

Then, still further, in this fellowship one with another, John presupposes the fellowship with God for each, which makes the possibility and the certainty of all being drawn into one family. He does not think it necessary to state, what is so plain and obvious, viz., that unless we are in sympathy with God, in our aspiration and effort after the light which is His home and ours, we have no real communion with Him. I said that sin separated man from man, and disrupted all the sweet bonds of amity, so that if men come into contact, being themselves in the darkness, they come into collision rather than into communion. A company of travellers in the night are isolated individuals. When the sun rises on their paths they are a company again. And in like manner, sin separates us from God, and if our hearts are turned towards, and denizens of, the darkness of impurity, then we have no communion with Him. He cannot come to us if we love the darkness. He,

Can but listen at the gate,And hear the household jar within.'

The tide of the Atlantic feels along the base of ironbound cliffs on our western shores, and there is not a crevice into which it can come. So God moves about us, but is without us, so long as we walk in darkness. So let us remember that no union with Him is possible, except there be this common dwelling in the light. Two grains of quicksilver laid upon a polished surface will never unite if their surfaces be dusted over with minute impurities, or if the surface of one of them be. Clean away the motes, and they will coalesce and be one. A film of sin separates men from God. And if the film be removed the man dwells in God, and God in him.

III. That Brings Me To My Last Point: The Progressive Cleansing Of Those Who Dwell In The Light.

The blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin.' Now if you will notice the whole context, and eminently the words a couple of verses after my text, you will see that the cleansing here meant is not the cleansing of forgiveness, but the cleansing of purifying. For the two things are articulately distinguished in the ninth verse: He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.' So, to use theological terms, it is not justification, but sanctification that is meant here.

Then there is another thing to be noticed, and that is that when the Apostle speaks here about the blood of Christ, he is not thinking of that blood as shed on the Cross, the atoning sacrifice, but of that blood as transfused into the veins, the source there of our new life. The Old Testament says that the blood is the life.' Never mind about the statement being scientifically correct; it conveys the idea of the time, which underlies a great deal of Old and New Testament teaching. And when John says the blood of Jesus cleanses from all sin,' he says just the same thing as his brother Paul said, the law of the spirit of life in Jesus Christ makes me free from the law of sin and death.' That is to say, a growing cleansing from the dominion and the power of sin is granted to us, if we have the life of Jesus Christ breathed into our lives. The metaphor is a very strong one. They tell us--I know nothing about the truth of it--that sometimes it has been possible to revive a moribund man by transfusing into his veins blood from another. That is a picture of the only way by which you and I can become free from the tyranny that dominates us. We must have the life of Christ as the animating principle of our lives, the spirit of Jesus emancipating us from the power of sin and death.

So you see, there are two aspects of Christ's great work set before us under that one metaphor of the blood in its two-fold form, first, as shed for us sinners on the Cross; second, as poured into our veins day by day. That works progressive cleansing. It covers the whole ground of all possible iniquity. Pardon is much, purifying is more. The sacrifice on the Cross is the basis of everything, but that sacrifice does not exhaust what Christ does for us. He died for our sins, and lives for our sanctifying. He died for us, He lives in us. Because He died, we are forgiven; because He lives, we are made pure. Only remember John's if.' The blood of Jesus will progressively cleanse us until it has cleansed us from all sin, on condition that we walk in the light,' not otherwise. If the main direction of our lives is towards the light; if we seek, by aspiration and by effort, and by deliberate choice, to live in holiness, then, and not else, will the power of the life of Jesus Christ deliver us from the power of sin and death.

Now, my text presupposes that the people to whom it is addressed, and whom it concerns, have already passed from darkness into light, if not wholly, yet in germ. But for those who have not so passed, there is something to be said before my text. And John says it immediately; here it is, If any man sin we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous, and He is the propitiation for our sins; and not for our sins only, but for the whole world.' So we have to begin with the blood shed for us, the means of our pardon, and then we have the advance of the blood sprinkled on us, the means of our cleansing. If by humble faith we take the dying Lord for our Saviour, and the channel of our forgiveness, we shall have the pardon of our sins. If we listen to the voice that says, Ye were sometime darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord. Walk as children of the light,' we shall have fellowship with the living Lord, and daily know more and more of the power of His cleansing blood, making us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light.'

MHCC: 1Jo 1:5-10

A message from the Lord Jesus, the Word of life, the eternal Word, we should all gladly receive. The great God should be represented to this dark world, as pure and perfect light. As this is the nature of God, his doctrines and precepts must be such. And as his perfect happiness cannot be separated from his perfect holiness, so our happiness will be in proportion to our being made holy. To walk in darkness, is to live and act against religion. God holds no heavenly fellowship or intercourse with unholy souls. There is no truth in their profession; their practice shows its folly and falsehood. The eternal Life, the eternal Son, put on flesh and blood, and died to wash us from our sins in his own blood, and procures for us the sacred influences by which sin is to be subdued more and more, till it is quite done away. While the necessity of a holy walk is insisted upon, as the effect and evidence of the knowledge of God in Christ Jesus, the opposite error of self-righteous pride is guarded against with equal care. All who walk near to God, in holiness and righteousness, are sensible that their best days and duties are mixed with sin. God has given testimony to the sinfulness of the world, by providing a sufficient, effectual Sacrifice for sin, needed in all ages; and the sinfulness of believers themselves is shown, by requiring them continually to confess their sins, and to apply by faith to the blood of that Sacrifice. Let us plead guilty before God, be humble, and willing to know the worst of our case. Let us honestly confess all our sins in their full extent, relying wholly on his mercy and truth through the righteousness of Christ, for a free and full forgiveness, and our deliverance from the power and practice of sin.

MHCC: 1Jo 2:1-2

When have an Advocate with the Father; one who has undertaken, and is fully able, to plead in behalf of every one who applies for pardon and salvation in his name, depending on his pleading for them. He is " Jesus," the Saviour, and " Christ," the Messiah, the Anointed. He alone is " the Righteous One," who received his nature pure from sin, and as our Surety perfectly obeyed the law of God, and so fulfilled all righteousness. All men, in every land, and through successive generations, are invited to come to God through this all-sufficient atonement, and by this new and living way. The gospel, when rightly understood and received, sets the heart against all sin, and stops the allowed practice of it; at the same time it gives blessed relief to the wounded consciences of those who have sinned.

Matthew Henry: 1Jo 1:5-7

The apostle, having declared the truth and dignity of the author of the gospel, brings a message or report from him, from which a just conclusion is to be drawn for the consideration and conviction of the professors of religion, or professed entertainers of this glorious gospel.

I. Here is the message or report that the apostle avers to come from the Lord Jesus: This then is the message which we have heard of him (1Jo 1:5), of his Son Jesus Christ. As he was the immediate sender of the apostles, so he is the principal person spoken of in the preceding context, and the next antecedent also to whom the pronoun him can relate. The apostles and apostolical ministers are the messengers of the Lord Jesus; it is their honour, the chief they pretend to, to bring his mind and messages to the world and to the churches. This is the wisdom and present dispensation of the Lord Jesus, to send his messages to us by persons like ourselves. He that put on human nature will honour earthen vessels. It was the ambition of the apostles to be found faithful, and faithfully to deliver the errands and messages they had received. What was communicated to them they were solicitous to impart: This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you. A message from the Word of life, from the eternal Word, we should gladly receive: and the present one is this (relating to the nature of God whom we are to serve, and with whom we should covet all indulged communion) - That God is light, and in him is no darkness at all, 1Jo 1:5. This report asserts the excellency of the divine nature. He is all that beauty and perfection that can be represented to us by light. He is a self-active uncompounded spirituality, purity, wisdom, holiness, and glory. And then the absoluteness and fulness of that excellency and perfection. There is no defect or imperfection, no mixture of any thing alien or contrary to absolute excellency, no mutability nor capacity of any decay in him: In him is no darkness at all, 1Jo 1:5. Or this report may more immediately relate to what is usually called the moral perfection of the divine nature, what we are to imitate, or what is more directly to influence us in our gospel work. And so it will comprehend the holiness of God, the absolute purity of his nature and will, his penetrative knowledge (particularly of hearts), his jealousy and injustice, which burn a a most bright and vehement flame. It is meet that to this dark world the great God should be represented as pure and perfect light. It is the Lord Jesus that best of all opens to us the name and nature of the unsearchable God: The only-begotten, who is in the bosom of the Father, the same hath declared him. It is the prerogative of the Christian revelation to bring us the most noble, the most august and agreeable account of the blessed God, such as is most suitable to the light of reason and what is demonstrable thereby, most suitable to the magnificence of his works round about us, and to the nature and office of him that is the supreme administrator, governor, and judge of the world. What more (relating to and comprehensive of all such perfection) could be included in one word than in this, God is light, and in him is no darkness at all? Then,

II. There is a just conclusion to be drawn from this message and report, and that for the consideration and conviction of professors of religion, or professed entertainers of this gospel. This conclusion issues into two branches: - 1. For the conviction of such professors as have no true fellowship with God: If we say we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth. It is known that to walk, in scripture account, is to order and frame the course and actions of the moral life, that is, of the life so far as it is capable of subjection to the divine law. To walk in darkness is to live and act according to such ignorance, error, and erroneous practice, as are contrary to the fundamental dictates of our holy religion. Now there may be those who may pretend to great attainments and enjoyments in religion; they may profess to have communion with God; and yet their lives may be irreligious, immoral, and impure. To such the apostle would not fear to give the lie: They lie, and do not the truth. They belie God; for he holds no heavenly fellowship or intercourse with unholy souls. What communion hath light with darkness? They belie themselves, or lie concerning themselves; for they have no such communications from God nor accesses to him. There is no truth in their profession nor in their practice, or their practice gives their profession and pretences the lie, and demonstrates the folly and falsehood of them. 2. For the conviction and consequent satisfaction of those that are near to God: But, if we walk in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. As the blessed God is the eternal boundless light, and the Mediator is, from him, the light of the world, so the Christian institution is the great luminary that appears in our sphere, and shines here below. A conformity to this in spirit and practice demonstrates fellowship or communion with God. Those that so walk show that they know God, that they have received of the Spirit of God, and that the divine impress or image is stamped upon their souls. Then we have fellowship one with another, they with us and we with them, and both with God, in his blessed or beatific communications to us. And this is one of those beatific communications to us - that his Son's blood or death is applied or imputed to us: The blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. The eternal life, the eternal Son, hath put on flesh and blood, and so became Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ hath shed his blood for us, or died to wash us from our sins in his own blood. His blood applied to us discharges us from the guilt of all sin, both original and actual, inherent and committed: and so far we stand righteous in his sight; and not only so, but his blood procures for us those sacred influences by which sin is to be subdued more and more, till it is quite abolished, Gal 3:13, Gal 3:14.

Matthew Henry: 1Jo 1:8-10

Here, I. The apostle, having supposed that even those of this heavenly communion have yet their sin, proceeds here to justify that supposition, and this he does by showing the dreadful consequences of denying it, and that in two particulars: - 1. If we say, We have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us, 1Jo 1:8. We must beware of deceiving ourselves in denying or excusing our sins. The more we see them the more we shall esteem and value the remedy. If we deny them, the truth is not in us, either the truth that is contrary to such denial (we lie in denying our sin), or the truth of religion, is not in us. The Christian religion is the religion of sinners, of such as have sinned, and in whom sin in some measure still dwells. The Christian life is a life of continued repentance, humiliation for and mortification of sin, of continual faith in, thankfulness for, and love to the Redeemer, and hopeful joyful expectation of a day of glorious redemption, in which the believer shall be fully and finally acquitted, and sin abolished for ever. 2. If we say, We have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us, 1Jo 1:10. The denial of our sin not only deceives ourselves, but reflects dishonour upon God. It challenges his veracity. He has abundantly testified of, and testified against, the sin of the world. And the Lord said in his heart (determined thus with himself), I will not again curse the ground (as he had then lately done) for man's sake; for (or, with the learned bishop Patrick, though ) the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth, Gen 8:21. But God has given his testimony to the continued sin and sinfulness of the world, by providing a sufficient effectual sacrifice for sin, that will be needed in all ages, and to the continued sinfulness of believers themselves by requiring them continually to confess their sins, and apply themselves by faith to the blood of that sacrifice. And therefore, if we say either that we have not sinned or do not yet sin, the word of God is not in us, neither in our minds, as to the acquaintance we should have with it, nor in our hearts, as to the practical influence it should have upon us.

II. The apostle then instructs the believer in the way to the continued pardon of his sin. Here we have, 1. His duty in order thereto: If we confess our sins, 1Jo 1:9. Penitent confession and acknowledgment of sin are the believer's business, and the means of his deliverance from his guilt. And, 2. His encouragement thereto, and assurance of the happy issue. This is the veracity, righteousness, and clemency of God, to whom he makes such confession: He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness, 1Jo 1:9. God is faithful to his covenant and word, wherein he has promised forgiveness to penitent believing confessors. He is just to himself and his glory who has provided such a sacrifice, by which his righteousness is declared in the justification of sinners. He is just to his Son who has not only sent him for such service, but promised to him that those who come through him shall be forgiven on his account. By his knowledge (by the believing apprehension of him) shall my righteous servant justify many, Isa 53:11. He is clement and gracious also, and so will forgive, to the contrite confessor, all his sins, cleanse him from the guilt of all unrighteousness, and in due time deliver him from the power and practice of it.

Matthew Henry: 1Jo 2:1-2

These verses relate to the concluding subject of the foregoing chapter, in which the apostle proceeds upon the supposition of the real Christian's sin. And here he gives them both dissuasion and support.

1. Dissuasion. He would leave no room for sin: " My little children, these things write I unto you, that you sin not, 1Jo 2:1. The design or purport of this letter, the design of what I have just said concerning communion with God and the overthrow of it by an irreligious course, is to dissuade and drive you from sin."See the familiar affectionate compellation with which he introduces his admonition: My little children, children as having perhaps been begotten by his gospel, little children as being much beneath him in age and experience, my little children, as being dear to him in the bonds of the gospel. Certainly the gospel most prevailed where and when such ministerial love most abounded. Or perhaps the judicious reader will find reason to think that the apostle's meaning in this dissuasion or caution is this, or amounts to this reading: These things write I unto you, not that you sin. And so the words will look back to what he had said before concerning the assured pardon of sin: God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, etc., 1Jo 1:9. And so the words are a preclusion of all abuse of such favour and indulgence. "Though sins will be forgiven to penitent confessors, yet this I write, not to encourage you in sin, but upon another account."Or this clause will look forward to what the apostle is going to say about the Advocate for sinners: and so it is a prolepsis, a prevention of like mistake or abuse: " These things write I unto you, not that you sin, but that you may see your remedy for sin."And so the following particle (as the learned know) may be rendered adversatively: But, if a man sin, he may know his help and cure. And so we see,

II. The believer's support and relief in case of sin: And ( or but ) if any man sin (any of us, or of our foresaid communion), We have we an Advocate with the Father, etc., 1Jo 2:1. Believers themselves, those that are advanced to a happy gospel-state, have yet their sins. There is a great distinction therefore between the sinners that are in the world. There are Christianized (such as are instated in the sacred saving privileges of Christ's mystical or spiritual body) and unchristianized, converted and unconverted sinners. There are some who, though they really sin, yet, in comparison with others, are said not to sin, as 1Jo 3:9. Believers, as they have an atonement applied unto them at their entrance into a state of pardon and justification, so they have an Advocate in heaven still to continue to them that state, and procure their continued forgiveness. And this must be the support, satisfaction, and refuge of believers (or real Christians) in or upon their sins: We have an Advocate. The original name is sometimes given to the Holy Ghost, and then it is rendered, the Comforter. He acts within us; he puts pleas and arguments into our hearts and mouths; and so is our advocate, by teaching us to intercede for ourselves. But here is an advocate without us, in heaven and with the Father. The proper office and business of an advocate is with the judge; with him he pleads the client's cause. The Judge with whom our advocate pleads is the Father, his Father and ours. He who was our Judge in the legal court (the court of the violated law) is our Father in the gospel court, the court of heaven and of grace. His throne or tribunal is the mercy-seat. And he that is our Father is also our Judge, the supreme arbitrator of our state and circumstances, either for life or death, for time or eternity. You have come - to God, the Judge of all, Heb 12:23. That believers may be encouraged to hope that their cause will go well, as their Judge is represented to them in the relation of a Father, so their advocate is recommended to them upon these considerations: - 1. By his person and personal names. It is Jesus Christ the Son of the Father, one anointed by the Father for the whole office of mediation, the whole work of salvation, and consequently for that of the intercessor or advocate. 2. By his qualification for the office. It is Jesus Christ the righteous, the righteous one in the court and sight of the Judge. This is not so necessary in another advocate. Another advocate (or an advocate in another court) may be an unjust person himself, and yet may have a just cause (and the cause of a just person in that case) to plead, and may accordingly carry his cause. But here the clients are guilty; their innocence and legal righteousness cannot be pleaded; their sin must be confessed or supposed. It is the advocate's own righteousness that he must plead for the criminals. He has been righteous to the death, righteous for them; he has brought in everlasting righteousness. This the Judge will not deny. Upon this score he pleads, that the clients' sins may not be imputed to them. 3. By the plea he has to make, the ground and basis of his advocacy: And he is the propitiation for our sins, 1Jo 2:2. He is the expiatory victim, the propitiatory sacrifice that has been offered to the Judge for all our offences against his majesty, and law, and government. In vain do the professors of Rome distinguish between and advocate of redemption and an advocate of intercession, or a mediator of such different service. The Mediator of intercession, the Advocate for us, is the Mediator of redemption, the propitiation for our sins. It is his propitiation that he pleads. And we might be apt to suppose that his blood had lost its value and efficacy if no mention had been made of it in heaven since the time it was shed. But now we see it is of esteem there, since it is continually represented in the intercession of the great advocate (the attorney-general) for the church of God. He ever lives to make intercession for those that come to God through him. 4. By the extent of his plea, the latitude of his propitiation. It is not confined to one nation; and not particularly to the ancient Israel of God: He is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only (not only for the sins of us Jews, us that are Abraham's seed according to the flesh), but also for those of the whole world (1Jo 2:2); not only for the past, or us present believers, but for the sins of all who shall hereafter believe on him or come to God through him. The extent and intent of the Mediator's death reach to all tribes, nations, and countries. As he is the only, so he is the universal atonement and propitiation for all that are saved and brought home to God, and to his favour and forgiveness.

Barclay: 1Jo 1:5

A man's own character will necessarily be determined by the character of the god whom he worships; and, therefore, John begins by laying down the nature of the God and Father of Jesus Christ whom Christians worship. God, he says, is light, and there is no darkness in him. What does this statement tell us about God?

(i) It tells us that he is splendour and glory. There is nothing so glorious as a blaze of light piercing the darkness. To say that God is light tells us of his sheer splendour.

(ii) It tells us that God is self-revealing. Above all things light is seen; and it illumines the darkness round about it. To say that God is light is to say that there is nothing secretive or furtive about him. He wishes to be seen and to be known by men.

(iii) It tells us of God's purity and holiness. There is none of the darkness which cloaks hidden evil in God. That he is light speaks to us of his white purity and stainless holiness.

(iv) It tells us of the guidance of God. It is one of the great functions of light to show the way. The road that is lit is the road that is plain. To say that God is light is to say that he offers his guidance for the footsteps of men.

(v) It tells us of the revealing quality in the presence of God. Light is the great revealer. Flaws and stains which are hidden in the shade are obvious in the light. Light reveals the imperfections in any piece of workmanship or material. So the imperfections of life are seen in the presence of God. Whittier wrote:

"Our thoughts lie open to thy sight;

And naked to thy glance;

Our secret sins are in the light

Of thy pure countenance."

We can never know either the depth to which life has fallen or the height to which it may rise until we see it in the revealing light of God.

Barclay: 1Jo 1:5

In God, says John, there is no darkness at all. Throughout the New Testament darkness stands for the very opposite of the Christian life.

(i) Darkness stands for the Christless life. It represents the life that a man lived before he met Christ or the life that he lives if he strays away from him. John writes to his people that, now that Christ has come, the darkness is past and the true light shines (1Jo 2:8). Paul writes to his Christian friends that once they were darkness but now they are light in the Lord (Eph 5:8). God has delivered us from the power of darkness and brought us into the Kingdom of his dear Son (Col 1:13). Christians are not in darkness, for they are children of the day (1Th 5:4-5). Those who follow Christ shall not walk in darkness, as others must, but they will have the light of life (Joh 8:12). God has called the Christians out of darkness into his marvellous light (1Pe 2:9).

(ii) The dark is hostile to the light. In the prologue to his gospel John writes that the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it (Joh 1:5). It is a picture of the darkness seeking to obliterate the light--but unable to overpower it. The dark and the light are natural enemies.

(iii) The darkness stands for the ignorance of life apart from Christ. Jesus summons his friends to walk in the light lest the darkness come upon them, for the man who walks in the darkness does not know where he is going (Joh 12:35). Jesus is the light, and he has come that those who believe in him should not walk in darkness (Joh 12:46). The dark stands for the essential lostness of life without Christ.

(iv) The darkness stands for the chaos of life without God. God, says Paul, thinking of the first act of creation, commanded his light to shine out of the darkness (2Co 4:6). Without God's light the world is a chaos, in which life has neither order nor sense.

(v) The darkness stands for the immorality of the Christless life. It is Paul's appeal to men that they should cast off the works of darkness (Rom 13:12). Men, because their deeds were evil, loved the darkness rather than the light (Joh 3:19). The darkness stands for the way that the Christless life is filled with things which seek the shadows because they cannot stand the light.

(vi) The darkness is characteristically unfruitful. Paul speaks of the unfruitful works of darkness (Eph 5:11). If growing things are despoiled of the light, their growth is arrested. The darkness is the Christless atmosphere in which no fruit of the Spirit will ever grow.

(vii) The darkness is connected with lovelessness and hate. If a man hates his brother, it is a sign that he walks in darkness (1Jo 2:9-11). Love is sunshine and hatred is the dark.

(viii) The dark is the abode of the enemies of Christ and the final goal of those who will not accept him. The struggle of the Christian and of Christ is against the hostile rulers of the darkness of this world (Eph 6:12). Consistent and rebellious sinners are those for whom the mist of darkness is reserved (2Pe 2:9; Jd 13 ). The darkness is the life which is separated from God.

Barclay: 1Jo 1:6-7

Here John is writing to counteract one heretical way of thought. There were those who claimed to be specially intellectually and spiritually advanced, but whose lives showed no sign of it. They claimed to have advanced so far along the road of knowledge and of spirituality that for them sin had ceased to matter and the laws had ceased to exist. Napoleon once said that laws were made for ordinary people, but were never meant for the like of him. So these heretics claimed to be so far on that, even if they did sin, it was of no importance whatsoever. In later days Clement of Alexandria tells us that there were heretics who said that it made no difference how a man lived. Irenaeus tells us that they declared that a truly spiritual man was quite incapable of ever incurring any pollution, no matter what kind of deeds he did.

In answer John insists on certain things.

(i) He insists that to have fellowship with the God who is light a man must walk in the light and that, if he is still walking in the moral and ethical darkness of the Christless life, he can not have that fellowship. This is precisely what the Old Testament had said centuries before. God said, "You shall be holy; for I the Lord your God am Holy" (Lev 19:2; compare Lev 20:7; Lev 20:26). He who would find fellowship with God is committed to a life of goodness which reflects God's goodness. C. H. Dodd writes: "The Church is a society of people who, believing in a God of pure goodness, accept the obligation to be good like him." This does not mean that a man must be perfect before he can have fellowship with God; if that were the case, all of us would be shut out. But it does mean that he will spend his whole life in the awareness of his obligations, in the effort to fulfil them and in penitence when he fails. It will mean that he will never think that sin does not matter; it will mean that the nearer he comes to God, the more terrible sin will be to him.

(ii) He insists that these mistaken thinkers have the wrong idea of truth. He says that, if people who claim to be specially advanced still walk in darkness, they are not doing the truth. Exactly the same phrase is used in the Fourth Gospel, when it speaks of him, who does the truth (Joh 3:21). This means that for the Christian truth is never only intellectual; it is always moral. It is not something which exercises only the mind; it is something which exercises the whole personality. Truth is not only the discovery of abstract things; it is concrete living. It is not only thinking; it is also acting. The words which the New Testament uses along with truth are significant. It speaks of obeying the truth (Rom 2:8; Gal 3:7); following the truth (Gal 2:14; 3Jo 1:4); of opposing the truth (2Ti 3:8); of wandering from the truth (Jam 5:19). There is such a thing as might be called "discussion circle Christianity." It is possible to look on Christianity as a series of intellectual problems to be solved and on the Bible as a book about which illuminating information is to be amassed. But Christianity is something to be followed and the Bible a book to be obeyed. It is possible for intellectual eminence and moral failure to go hand in hand. For the Christian the truth is something first to be discovered and then to be obeyed.

Barclay: 1Jo 1:6-7

As John sees it, there are two great tests of truth.

(i) Truth is the creator of fellowship. If men are really walking in the light, they have fellowship one with another. No belief can be fully Christian if it separates a man from his fellow-men. No Church can be exclusive and still be the Church of Christ. That which destroys fellowship cannot be true.

(ii) He who really knows the truth is daily more and more cleansed from sin by the blood of Jesus. The Revised Standard Version is correct enough here but it can very easily be misunderstood. It runs: "The blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin." That can be read as a statement of a general principle. But it is a statement of what ought to be happening in the individual life. The meaning is that all the time, day by day, constantly and consistently, the blood of Jesus Christ ought to be carrying out a cleansing process in the life of the individual Christian.

The Greek for to cleanse is katharizein (2511) which was originally a ritual word, describing the ceremonies and washings and so on which qualified a man to approach his gods. But the word, as religion developed, came to have a moral sense; and it describes the goodness which enables a man to enter into the presence of God. So what John is saying is, "If you really know what the sacrifice of Christ has done and are really experiencing its power, day by day you will be adding holiness to your life and becoming more fit to enter the presence of God."

Here indeed is a great conception. It looks on the sacrifice of Christ as something which not only atones for past sin but equips a man in holiness day by day.

True religion is that by which every day a man comes closer to his fellow-men and closer to God. It produces fellowship with God and fellowship with men--and we can never have the one without the other.

Barclay: 1Jo 1:6-7

Four times in his letter John bluntly accuses the false teachers of being liars; and the first of these occasions is in this present passage.

(i) Those who claim to have fellowship with the God who is altogether light and who yet walk in the dark are lying (1Jo 1:6). A little later he repeats this charge in a slightly different way. The man who says that he knows God and yet does not keep God's commandments is a liar (1Jo 2:4). John is laying down the blunt truth that the man who says one thing with his lips and another thing with his life is a liar. He is not thinking of the man who tries his hardest and yet often fails. "A man," said H. G. Wells, "may be a very bad musician, and may yet be passionately in love with music"; and a man may be very conscious of his failures and yet be passionately in love with Christ and the way of Christ. John is thinking of the man who makes the highest possible claims to knowledge, to intellectual eminence and to spirituality, and who yet allows himself things which he well knows are forbidden. The man who professes to love Christ and deliberately disobeys him, is guilty of a lie.

(ii) The man who denies that Jesus is the Christ is a liar (1Jo 2:22). Here is something which runs through the whole New Testament. The ultimate test of any man is his reaction to Jesus. The ultimate question which Jesus asks every man is: "Who do you say that I am?" (Mat 16:13). A man confronted with Christ cannot but see the greatness that is there; and, if he denies it, he is a liar.

(iii) The man who says that he loves God and at the same time hates his brother is a liar (1Jo 4:20). Love of God and hatred of man cannot exist in the same person. If there is bitterness in a man's heart towards any other, that is proof that he does not really love God. All our protestations of love to God are useless if there is hatred in our hearts towards any man.

Barclay: 1Jo 1:8-10

In this passage John describes and condemns two further mistaken ways of thought.

(i) There is the man who says that he has no sin. That may mean either of two things.

It may describe the man who says that he has no responsibility for his sin. It is easy enough to find defences behind which to seek to hide. We may blame our sins on our heredity, on our environment, on our temperament, on our physical condition. We may claim that someone misled us and that we were led astray. It is characteristic of us all that we seek to shuffle out of the responsibility for sin. Or it may describe the man who claims that he can sin and take no harm.

It is John's insistence that, when a man has sinned, excuses and self-justifications are irrelevant. The only thing which will meet the situation is humble and penitent confession to God and, if need be, to men.

Then John says a surprising thing. He says that we can depend on God in his righteousness to forgive us if we confess our sins. On the face of it, we might well have thought that God in his righteousness would have been much more likely to condemn than to forgive. But the point is that God, because he is righteous, never breaks his word; and Scripture is full of the promise of mercy to the man who comes to him with penitent heart. God has promised that he will never despise the contrite heart and he will not break his word. If we humbly and sorrowfully confess our sins, he will forgive. The very fact of making excuses and seeking for self-justification debars us from forgiveness, because it debars us from penitence; the very fact of humble confession opens the door to forgiveness, for the man with the penitent heart can claim the promises of God.

(ii) There is the man who says that he has not in fact sinned. That attitude is not nearly so uncommon as we might think. Any number of people do not really believe that they have sinned and rather resent being called sinners. Their mistake is that they think of sin as the kind of thing which gets into the newspapers. They forget that sin is hamartia (266) which literally means a missing of the target. To fail to be as good a father, mother, wife, husband, son, daughter, workman, person as we might be is to sin; and that includes us all.

In any event the man who says that he has not sinned is in effect doing nothing less than calling God a liar, for God has said that all have sinned.

So John condemns the man who claims that he is so far advanced in knowledge and in the spiritual life that sin for him has ceased to matter; he condemns the man who evades the responsibility for his sin or who holds that sin has no effect upon him; he condemns the man who has never even realized that he is a sinner. The essence of the Christian life is first to realize our sin; and then to go to God for that forgiveness which can wipe out the past and for that cleansing which can make the future new.

Barclay: 1Jo 2:1-2

The first thing to note in this passage is the sheer affection in it. John begins with the address, "My little children." Both in Latin and in Greek diminutives carry a special affection. They are words which are used, as it were, with a caress. John is a very old man; he must be, in fact, the last survivor of his generation, maybe the last man alive who had walked and talked with Jesus in the days of his flesh. So often age gets out of sympathy with youth and acquires even an impatient irritableness with the new and laxer ways of the younger generation. But not John, in his old age he has nothing but tenderness for those who are his little children in the faith. He is writing to tell them that they must not sin but he does not scold. There is no cutting edge in his voice; he seeks to love them into goodness. In this opening address there is the yearning, affectionate tenderness of a pastor for people whom he has known for long in all their wayward foolishness and still loves.

His object in writing is that they may not sin. There is a two-fold connection of thought here--with what has gone before and with what comes afterwards. There is a two-fold danger that they may indeed think lightly of sin.

John says two things about sin. First, he has just said that sin is universal; anyone who says that he has not sinned is a liar. Second, there is forgiveness of sins through what Jesus Christ has done, and still does, for men. Now it would be possible to use both these statements as an excuse to think lightly of sin. If all have sinned, why make a fuss about it and what is the use of struggling against something which is in any event an inevitable part of the human situation? Again, if there is forgiveness of sins, why worry about it?

In face of that, John, as Westcott points out, has two things to say.

First, the Christian is one who has come to know God; and the inevitable accompaniment of knowledge must be obedience. We shall return to this more fully; but at the moment we note that to know God and to obey God must, as John sees it, be twin parts of the same experience.

Second, the man who claims that he abides in God (1Jo 2:6) and in Jesus Christ must live the same kind of life as Jesus lived. That is to say, union with Christ necessarily involves imitation of Christ.

So John lays down his two great ethical principles; knowledge involves obedience, and union involves imitation. Therefore, in the Christian life there can never be any inducement to think lightly of sin.

Barclay: 1Jo 2:1-2

It will take us some considerable time to deal with these two verses for there are hardly any other two in the New Testament which so succinctly set out the work of Christ.

Let us first set out the problem. It is clear that Christianity is an ethical religion; that is what John is concerned to stress. But it is also clear that man is so often an ethical failure. Confronted with the demands of God, he admits them and accepts them--and then fails to keep them. Here, then, there is a barrier erected between man and God. How can man, the sinner, ever enter into the presence of God, the all-holy? That problem is solved in Jesus Christ. And in this passage John uses two great words about Jesus Christ which we must study, not simply to acquire intellectual knowledge but to understand and so to enter into the benefits of Christ.

He calls Jesus Christ our Advocate with the Father. The word is parakletos (3875) which in the Fourth Gospel the King James Version translates Comforter. It is so great a word and has behind it so great a thought that we must examine it in detail. Parakletos (3875) comes from the verb parakalein (3870). There are occasions when parakalein (3870) means to comfort. It is, for instance, used with that meaning in Gen 37:35, where it is said that all Jacob's sons and daughters rose up to comfort him at the loss of Joseph; in Isa 61:2, where it is said that the function of the prophet is to comfort all that mourn; and in Mat 5:4, where it is said that those who mourn will be comforted.

But that is neither the commonest nor the most literal sense of parakalein (3870); its commonest sense is to call someone to one's side in order to use him in some way as a helper and a counsellor. In ordinary Greek that is a very common usage. Xenophon (Anabasis 1.6.5) tells how Cyrus summoned (parakalein, 3870) Clearchos into his tent to be his counsellor, for Clearchos was a man held in the highest honour by Cyrus and by the Greeks. Aeschines, the Greek orator, protests against his opponents calling in Demosthenes, his great rival, and says: "Why need you call Demosthenes to your support? To do so is to call in a rascally rhetorician to cheat the ears of the jury" (Against Ctesiphon 200).

Parakletos (3875) itself is a word which is passive in form and literally means someone who is called to one's side; but since it is always the reason for the calling in that is uppermost in the mind, the word, although passive in form, has an active sense, and comes to mean a helper, a supporter and. above all, a witness in someone's favour, an advocate in someone's defence. It too is a common word in ordinary secular Greek. Demosthenes (De Fals. Leg. 1) speaks of the importunities and the party spirit of advocates (parakletoi, 3875) serving the ends of private ambition instead of public good. Diogenes Laertius (4: 50) tells of a caustic saying of the philosopher Bion. A very talkative person sought his help in some matter. Bion said, "I will do what you want, if you will only send someone to me to plead your case (i.e., send a parakletos, 3875), and stay away yourself." When Philo is telling the story of Joseph and his brethren, he says that, when Joseph forgave them for the wrong that they had done him, he said, "I offer you an amnesty for all that you did to me; you need no other parakletos (3875)" (Life of Joseph 40). Philo tells how the Jews of Alexandria were being oppressed by a certain governor and determined to take their case to the emperor. "We must find," they said, "a more powerful parakletos (3875) by whom the Emperor Gaius will be brought to a favourable disposition towards us" (Leg. in Flacc. 968 B).

So common was this word that it came into other languages just as it stood. In the New Testament itself the Syriac, Egyptian, Arabic, and Ethiopic versions all keep the word parakletos (3875) just as it stands. The Jews especially adopted the word and used it in this sense of advocate, someone to plead one's cause. They used it as the opposite of the word accuser and the Rabbis had this saying about what would happen in the day of God's judgment. "The man who keeps one commandment of the Law has gotten to himself one parakletos (3875); the man who breaks one commandment of the Law has gotten to himself one accuser." They said, "If a man is summoned to court on a capital charge, he needs powerful parakletoi (3875) (the plural of the word) to save him; repentance and good works are his parakletoi (3975) in the judgment of God." "All the righteousness and mercy which an Israelite does in this world are great peace and great parakletoi (3875) between him and his father in heaven." They said that the sin-offering is a man's parakletos (3875) before God.

So the word came into the Christian vocabulary. In the days of the persecutions and the martyrs, a Christian pleader called Vettius Epagathos ably pled the case of those who were accused of being Christians. "He was an advocate (parakletos, 3875) for the Christians, for he had the Advocate within himself, even the Spirit" (Eusebius: The Ecclesiastical History,, 5: 1). The Letter of Barnabas (20) speaks of evil men who are the advocates of the wealthy and the unjust judges of the poor. The writer of Second Clement asks: "Who shall be your parakletos (3875) if it be not clear that your works are righteous and holy?" (2 Clement 6: 9).

A parakletos (3875) has been defined as "one who lends his presence to his friends." More than once in the New Testament there is this great conception of Jesus as the friend and the defender of man. In a military court-martial the officer who defends the soldier under accusation is called the prisoner's friend. Jesus is our friend. Paul writes of that Christ who is at the right hand of God and "who intercedes for us" (Rom 8:34). The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews speaks of Jesus Christ as the one who "ever lives to make intercession" for men (Heb 7:25); and he also speaks of him as "appearing in the presence of God for us" (Heb 9:24).

The tremendous thing about Jesus is that he has never lost his interest in, or his love for, men. We are not to think of him as having gone through his life upon the earth and his death upon the Cross, and then being finished with men. He still bears his concern for us upon his heart; he still pleads for us; Jesus Christ is the prisoner's friend for all.

Barclay: 1Jo 2:1-2

John goes on to say that Jesus is the propitiation for our sins. The word is hilasmos (2434). This is a more difficult picture for us fully to grasp. The picture of the advocate is universal for all men have experience of a friend coming to their aid; but the picture in propitiation is from sacrifice and is more natural to the Jewish mind than to ours. To understand it we must get at the basic ideas behind it.

The great aim of all religion is fellowship with God, to know him as friend and to enter with joy, and not fear, into his presence. It therefore follows that the supreme problem of religion is sin, for it is sin that interrupts fellowship with God. It is to meet that problem that all sacrifice arises. By sacrifice fellowship with God is restored. So the Jews offered, night and morning, the sin-offering in the Temple. That was the offering, not for any particular sin but for man as a sinner; and so long as the Temple lasted it was made to God in the morning and in the evening. The Jews also offered their trespass-offerings to God; these were the offerings for particular sins. The Jews had their Day, of Atonement, whose ritual was designed to atone for all sins, known and unknown. It is with that background that we must come at this picture of propitiation.

As we have said, the Greek word for propitiation is hilasmos (2434), and the corresponding verb is hilaskesthai (2433). This verb has three meanings. (i) When it is used with a man as the subject, it means to placate or to pacify, someone who has been injured or offended, and especially to placate a god. It is to bring a sacrifice or to perform a ritual whereby a god, offended by sin, is placated. (ii) If the subject is God, the verb means to forgive, for then the meaning is that God himself provides the means whereby the lost relationship between him and men is restored. (iii) The third meaning is allied with the first. The verb often means to perform some deed, by which the taint of guilt is removed. A man sins; at once he acquires the taint of sin; he needs something, which, to use C. H. Dodd's metaphor, will disinfect him from that taint and enable him once again to enter into the presence of God. In that sense hilaskesthai (2433) means, not to propitiate but to expiate, not so much to pacify God as to disinfect man from the taint of sin and thereby fit him again to enter into fellowship with God.

When John says that Jesus is the hilasmos (2434) for our sins, he is, we think, bringing all these different senses into one. Jesus is the person through whom guilt for past sin and defilement from present sin are removed. The great basic truth behind this word is that it is through Jesus Christ that man's fellowship with God is first restored and then maintained.

We note one other thing. As John sees it, this work of Jesus was carried out not only for us but for the whole world. There is in the New Testament a strong line of thought in which the universality of the salvation of God is stressed. God so loved the world that he sent his son (Joh 3:16). Jesus is confident that, if he is lifted up, he will draw all men to him (Joh 12:32). God will have all men to be saved (1Ti 2:4). He would be a bold man who would set limits to the grace and love of God or to the effectiveness of the work and sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Truly the love of God is broader than the measures of man's mind; and in the New Testament itself there are hints of a salvation whose arms are as wide as the world.

Constable: 1Jo 1:5--3:1

II. Living in the light 1:5--2:29

"The teaching of 1 John is concerned essentially with the conditions for true Christian discipleship. The two main divisions of the letter set out these conditions and exhort the readers to live in the light (1:5-2:29) as children of God (3:1-5:13)."²⁷

John began his exposition of how his readers could enjoy fellowship with God by introducing the concept of God as light (1:5-7) and then explaining with four conditions what fellowship with God requires (1:8-2:29).

Constable: 1Jo 1:5-7

A. God as Light 1:5-7

John began his explanation of what it means to live in the light by emphasizing that God is light.

1:5 This verse provides a basis for what follows in verses 6-10. It gives the standard against which the three following Christian professions fall short.

The "message" is the truth that Jesus Christ, the first "Him," revealed to the apostolic eyewitnesses.

The figure of light that John used to describe God emphasizes His ability to reveal and His ability to deal with what the light of His holiness reveals (cf. John 1:4-5, 7-9; 3:19-21; 8:12; 9:5; 1:35-36, 46; Rev. 21:23).²⁸ God exposes and condemns sin (called "darkness" in John 1:5; 3:19; 12:35 [twice], and in 1 John 1:5-6; 2:8-9, 11 [twice]). The light figure emphasizes these qualities in God: His splendor and glory, His truthfulness, His purity, His self-communicative nature (cf. Ps. 27:1; 36:9; Isa. 49:6; John 1:9), His empowering activity (cf. John 8:12; 12:35; Eph. 5:8-14), and His right to demand (cf. John 3:19-21).²⁹ The light-darkness motif was common in both the Hellenistic and Jewish thought life of John's day and culture.³⁰ For John these concepts were mainly ethical (cf. Eph. 5:8-14).³¹

"Whatever other qualities this metaphorical designation may include, it clearly involves the intellectual and moral--enlightenment and holiness. Just as light reveals and purifies, so by His very nature God illuminates and purifies those who come to Him. His nature determines the conditions for fellowship with Him."³²

"As darkness has no place in God, so all that is of the darkness is excluded from having fellowship with God."³³

John frequently emphasized his propositions by restating them in a negative form, as he did here.

1:6 John may have used the "If we claim" phrase in verses 6, 8, and 10 to voice the teaching of false teachers.³⁴

"It is probable that these claims were real statements made by people in the church to which John was writing, and that they reflect the outlook of the people who were causing trouble in the church."³⁵

John's reminder here is that the Christian who claims to have fellowship with God who is light (holiness) but disobeys Him is lying. A practicing sinner cannot have close fellowship with a holy God, though he can have a relationship with God (i.e., be a true Christian). God revealed this truth throughout Scripture. Action was a very important part of knowledge for John, and it must be for us as well (cf. James).

The Greek word translated "fellowship" (koinonia) here means sharing by two or more parties. It does not refer to sharing salvation.³⁶ John earlier said his aim was that his readers, who were Christians (2:12-14, 21, 27), should enjoy fellowship with the apostolic eyewitnesses that they did not then share (v. 3).

". . . all true fellowship' is predicated on apostolic doctrine."³⁷

1:7 Walking in the light means walking according to the light. The idea is more where we walk than how we walk. Had John said "according to" the light rather than "in" the light, he would have been requiring sinless perfection for fellowship with God. We must be open and responsive to the light that we have, which increases as we grow in our knowledge of God's will.

"One another" evidently means God and us rather than our fellow believers and us in view of the context. We share the light in which God dwells. Another view is that John meant that we cannot enjoy fellowship with God if we neglect fellowship with other Christians.³⁸

Two things are equally true of believers who walk in the light according to this verse: we enjoy fellowship with God, and we are experiencing cleansing from every sin.

"This ["every sin"] refers to man's sinful nature in general, although it may include the wrong acts which can occur even when a Christian is living in the light.'"³⁹

"The thought is not of the forgiveness of sin only, but of the removal of sin. The sin is done away; and the purifying action is exerted continuously."⁴⁰

God cleanses us at conversion in the sense that He will never bring us into condemnation for our sins. However, we need continual cleansing from the defilement that daily living brings because it hinders our fellowship with God (cf. John 13:10). The "blood of Jesus" is a metonymy for the death of Jesus.⁴¹

"What John has in mind here is the cleansing of the conscience from guilt and moral defilement which is so insisted on in the Epistle to the Hebrews (Heb. 9:14; 10:2, 22), and which takes a leading place among the saving benefits of the redemptive self-sacrifice of Christ."⁴²

Constable: 1Jo 1:8--3:1

B. Conditions for living in the light 1:8-2:29

John articulated four fundamental principles that underlie fellowship with God to facilitate his readers' experience of that fellowship. One must renounce sin (1:8-2:2), obey God (2:3-11), reject worldliness (2:12-17), and keep the faith (2:18-29) to live in the light of God's presence.

"If the readers are to have fellowship with the Father and with the Son (v. 3), they must understand what makes this possible. They must know who God is in himself and, consequently, who they are in themselves as creatures of God. So the author first describes the moral character of God in terms of light (v. 5) and then goes on to deny three claims made by those who falsely boast of their knowledge and fellowship with God. The false positions are (1) moral behavior is a matter of indifference in one's relationship to God (v. 6); (2) immoral conduct does not issue in sin for one who knows God (v. 8); and (3) the knowledge of God removes sin as even a possibility in the life of the believer (v. 10). True tests' or evidence of fellowship with God or walking in the light are (1) fellowship with one another (v. 7), with subsequent cleansing by the blood of Christ; (2) confession of sin, (v. 9) which brings both forgiveness and cleansing; and (3) trusting that if we sin we have Jesus Christ as an advocate and sacrifice for our sins (2:2)."⁴³

"It would be difficult to find any single passage of Scripture more crucial and fundamental to daily Christian living than 1 John 1:5-10. For here, in a few brief verses, the disciple whom Jesus loved' has laid down for us the basic principles which underlie a vital walk with God."⁴⁴

Constable: 1Jo 1:8--2:3

1. Renouncing sin 1:8-2:2

John continued a structural pattern that he established in the previous section (vv. 6-7) in which he used pairs of clauses to present a false assertion followed by his correction.

1:8 This second claim (cf. v. 6) is more serious, and its results are worse: we do not just lie, but we deceive ourselves.

If a Christian claims to be experiencing fellowship with God, he may think he is temporarily or permanently entirely sinless. Our sinfulness exceeds our consciousness of guilt. We have only a very limited appreciation of the extent to which we sin. We commit sins of thought as well as deed, sins of omission as well as commission, and sins of nature as well as action.

Some have interpreted the phrase "no sin" to mean no sin nature or no sin principle.⁴⁵ However this seems out of harmony with John's other uses of "to have sin" (cf. John 15:22, 24; 19:11). Rather, it probably means to have no guilt for sin.⁴⁶

God's truth as Scripture reveals it does not have a full hold on us if we make this claim. "In us" suggests not that we have the facts in our mental grasp but that they have control over us. They are in us as a thread is in a piece of cloth rather than as a coin is in a pocket. The same contrast exists between intellectual assent and saving faith.

1:9 This verse is the converse of verse 8. Acknowledging the sins of which we are aware is opposite to saying we are not guilty for sinning. The Greek word translated "confess" (homologemen) literally means to say the same thing. Confessing therefore means saying about our sins what God says about them, namely, that they are indeed sins, offenses against Him, and not just mistakes, blunders, or errors.⁴⁷

"He who confesses and condemns his sins,' says Augustine, already acts with God. God condemns thy sins: if thou also dost condemn them, thou art linked on to God.'"⁴⁸

If we confess our sins, God will then forgive the sins we confess and will in addition cleanse us from all unrighteousness. Consequently we do not need to worry that He has failed to forgive us for sins of which we are unaware! Sin incurs a debt to God, but forgiveness (Gr. aphiemi) cancels the debt and dismisses the charge. Sin also pollutes the sinner, but God's cleansing (katharizo) removes the stain so we can be holy again.

God absolutely promises forgiveness that is consistent with His justice (because Jesus Christ paid the penalty for all our sins).

Some expositors teach that this verse cannot apply to Christians since God has already forgiven Christians and therefore we do not need to ask for what we already have.⁴⁹ This viewpoint fails to distinguish between forensic forgiveness that we receive at conversion and family forgiveness that we need after conversion. For example, a judge could pay his own son's fine in court but then discipline him when they got home. Jesus instructed His believing disciples to ask the Father for forgiveness (Luke 11:14). The fact that God has removed the penalty for our sins at conversion (Eph. 1:7) does not remove the necessity of confessing our sins frequently (cf. Matt. 6:11-12). Again, the issue is not acceptance by God but fellowship with God. Conversion (forensic) forgiveness makes us acceptable as members of God's family. Continual (family) forgiveness enables us to experience intimate fellowship as sons within God's family.

1:10 The false claim here is that what we have done is not really sin. This is the third and most serious charge (cf. vv. 6, 8). It puts God's revelation of sin aside and makes man the authority for what is and what is not sin. This claim says God is wrong in His judgment of man and is therefore a liar. The claimant dismisses His Word as invalid (e.g., Ps. 14:3; Isa. 53:6; John 2:24-25; Rom. 3:23).

Note that each of these three false claims in verses 6, 8, and 10 is a denial of the truth that immediately precedes it in verses 5, 7, and 9 respectively. The corrective to each false claim follows in the verse immediately after it.

Truth	False claim
God is light (v. 5).	We have fellowship with Him (v. 6).
Walking in the light is necessary for fellowship with God (v. 7).	We have no guilt for sin (v. 8).
Confession restores fellowship with God (v. 9).	We have not sinned (v. 10).

"What then is the principle of fellowship with God? Succinctly stated, it is openness to God and full integrity in the light of His Word."⁵⁰

2:1 John's preceding comments on the inevitability of sinful behavior (vv. 6-10) led to his assuring his readers here that he did not want them to sin. Avoidance of sin is important even though it is not entirely possible.

John used the Greek word translated "children" here (teknia) as a family term of endearment. It means "little born ones" (2:12, 28; 3:7, 18; 4:4; 5:21; John 13:33; cf. Gal. 4:19). "My" adds a further note of tenderness. These terms do not require us to conclude that the recipients were necessarily John's personal converts.

"May not sin" does not mean "may never ever sin again." Sinning is inevitable for sinners, even forgiven sinners, but in every instance of temptation there is always the possibility that we will not fall (1 Cor. 10:13). "If" introduces a condition assumed to take place for the sake of the argument (a third class condition in Greek).

As our Advocate (friend in court, or defense attorney) Jesus Christ pleads the cause of the sinning Christian before God the Father (cf. Heb. 7:25). This ministry appears to be broader than simply aiding the sinner after he or she sins. It evidently includes pleading the sinner's cause with the Father whenever that becomes necessary, as when Jesus prayed that Peter's faith would not fail (Luke 22:31-32). Here, however, the emphasis is on Jesus Christ's help after we have sinned. Since Jesus Christ is righteous He is the perfect Advocate with God (cf. Acts 3:14; 7:52).

The Greek word translated "Advocate" is parakleton that transliterated into English is "Paraclete." It means one who gets called to the side of another to help. Jesus used this word four times in the Upper Room Discourse to describe the Holy Spirit (John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7). He called the Holy Spirit another Paraclete like Himself (John 14:16).

"Whereas in the first part of this v[erse] John is anticipating too lenient an attitude toward sin, in the second half he is countering the possibility of too harsh a view."⁵¹

2:2 Jesus Christ did not just make satisfaction for our sins, though He did that. He is the satisfaction Himself. The Septuagint translators used the same Greek word translated "propitiation" here (hilasmos, satisfaction, cf. 4:10) to translate the "mercy seat" on the ark of the covenant. Jesus' body was the site where God placated His wrath against sin. Verses 1:5-2:2 all have Old Testament tabernacle connotations. Jesus' death not only expiated (cleansed) sins, but it satisfied God's wrath against sin.⁵²

This verse provides strong support for the fact that Jesus Christ died for all people (unlimited atonement). In His death the Lord Jesus provided salvation that is sufficient for all, though it is efficient only for those who trust in Him (2 Cor. 5:14-15, 19; Heb. 2:9; Rev. 22:17). "Our" refers to the sins of all believers, and the "whole world" means all humankind, not just the elect (cf. John 1:12; 3:16). Those who hold to "particular redemption" (i.e., that Jesus died only for the elect) limit the meaning of the "whole world" to the world of the elect.

John reminded his readers in this section (1:8-2:2) that fellowship with God is possible only when we deal with sin in our lives. This is true of believers (1:5-2:1) as well as unbelievers (2:2).

College: 1Jo 1:1-10

1 JOHN 1

I. THE WORD OF LIFE (1:1-4)

¹ That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched - this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. ² The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us. ³ We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. ⁴ We write this to make our ^a joy complete.

^a 4 Some manuscripts your

The Greek text of these first four verses is actually only one sentence, which makes it a little more complicated for us in the English text. But John begins this epistle, as well as his Gospel account, in much the same way as does the author of Genesis: with an assumption. He assumes with great assurance that God exists. Genesis begins with the statement "In the beginning God . . . ." John merely asserts the presence of God; he feels no need to prove the existence of Deity. In his Gospel account, he stated, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" (John 1:1). Now he begins this first epistle with the same self-assured faith that God is. And no argument is needed! He does not try to prove that God is. God is! And that is that!

This was John's first proclamation concerning the bodily reality of the Son of God. It is the first of several attacks on the docetic teachers who, because they perceived themselves as spiritually advanced, were claiming that Jesus was never clothed with the physical attributes of humanity. He only seemed to be physical. He was not born, did not die, but He only seemed to. Since this epistle was written to assuage the fears and to build the faith of those who would read it in the light of the Gnostics' teaching about the bodily reality of Jesus, John begins his argument at the outset. John had seen, felt, and touched Jesus; he had talked to him, and had heard him speak. He could testify personally to Christ's reality. This " Word of life" about whom John wrote involves the message of Jesus, and he declares that he was a witness.

1:1 That which was from the beginning,

In this prologue to John's treatise, at least five major ideas stand out as major themes for the book. The first of these is The Word was in the beginning . It was the "Word" of God who actually brought creation into reality. God spoke, and it happened. John begins his epistle with this great truth: That which was from the beginning . He then identifies what was from the beginning as the Word of life . It was also the "eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us." This phenomenal declaration has been identified with the beginning of all things. When one reads the fourth Gospel, it is easy to see the unity of John's entire message about the Christ. John opens the fourth Gospel with, "In the beginning was the Word [lovgo", logos , "word"], and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning" (John 1:1,2). The same meaning is given to logos in 1 John as is given in the Gospel of John. John was not writing or speaking of something he had heard from others. He himself had seen, heard and touched Jesus.

At the time that John was writing, an early heretic by the name of Cerinthus also lived. He was a Gnostic who tried to explain the nature of Jesus in an altogether different way. He believed that Jesus was the Son of God, but he believed that Jesus was "adopted" by God sometime during Jesus' earthly life. This theory came to be known as the "Adoptionist Theory." Evidently, John was writing this treatise on the Word as a response to the false teachings of the Gnostics. Throughout this study, we will make reference to ideas that were gnostic in doctrine.

Jesus claimed to have been with God in the beginning. While praying his intercessory prayer, Jesus said "Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began" (John 17:5). If Jesus was not coeternal with God, he becomes the world's greatest liar. Either he is the Son of God, or he is an impostor.

which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched - this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. 1:2 The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it,

The second theme of the prologue is The Word became flesh . The life appeared , John wrote. It is a completed action. Elsewhere, John states that the "Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us" (John 1:14). God himself in the form of his Son Jesus actually lived among us as a man! John makes repeated emphasis on the factual reality of Jesus' life: he could be heard, seen, and touched. The Word indeed became flesh!

It was necessary for Jesus to become a man. The incarnation is one of the cardinal truths of Scripture. Without it, salvation would not be ours. From Adam forward, humankind has transgressed the law of God. Every last person has disappointed their Creator, the God of heaven. Something had to be done. A sacrifice needed to be offered. "[T]he law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness" (Heb 9:22). Christ became a man and offered himself "once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself" (Heb 9:23-36). It was necessary for Jesus to die. The apostle Paul wrote that Jesus needed to die so that he would be exalted (see Phil 3:7-8). Salvation could not be ours unless he died. The Docetists maintained, however, that he only seemed to die. From the Greek word dokevw (dokeô "it seems"), Docetism claimed that all that Jesus did that would be human - being born, eating, dying, etc. - only seemed to happen. Cerinthus, mentioned above, promoted this doctrine. Jesus was "adopted" by God at his baptism when the Spirit descended on him, or at some other time, and then only pretended to die on the cross. It was claimed that Simon of Cyrene not only carried the cross for Jesus, but he also was crucified in the place of Jesus while Jesus was watching and laughing from nearby (see the footnote by Marshall at the previously cited reference). A number of references in 1 John will show the impact of this false teaching.

and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us.

The third theme of this prologue is Jesus is with us now and forever . As he was about to ascend into heaven, he promised his disciples, "I am with you always" (Matt 28:20). On another occasion Jesus said, "[W]here two or three come together in my name, there am I with them" (Matt 18:20). Jesus is alive and with us.

We can be thankful that Christ brought us the greatest way of life one could conceive. Christianity is unique among all major world religions: it is the only religion with a living leader. No other world religion can make that claim. All the other leaders have been dead for centuries, but the religion Jesus brought did not even begin until he had died and was risen from the dead. His resurrection is the central fact of Christianity. John stresses the eternality of Jesus. He is so positive about this that he refers to Jesus' coming into the world this way: "The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it."

1:3 We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ.

The fourth major theme of the prologue is We have fellowship with the Father and the Son. John declares that this proclamation of eternal life is being made so that you may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ." "Fellowship" is a very important word in the New Testament. It is translated from koinwniva (koinônia, "to have in common") and is involved in many aspects of the Christian life. It is used in the New Testament to refer to sharing with or helping someone in some common goal (see Acts 2:42); giving someone the "right hand of fellowship" (Gal 2:9); having a "oneness" in someone's suffering (Phil 3:10), to name a few of the uses. It is also used in Acts 2:42 to refer to interpersonal and interspiritual relationships within the church. The early Christians "devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to the fellowship . . ." (Acts 2:42). And John makes reference in these verses to the "fellowship" which we have with God, with Christ, with the Holy Spirit and with each other.

It was especially important for John that our fellowship continue. False teaching and division tend to weaken or destroy the fellowship of the body. It appears to us that John views the role of fellowship as extremely vital. Although he uses the word koinônia four times in this chapter, he is careful to show the interrelation between God and his Son with each other and with all of us. It is highly possible that John is emphasizing fellowship with God and his Son Jesus Christ to further stress the dangers of minimizing the incarnation as the Docetists were doing. Our fellowship is not with God only or Jesus only, but with both God and Jesus, as well as with all of the saints though the generations.

The early Christians often practiced what was referred to as "love feasts," or "agape feasts." These love feasts provided an opportunity for the new and inexperienced Christians to build strength from fellowship with other Christians in order to be able to cope with the world. Newborn Christians will seek out associations, and if these associations are not provided in the church, they will seek for them outside the family of believers. There is a constant need of fellowship, or love feasts, to provide support and love for each other.

With blessings, there come responsibilities. Fellowship is a great blessing, and has its attendant obligations. At least four of these were stressed by the early church. First, a need to develop a mutual care for one another. The most common word for Christian "love" in the New Testament is ajgavph (agapç, "love"). Agapç does not mean the same thing as friendship love nor does it necessarily develop mutuality. Agapç can be commanded, for it involves thinking of others in terms of considering their best interests. Paul suggested this form of love when he wrote, "Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others" (Phil 2:4).

Second, we should seek the presence of our brothers and sisters in the Lord. The early Christians sought the "fellowship" of their fellow Christians. We tend to become like those who are significant to us. If we constantly seek the presence of those who are spiritually minded, we will tend to develop more spirituality ourselves.

Third, we should share with those who have need. The Parable of the Good Samaritan is an excellent illustration of how to serve those who have need (see Luke 10:25-37). Later in this epistle, John wrote, "If anyone has material possessions and sees his brother in need but has no pity on him, how can the love [ajgavph] of God be in him?" (1 John 3:17).

Fourth, we have partnership in God's service. What an exalting thought! To literally have fellowship with the Creator of everything. God is my partner! Paul refers to the Philippians' "partnership [koinônia] in the gospel from the first day until now" (Phil 1:5). They were partners because they shared with him in the work of preaching.

When we walk in the Light, and when we truly have the fellowship with God through his Son, we will have our sinful lives purified from all sin. We will live in a "purified-from-sin" relationship. We can constantly live in the presence of the Most High God. We can live in the shadow of the cross if we are willing to submit to the love of Jesus. What a highly favored people we are!

The fifth major theme of this prelude is The Word will abide forever. In other words, it is the Eternal Word. The expression "Word of God" should not be limited to the written word, or what we call the Bible. The living Word is Jesus Christ and he sent the Spirit to reveal to us the written word (see John 14:26). This Word is the living Word of God, the Son of God, and his revelation of salvation sent to us.

Christ is truly eternal. He died on the cross never to die again. He paved the way for all of those who believe on him so that they may never die. Death for the Christian becomes nothing more than a changing of worlds. We experience physical death, but, in truth, we have eternal life abiding in us already, because "Jesus lives forever" and intercedes for us to the Father (Heb 7:24- 25). Our future is secure; our hope is eternal. We believe in the Son of God who lives forever - the Eternal Word of God. In several places in this epistle, John assures us that eternal life is a here and now possibility, not a then and there. We have life now (see 1 John 5:11-13).

1:4 We write this to make our joy complete.

John ends the prologue with an interesting, if somewhat vague, statement. We write this to make our joy complete . John uses the expression "I write unto you" at least eleven times in this epistle and twice in the negative, "I am not writing . . . ." He is very careful to inform his readers that he has specific reasons for writing to them. This brief sentence is a little difficult to understand completely. Some translations read "to make our joy complete," while other translations read "to make your joy complete." If the correct translation is "our joy," then John is either speaking of his own joy (with an editorial use of "we") or a shared joy; if it is translated "your joy," then John is speaking about the joy of the recipients of the letter. I am prone to agree with the rendering of the American Standard Version, Revised Standard Version and New International Version which use the pronoun "our." Probably, in view of the discussion about the fellowship with God, Christ, and each other, the "complete" joy refers to how this great revelation of the Word to us affects all of us.

II. LIFE WITH GOD AND THE WORLD (1:5-2:27)

A. THE WAY OF LIGHT AND DARKNESS (1:5-7)

⁵ This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all. ⁶ If we claim to have fellowship with him yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live by the truth. ⁷ But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all ^a sin.

^a 7 Or every

1:5 This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you:

John is beginning to discuss some of the problems that the church is facing, mainly those associated with the gnostic movement. Having identified Jesus as the witnessed one who is the Word of God, he makes sure that his readers know that the message he is giving to them does not come from him, but from the "witnessed one," Jesus the Word. John R.W. Stott states that "[t]he link between this paragraph and the foregoing preface is in the word message . John has already used the verb a pangellomen ('we proclaim', v. 3); he now uses the very similar anangellomen, we . . . declare , in conjunction with the noun angelia, message . This message has not been invented by himself or the other apostles, but is what they have heard from him ." Through the Holy Spirit, John and the other apostles, Jesus the Word has given the readers the message as he promised he would (see John 14:26).

God is light; in him there is no darkness at all.

The message that John declared to them was, God is light; in him there is no darkness at all . The concept of light versus darkness in a religious sense is not new to the Christian era. The prophets of old recognized that God is light. The Psalmist wrote, "The LORD is my light and my salvation" (Ps 27:1). Isaiah wrote, "Your sun will never set again, and your moon will wane no more; the LORD will be your everlasting light, and your days of sorrow will end" (Isa 60:20). The "light-darkness" motif was very prominent in the Persian Zoroastrian religion. Their two gods - Ahura Mazda (the god of light, standing for their god of good, also called Ormazd) and Ahura Mainyu (the god of darkness, standing for their god of evil, also called Ahriman) - form the basis for the dualistic religious concept. In the Qumran community of the Essenes, there were documents centered around the concept of light and darkness. There was one document entitled The War of the Sons of Light and the Sons of Darkness . Just the mention of the title of this scroll emphasizes the importance of the "Light-Darkness" concepts of the early Christian world.

Light and darkness are also used by Jesus Christ and later by his inspired writers, like John in this reference. John wrote, "This is the message we have from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all." Jesus was quoted by John as saying, "I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life" (John 8:12). Again, Jesus states that his followers are "the light of the world" (Matt 5:14). Jesus makes it clear that God is total light; no darkness is in him. Light, then, is God's representation of good; dark is God's symbol for evil. John states that "God is light, and there is no darkness in him." Not only is God light, but he is the source of all light; he spoke light into existence in the beginning (see Genesis 1:3). The Christians to whom John was writing were encouraged to "walk in the light;" we actually lie if we pretend to be God's children and "walk in darkness."

1:6 If we claim to have fellowship with him yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live by the truth.

In the next two verses, John connects all of this: the message, fellowship, living in the light, and our purification from sin. Those false teachers who "went out from us" (2:19) were "trying to lead you astray" (2:26) causing these Christians deep trouble and turmoil. John is beginning his warning of what they must do to protect their souls from being tainted by these false teachings.

1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light,

This statement is a little difficult to understand. Jesus is the light, but John uses the expression, "he is in the light." Stott wrote, "God is eternally and necessarily in the light because he is himself light; we are called to walk in the light. God is in the light because he is always true to himself and his activity is consistent with his nature." The very concept of God being the ultimate light is beyond our human comprehension; but, I believe the explanation Stott gives sheds light on what John was telling us.

we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin.

The blood of Jesus, his Son would be repulsive to those who had separated themselves from those faithful to the incarnation of Jesus. The blood was a part of the incarnation, and this was physical and thus denied by those of the apostasy. The Gnostics, and especially the Docetists, would deny that blood would have anything to do with salvation. F.F. Bruce wrote, "Most serious of all the consequences of their apostasy is this: the blood of Jesus, which is constantly accessible for the cleansing of those who remain within the fellowship, is not available for those who show a persistent preference for 'walking in darkness.'" John connects the message, fellowship, living in the light, and purification from our sins together.

B. ADMITTING OUR SIN (1:8-10)

⁸ If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. ⁹ If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. ¹⁰ If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives).

^a 2 Or He is the one who turns aside God's wrath, taking away our sins, and not only ours but also

John is here attacking one of the central beliefs of the Gnostics: that real Christians do not sin. Bruce wrote, "These new teachers [those who went out from the Christians to whom John refers in 2:19] claimed to have reached such an advanced stage in spiritual experience that they were 'beyond good and evil.' They maintained that they had no sin, not in the sense that they had attained moral perfection but in the sense that what might be sin for people at a less mature stage of inner development was no longer sin for the completely 'spiritual' man." This becomes a very damnable doctrine, for it led some early Christians to live licentious lives, because they believed they would not be punished for it.

1:8 If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.

Elsewhere in God's revelation we are told that there is no one who has not sinned except Jesus (Rom 3:23). These false teachers had undoubtedly convinced themselves that when one has the higher knowledge through their gnostic characteristics, they were above sin. Sin was physical and involved an abuse of the physical body. John tells them that this is a lie.

Some commentators have difficulty with the statement "if we claim to be without sin" in verse 8 and the statement in verse 10, "If we claim we have not sinned." Is there some difference between these two statements in the mind of John? John is saying that we ought not to claim we have no sins (present tense), and then we ought not to deny that we have had past sins. In either case - denial of present sin or denial of any past sins - we make God out to be a liar. J.W. Roberts stated that "in the first passage [v. 8] John refers to the sinful state; we must not argue that we are above sin so that no taint of its ugliness and stain may be found with us. Here [in v. 10] have not sinned refers to the committing of particular sins or deeds of unrighteousness."

Those who were promoting these false teachings regarding having no sin, John represents as sinners. They were not only deceiving themselves, but they were deceiving those who believed what they were teaching. John also taught that those of us who claim that we have not sinned call God a liar; but we also "deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us." John is saying here that if we do not admit that we are sinners, the truth is not in us. In John's Gospel, he quotes Jesus as saying that, "I am the way and the truth and the life" (John 14:6). If the truth is not in us, then Jesus is not in us, for he is the truth.

1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.

Sin causes us to be guilty in the sight of God, therefore in need of forgiveness. John is writing to those who have been born again, or have been baptized. The requirement of confessing our sins does not invalidate other requirements that God has given for receiving forgiveness of sins (see Acts 2:38). Forgiveness is the result of God's unlimited love for us. The sin that makes us guilty in God's sight also makes us unclean, for sin not only defiles the body but also the spirit. So, when we are forgiven, we are also purified from all of the iniquities which stain the soul and spirit. There is a wonderful power in the blood of Jesus Christ.

1:10 If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives.

John makes one more charge to those who would minimize the power of sin. Here, have not sinned likely refers to having committed specific sins. If we claim that we have not committed specific sins, we make him out to be a liar . Hence, this eternal "Word" which John has stressed cannot live in one who claims to have not sinned. Bruce wrote that the statement his word has no place in our lives is a much stronger statement than "his truth is not in us" (verse 8). Whatever the case, John is insisting that the false teachers are leading the faithful away from God and must be rejected.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

College: 1Jo 2:1-29

1 JOHN 2

C. THE ATONING SACRIFICE (2:1-2)

¹ My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have one who speaks to the Father in our defense - Jesus Christ, the Righteous One. He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for ^a the sins of the whole world.

^a 2 Or He is the one who turns aside God's wrath, taking away our sins, and not only ours but also

2:1 My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin.

John probably uses the word teknivon ( teknion , "little child") to indicate the vulnerability of these Christians due to their lack of mature experience in the Church. John, the disciple of love, was very fond of those to whom he was writing. He uses two intimately personal terms to refer to them: "my little children," or "dear children," and "dear friends." It is interesting that this man whom Jesus called a "son of thunder" in his early days of discipleship would become by the end of his life the "disciple of love." This is a further evidence of the power of Jesus on one's life. This statement is another one of those places in which John says, "I write to you so that . . . ." His purpose for writing was "that you will not sin." This is a continuation of the argument he has been making about his case against sin. Probably it would have been better if chapter 1 had been extended through 2:2, for he is discussing the same matter.

But if anybody does sin, we have one who speaks to the Father in our defense - Jesus Christ, the Righteous One. 2:2 He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

In 1 John 2:1-2, John is expounding on the remedy for sin. For, if anybody does sin , we have a remedy. If anyone sins, John says we have one who speaks . . . in our defense . He identifies Jesus Christ, the Righteous as that one who speaks in our defense. He is "representing our case" before the Father as he promised he would do. He is, therefore, our defense attorney, and he will represent us to God not only as we ask for forgiveness, but also when we stand before him on the day of judgment. He is qualified to do this because he is the atoning sacrifice for our sins . He has offered himself on the cross for our sins, and he has paid the debt for our guilt in the presence of God. This was the atoning sacrifice for our sins - but, not only for "our sins" but for the sins of all the world. John is not declaring here that this atoning sacrifice unconditionally paid the debt for out sins. We must accept the payment, obey his word and loyally serve him as our Savior.

D. KEEPING GOD'S COMMANDMENTS (2:3-6)

³ We know that we have come to know him if we obey his commands. ⁴ The man who says, "I know him," but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in him. ⁵ But if anyone obeys his word, God's love ^a is truly made complete in him. This is how we know we are in him: ⁶ Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did.

^a 5 Or word, love for God

It is evident that John is continuing his argument for acceptance of the "witnessed one," Jesus. John has presented Jesus to us as the one who was the eternal "Word of life," the life that appeared, with whom we have fellowship, the one who "speaks to the Father in our defense," and the one who is our "atoning sacrifice."

Coming to know Jesus involved developing an intimate relationship with him. The Greek word translated by the Eng;lish words "to know" is the same word used for a husband to know his wife intimately. Certainly John is not suggesting any kind of sexual connotation, but "to know" Jesus involves becoming one with him spiritually as a man becomes one with his wife physically. At this point, John presents Jesus as the one whom we are to obey. Those who had gone out from them, the false teachers, could admit to none of these characteristics, or qualities.

2:3 We know that we have come to know him if we obey his commands.

Does it seem incidental that John uses the word from which "Gnostic" comes to indicate that "We know"? We know that we know him if we are obedient to his commands. John uses the perfect indicative to express "We have come to know him." This expression was a challenge to the Gnostics to reckon with the implications of their false teachings. Their teachings make it impossible for their followers to accept a central foundation principle of Christianity; namely, the incarnation of Jesus. The Greek idea of knowledge was that it was an activity of the mind; but the Gnostics believed this special knowledge (gnw'si", gnôsis, "knowledge") that they possessed was "a gift of God to man. It comes by revelation. The early church believed that that revelation began with Jesus and was handed down through the apostles and inspired teachers."

So far in this epistle, John has testified to his own witness of Jesus' humanity (see 1:1-4). Now he is saying that we not only must believe in his humanity because there were witnesses to both his divine as well as his human existence, but we must also obey his commands. John suggests that Jesus added another dimension to this obedience, which is recorded in the Gospel account: "Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me" (John 14:21). And, again, "If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching. My Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him. He who does not love me will not obey my teaching" (John 14:23-24). John asserts in this epistle that "if anyone obeys his word, God's love is truly made complete in him" (v. 5).

2:4 The man who says, "I know him," but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

This is a very strong indictment. Not only is such a person a liar, but the truth is not in him. This statement answers a question that many Christians have: "How can I know that I am a Christian?" John says that we come to know him when we obey his commands. John's readers in the first century and we in this present century can know of a surety that we are children of God: if we have obeyed Jesus' commands, then "God's love is truly made complete in" us (v. 5).

2:5 But if anyone obeys his word, God's love is truly made complete in him. This is how we know we are in him:

The Gnostics held that they had to have had some supernatural outpouring of gnôsis ("knowledge") from God. The early Christians to whom John wrote had not experienced this outpouring, and they must have wondered what their relationship to God was. John states here that God's love is truly made complete in him. In the next short section, we will discuss more in detail this "love of God" which John identifies as "a new command."

2:6 Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did.

John has already stated that to have fellowship with God, we must walk in the light and Jesus is the light. One of the characteristics of John's writing style is that he often makes one point and then he states the concept in a negative form. For example, we come to know him if we obey his commandments; if we do not obey them, we are liars. Or, "God is light" and in him is no darkness. John uses some of the same analogies that Paul used. John sees our being "in him" and living "in him" as the same thing. So if we live in him , we must walk as Jesus walked. Jesus left an example that we should walk "in his steps" (see 1 Pet 2:21). Again, John may be striking at the gnostic docetic philosophy (the notion that Jesus only seemed to be human) when he refers to walking "as Jesus walked." Walking as Jesus walked, however, does not refer to some ritualistic religion; it is more than simply living a "form of religion"; it means truly walking an unselfish, God-centered life in all we do. Jesus was not interested in mere ritual and form; he was interested in our lives being God-like in all we do.

E. A NEW COMMANDMENT (2:7-8)

⁷ Dear friends, I am not writing you a new command but an old one, which you have had since the beginning. This old command is the message you have heard. ⁸ Yet I am writing you a new command; its truth is seen in him and you, because the darkness is passing and the true light is already shining.

This discussion of the "new command" and the "old command" is, in reality, a continuation of the previous paragraph; however, we are discussing it here as a new paragraph.

2:7 Dear friends,

John begins this discussion by referring to these Christians as ajdelfoiv ( adelphoi , "brothers"). This word has been translated variously as "dear friends" (NIV), "brethren" (KJV), and "beloved" (RSV), to list a few. Literally the word is "brothers" or "brethren." Some of these other renditions are undoubtedly used to show the very close relationship John sustained with them, and I think with good intent. Certainly no harm is done to the language by showing this friendship relation. However, we should keep in mind that John was using language that indicated a family relationship, with God as Father.

I am not writing you a new command but an old one, which you have had since the beginning.

This is both a new command and an old command. John may be indirectly referring to a statement made by Jesus as recorded in his Gospel. "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another" (John 13:34-35). Notice here that John has switched from the plural [commands, v. 3] to the singular [command]. In the light of John 13:34-35. it is easy to conclude that all of the commandments are summed up in one, namely, "to love one another." Jesus designated love as the identification mark of his disciples. There is no other command or practice anywhere else in Holy Scripture that so succinctly sums up the identification of Jesus' disciples.

It was a "new" command when Jesus first gave it. Love from Jesus' perspective was summarized in the word ajgavph (agapç, "love"). There are several Greek words that can be translated by our English word "love," but this use of love is a stronger form of love. It was rarely used in pagan or secular sources. Jesus uses the imperative mood (ajgapa'te, agapate ). But the force of John's use of this imperative is that it is a strong "recommendation" or order to do so. If we want to obey the "new" command, we are expected to love one another. Some of the words used in the New Testament for "love" are more emotional in quality than agapç is. See the discussion of agapç and fivlo" (philos ) in the next paragraph. To love one another is to expect or desire that they be treated well.

This old command is the message you have heard.

But why does John refer to a new commandment, then says it is an old commandment? This command is the message you have heard . John calls this an old commandment because these Christians had known it "from the beginning." Beginning does not refer to the beginning of time, but the beginning of the gospel age, or at least the beginning of their acquaintance with the gospel. "Love" (or agapç as opposed to philos ["friendship love"]) had been a part of the message heard from the beginning (v. 5). So, it was an old message to those who had heard it, but a new message to those who had not heard it before. When Jesus told his disciples of the "new command," it really was a new one. The word agapç had not been used in the same way or with the same meaning Jesus place upon it. It was a new message. It suggests a type of love than can be commanded. The other words for "love" connote a more emotional type of feeling. The new message was one of an unselfish, caring love, a love that was concerned for the well-being of the other person. Some commentators do not attach any connection to Jesus' statement in John 13:34, but I am convinced that there is a connection from the fact that John wrote both statements and also from the fact that this is the only sense in which I can understand the "new" and the "old" commandment about loving one's brother.

2:8 Yet I am writing you a new command; its truth is seen in him and you,

The Law of Moses had taught that one should love one's neighbor as oneself. Jesus' love went even farther than this. Jesus told them to love "even as I have loved you" (John 13:34). This "new" love, agapç, was not necessarily a love that responded to others' love (this was implied by philos , a brotherly love or a reciprocal love).

because the darkness is passing and the true light is already shining.

Here in verse 8, John applies all of this to those false teachers. He is identifying love, the new love, as the true light . . . already shining. If Jesus is the light, and John has already argued that he is, then to love as Jesus loved would be to shine in the lives of others with the light of Jesus' love. Therefore, if one did not love, the darkness was taking over. The darkness (a strong element of the Gnostics' teaching) is passing away among those who love as Jesus loved. Obeying the commands of Jesus will assure us that we are "in the light" (see v. 7).

F. IN THE LIGHT OR IN THE DARKNESS (2:9-11)

⁹ Anyone who claims to be in the light but hates his brother is still in the darkness. ¹⁰ Whoever loves his brother lives in the light, and there is nothing in him to make him stumble. ¹¹ But whoever hates his brother is in the darkness and walks around in the darkness; he does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded him.

^a 10 Or it

The Gnostics saw darkness as being related to the evil god, or the god who created matter. Darkness, therefore, was to be avoided, they believed. They believed that the "light" represented by the good god, whom incidentally they regarded as the father of Jesus Christ, was to be looked for. In these two verses, John is facing the real meaning of light: it involves loving one's brother. He is not confining love to this, for if one has love for the Father, he will also love his brother (see 4:20).

The expression "the love of God" has at least three possible meanings. It can refer to the love that God has for man; or man's love for God; or, God's kind of love. These three points of view are discussed in some detail by Marshall. It is not likely that John made such a line of distinction as this, but he probably saw all of these three meanings intertwining throughout the whole concept of love. Notice in the previous paragraph (see v. 5) that if anyone obeys the word of God, "God's love is truly made complete in him." Love that is complete is love that has matured or reached its ultimate goal. "Made complete" is a translation of teteleivwtai (teteleiôtai, "has been perfected"). This is a perfect tense, passive voice of its verb form. It signifies that it has been perfected (completed action) from a force outside of itself. The word suggests that the perfection has come from no act of its own. Obviously, the one who has been acting is Jesus Christ. We need to remember that love, or any other characteristic of humanity, is never completely perfect until it has been "made perfect" by the cross of Jesus.

Love is the very essence of God. Later on in this epistle (4:16) we are told that "God is love." God's love surely showed an unselfish concern for all the world in that he gave his only Son for our salvation. We must recognize that if God's love is ever demonstrated in our lives, we will need to demonstrate an unselfish concern for God and his will. In our everyday language, we think and speak of "perfection" or "perfect" as that without error or flaw. The Greek word for perfect is tevleio" ( teleios , "complete, mature, perfect") and we must make God's love perfect in us by walking as Jesus walked (see vv. 5,6).

2:9 Anyone who claims to be in the light but hates his brother is still in the darkness.

Living in the light has no place for hatred. Love can abide only in a life lived in the light. If we claim that we love our brother, but we are living in the darkness - that is, out of fellowship with Christ who is the Light - we lie and do not have the truth. John's concept of love is different from what ours often is. Marshall makes this distinction: "We would say that there are persons whom we do not love, but this is not the same thing as hating them. . . . Our attitude is a neutral one. . . . But John will have none of this. His concept of love is caring for the needs of others, even to the point of self-sacrifice. If I am unwilling to to do that for somebody in need, I love myself more than him. . . ."

2:10 Whoever loves his brother lives in the light, and there is nothing in him to make him stumble.

Here is another of John's stylistic device of stating a fact and then giving the opposite. In verse 9, John expresses the negative idea of hating a brother and remaining in darkness; here, whoever loves his brother is in the light. Failing to live in the light places one in the darkness and here people stumble. What a beautiful analogy: how many of us have tried to walk in the darkness of night and have stumbled? The one who "lives in the light" has no reason to stumble for the light shows him the way. The same is true of the Christian. If we walk in the light, we can see by the direction from Jesus how to walk without stumbling.

2:11 But whoever hates his brother is in the darkness and walks around in the darkness; he does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded him.

Again, John uses the opposite to emphasize the role of "Light" and "Darkness." John uses four verbs here in this passage: " hates his brother," " walks around in darkness," "does not know where he is going," and "darkness has blinded him." The first three are in the active voice, indicating that the subject is doing the acting." The fourth verb is in the passive voice, indicating that the subject is acted upon. This is significant in our understanding of how we behave. Lenski discusses the individual who walks in darkness as "one of the haters who has turned heretic and hates the brethren that are true to the Word and refuse to give it up at his bending. He is bent on being a skandalon, on dragging others into the night of spiritual death, into the same night in which he is, in which he walks, which has made his own eyes blind." The word skavndalon ( skandalon , "a snare, a stumbling-block") is used in verse 10 of one who would make others stumble. John is definitely referring to those who have left the body of believers and have become gnostic heretics.

To "hate a brother," "walk in darkness," and "fail to know" are all the fault of the person. We must actively conduct our lives so that we are living in Christ. One who is walking in the dark is the same as a blind person. This was a strong statement to be making to those false teachers who did not have the proper understanding and appreciation of Jesus, but who thought they were the bearers of light! John is not suggesting in these verses that the Christians he is addressing are blind or not obedient. He is referring to those who are stirring up the hearts and minds of those Christians. He is referring to the Gnostics!

G. JOHN'S REASONS FOR WRITING (2:12-14)

I write to you, dear children,

because your sins have been forgiven on account of his name .

I write to you, fathers,

because you have known him who is from beginning.

I write to you, young men,

because you have overcome the evil one.

I write to you, dear children,

because you have known the Father.

I write to you, fathers,

because you have known him who is from the beginning.

I write to you, young men,

because you are strong,

and the word of God lives in you,

and you have overcome the evil one .

This is a rather unusual section of 1 John. John addresses several groups of people on why he has written to them. "I write to you" occurs six times here and five times throughout the rest of the book: 1:4 (with "we"); 2:1,8,26; and 5:13. He uses the same expression in a negative form at least twice. Whether he is attempting to establish his credibility by using this expression or whether there is another reason for this sentence construction, there is wide opinion. Another strange sentence structure is the use of the present tense for "I write" in the first statement (vv. 12-13) and the aorist for "I wrote" in the second sentence (v. 14).

In these six references to "dear children," "fathers," "young men," and by implication the opposite sex must be included, John is using endearing words to show his love for them. All of these terms are endearing terms. John evidently wants his readers to know the reason for his writing, for he mentions it more than a dozen times in the epistle. It was important for those Christians to realize the solemnity and seriousness of the heretical movement beginning among them. It is interesting to note that John addresses three groups of people, as noted above, and he addresses each of them twice. "Dear children" are admonished in verses 12 and 13; all three groups are addressed in verse 13; and "fathers" and "young men" are addressed in verse 14. Why he has selected these three groups we do not know. Stott suggests that Augustine and other Latin commentators favored "the view . . . that they represent three different stages of spiritual pilgrimage: the little children are those newborn in Christ; the young men are more developed Christians, strong and victorious in spiritual warfare; while the fathers possess the depth and stability of ripe Christian experience" (italics added).

2:12 I write to you, dear children, because your sins have been forgiven on account of his name.

In the first of these six statements, John says your sins have been forgiven on account of his name . John strikes another strong blow at his opponents. In the first place, he asserts that they have sins, or else how could they be forgiven of them (see vv. 8-10)? In the second place, this was accomplished on account of "his name." This strikes at the gnostic belief that Jesus only seemed to be human, for it is implied that Jesus' sacrifice had something to do with the forgiveness.

2:13 I write to you, fathers, because you have known him who is from the beginning.

Because they are identical statements, we are discussing verse 13a and 14a together. Why John has both of these identical statements is not known. See the comment at the end of the section of Scripture. Above we noted that the chronological age of the "little children" was not intended. If chronological age is intended, then we are at a loss to know why he uses teknia in one reference and paidia in the other one. By the same logic, the expression "fathers" referred not to chronological age, but to experience in knowing the Lord, or spiritual maturity. They have known him from the beginning. It seems safe to assume that these "fathers" he is addressing may have actually known Jesus, or at least they were personally aware of him in some way. These fathers were probably the "spiritual" fathers rather than physical fathers. Stott suggests that they may "have progressed into a deep communion with God." A continuity of the message of Jesus must be very important, for in both of these references to the "fathers," he gives the same admonition, because you have known him who is from the beginning (verses 13b and 14).

I write to you, young men, because you have overcome the evil one.

Again, John opposes the Gnostics' concept that Christians do not sin (see comments on 1:8-2:2). There may be an implied compliment that John is giving the "young men" who have had the ability to "overcome the evil one." The language here is such that John recognizes that these "young men" have conquered, or overcome, the evil one.

I write to you, dear children, because you have known the Father.

This third part of verse 3 is the second statement to the "dear children." There are at least two differences from the previous statement in verse 12. First of all, a different word is used in the Greek to reference the children. It is paidiva ( paidia ), plural of the noun paidivon ( paidion , (little child"). This is a diminutive form of expression and does refer to "infants" or "little children." Is John referring to the same "little children" of verse 12? It should be noted that this time there is a different "because" statement. The first statement was written "because your sins have been forgiven." This present statement was written because you have known the Father. In a sense, they are saying the same thing because when one comes to the Father, his sins are forgiven. Obedience to the commands (or commandments) of God will bring about forgiveness.

2:14 I write to you, fathers, because you have known him who is from the beginning. I write to you, young men, because you are strong, and the word of God lives in you, and you have overcome the evil one.

As we noted above, the first line is an identical repetition of verse 13a. Some commentators agree that the "young men" were a group of Christians who were younger, less mature than the "fathers," yet they were dedicated, energetic Christians who nevertheless would be susceptible to false teaching. Hence, John felt the need to warn them of the dangers they faced. They were Christians in whom the Word of God dwells which has helped them to withstand the "evil one." Perhaps John is commending these "young men" for their strength and ability to withstand evil teaching.

Some commentators suggest that John is using the "little children" expression to refer to all of the Christians and that there are, in reality, only two groups he is referring to: the "young men" and "fathers." There appears to be no definitive answer to this triple pattern of groups in the church, nor a compelling explanation of why they are given twice. There is a wide range of opinions on the nature and purpose of the six statements.

H. CHRISTIANS AND THE WORLD(2:15-17)

¹⁵ Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. ¹⁶ For everything in the world - the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the boasting of what he has and does - comes not from the Father but from the world. ¹⁷ The world and its desires pass away, but the man who does the will of God lives forever.

The word "world" (kovsmo", kosmos ) is used at least 20 times in this epistle: 2:2,15,16,17; 3:1; 4:1,3,4,5,9,14,17; 5:4,5,19. It is used to mean different things. Marshall notes that "It ['world'] can refer in quite a neutral way to the created universe which God made to be 'very good' (Gen. 1:31). But in the writings of John 'world' signifies more usually mankind organized in rebellion against God, so that the word carries a negative sense. It is under the control of the evil one. . . ."

2:15 Do not love the world or anything in the world.

Much of the world in which John lived saw the world in terms of a conflict of forces. The Gnostics, for example, saw the world from the point of view of two gods: the god of the Old Testament, the creator of good and evil, the Demiurge; and the god of the New Testament, a loving, caring God, the father of Jesus Christ. The world was often viewed as an enemy to good and right. Peter, in his first epistle, reminded his audience that we are "strangers in the world" (1 Pet 1:1). He also wrote "I urge you, as aliens and strangers in the world, to abstain from sinful desires, which war against your soul" (1 Pet 2:11). Paul also reminds us that we are not a part of the world (Eph 2:11-12). So, it is not strange that John would warn his readers do not love the world .

This admonition should not be interpreted as saying that we should hate the physical world, for it is God's creation. This admonition by John is not recommending that Christians should separate themselves totally from the world. Jesus told his Father that he did not want the disciples to leave the world, "but that you protect them from the evil one. They are not of the world, even as I am not of it" (John 17:15-16). We are not to become attached to the world in the sense that we do not want to join Jesus in the place he is preparing for us (see John 14:1ff.). This world is not our final home, but it is only the place where we prepare for the home in heaven.

If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

Again, John is not urging that we hate this world. We must learn to "be content whatever the circumstances" and learn "the secret of being content in any and every situation" (Phil 4:11-12). What John is recommending is that we not participate in the worldly things and become tied to the world. For, if we do this, the Father is not in us.

2:16 For everything in the world - the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the boasting of what he has and does - comes not from the Father but from the world.

Here, John more specifically defines what he means by loving the world. There are three types of temptation that he delineates: "lust of the flesh," or "the cravings of sinful man," "the lust of his eyes," and "the pride of life," or "the boasting of what he has and does." Humankind has always been much the same. The temptations of our present day, or of John's day, are not much different from those temptations in the Garden of Eden. God had told them not to touch the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. But, when Satan tempted Eve, and ultimately Adam, Scripture says "When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food [lust of the flesh], and pleasing to the eye [lust of the eye], and also desirable for gaining wisdom [pride of life], she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate it" (Gen 3:6). We are not saying that because something is good to eat or beautiful to look at or will cause us pleasure, that it is always wrong, but in this case it is true because God had specifically commanded that they not eat of it.

Again, look at the temptation of Jesus. Satan presented three temptations to Jesus. He appealed to his fleshly desires. Jesus was fasting, but Satan told him to turn stones into bread. Satan took Jesus "to the holy city and had him stand on the highest point of the temple" and tempted him to "throw [himself] down" and God would save him. Jesus responded with, "Do not put the Lord your God to the test." And, third, Satan "took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor." Implied is the idea, "Look how all these people will see you and revere you." Satan said, "If you will bow down and worship me, I will give you all these kingdoms," but Jesus ordered Satan to go away; he would worship only God (see Matthew 4:1-10). Isn't it interesting that in the Garden of Eden and at the wilderness of Jesus' temptation, sin presented itself in three types of temptation, and now John warns against the same ones? He warned his readers of lust of the flesh, lust of the eye, and pride of life.

2:17 The world and its desires pass away, but the man who does the will of God lives forever.

There is good reason for us to avoid the world and all of its allurements: the new age, the Christian age, has come. All that does not come from the will of God will eventually be doomed. John clearly says, the world and its desires pass away. Only one group of people will remain: those who do the will of God. They will live forever. Those who were refusing to accept the full message of God should have felt the strength of John's argument. For that day, as well as for our own day, humanity must obey the commands of God's choice, not its own. In our age of wanting to make our own decisions, we must carefully follow what God wants rather than what we want.

I. WARNINGS AGAINST ANTICHRISTS (2:18-27)

¹⁸ Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we now it is the last hour. ¹⁹ They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.

²⁰ But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and all of you know the truth. ^{a 21} I do not write to you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it and because no lie comes from the truth. ²² Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist - he denies the Father and the Son. ²³ No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also.

²⁴ See that what you have heard from the beginning remains in you. If it does, you also will remain in the Son and in the Father. ²⁵ And this is what he promised us - even eternal life.

²⁶ I am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray. ²⁷ As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit - just as it has taught you, remain in him.

^a 20 Some manuscripts and you know all things

2:18 Dear children,

John has alluded to the false teachers earlier in this epistle, but this is the most biting reference to them yet. There is an urgency to this message. John begins this discussion with his loving statement "my little children" ( paidia ). It is obvious that this is a term of endearment, for he has already addressed the "young men" and "fathers." The message here appears to be specially important to John by the use of this diminutive form of pai'" ( pais , child).

this is the last hour;

Some commentators hold that John is teaching that the "old age" is about to pass away and that Jesus will be returning shortly. It is true that John states that it is the "last hour" or the last age. Several references are made to the "last times" in various places in the New Testament. Peter declared, referring to the astounding presence of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost, that "this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel: ' In the last days [emphasis mine] God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people'" (Acts 2:16-17). Paul uses the same kind of language in 1 Timothy 4:1, "The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith." (See also Isa 2:2; Dan 12:9; Micah 4:1; 2 Tim 2:17; and 2 Pet 3:3.) All of these references are to the fact that Jesus brought a new age, as opposed to the age marked by the Law of Moses. This is indeed the last time, and at the end of these days, Jesus will return, but we know neither the day nor the hour when he will come; neither did John.

and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour.

The term "antichrist" is not found in early Christian times outside of Christian circles. Although the concept of an antichrist was spoken of in other writings, the word ajnticrivsto" ( antichristos , "antichrist," i.e. one standing in opposition or competition to Christ) is found only in John's epistles in 1 John 2:18,22; 4:3; 2 John 7. There were many early Christians who were looking for the "antichrist." Such enemies of Christ had been predicted, though not using this word, by Paul and others. The presence of these "antichrists" of John's day was regarded as proof of their existence; hence, he writes This is how we know it is the last hour, namely, by their appearance. It must be the last days. The absence of the definite article before "last hour" in the Greek text is assumed by some commentators to mean that the presence of these false teachers is "last hour kind of behavior." Perhaps John is saying that this is "a signal or sign of the last hour." Earlier, it was stated that this was not necessarily a declaration of the time of the Second Coming or parousia (parousiva, "coming or second coming of Jesus"). As we noted earlier, Jesus said no one knows the day or hour of his coming, not even he himself. It is true, however, that many "antichrists," or adversaries of the Christ, were appearing by the end of the first century when this epistle was written. John, this apostle of love but who was described by Christ earlier as a "son of thunder," is speaking very harshly of these enemies of Jesus who are declaring that his earthly existence was only a figment of their imagination or only seemed to take place. Jesus had warned that "false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive the elect - if that were possible. See, I have told you ahead of time" (Matthew 24:24-25).

2:19 They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.

Although John has not yet specifically identified who these false teachers are, he does indicate that they had been with them. It would appear that these who went out from us had at one time been Christians, but they may have not been deeply converted. At what point these individuals turned their backs on the church, we do not know. The gnostic movement certainly began during or before the first century. The apostle Paul warns of departures from the truth: "The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron" (1 Tim 4:1). He then delineates some of the false teachings they promoted, some of which were clearly practiced by some of the Gnostics of the first and second centuries.

John seems willing to separate these faithful Christians from those who went away. He says that their going away showed that none of them belong to us . There comes a time when false teaching begins to be promoted that church leaders, specifically the elders, need to "mark" those heresy promoters and not allow them to bring division in the body.

2:20 But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and all of you know the truth.

John turns his attention away from "those who went away" to those who are still among the faithful. Those faithful "children" have been protected from the evil one. They have an anointing from the Holy One . The word "anointing" is the word crivsma ( chrisma ). It is highly possible that John is making a play on words. "Christ" is a translation of cristov" ( christos , "Christ," or "the anointed one"). The first four letters (or, in English, the first five) are the same in both words. But, at any rate, we have an anointing from Christ, or the Holy Spirit. Whichever he means here, it is a divine anointing from the Godhead.

2:21 I do not write to you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it and because no lie comes from the truth.

The anointing has made the true believers to know the truth. The anointing comes from the truth. Therefore, those who have remained faithful to the "anointing" have the truth and are not liars. I recommend that the reader look at John 14, 15, and 16, where Jesus tells the apostles that he will send to them the Holy Spirit. The anointing of the apostles with the Holy Spirit cannot be ignored, for it is in their receiving of the Holy Spirit that God and his Son should be revealed to us.

2:22 Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist - he denies the Father and the Son.

Who is the liar? John asks. The Gnostics believed that they had a secret revelation or knowledge from God. It was a special knowledge for their own group which made them some sort of a special class of individuals - a "notch above" normal Christians. John answers his own question by saying the liar is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ . This is a description of the docetic Gnostic. There is no room for fellowship between God and heretics. By their own acceptance of "the lie," they have severed their fellowship with God. Satan is the liar; the Gnostic who is a follower of Satan is the liar. This is the force of John's charge. Such a man is the antichrist - he denies the Father and the Son. This is the first time that John actually identifies who is the antichrist, the adversary, of Christ. He is the one who denies the humanity of Jesus. This charge is levelled directly at the docetic element of Gnosticism.

We cannot be certain of all that the Gnostics taught. It is almost universally accepted that the Gnostics of John's day were greatly influenced by the teachings of Cerinthus. However, it is likely that they did not accept all of Cerinthus's teachings. Cerinthus believed and taught the Adoption concept of Jesus' Sonship. In other words, Cerinthus believed that at some time, probably at his baptism, he was adopted by God, as we indicated earlier. We do not have any indication in John's epistle that the Gnostics of his time accepted this.

2:23 No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also.

The real gravity of the gnostic theology is seen in this verse. Not only does the docetic teaching that Jesus was not a physical reality, that is, Jesus only seemed to be human, make the believer in Docetism a liar, but it also makes him deny both the Father and the Son. Confession of the Son seems to be a requirement of possessing or "having" the Father. In other words, "you can't have one without the other." These heretics could not have the Father without accepting Jesus as his Son.

2:24 See that what you have heard from the beginning remains in you. If it does, you also will remain in the Son and in the Father.

In such a time of spiritual frustration, it is important for these first century Christians to have an anchor. John urges them to remain in the things which they have heard from the beginning: the pure gospel of Jesus Christ. Again, as in previous places, the beginning refers to the beginning of the Christian age, or at least their initial confrontation with the gospel. We, in the modern world, ought to be faithful to what was taught in the beginning rather than chase after new fads and innovations of religious practice. John is urging his readers to cling to the original Christian message. He promises that if they do, they will remain in the Son and in the Father .

2:25 And this is what he promised us - even eternal life.

There is a reward for those who remain faithful, John promises. It is not so evident in this reference as it is later in the epistle, but this eternal life is not a "there and then" situation, but it is a "here and now" promise. John is very clear on the fact that our eternal life begins in this life , and we do not have to wait until later for it to begin. See 1 John 5:12 as an example of what John was revealing. Eternal life is in the present tense. On the other hand, John is not saying that there is an eternal security once one has been born again: it is possible for us to lose the eternal life by not remaining in Jesus.

2:26 I am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray.

Here is another of the "I am writing. . ." statements. We have noted that this expression occurs at least eleven times in the epistle. This time, the purpose that he is writing to them about is those who are trying to lead you astray . This short statement gives us an important glance into the activities of the heretics: they were evangelistic in their efforts. Not only were they holding these views themselves, but they were evidently active in their proselyting activities. They were seeking to evangelize recruits from the believers. John is writing about this; he is warning them of their tactics. Their aim was "to lead you astray."

2:27 As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit - just as it has taught you, remain in him.

John wants them to know that he is not overly concerned about them, just being cautious. First, he has warned them about gnostic heresy (v. 26); second, they (at least, some of them) have known the Lord from the beginning; third, they have received an anointing from Jesus and from the Father.

III. GOD'S LOVE FOR US/OUR LOVE

FOR ONE ANOTHER (2:28-3:24)

A. CHILDREN OF GOD (2:28-29)

²⁸ And now, dear children, continue in him, so that when he appears we may be confident and unashamed before him at his coming.

²⁹ If you know that he is righteous, you know that everyone who does what is right has been born of him.

At this point, John makes a transition from the polemic approach to a more exhortative and practical approach. He temporarily ends the warnings of the Gnostics and their false teaching and begins a more loving, relational message. What is our relationship to God? How does the fact that we are children of God affect our everyday living? How will the recognition that we are the children of God affect our relationship with each other and with the concept of right and wrong? It is important for us to realize that God is a loving, caring God rather than a despotic, and punitive God. So, these two verses and the first section of the third chapter are an explanation of who we are and how we relate to God.

2:28 And now, dear children, continue in him,

The term, And now , is undoubtedly used to indicate that he is beginning a new topic. John opens this new topic by talking about the importance of continuity in Christ Jesus. The NIV translates this continue in him . . . . Others have translated it "And now, dear children, abide in him. . . ." The Greek for the last three words is mevnete ejn ajutw/' ( menete en autô, "abide in him"). The NIV translators were probably wanting to show not only a one-time abiding, but a continuous abiding. The use of the word "abide" seems to me to be a stronger relationship to Jesus or the Father. And the use of the present, active, indicative verb form actually shows a continuous abiding, not a one-time abiding. Earlier, John has shown that those who "know God," who "have God," and those in whom God abides are those in whom God's word abides. Furthermore, he has told us that "this is what he promised us - even eternal life" (2:25).

so that when he appears we may be confident and unashamed before him at his coming.

John reminds his readers of the return of Jesus. We must be prepared with the indwelling of Jesus, or his abiding in us. We do not want to "shrink from shame at his coming." If Jesus is abiding in us, or if we continue in him, we will have no reason to be ashamed at his coming. We will be in a continuing fellowship with him. "Confidence" is often translated as "boldness" in some translations. In this context, John's statement later on in the epistle, "there is no fear in love," takes on a special meaning (see 4:18). John wants us to be prepared so that we will be unashamed , or that we will not be made to be ashamed when he comes. We should strive to live in such a manner that we can stand before him with boldness. In Jesus' first coming, he came to be our Savior and he died on the cross to bring that about. In his second coming, he will be our judge, and we need to be prepared for that. Earlier, we discussed the fanerwqh' (phanerôthç) of Jesus as compared with the parousiva ( parousia ). Actually these two words complement each other. The manifestation of Jesus (phanerôthç) will take place when he comes again. This is the time when John hopes that his readers will not be made ashamed because they will have walked as Jesus walked.

2:29 If you know that he is righteous, you know that everyone who does what is right has been born of him.

John introduces a new thought not discussed before. That is that we have been born of him . He appears to be changing the "person" in this verse. Nowhere in the New Testament are we told to be "born of Christ." Even Jesus (see John 3:1ff.) did not represent himself as being the source of the new birth. Throughout the New Testament, "born of" refers to God. John states that if you know that he is righteous then you will know that those who do right have "been born of him." He represents "righteousness," not "knowledge" as that which makes us know they have been born again. Is this a subtle jab at the Gnostics? They would have claimed that their "special" knowledge would be the source of being born again, not righteousness. This introduction of the regeneration or being born of him is a very natural transition into the next chapter and our being children of God.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

Lapide: 1Jo 1:1-10

 

THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF

S. JOHN.

——o——

CHAPTER 1

Ver. 1.— That which was from the beginning, &c. The beginning of this Epistle corresponds with the beginning of St. John's Gospel. Both here and there he sets forth the eternity and the Godhead of Christ, and next His Incarnation, these being the two chief Mysteries, and the cardinal points, of the whole Christian faith.

The word 'was' points, says St. Basil, 'to eternity,' "that thus we might understand," says Bede, "that the Word which was coeternal with the Father was before all time," for whatever time you may assign, or imagine beforehand, it is true to say that the Word then was; thousands, or millions of years, or ever the world was, for He was before any imaginable number of years, even from all eternity. Nor does it mean merely that He was before the beginning of the world, and of time, but that even then He was from all past eternity. And we speak of the Word in the imperfect, and not in the past time, to signify that He still exists. So St. Cyril, Chrysostom, Theophylact, and others, on John i 1. And St. John wrote thus against the Arians who would afterwards arise, and say that there was a time when He 'was' not, denying that He was eternal. This also was condemned by the Nicene Council, and therefore St. John repeats the word 'was' to show that whatever time you may think of, or imagine, the Word at that very time 'was'. "Carry your thoughts back (says St. Basil, Contr. Eunom.) as far as you can, and you will not be able to rise beyond that time."

Ver. 2.— But the word signifies not only His eternity, but His eternal generation, and (3.) His Godhead, for 'Being' or existence, as Elias Cretensis says, is peculiar ( proprium ) to God. For He is the fulness and boundlessness of being, a very boundless ocean of being. Whence Didymus ( in loc.), S. Cyril (in John i.), and S. Ambrose ( de.Fide i. 5) acutely observe that the several creatures are said to be this or that, but that God alone is said absolutely to be. (4.) The word 'was' signifies that the 'Word' still exists and abides. Thus St. Thomas says on John i., 'Was' signifies past, present, and future time. The Word then ever was, ever is, and ever will be. As St. Basil says ( de Sp. Sancto, cap. vi.) When John said 'In the beginning was the Word' he confines our thoughts within fixed limits. For the word 'was' allows our thoughts no outlet; and the word 'beginning' keeps our thoughts also from soaring beyond it, for however thou mayest strive to see ought beyond the Son, yet wilt thou never be able to pass beyond 'the beginning.' But if we speak correctly of God, His eternity cannot be bounded by any time whatsoever. For, as St. Gregory Nazianzen says, 'God both ever was, and is, and will be.' Or, to speak more correctly, He ever is. But our expressions designate only the flow and lapse of time. As St. Augustine says, "I separate in my mind every mutable thing from eternity, and in eternity itself I discern no spaces of time, for they consist in past and future motions, but in eternity there is nothing past or future, for the past has ceased to be, and future has not come into being; while eternity only is : it has not passed away as ceasing to be, nor is it future as not yet existing." Plato says the same. Why then does the Vulgate use the perfect and not the imperfect tense? 1. Because St. John in what follows uses the perfect tense. 2. Because 'first' signifies more clearly that the Word was from the beginning. 3. Both these tenses are used indiscriminately, as St. Ambrose uses the imperfect tense; and lastly, Holy Scripture uses both past, present, and future tenses in speaking of God, for His eternity includes them all. As S. Augustine says ( Tract xcix. in John ), "Although the immutable and ineffable nature of God admits not of past or future time, but simply Is as incapable of change, yet because time is ever changing with us (in this our mortal and changeable state) we say not falsely, He hath been, He shall be, He is: hath been, because He has never ceased to be; shall be, because He will never cease to be; is, because He ever exists."

From the beginning, referring to Gen 1:1. But here there is a distinction between 'created' and 'was.' God created the world in the beginning of time: but He begat the Son in the beginning of eternity, which is signified by 'was.' Tertullian rightly says that the Gospel was the supplement of the Old Testament. For John supplements Moses, by putting the beginning of the Word before the beginning of the world, which was created ages afterwards. But what then was this 'Beginning'? 1. S. Cyril and Origen, in John i., understand by it God the Father, for the Son was ever in the bosom of the Father. 2.  S. Augustine, Bede, and S. Hilary (de Trin. lib. ii.) understand by it the beginning of the world, or of time. For even before this the Word 'was' from all eternity. See Psa 119:3 (Vulg.); Pro 8:25. As S. Hilary says: "Conceive any beginning you please, you cannot bound Him by time, for He then was;" and again, "He is out-limited by any time, as to make that to begin which existed, rather than was made, in the beginning. 3. S. Augustine, Chrysostom, Theophylact explain it that the Word was before all created beings. See. Pro 8:22. Nonnus in his Paraphrase says that it means, He was before all time, coeval with the Father, of the same nature as the Father, incomprehensible, ineffable. 'In the beginning' then, is from all eternity (Micah v. 2). For eternity is a beginning without beginning. So S. Athanasius ( Contr. Ar.) and others. S. Ambrose ( de Fide i . 5) says that the word 'was' reaches indefinitely. That which was in the beginning is not included in time, is not preceded by any beginning." (Pseudo)-Augustine, Serm. vi . de temp. (ccxxxiv. in App.): "He who was in the beginning includes within Himself all beginning." And Nazianzen ( Orat. de Fide ): "Whatever beginning you choose to assign, will be objected to, for He was in the beginning." But S. Cyril (in John i.) speaks more expressly: "Nothing is more ancient than the beginning, if the word retains its proper meaning. In the beginning of a beginning cannot be thought of. For if it be conceived, this first beginning will be done away with, and then will be really no beginning. And besides, we should then be obliged to go through an infinite series, and not be able to rest simply in any beginning whatsoever." 4. But it may be explained thus. The Word was the beginning of the breathing forth of the Holy Spirit, and thus of the creation of all things (Pro 8:22). The Word being regarded as the pattern or idea according to which God created all things. By this expression John approves the Divinity of the Son of God against Cerinthus and the heretics of the day, who said that Christ was a mere man; as Paul of Samosata, and Photinus afterwards. The Arians partly held this opinion, for though they allowed that He existed before His birth in the flesh, yet they denied His eternal generation, and regarded Him as the first of all God's creatures. This one expression 'which was from the beginning,' implicitly includes the threefold statement in the gospel: (1) In the beginning was the Word.—(2) The Word was with God. (3.) The Word was God. And without quoting this passage S. John refers here to it, for that which was from all eternity must necessarily be God: for nothing is eternal but God.

The first member of the sentence properly and explicitly sets forth when the Word, was: then where He was, and then what was His essence, and its identity with that of the Father. These three blessings did the Word confer on us in His Incarnation, wherein He betrothed His humanity (as it were) to the Eternal Word, and thus joined and betrothed to Itself the whole human race, that we who are temporal might become eternal, from being earthly might become heavenly, that we men might become Gods, in order that our being in time or place, our very essence, might be firmly fixed in the Divine and eternal Word.  S. Gregory Nazianzen ( Orat. xxxvii. on the Nativity ) beautifully says, "The Son of God, who was before all worlds, invisible, incomprehensible, incorporeal, that Beginning, coming from the Beginning, that Light of Light, that Fount of Light and immortality, that stamp of the Archetype, that firmly impressed Seal, betakes Himself to His own image, takes upon Him flesh for the sake of flesh, and is united to an intellectual soul for my soul's sake, in order that He might cleanse like by like." And again, "God united with manhood made one Person of two contrary natures, body and spirit, one of them being deified by the other."

"0 strange union, 0 wondrous interblending! He who exists is made, the uncreated is created; He who is unconfined is (by the medium of an intellectual soul) contained within the compass of a gross body of flesh; He who enriches others suffers poverty, for He takes my poor and humble flesh that I might attain to the riches of His Divinity. He who is full is made empty, emptied of His glory for a short time, that I might be made partaker of His fulness. What riches of His goodness! What a mystery encircles me: He becomes partaker of my flesh, in order to save man who is His image, and to confer immortality on our flesh."

That which we have heard, which we have seen. Lyra refers this to the preaching of John the Baptist, and what he pronounced Christ to be. Didymus and others to the prophecies respecting Christ, and to the several appearances of God to Adam, and the Patriarchs in the Old Testament. For though the whole three Persons were manifested, yet it was specially a manifestation of the Word of God, signifying and anticipating His real appearance, at His own due time, in the flesh. (See Clement, Constit. v. 22; Justin, contr. Trypho ; Origen , Hom. i. in Isa. vi., &c.) For though in all these appearances, and especially in that noblest of all, at the giving of the Law, there appeared, properly speaking, only the person of an Angel (see Gal 3:19), yet this Angel specially represented the Word or Son of God.

But these instances are not to the point, for the Patriarchs and Prophets heard and saw the Word only darkly and in type, and not as the Apostles and disciples of Christ did, which is what S. John here means (see Heb 1:1; Mat 17:5).

S. John puts hearing first, sight afterwards, ascending from that which is less certain to that which is more certain, for he adds lastly, and our hands have handled. As S. Augustine says ( de Diversis lxi. [ al. ccclxxi.]), "A man who could be seen was not to be followed, but God was to be followed Who could be seen. In order then that He might be made manifest, and be seen of men, and followed by men, He was made man." And on Ps. 33., "That man might not disdain to follow a humble man, God humbled Himself, that the pride of man might not disdain to follow the footsteps of God." See also S. Gregory, Mor. xxix. 1; and Hugh of S. Victor ( lib. Sent.) gives as one reason for the Incarnation, "that the inward eye might feast on His Godhead, the outward eye on His manhood." This is what S. Paul speaks of ( Tit. iii.) when he says that the love of God towards man appeared.

Which we have seen, and admired, as a most wonderful sight. It was with the mind only that the Apostles beheld Christ's Godhead, gathering it from His doctrine, miracles, holiness, &c. The Word was both seen and heard through the flesh, as a king is seen by His people, as we look on anything through a cloud, as fire is seen through the heated metal, &c. And though the union of the Word with flesh resembled all these, yet it was more perfect than any of them, for all of them, save that of body and soul, are accidental, but the union of the Word with the manhood is substantial. It is not, however, essential, for the Divine Essence is clearly separate and distinct from the manhood. But yet the union is hypostatical or personal, the manhood and the Godhead existing in the same Person. As in the Eucharist, the Godhead and manhood are hid under the species of the Bread and Wine. As S. Chrysostom says, "Behold, thou seest Christ, thou touchest, thou eatest Him." ( Hom. lx . ad pop.)

And our hands have handled, just as blind men do, touching everything by the hand, as S. Thomas did (Joh 20:27), and also the other Apostles (Luk 24:39). So S. Leontius ( Epist. xcvii.), S. Athanasius ( Orat. contr. Arian ), and many others; though Euthymius thinks that Thomas alone touched His wounds. And in their daily intercourse with Christ the Apostles must have touched Him, with love and veneration when they acknowledged Him as God. For as Oecum says, "He was both seen and not seen, tangible and intangible,—speaking as man, working miracles as God." But we may fully believe that S. John did this with peculiar devotion and affection, when he rested on His breast.  S. Clement Alex. seems to say that Christ's wounds miraculously yielded to the touch of the disciples, so as to make them feel as though they were open. S. Augustine, Ambrose, and others believe that the wounds remained open. ( See Suarez, par. iii . Disput. xlvii. sect. 2.)

S. John inculcates and enlarges upon the doctrine of the Incarnation, first against Basilides, who maintained that Christ assumed flesh in appearance only, and therefore did not really suffer and redeem us. So Epiphanius, Hær. xxiv.

Secondly, to confirm the faithful in their belief of the doctrine, and to convert unbelievers by an argument derived from the evidence of our senses. He maintains then that he himself had seen, heard, and touched Christ. So also S. Peter (Act 10:40). For, as Tertullian ( de Anim. ch. xvii) says, "It would indeed be false testimony, if our very senses proved false."

Thirdly, to show the condescension of the Word, and the dignity of the Apostles. For the Word deigned to come down from heaven, and to join together God and man in the closest personal union, so that all the attributes of God belong to man, and vice versa, and He accordingly, through the attributes of a man, manifests the attributes of God to the Apostles.

In this way the intangible became tangible (says Nazianzen, Orat. xxxviii.), for we cannot form in our minds any likeness of God, Who is a Spirit. In order then that we might conceive of Him, invoke Him, behold, address, and touch Him, He was made man. Whence Paulinus says (in his Epistle to Florentinus), "He, our Lord and God, Who appeared on earth, and held converse with men, is our Sheep and our Shepherd. He is our Emmanuel, God with us, the Lord of Majesty, and the Son of the Handmaiden, being one of these by nature, and being made the other. The same Person being the Creator and the Redeemer of man, God of God, Man for man's sake, the Son of God before all worlds, the Son of man for the sake of the world," &c. He then, Who in His Godhead was our Father, became, as it were, a mother to mankind by the manhood He assumed (see notes on Acts xvii. 24 and 29), but also because God as Bridegroom took to Himself our mother—humanity—as His spouse, and joined it to Himself in everlasting wedlock. (This was prefigured by the marriage of Adam and Eve.) By His humanity then He wedded ourselves and our nature, to become our Mother, as He was before that our Father, in order that we might approach Him with boldness, as children who are afraid of their father approach their mother first of all, and obtain their request. (2.) We therefore invoke Christ's manhood, when we end all our prayers 'through Jesus Christ our Lord.' And as a mother bears a child in her womb, and then trains and fashions it, so did Christ by His continual labours for us, especially on the cross, conceive us, bring us to the birth, nourish and fashion us. Thirdly, because the Incarnation was the work of the highest intelligence and wisdom, as well as of the highest goodness. This latter is ascribed to the Holy Spirit, as the former to the Word. But all of them are subordinate to the omnipotence of the Father. He conceived all things by His Word, as if in the womb, and by His goodness He pours forth His bowels of mercy on us, and especially through the Incarnation He addresses His children (Isa 49:15) as a mother. "The Gentiles," says S. Clement ( Strom. lib. v.), "used to call God μητζοπάτοζα."( See S. Augustine, de Civ. vii. 9.)

In order that we may understand the boundless benefits of the Incarnation, S. John suggests four points for our consideration—Who? What? For Whom? and Why?

1. Who then assumed our flesh? The eternal Word, the King of kings and Lord of lords, Emmanuel, Wonderful, Counsellor, &c. See Isa. ix. 6. This is what the Church says in the Preface for Christmas Day, "By the mystery of the Incarnate Word Thy new and bright light has shone in the eyes of our mind, so that by visibly beholding our God we may thereby be enraptured with the love of invisible things." The Divine Nature did not suffer change or loss by the Incarnation, but remained unaltered in Its own nature and impassible.  S. Leontius ( Serm. x. de Nativ.) says , "The same who took on Him the form of a servant, is in the form of God. The same is incorporeal, and yet assumed a body. The same Being is inviolate in His own might, and subject to suffering in our weakness. He was ever the same Being, never separated from His Father's throne, and yet was by wicked men crucified on the tree."  S. Cyril (in John i. 1) compares the Word made man to a heated coal or iron. As the fire consumes not the iron, but both substances remain uninjured, in like manner the Godhead changed not the manhood, nor the manhood the Godhead: both remain unchanged. This was signified by the burning bush. See too the three Dialogues of Theodoret, where he maintains this against Eutyches. As Damascene says ( Orat. i. de Nativ.), "Thy love, 0 Lord, towards me was so great, that Thou didst not carry out the work of my redemption by an angel or any created being, but as Thou didst create me at first, so didst Thou Thyself effect my redemption. And S. Augustine, Serm. lix. Verb. Dom. ( al. lxii.), says, "The all-powerful Physician came down to heal the sufferer. He humbled Himself so far as to take mortal flesh, just as the physician comes down to the bedside of his patient."

2. What did God become in the Incarnation? He became flesh, or man: "The flesh," says S. Augustine, "had blinded, the Flesh healeth thee. For the soul became carnal by yielding to carnal affections, and the eyes of its heart were thus blinded. But the Word was made flesh. Thy Physician made thee an eye-salve, that by His Flesh He might extinguish the sins of the flesh." The flesh of man is wretched, above that of other animals, subject to countless sufferings and diseases, and corrupted by concupiscence. But yet the Word assumed it, and passing by all the orders of angels, came down into this vale of misery, and united this very flesh to Himself by the closest bond of a personal union. Supposing a sheep were led to the slaughter, and a man from love and compassion wished to die in its stead, as S. Francis used to buy and set them free for love of Christ, would not this be termed an insane and extravagant love? But the love of Christ was as much greater than this, as God surpasses man infinitely more than a man surpasses a sheep. This therefore is the great mystery of godliness (1Ti 3:18). We ought then to wonder and be astounded at this when we see the Infant lying in the manger, and say, "Can this child be my God, the King of heaven, the Creator of the universe?" S. Thomas says ( 0pusc. lx.), God communicates Himself to all by His presence, to the just by His grace, and above all to our flesh by His substance; naturally, supernaturally, and personally, says Cajetan. And in fact, by His manhood He has raised all men, and through them the whole universe, and united it to Himself, that God might be all in all. And again, He united Himself to man, the first to the last, for man was the last created of all things, God coming round to that point from which He started.

3. But for whom did He become flesh? For man, a sinner, and like to the vilest worm. "The child was born, the Son was given for us." Christ did not assume our nature for Himself, as though He needed or delighted in that humanity which He assumed. It was for us. We were the ultimate end of His Incarnation. For He was born in the flesh, that we might be born spiritually in our souls. "For us men," &c., in the Nicene Creed. What, says S. Anselm, "can we imagine more compassionate, than God saying to a sinner, destined to eternal punishment, and unable to redeem himself, Take My Only Begotten Son, and offer Him for thyself; or for the Son to say, 'Take me, and redeem thyself.' Codrus sacrificed himself for his country; but what comparison can this bear to Christ, who, clothing Himself with our flesh, freed us from eternal death and hell, and made us heirs of His heavenly kingdom and eternal glory?"

4. But why was the Word made man? To deliver man from hell, death, sin, and utter misery of body and soul. For the Word gained nothing for Himself but the "emptying" of Himself, insults, poverty, death, and the cross. For our redemption "He was born in time, that we might be born for eternity, He was born in a stable, that we might be born in heaven." (S. Gregory Nazianzen). Hear S. Augustine ( Serm. ix . de Nativ.): Our Lord Jesus Christ, who is from eternity, the Creator of all things, became our Saviour by being born on this day. He was born for us in this ever-changing state, in order to bring us to the eternal Father. God became man, that man might become God, and, that man might eat angels' food, the Lord of angels became man." And also S. Gregory Nazianzen ( in. Distiches ).  S. Clemens Alex. says that by His Incarnation He changed earth into heaven, and made angels, and even gods, of men. (And so too [Pseudo]-Origen, Hom. ix . in diversis ; S. Leontius, Serm. vi . de Nat. ; and S. Anselm, Cur. Deus Homo.)

See then the immensity of this blessing. God not only rains down manna, but rends the heavens as it were, and showers all the treasures and compassions of the Godhead upon us. (See Isa. xlv. 8.) And S. Augustine, Serm. xxvii . ( nunc clxxxvii.): "My mouth shall speak the praise of the Lord, the Lord by whom all things were made, the Revealer of His Father, the Maker of His Mother, the Son of God—of His Father without a mother; the Son of Man—of His mother without a father; the Word of God before all times, made man at the fitting time. . . . Great in the form of God, little in the form of a servant. . . . And yet not so as to detract ought from His greatness, or that His littleness should be overwhelmed by His greatness," &c. And S. Gregory Nazianzen thus rejoices ( Orat. xxx. 7): "Christ is born: glorify Him; Christ has come down from heaven: go forth to meet Him. . . . Clap your hands together, all ye people, for unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given. . . . He who is without flesh is incarnate, the Word increases in stature, the invisible is seen, the intangible is touched, He who is without time begins to be the Son of God—is made the Son of man. Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever." See S. Bernard ( Serm. i. de Epiphany ): "What could declare His mercy so much as His taking on Him our misery? . . . for the more He humbled Himself in His humanity, the more did He exhibit His goodness; and the viler He became for me, the dearer did He become to me." And ( Serm. lxiv. in Cant.), "0 the sweetness, the grace! 0 the power of love! The highest of all has become the lowest of all. And who effected this? Love ignoring dignity, great in condescension, mighty in its affections, powerful in persuasion. And what mighty violence! love triumphs over God, to teach us that it was of His love that His fulness was poured forth, His height brought down, and His one nature associated with another."

Let us then open our heart wide to receive this manna pouring down from heaven, that so by our boundless desires we may embrace and taste all its sweetness. Let us imitate the Patriarchs, who waited four thousand years, and longed and thirsted for it, saying, "0 that thou wouldest rend the heavens and come down!"

Let us imitate the Blessed Virgin, who after His conception longed for His birth, was torn away from the world, and wholly united to Christ. Let every one make known to Christ his necessities, and that temptation which specially weighs him down, and say confidently with S. Catherine of Sienna, "0 Lord, I have Thee present: Thou art mine, I will not let Thee go till Thou removest this temptation; grant me this virtue or grace, till Thou entirely possessest my heart, and imbuest it with Thy love." For He came on earth for this very purpose.  S. Jerome and S. Paula went to Bethlehem, that they might continually behold in their minds the birth of Christ. So S. Francis just before his death celebrated Christmas with an ox and ass, ever repeating, "Let us love the Babe of Bethlehem." And S. Bernard on this mystery surpasses himself, as he preached, saying, "Christ gave Himself wholly for thee: do thou give thyself wholly to Him; as He became man for thee, do thou in return be born to Christ—engraft thyself with the Word, betroth and give thyself wholly to God." See also Serm. in Cœna Dom. at the end of his works.

And our hands have handled of the word of life. That is, that Very Word which we have handled, seen, and heard. That which we could handle and touch, His humanity, e.g., and thus have found that He truly assumed human flesh, and was not a phantom or spectre. Happy they who were permitted thus to see, hear, and touch the Incarnate Word. See Luk 10:23.

Didymus refers all this to the Resurrection, a mystery which the Apostles constantly confirm and enforce. The Gloss confines it to the Transfiguration. But it is far better to refer it to the whole economy of the Incarnation of the Word of life, that is, the eternal, uncreated, Divine Word. S. Basil thinks that the Holy Spirit may be called the Word. But, as S. Thomas says, in an improper sense. See notes on John i. 1.

But it may be asked, (1.) why does S. John call the Son, the Word? 1st, Because both in his Gospel and Epistle he refers to that beginning which Moses speaks of. 2d, Because the Word Who is in the bosom of the Father has all wisdom. And this wisdom S. John sets forth, dwelling more on Christ's teaching and doctrine, while the other evangelists dwell more on what He did. He therefore calls Christ the Word, because he purposes to recount the sayings of this "Word." 3d, If he had called Him the Son, they might have imagined Him to be of a bodily and passible nature. But the "Word" signifies that His generation was not human but spiritual and divine, and consequently pure, perfect, and incorruptible, generated by the Divine mind as a word is generated in our mind. 4th, Because the "Word" signifies the mental conception of God the Father, and this is the generation of the Son, who represents and sets forth the wisdom and will of the Father, as a word would do. And this too is the very reason why the Son, and not the Father or the Holy Spirit, was incarnate, because the Incarnation took place in order to manifest God to man. But it is by a word that anything is manifested. And as the Word was begotten of the Father in the Spirit, so did it become Him to be born of His mother in the flesh.  S. John therefore leads us to the Word, and through Him to God, in order to teach us ever to hold sweet converse with Him. As Seneca says, "As the rays of the sun reach the earth, but dwell in their own source, so does a noble soul, which is sent among us to bring a closer knowledge of divine things, hold converse indeed with us, but is not separated from its own source." It is wedded to the eternal word, as S. Ambrose says and S. Augustine ( Serm. xxxviii . nunc Serm. cxvii.), "A man becomes happy by attaining to that which ever continues happy, and is itself perpetual happiness, and that by which man lives is perpetual life, that by which he becomes wise is perpetual wisdom, and that by which he is enlightened is perpetual light."

2d. But why is the Son called λόγος? (1.) That word can be translated 'wisdom.' And just as wisdom is intimately connected with ourselves, so is the Son with the Father. And (2.) as reason or knowledge proceeds from the mind, so does the Word or the Son proceed from the Father. So Origen, S. Chrysostom, Theophylact, Euthymius in John i., Nazianzen, Orat. iv., S. Basil, &c. And (3.) because He makes us subject to reason. See Rupertus on John i., and Eusebius, Demetrius, Evang. v . 5. "The Word has in Himself the reasons of all created things, and is accordingly termed the Wisdom and the Word of God." But this word 'reason' does not express so clearly His procession from the Father. (See S. Augustine, Quæst. lxiii. inter lxxxvii.) Besides which the word 'reason' speaks of the Essence of God and is common to the Whole Trinity, and is not merely personal as [Pseudo]-Dionysius says ( De Divinis Nominibus ). But lastly, 'reason' can exist in one who at the time does not understand (as when sleeping), but the 'Word' only in one who actually understands.

2d. The word λόγος may mean 'work.' For the Word is the coequal work of the Father as God. See Wisd. 7:25.

3d. It may mean 'power.' For the, Word is the arm of the Father, by which He created all things (as God), and by whom He redeemed all things. (See 1Co 1:23.)

4th. It may mean 'the form.' For the Word is the brightness of the Eternal Light. Wisd. 7:26; Heb 1:23. [Pseudo]-Dionysius speaks of the Father as the primordial Fount of Godhead, and the Son and the Holy Ghost as shoots (so to speak) of Godhead. And accordingly S. Augustine ( de Trin. vi. 10) says, "A certain person (S. Hilary, de Synod ) says that when he wished to express in the clearest manner the properties of the several Persons in the Trinity, he used to say that 'Eternity was in the Father, His Image in the Son, His use in the gift, i.e., the Holy Spirit the gift of the Father and the son.'" And (as above) "The Word increases not as we know Him, but ever remains one and the same, whether we adhere to or withdraw from Him, ever abiding in Himself, and renewing all things. The Form (or pattern) of all things, unfashioned Himself, independent of time and space."

5th. It can mean 'definition,' because He definitely and fully sets forth the nature of the Father, and of all things besides. As S. Gregory Nazianzen says, "The Son has the same relation to the Father as the definition to the thing defined. For he who sees the Son, sees the Father: for the Son is a brief and simple setting forth of the Father's nature." See Euthymius on John i. Again, it may mean 'a computation;' for the Word is the standard by which all things are computed.

6th. Again, it may mean the ' cause,' for the Word was both the efficient cause of all creatures, and also the idea which conceived them.

7th. Beza and others suppose it to be the promised Word, foretold by the Prophets. But Salmeron states in reply, that He was before all Prophets, and was with God. In fact, Beza denies the λόγος quite as much as do the Alogians (see Epiph. Hær. li.), as do also the Magdeburg Centuriators, and thus are semi-atheists.

8th. But the best meaning is that He is the 'Word,' not of the mouth and voice, but of the heart and mind. For as we conceive anything in our mind, so did the Eternal Father, knowing what was His own Essence and all its capacities, form and produce this Word from eternity in every respect equal and like to Himself, and consequently God, the Son of God, begotten of the Father. (See Suarez, lib. ix. de Deo Trin. cap. 4, 6, and others.)

Here note that the Word of God has a twofold sense, first, essential, because He is the very essence, mind, and will of the Father which He communicates to the Son and the Holy Spirit. The Arians believed this, but added that God began to be the Father only in time. (2.) There is the personal sense of the word, viz. the Word begotten of the Father, and a Person subsisting by Himself. Of Him S. John speaks both here and in his Gospel. S. Cyril ( Thesaur. vii. 1) says, "S. John chose the name of the 'Word' as most appropriate, and significative of the Godhead, and the procession of the second Person of the Trinity." But S. Augustine ( de Trin. xv. 14), "the Father knoweth all things in Himself—in Himself essentially, but in the Son as His Word."

The word λόγος is the same as discourse, or speech. Accordingly, Tertullian, S. Cyprian, S. Ambrose, Jerome, use the word ' Sermo.' Erasmus adopted this in the passage before us. For this innovation he was sharply handled by theologians, but defended by Calvin.

The term 'word' ( verbum ) is more appropriate—(1.) as the simplest; (2.) the most general term; (3.) because it is the proper word for any mental conception, and the Son is the conception of the Father's mind; (4.) a word is uttered by the mouth, and so did the Father make known His will through the Word, as S. Epiphanius expressly says ( Hær. lxxi.), and S. Augustine ( de Fide et Symb. cap iii.), "He is called the Word of the Father, because the Father is made known through Him. For just as we by our words make our mind known to a hearer, so is that Wisdom, whom the Father begat, most fittingly called the Word, because it is through Him that the very secrets of the Father are made known." S. John here and elsewhere calls Christ the Word by reason of His Godhead and not His manhood.

S. Basil, describing the dignity and attributes of the Word ( lib. ii . contr. Eunom.), says, "In order to have a worthy understanding of His generation from God, we should consider it to be impassible, indivisible, before all time, like a ray shooting forth from a light, not carefully wrought out at some subsequent time, but as existing together with its prototype, which gave it its being, and coexisting with it, like the impression of a seal, or as when teachers impart knowledge, without losing anything themselves, and yet instructing their hearers." And Tertullian ( adv. Praxeam, ch. ix.) uses the same comparisons. "God brought forth His Word, as a root produces a plant, a fountain the river, and the sun its rays. But yet we cannot separate them from each other, as the Word cannot be separated from God." This doctrine is fully set forth in the Creed which S. Gregory Thaumaturgus is said to have received from S. John himself, at the bidding of the Blessed Virgin. The Gentiles knew this truth in a shadowy way, having learned it either from the Old Testament or from the Sibylline Books, or even from the light of nature, or Divine Inspiration. Plato accordingly was called the Attic Moses, (Eusebius, de Prep. Evan. xiii . ; and Theodoret, de Curando Græc. Affect. lib. ii.), Lactantius ( de Sap. iv. 9) says, "Philosophers were not ignorant of this divine Word. For Zeno calls the Orderer of Nature and the Maker of the Universe the λόγος."

But it will be asked, was this Divine Word like our Word, or unlike? Partly like, and partly unlike. It was like in these respects. 1. As being immaterial. 2. As being in either case the vehicle of our thoughts; and 3, of our conceptions. 4. As being within. 5. As being the idea according to which nations are moulded. Hence Tinneus calls the Word of God his pattern world, the model of all created things. 6. As the thoughts of our mind are uttered outwardly in word, so was it when the Word of God spake in the Flesh He assumed. 7. As our word is the image of our understanding, so is the Word the image of God the Father. 8. As our word or conception lasts as long as we understand any matter, so is it with the Divine Word. The Divine mind ever abides, so does His Word. And as the mind of the Father is ever active, so is it with the generation of the Word. It is ever going on. As the Ephesian fathers say, "Let the splendour of light set forth that the Son of God has ever been co-eternal with the Father, let the 'Word' declare that His generation was without suffering, and let the Name of Son reveal His consubstantiality." See, too, S. Basil ( Hom. i . on S. John ). 9. As the conceptions of our mind precede our action. As S. Augustine says ( de Trinit. lib. xv. 11), "There are no acts of ours which are not previously suggested in the mind. There may be words of ours which are not followed by action, but the contrary cannot be: and in like manner the Word of God could be when as yet no creature existed, but no creature could exist except by Him by Whom all things were made."

II. It is unlike: (1.) Because our word is merely an accident of our mind: but the Word of God exists as a Substance and a Person. See S. Athanasius, Serm. i. Contr. Arianos ; and S. Chrysostom, Hom. i. on John ix. 2. (2.) Our word is a thing of time, subsequent to its conception in the mind, whereas the Word of God is from all eternity, and coeval with the Father. And again our 'word' results from our being unable otherwise to understand others. But the Word of God arises from the infinite perfection and productiveness of the Father's mind. (3.) Our speech is imperfect, ever changing, and complex. Whereas the Word of God is perfect, ever constant, unchangeable, one and the same, as S. Augustine says (on Ps. xliv.), "All things exist in One," and S. Athanasius, Serm. iii . contr. Arian. (4.) Our word or speech is distinct from our mind, whereas the Word of God is consubstantial with the Father. (5.) Our speech (or word) is part of our nature, but the Word of God is a Person distinct from the Father. (6.) Our word is not our son whereas the Word of God is the Son of God, as S. Augustine says ( de Trinit. vi. i): "The Father is Very Wisdom, but the Son is Wisdom and Power from the Wisdom and Power of the Father. The Father is not wise by engendered Wisdom, but is in Himself unbegotten Wisdom." (7.) Our words are feeble and ineffectual; the Word of God is all-powerful. (8.) Our words soon pass away and come to naught. The Word of God is eternal, for eternal is the understanding and the generation of the Father. S. Hilary says ( de Trinit. ii.), "The sound of the voice ceases, and the expression of our thought. But this Word is a reality, not a mere sound." (See Suarez ut supra.)

And therefore, though we may in some measure ascend from the word of our mind to (the knowledge of) the Word of God, yet this ascent by the light of nature is only to (the knowledge of) His essential Word. For this God conceives, understands, and bringeth forth all things. But that He brought forth and begat His Personal Word, that is as Son, surpasses the understanding both of angels and men. It must therefore be wondered at and adored in mute and holy silence, rather than be pried into and set forth by our too curious and yet feeble understanding, so that we may wonder and cry aloud with the Seraphim, 'Holy, Holy, Holy,' &c. This was not known to Plato, or to Demosthenes with all his eloquence. "I will bring to nought the understanding of the prudent," says S. Jerome to Paulinus. "My heart hath uttered a good word. I will speak of thy works to the King," says the Psalmist (Ps. xly. i.) "Thou seest that this Word is the Son of God, and we believe that He came forth from the Father's breast; from the womb of His heart, so to speak." (Nazianzen, Orat. de Fide.) See Ps. cx., on which S. Jerome says, "He brought Him forth from His own Nature, from His own substance, from the very inmost being ( medullis ) of His Godhead. Whatever the Father is Himself in His Godhead He gave wholly to His Son."

Tropologically. S. Augustine ( Confess. xi . 9) explains how the Word preaches to the heart of man, and S. Bernard says ( Serm. xlv . in Cant.): "His beauty is His love, and it is the greater because it takes the lead. But then it is, that from the very depths of His heart, and from His inmost affections, He cries more ardently for our love in return, in proportion as He feels that He was more ready to love us than we were to be loved by Him. And hence arose His speaking to us, His pouring forth His gift, and the response of the soul, its wonder and its thankfulness. And it therefore loves the more, because it sees that it is mastered in love, and wonders the more, and feels that it was not the first to love." And S. Ambrose, ( de Virg. iii.) says, "the Word of God wounds, but leaves not a sore ( ulcerat )." There is a wound of gracious love, there are wounds of charity, as the Spouse says ( Song ii.), "She who is perfect is wounded with charity. Good then are the wounds of the Word—the wounds of Him who loveth us."

The word of life. "For as the Father hath life in Himself, &c." (Joh 5:26.) Being is here attributed to the Father, life to the Word, love to the Holy Spirit.

Life is threefold, divine, angelic, human. Of these the Divine is most perfect, boundless, eternal, uncreated, the origin and source of angelic and human life. Angelic life is created, but spiritual. Human life is partly spiritual, partly corporeal. It is also natural and supernatural. The natural consists in life, sense, and reason. The supernatural also is two-fold, begun by grace and consummated in glory. Further than this the Divine Life is formal and causal. Formal is that life with which God Himself exists, causal that by which He gives life (whether natural or spiritual) to others. The Word then is called the Word of Life, as having life in Himself and as being the cause of life to others. As S. John says, "in Him was life," being in Himself essential life. See S. Thomas, par. i. Quæst. 28, where he alludes to the words (Ps. 36), "With Thee is the Fount of Life;" as Theodoret says, "With Thee is the Eternal Word, the Fount of Life, and in the Light of the Holy Spirit we shall see the light of the only Begotten One."

But secondly, it may mean, that in the Word there exist, as in archetype, the eternal reasons of all things. "The Wisdom of God, (says S. Augustine in John i. 1) in art (or theory) contains all things. Thou beholdest the heaven, sun, moon, they exist in the theory; outwardly they are bodies, in theory they are life." And again, "All things which are made, and have not life, have life in the Word of God, though they are not life, in themselves." The same statement occurs in the Homilies ascribed to Origen. As Philo says, "When He resolved to create this world, He formed a conception of it, and from that fashioned the world we now see." See note in translation of S. Augustine (on Joh 1:3) in Library of the Fathers.

But again, in Him is that which sustains and supports everything in life. See S. Chrysostom, Cyril, Theophylact, Euthymius in John i. 4, and Clement Alex. Adhort. ad gentes.

Thirdly, But it is best to understand it to mean that in the Word is our true life, both of grace and glory. He became man in order to communicate this life and light to men: that, just as the world at large was created by Him, so might man (this existence of the world) be re-created, and brought back from sin to the life of grace and glory. See below, verse 2, and chapter v. ii. See S. Chrysostom, Augustine, S. Ambrose, de Fide, cap. iii. and others. See too the many passages in this Gospel where life is spoken of as coming from the Word. See also Lactantius i. 11, on the meaning of Ζευ̃ς.

And the Life was manifested : By the Incarnation, by which He was beheld and even touched by men. This was prophesied by Isaiah; and see Luk 3:5. And S. Ambrose in Ps. xxxvi. (Psa 37:19)  says, "Christ is in all things our life. His Godhead is our life, His eternity is our life, His flesh is our life, His Passion is our life." Whence Jeremy says, "We shall live in His shadow, the shadow of His wings. The shadow of the cross is the shadow of His Passion, His death is life, His wounds are life, His blood is life, His burial is life, His Resurrection is the life of all men. Wishest thou to know how His death is life? We are baptized into His death, that we may walk with Him in newness of life [Rom. vi. 4]. And He says Himself, "Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone, but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit (John xii. 24). He, that grain of wheat, was separated from the body for us, and died that He might bring forth much fruit in us. His death therefore is the fruit of life."

And bear witness. In our words, our life, our suffering death and martyrdom. As S. John says of himself (Rev. v. 1.). Again, it means, "We protest and denounce, by threatening unbelievers with the terrible judgment of God." As Cassian says ( de Incarn. v . 6), "In faithfully discharging His Office, He leaves those who refuse to listen, to bear the peril of their own disobedience."

And shew unto you that Eternal Life : Christ, who as the Word of God is eternal life: which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us—being made visible by His Incarnation, miracles, especially (says Cajetan) by His Transfiguration, Resurrection, and Ascension. By which latter He shows that not only as the Word, but as man also, He will live a glorious and eternal life.

With the Father. As the Gospel says, "The Word was with God." Being, as Nonnus says, "never parted from the Father: ever seated on His Throne."

S. John here answers the objection, "How could He be ever with the Father, when there was no place where He could be?  S. John replies that there was no need of space for Him. He was in the bosom of the Father. But the word 'with' signifies three things: (1) That He was a person distinct from the Father, (2) that He was closely connected with Him, (3) was equal to the Father. This overthrows the Eunomian heresy that the Son was not the Word, for S. John says that it was the same Word which was with the Father, and was manifested in the flesh. And to keep them from inferring that the Word was not God, S. John expressly adds, "And the Word was God." For the Divine Persons, though distinct the one from the other, have yet one and the same Essence. And that the Word was not, as Arian suggested, separable from the Father, as some article of dress (see S. Fulgent, contr. Monimum, lib. iii . cap. 2, 3), He is one with the Father as heat and brightness co-exist in the fire, or as memory and understanding co-exist in the same mind, or perhaps intellect, memory, and will are identical with the mind itself.

And was manifested unto us. This was at the Incarnation (as S. Dionysius Alex. says), where the invisible became visible, and when He who far surpasses every being came from the hidden shrine of Godhead, became man, and stood forth to our view. But God in truth is hidden even after this manifestation of Himself, or indeed (to announce a higher truth) even in this very manifestation. For the Godhead of Jesus was hidden, and the mystery which then was wrought respecting Him is not revealed or brought into light by anything which can be said or thought about Him, but even when it is spoken of cannot be explained, and when it is understood is still kept secret.

Ver. 3.— That ye also may have fellowship with us. That is, in the same faith and Church of Christ, where all partake in the same sacraments. It means also that ye should make increase and advance in the faith. It signifies a continuous and growing act. For he speaks to the faithful who already belonged to this society, though Œcumenius thinks it refers to unbelievers, whom John wished to attract to the Church of Christ. This is what S. Paul speaks of (Heb 12:22), "Ye have come unto Mount Sion," &c. For with all these we have fellowship in the Church—with Angels, with the Apostles, with the early Christians, with just men made perfect, with Christ and with God. Whence S. John adds,

And that our fellowship may be with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ. Not with the god of Simon Magus, and with his mediating angels, whom he regards, as does Plato also, as demigods. For, as Bede says, "No one can have fellowship with God, unless he be first joined to the fellowship of the Church." And as S. Cyprian says ( de Unit. Eccelesiæ ), "Whoever is separated from the Church is joined to an adulteress. He is severed from the promises of the Church, and will not attain to the rewards which Christ offers. He who has left the Church of Christ is an alien, is profane, is an enemy. He cannot have God as his Father, who hath not the Church as his mother. If no one could escape who was without the ark, so can no one escape who is without the Church, &c." Excommunicated persons then who are separated from the Church are likewise separated from God. In the Greek this is stated more plainly and forcibly, Our fellowship is with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ. It sets forth the nobleness of the fellowship of the Church, as being our fellowship with God and Christ, for the Church is His spouse. (See 2Pe 1:4; 1Co 1:9 and 1Co 6:7.) All the faithful then have fellowship with Christ and God by faith, hope, and charity, and the more so as they advance in these graces, imitate His life, and help to propagate His truth, like the Apostles, who did and suffered so much for Christ, and devoted themselves entirely to promote His glory and the salvation of souls. This fellowship or society embraces all the qualifications of true friendship which Aristotle, Cicero, and others speak of. Accordingly S. Augustine ( Tract. lxxvi . on John ) says, "The Holy Spirit with the Father and the Son makes His abode with us as in a temple. The whole three Persons come to us, when we come to them: they come by succouring, we by obeying; they by enlightening, we by beholding the light; they by filling us, we by receiving—so that our sight of them is not outward, but inward, and their dwelling with us is not transitory but eternal." Dionysius the Carthusian beautifully and piously explains ( in loc.) how the faithful should hold converse with God. Hesselius and Lorinus describe our fellowship with Christ as that of a lord with his servant, a father with an adopted child, of the enlightener and the enlightened, the justifier and the justified, a ruler and subject, a giver and receiver, of one who invokes and one who hears, of one who bestows gifts and one who returns thanks, of Him who blesses and he who is blessed; so that, cleaving to God, we may be one with Him, and walking in the light as He is in the light, may have fellowship with Him. It is (as concerns Christ's human nature) like the relation of a master and his scholars, of a Priest and those for whom he offers sacrifice and intercedes, of one who suffers punishment which another deserved, and one who receives a favour which he did not deserve, &c. Scripture explains it under the type of a Shepherd and his sheep, the head and the members, of food and its eaters, the vine and the branches, and so on. We, in a word, who are partakers of His sufferings, are partakers of His consolations. Christ also calls us His friends, brethren, &c. He says that His God is our God, His Father and our Father. (See Eph 2:19; 1Jo 3:1; 2Co 11:2; Hos 2:19)

And these things write we that ye may rejoice in the fellowship of the Church of Christ, and that our joy may be full. Increase daily more and more (see Phi 2:2; Joh 17:13.) This is the result of a good conscience (2Co 1:12). As S. Bernard says to Pope Eugenius, "What is more precious, what more calm, and what freer from care than a good conscience? It fears not losses, it fears not reproaches, it fears not bodily tortures, for it is exalted rather than cast down by death itself." And so too Cicero, Horace, and other heathen writers. The Apostle therefore rightly sets forth the hope and confidence inspired by a pure and innocent conscience. For S. Augustine truly said [on Ps. 31], "The very charity of a righteous man gives him hope of a good conscience, for a good conscience inspires hope; for just as an evil conscience leads to utter despair, so does a good conscience inspire confident hope."

The joy then of believers is real and solid. Being joy in the Lord it satisfies and fills the mind, while joy in worldly delights, wealth, and honours, does but excite without gratifying. Hear S. Gregory ( Hom. xi . in Evang.), "Because unending lamentations follow after present joys, avoid vain joys in this life if ye dread sorrow in the next. For no one can both rejoice with the world here, and reign with Christ hereafter. Abstain therefore from the fleeting pleasures of temporal delight, subdue the desires of the flesh. And if anything charms thy mind here, let it shrivel to nothing at the thought of the eternal fire; and whatever makes thee merry in youth, let youthful discipline check and restrain, that so ye may more easily obtain eternal joys, by fleeing of your own accord from those which are only temporal." And S. Chrysostom ( Hom. xviii. ad populum ), "He that rejoices in the Lord can never by anything accidental be deprived of it. For all other things which delight us are subject to change, nor can they afford us so much pleasure

Lapide: 1Jo 2:1-29

CHAPTER 2

Ver. 1.— My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. At the end of the last chapter it was said that all who were grown up had sinned, either mortally as heathens, or venially as Christians. But he now exhorts them one by one to be most watchful against the sins they committed as heathens, and to abstain as far as they could from venial sins. For though it be impossible to avoid them collectively, yet it is possible to avoid them one by one, especially such as are committed not by surprise, but with previous consideration, and deliberately.

But if any man sin, we have an Advocate. This anticipates the objection, what then will he do, who through human weakness has fallen into some unusual and shameful sin? He answers, he should not despair, or be cast down, because we have Christ as our advocate with our most loving Father, Christ who by presenting His death and sufferings which He underwent for us, will easily obtain our pardon, if we are truly penitent, for God is most merciful, and Christ's merits are infinite. And just as the severity of a wound or disease displays the skill and credit of the physician who cures them, so does the greatness of our sins which He heals, and in which He is a propitiator, set forth the greatness of Christ's mercy, grace, and redemption. As in the case of the Magdalene and S. Paul. See 1Ti 1:15. Here observe Advocate means one who pleads our cause: in a forensic sense; and He is so—1. By displaying His wounds, and thus silently pleading His own Merits. 2. Many, with great probability, assert that He is ever praying for us orally, being no longer a wayfarer on earth, but as having attained to his rest and claiming our pardon as His right. See Heb 7:25,Heb 9:12; Joh 14:16; Rom 7:3. Beza and others thence contend that the saints are not our advocates, and that we make them superior to Christ, if we regard them as such. But they reason falsely, for we know and profess that Christ is the Son of God, and that the Blessed Virgin and the Saints are immeasurably inferior to Him. But yet they intercede for us through His merits. See S. Irenæus, v. 29;  S. Bernard, xii.; and on the whole question, Bellarmine, de lnvocat. Sanct.

Jesus Christ the righteous. That is, (1.) Innocent and holy, and who by His very sanctity is most loved of the Father, and desirous to be heard of Him. (2.) He who made a full satisfaction for our sins, paying a full ransom for them by His own Blood. He is then our righteous advocate in another sense, as pleading a righteous cause, as those who plead for gain. Whence Cassiodorus says ( Epist. xi. 4.), "If in your zeal for advocacy ye have shone forth with the light of justice." Such an one, then, is a good advocate amongst men, but not with God, since we ask of Him, not justice, but mercy and grace. And His is a tribunal of grace.

Ver. 2. — And ( i.e., because) He is the propitiation (the propitiator) for our sins. For by offering Himself on the Cross as a Victim for sins, He has made satisfaction for them, and reconciled the Father to us. This refers to the mercy-seat, which was above the ark (see Exo 25:17), which represented Christ our Propitiator (see Rom 3:25.). S. Augustine ( de Fide et 0peribus ) reads, "He is the entreater ( exoratio ) for our sins."  S. Cyprian reads deprecatio, John means that Christ is so powerful an advocate, that our case cannot fail in His hands, being Himself, by His very office, our redemption and propitiation, who made a full satisfaction for our sins.

So S. John says (Rev 1:5); and S. Leo ( Serm. xii . de Passione ), "The pouring forth of His righteous Blood for the unrighteous, was so powerful to gain this privilege, so fully sufficient to pay the price, that if the whole body of captives believed in their Redeemer, the bands of tyranny would not retain their hold of a single one . . . For though the death of the Saints was precious in the sight of the Lord, yet it was not the death of any innocent person that was the propitiation of the world. The righteous received crowns, they did not confer them. In the fortitude of the saints were exhibited examples of patience, not gifts of righteousness. They each died their own several deaths, and none of them dying discharged any other's debt than his own, since the Lord Jesus Christ stood forth alone among the sons of men, in whom all are crucified, all die, all are buried, and all moreover will be raised again." For this cause S. Augustine and other saints who had sinned betook themselves to the wounds of Christ, and dwelt therein as in a refuge. See note on Zech. xiii. As S. Ambrose ( pref. in Ps. xxxv.) says, "The Blood of Christ is fine gold, plenteous to redeem, and flowing forth to wash away every sin."

And not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world. Not for Jews only but for Gentiles, to whom Christ ordered the Gospel to be preached. Again, Christ is offered in the Sacrifice of the Mass for all men, excepting those who are excommunicated.

And hereby do we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. We know Him by probability and conjecturally. But our knowledge must be practised: it must show itself in love and affection, and in outward acts. And we shall in this way secure Him as our Advocate. S. Augustine says ( De Fide et 0per. cap. xii), "Let not our mind be so deceived as to think that it knows God if it confess Him with a dead faith, that is, without works." So David says, Psa 103:18, "To think upon His commandments to do them." See his dying advice to Solomon, "Know thou the God of thy fathers," that is believe, reverence, love, and obey Him. See also Hos 6:6, For he who does not observe the law of God assuredly does not know it, because he does not practically value or ponder as he ought on His boundless majesty, goodness, power, wisdom, and righteousness, for else he would love, reverence, and obey Him with his whole heart. For, as Bede says, "He who loves not God, shows that he knows not His loveliness, and he has not learned to taste and see how gracious and sweet He is, if he does not labour continually to do those things which are pleasing in His sight." See chap. iv. 7, 8.

Catharinus wrongly infers that the righteous can know for certain that they are righteous and in God's favour. But although they may have grace and the love of God in their hearts, yet they do not see them, and though they outwardly observe the commandments of God, yet they know not whether they observe them from love of Him, and as He commanded. And though they feel that they love God, yet they know not whether this love is what it should be, and simply for God's sake. ( See Conc. Indent. sess. vi . cap. 9; Bellarmine , de Justif. iii . 1 seq.)

Ver. 4.— He that saith he knoweth Him, that is, with true and saving knowledge, such as leads to eternal life, and keepeth not His commandments is a liar. As the Apostle said (Rom 1:21) of the philosophers who knew God, but only in a speculative and barren way, "When they knew God, they glorified Him not as God."

Ver. 5.— But whoso keepeth His word, in him verily is the love of God perfected. This confirms the previous statement, by way of antithesis. The word is spoken of in the singular number, because the law of love comprehends all others, just as a root implies the leaves and fruit, and the whole tree.

Perfect love is that which fulfils that command, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart," &c. (Mat 22:37.) For he who observes the commands of God loves God with all his heart, though he may sin venially, which is a necessary evil in this life of corruption. But in this perfectness of Christian charity and life there are various grades. The first is so to love God with all the heart as never to offend Him mortally. 2. Never deliberately to offend Him venially, even for the sake of the whole world. 3. To renounce, for the love of God, the love of every creature, and to devote thyself entirely to His service as "religious" do. See, too, Rom. viii. 35. 4. Not to think, wish, or love anything save God, or for His sake. Origen ( Præf. in Evan. S. Joan ) says , "He who is perfect, no longer lives himself, but Christ lives in him;" and S. Augustine ( Serm. xxxix . de temp. [ nunc cccl]) says, "As covetousness is the root of all evil, so is love the root of all good. The love of God and our neighbour fills up the whole length and breadth of the sacred word." He then adds, "Without it a rich man is poor, with it a poor man is rich. It gives patience in adversity, moderation in prosperity, endurance in hard sufferings, and so forth." And S. Bernard writes thus to the brethren ( de Monte Dei, xix.): "Perfection, though not of the same kind, is required of you all. As one star differs from another star in glory, so does cell from cell,*in the beginners, the progressing, and the perfect The first state may be called the animal, the next the rational, the last the spiritual, the first relating to the body, the second to the soul, the third finding its rest in God alone. Each, however, has its own rate of progress and measure of perfection. The beginning consists in perfect obedience in the animal life, its progress in bringing the body into subjection, its perfection in turning the practice of good into delight in it. And so too, in the rational life, the perfection of which is the spiritual life, and the perfection of the spiritual life is to be changed into the same image from glory to glory, as by the Spirit of the Lord." And S. Maximus says ( De Charitate Cent. iii. 97), "That soul is perfect whose whole powers turn only towards God." See also Centur. iv. 17; and S. Francis ( in 0pusc. decem perfect—considered to be spurious: see Cave) says, "A Christian's perfection is to root out from his heart all worldly affections, and to find no root, or resting-place, save in Him who made it. And again, to have such patience as to love him the more who has done or said any wrong of him. For as God of His bounty conferred on him all his blessings, so should he believe that He secretly pledges Himself to send on him every kind of evil, in order to show a sinner his sins, and thus lightly punish them once in this present life, that He may not scourge them more severely for ever. He should therefore love him who has done or spoken any evil against him, as being the messenger of God to him for good," &c.

Hereby know we that we are in Him.  S. Augustine here adds, ' If we be perfected in Him,' but nearly all MSS. omit these words. The meaning is, we know that we are in Him if we keep His commandments. This is the effect and sign of our cleaving to Him. Moreover, it is by love that we abide in God, as the thing loved is in the lover. For the soul is more in that which it loves, than in that which it animates. And God in return loves those who love Him, dwells in them, cares for, directs and protects them. Augustine says, that we who love Christ are in Christ, as the members in the body. See Joh 15:23. The soul then of one who loves God is a kind of temple, in which all the three Persons abide. And by abiding S. John means intimate union, permanent resting, continual presence, friendly converse, and all other offices of true friendship.

Ver. 6.— He that saith he abide in Him ought himself also so to walk, even as He walked. By advancing in virtue, especially in charity, and exhibiting its works more and more every day, as Christ "increased in wisdom and stature." "The true righteousness of the perfect," says S. Leo ( Serm. ii. de Quadr.), "is for them never to presume that they are perfect, lest by stopping short when their journey is not yet done, they should incur the risk of failing." See Eph. v. 1. S. Prosper ( de vit. contempl. lib. 11) beautifully says, "What is walking as He walked, except the despising all the good things which He despised, not to fear the sufferings He endured, to teach what He taught, to hope for what He promised, to confer kindnesses on the ungrateful, not to requite to evil-wishers according to their deserts, to pray for our enemies, to pity the perverse, patiently to bear with the crafty and proud, and, as the Apostle says, to die to the flesh that we may live to Christ?" &c.

Whence Gregory Nyssen defines Christianity to be an imitation of the Divine nature, &c. S. Augustine ( de Vera Relig. cap. xv.) tells us that the Word was made flesh, to teach us the way of life not by force but by example, in ministering to the poor, in refusing to be a king, in submitting to every kind of injury, &c. In fact, His whole life, in the nature He deigned to assume, was a moral discipline. S. Cyprian ( de Zelo et Livore ), "If parents delight in having children who are like themselves, much more does God rejoice when a man is spiritually born; and again, as we have borne the image of the earthly, let us also bear the image of the heavenly. But we cannot do this unless we exhibit a resemblance to Christ; for this is to change our old self, and to begin a new life, and that thus the Divine truth may shine forth in thee, as He Himself promised, 'Those that honour Me, I will honour.'"

My beloved, I write a new commandment unto you. This commandment of loving God and our neighbour was not new, for it was given to the Jews, and before that to Adam and all men by the Law of Nature, which was in the mind of God from all eternity. This, was an answer to the objection made to the Apostle's teaching, that it was new and unheard of. It was again an old commandment as having been taught Christians from their very baptism.

Again, a new commandment I write unto you. It was new, as being a new enforcing of an old commandment, which had been forgotten by long disuse. (See Joh 13:33.) And it was enforced by Christ on the new principle of love, and also more fully explained (Matt v. 38; Joh 14:15-16). It was new on various grounds—1. Because of the new efficient cause, viz. Christ, who enforced it more stringently upon us. And again, by reason of the new source of charity and grace, viz., the Holy Spirit poured forth at Pentecost. The false interpretations of the Jews were thus put aside, and a new law, and new obligations and duties, imposed on Christians. See Mat 5:43.

2. It was a new law; by reason of a new material cause, viz., the new and enlarged body of Christians, who were before in the darkness of unbelief and hatred, but who were now bound by it to love God and their neighbour.

3. There was a new formal cause, namely, the Incarnation, and the union of all Christians in Christ. For in Christ there is an union, not with Christ only, but with all Christians in Him, an union by nature, by grace, and by the sacraments (especially by the Holy Eucharist), which is the foundation of a greater and singular obligation to a stricter love of God, of Christ, and of all Christians. And this is a pure, perfect love, in so much as Christ is far above, and more perfect than other men. Moreover, by Christ's Incarnation we owe greater love, not only to Christ, but also to the whole Trinity, by reason of our closer union, and also of the new and very great blessings conferred on us thereby. For by the Incarnation we have a new relation and union to the Holy Trinity, and also between ourselves, and a new cause and formal reason for love. For by the Incarnation Christ has became our kinsman and brother, so that we ought mutually to love each other, as brethren and members of the one body of Christ. So Toletus and F. Lucas on John 13.

4. It is new, with regard to the example Christ has set us. He poured forth His blood out of pure love. And such indeed was the love of the Blessed Virgin, and the early Christians. We are taught to do according to the pattern shewed us in the Mount. Christ says, "As I have loved you"—words which have caused much matter for shame, and also much matter for exaggeration. For consider what arguments for love Christ furnished at every moment, by His birth, His labour, His preaching, His suffering, His dying, and thus thou wilt see how little is the love of all men. As S. John the Almoner, Bishop of Alexandria, used to say when one praised his liberality to the poor: "My brother, I have not yet shed my life for thee, as the Lord commanded me."

We are therefore taught by Christ not merely to love our neighbour as ourselves, but even more than ourselves. For Christ died for us though we were His enemies, teaching us to do the same. This was an unheard-of love both among the Jews and the world at large. So S. Cyril, in John xiii., S. Chrysostom, Theophylact, Rupertus. Arias [Montanus] says, that our love should be most fervent, and abounding in kind offices, even towards our enemies, and ready to shed our, blood for the good of our brethren, as Christ did. So Cajetan, Gagneius, S. Major, and others.

5. In regard of the new end Christ set before us, He wished to make us heavenly men, and not earthly. And he wished us to renew our love by frequent communions, sermons, meditations, &c. S. John in his old age used frequently to repeat and inculcate these words.  S. Bernard ( Serm. v. in Cæna. Dom.): "It is a new commandment because it makes all things new, putting off the old man and putting on the new, and by daily admitting to heaven mankind who were banished from paradise." " Is it not a new commandment," says S. Augustine, "because this commandment renews those who obey it, and thus makes us new men, heirs of the New Testament, singers of the new song, making and gathering into one a new people?"  S. Gregory ( Hom. xxxii . in Evang.) says, "Our Lord and Redeemer came as a new man into the world, giving us new precepts. For since our old life was brought up in sin, He set up in opposition to it newness of life," charity as opposed to concupiscence, and the love of God and our neighbour against our self-love.

6. Maldonatus understands by 'new' something excellent and pre-eminent. And others again by 'new' understand a commandment never given before, as men were called 'new' who were newly made: and 'new' also because Christ wished His disciples to observe it 'anew,' as being the last He gave them. As F. Lucas explains it, "I have reserved this commandment to you, in order that ye may keep it more firmly in your memory. For I wish specially to commend it to you, being such a command as no one ever yet gave his disciples, being a gentle and loving command. It was 'new' then, as newly enjoined by Christ in His Last Supper, and as being a command peculiar to Christ, and being in a singular manner commanded by Him." (See. S. Basil, de Bapt. cap. ult.)

7. It was 'new' with respect to its effects, the heroic deeds of S. Paul and the other Apostles, their new and unheard-of labours and persecutions, and the new alacrity and ardour with which they subdued the world to Christ. A love which led Paul to wish himself accursed for the sake of his brethren, which caused Paulinus to sell himself into slavery for the sake of ransoming the son of a widow—a love which led S. Dominick, S. Francis, S. Ignatius and others to devote themselves to the salvation of souls, and led the blessed Jacoponus to pray that he might suffer all the sufferings of all the lost, that he might save them all, if it were God's will.

8. It was a 'new' commandment as specially pertaining to the New Testament, and distinguishing it from the Old. See Joh 13:35; Son 2:4, Son 8:6.

Such was the love of the early Christians. See Act 4:32. "See how these Christians love one another, and are ready to die for each other," was remarked by the heathen. Tertullian says why they called each other brethren, as acknowledging one God as their father, having drunk of the one Spirit of holiness, as having come from the same womb of ignorance to the same Light of Truth, &c.

Which thing is true in Him and in you. Namely, this law of love, as springing from the Law of Nature, and it is not only the most ancient command, but is true also in you, because ye have embraced it together with your new life in Christ. But some refer this to Christ, which is far better. For though He is not expressly mentioned, yet He was mentioned above (ver 1-4). But S. John's heart was so full of Christ, that when he says 'Him,' he does not mean any one else, but Christ, as was the case also with the Magdalene (Joh 20:15).  S. Jerome ( contra Jovin, lib. 11) accordingly reads, "which is most true both in Christ and in you." Some explain it thus, "This law of charity is that which makes you to be as truly in Christ as ye are in yourselves." 2d. We may explain it thus (and it is the best meaning), "As Christ loves Christians in the highest degree as members of His Body, so should we devote ourselves entirely to the love of Him and our fellow-Christians."

Because the darkness (of ignorance, lust, and sin, as well as of the shadows, the terrors and ceremonies of the Old Testament) is past, and the true Light now shineth, the light of faith, grace, love, and of all holiness. See Rom 13:12; Eph 5:6. This is called the 'true,' i.e. the perfect, full, Divine Light. See John i. 9. Christ calls Himself the true vine (John xv. 1) and the true head, i.e. fully satisfying (John vi. 55). As a symbol of this, Christ was incarnate at the Vernal Equinox, and was born at the Winter Solstice, when the days are beginning to increase. See S. Augustine, Serm. xxii. de temp. [not S. Augustine.]

Ver. 9. — He that saith he is in the Light (of the Gospel, Faith, and Charity) and hateth his brother, is in darkness, in ignorance of his sins, anger, hatred, lust, &c. And by these he is so blinded as not to see the great evil of hatred, how odious to God, who is the light of Charity, what destruction it causes, what torments of hell it brings with it. "He is blinded with his wickedness," says S. Chrysostom ( de Erudit. discipl.): "he goes ignorantly into hell-fire, and is hurled headlong into punishments." See Exo 11:16. And S. Cyprian ( de zelo et livore ) says: "If thou hast begun to be a man of light, do the things of Christ, for He is our Light and day. Why rushest thou into the darkness of anger? Why wrappest thou thyself in a mist of envy? Why dost thou extinguish with the darkness of envy every spark of peace and charity? Why dost thou go back to the devil, whom thou hast renounced? Why hast thou become like Cain? Cain? He is in the darkness of hell, because he is tending towards it." S. Basil says, "As he who has charity has God within him, so he that has hatred and anger has a devil within him," &c.; and S. Chrysostom calls anger a self-chosen ( voluntarium ) devil. In an angry man you may see all the furies of hell. As Seneca says ( lib. ii . de Ira ).

Even until now. For though baptism be an enlightenment, yet it cannot dispel the darkness of hatred, if it be voluntary, or come on after baptism. (See S. Augustine, Bede, and Hugo.)

Ver. 10. — He that loveth his brother abideth in the light (of faith and love: this is an antithesis to the former verse), and there is no occasion for stumbling in him.  S. Jerome (in Matt. xxv.) explains the words πζόστομμα and σκάνδαλον. This may be taken to have either an active or a passive meaning, the giving of offence, or the taking of offence. See 1Co 13:4; Pro 15:19; Psa 119:165. One who loves neither gives offence, nor takes it: "If my brother offends me," they would say, "shall I abandon charity? Far from it. I will overcome evil with good, I will follow Christ, I will show him how I love the brethren, how I love God. I will not fight against my brother who has wronged me. I will rather fight against his disease of mind, and drown his anger and ill-will with floods of charity."  S. Augustine says ( in loc.), "Who are they who either take or make offence? They who are offended at Christ or the Church. They who are offended in Christ are burnt as by the sun, they who are offended in the Church are burnt as by the moon. But the Psalm says (Psa 122:6), 'the sun shall not burn thee by day, nor the moon by night,' that is, if thou holdest fast by charity thou wilt suffer no offence either in Christ or the Church, and thou wilt forsake neither Christ nor the Church." A passage is here added from a sermon once supposed to be S. Augustine's, but subsequently regarded as spurious, as is also another sermon quoted just afterwards, showing who are true and who are false friends, and that those who seem to be our enemies are in truth our best friends, and to be regarded as such. And S. Basil ( Reg. brev. clxxvi.) says the same.

Ver. 11.— But he that hateth his brother is in darkness. For, as Œcumenius says, "He cannot be in the light of Christ, who hateth him for whom Christ died."

And knoweth not whither he goeth. "For (as says S. Cyprian, de Zelo ) he goes down to hell, ignorantly and blindly, and withdrawn from the light of Christ, who says, 'I am the Light of the world.'" "Hatred," says the author of Imperf. Homily xiii. [on S. Matt.] "is the spirit of darkness, and wherever it settles it defiles the purity of holiness;" and adds, "The world is so full of offences, that if we wish to love our friends only, we shall not find anything to love." See Pro 4:19; Zep 1:17;  and Isa 59:10. For in truth nothing so blinds our reason as hatred. "There is no difference between anger and madness," says S. Chrysostom on S. John ( Hom. xlvii.)

And anger is so blind as not to see its own blindness. Seneca adduces the case of Harpasto, his wife's handmaid ( Ep. li.), who did not understand that she was blind, adding, "No one admits that he is covetous, or ambitious, or angry. I have not settled on my course of life (he says), it is our youth that causes it. But why do we deceive ourselves? The evil is not without us, but within us, and therefore we find it hard to regain our health, because we know not that we are ill." Democritus blinded himself by looking at the sun, in order that he might not see the happiness of the wicked. And in like manner do the envious and malicious blind themselves.

Ver. 12.— I write unto you, little children. Commending what he had said to the several grades whom he addressed. He places them in three classes according to their respective ages. He congratulates them on the gift of the Gospel which they had received, and exhorts them to persevere and make progress therein. The children represent beginners or neophytes; young men, those who are advancing; the old men, those who are perfect. And he thus suggests that Christians should advance in virtue, as they advance in years. Clemens, Œcumenius, and others take this view, though S. Augustine holds that these three terms apply equally to all classes; that they are called children as having been new-born in baptism, fathers as acknowledging Christ as their Father and the Ancient of Days, and youths because they are strong. But the first meaning seems the simplest. Because your sins, into which ye are likely to fall, are forgiven you, in baptism, for His Name's sake, i.e., for Christ's sake, or else by our calling on Christ's Name, or else by the authority and power of Christ. For by this are sins remitted through His grace and merits.

Morally. S. John here teaches that great care must be taken in training children. (He here gives as an instance the case of the youth whom he entrusted to a Bishop.) For the whole regulation of our life depends on our childhood's training. S. Ignatius accordingly founded schools for such training. See Rebadeneira in his life ( lib. iii . cap. 24), where he quotes many Fathers, Councils, and Philosophers.

Mystically. S. Augustine ( de Vera Relig. cap. 26) describes the seven ages of a righteous man. He first drinks in the lessons and examples of history—next he forgets things of earth, and reaches after things divine, and strives after the highest and unchanging rule of life, by the steps of wisdom—next he proceeds more boldly, wedding his carnal appetite to the strength of reason, and rejoicing within with a kind of conjugal joy, when the soul is united to the mind, and is so covered with the veil of modesty as no longer to be compelled to live rightly, but even not to delight in sin, though all might allow it. And fourthly, he acts thus in a more bold and orderly manner, shining forth into the perfect man, and becoming more capable of bearing all the persecutions and tempests of this world and even breaking their force. Fifthly, to be calm and tranquil, in every respect enjoying to the full the highest and ineffable wisdom; and sixthly, a thorough turning to the life eternal, and a complete obliviousness to this temporal life, and a passing on to the perfect image and likeness of God. The seventh age is that of eternal rest, which is not distinguished by any different stages of growth.

Ver 13.— I write unto you, fathers, because ye have known Him who is from the beginning. Fathers, we know, are proud of their experience; and therefore he fitly congratulates them on having known the Ancient of Days, who is from eternity. For, as S. Augustine says, "Christ is new in the flesh, but ancient in His Godhead." He adds, "Remember, ye who are fathers, if ye forget Him who is from the beginning, ye have lost your fatherhood."

I write unto you, young men, because ye have overcome the wicked one. He passes to that stage of life which rejoices in its strength, and is full of concupiscence. He congratulates them for having overcome the wicked one, for he is speaking to Christian young people living in a Christian way, as S. Agnes, S. Lucy, S. Agatha, and many others, or that young man of whom S. Jerome speaks (in the life of Paul the first hermit), who when tempted by a harlot to sin, bit off his tongue, and spat it in her face, and thus by the intensity of the pain overcame the feeling of lust. This strength and this victory was Prompted by Christ. See 1Co 15:57. And S. Augustine ( in. loc.) says, "If the wicked one is overcome by the young men, He is fighting with us. He fights, but he does not overcome. Is it because we are strong, or because He is strong in us, who in the hands of His persecutors was found weak? He hath made us strong who resisted not His persecutors, for He was crucified in weakness, but liveth by the power of God." (2Co 13:4.)

Ver. 14.— I write unto You, children. He here comes round and says the same thing in other words, to enforce it the more, calling them τεκνία in the first instance, and παιδία here.

Because ye have known the Father, by the words of the Creed.

Morally, Catherinus beautifully says, "The life of beginners is to be, in a sense, under Him, who by cherishing us in His paternal embraces and allurements, keeps away from us for a while sharper temptations. But He afterwards hands us over to the Son, for our growth and fuller instruction, and at last to the Holy Spirit to be strengthened and perfected."

Here in some MSS. the exhortation to fathers is repeated. F. Lucas notices its omission in the Complut. Polyglot and in the Vulgate, and asks why it is omitted. Is it because a single admonition was enough for the aged?

I write to you, young men, because ye are strong, and have overcome the wicked one. Him who is the chief and head of all malignity. "Consider," says S. Augustine ( in. loc.), "that ye are young, fight that ye may overcome again and again, overcome that ye may be crowned. Be lowly, that ye fall not in the fight." And again, "This is a great commendation of grace, that it instructs the hearts of the humble, but stops the mouths of the proud."

And the word of God abideth in you. Ye keep that word which we and our fellows have preached. Others understand it of the Uncreate and Eternal Word. Ye have remained stedfast in the faith, and have thus overcome the wicked one. As Œcumenius says, "In promising youths and young men (strong as they may be and needing to be trained for war) the glory of victory, he shows that they require to be addressed in noble and warlike terms." And S. Prosper ( Epist. ad Demetriad in S. Ambrose Ep. iv. 33) says, "Our will is aided by the operation of the Spirit, but is not done away with. The effect of grace is this, that our will, corrupted as it is by sin, beside itself with vanities, surrounded by corruptions, entangled with difficulties, should not remain in this feeble state, but should be cured and regain its strength by the aid of the All-compassionate Physician." And again, "The crafty tempter is ever on the watch, that, as our devotion increases, pride should steal in, and a man should glory in himself, rather than in God, for the good that is in him. The Apostle tells us to work out our salvation with fear and trembling. And accordingly the more we advance in holiness, the greater reason we have for fear and trembling, lest the mind, conscious of its progress, should be hurried into excess of pride, and thus become defiled by vanity, while it seems to itself to be resplendent in virtue."

Ver. 15 . — Love not the world. "There are two loves," says S. Augustine ( in. loc.), "the love of God and the love of the world. If the love of the world occupy the heart, there is no room for the love of God to enter. Let the love of the world retire, let the love of God enter in; let the better have its own place. Thou lovedst the world: love it no more. When thou hast drained out the love of the world from thy heart, thou shalt drink in love divine, and then shall charity begin to dwell in thee, from whence nothing evil can proceed." "It is," he proceeds, "as clearing a field before planting fresh trees."

The Abbot Isaias ( de Pænit. Orat. xxi.) answered the question, "What is the world?" in this way. "It is a fatal rushing into sin—doing what is contrary to nature—fulfilling the desires of the flesh—thinking we shall live here for ever, the caring more for the body than for the soul—glorying in things which perish." As the Apostle John says, "Love not the world," &c. As S. Augustine says, "In this vale of misery thou shouldst not possess anything so beautiful, or so delightful, as to fully occupy your mind. Shun the world, if thou wishest not to be worldly. If thou art not worldly, the world delighteth thee not. Avoid the creatures if thou desirest to have the Creator. Let every creature be vile in thy sight, that the Creator may be sweet in thy heart"

If any one love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. See Jam 4:4. "We must not give half our heart to God, and half to the world." As S. Leo says ( Serm. v. de Jejun. 7 Mensis ): "There are two loves . . . for the rational soul loves either God or the world. There can be no excess in the love of God. But in the love of the world all things are hurtful. And therefore we must firmly cleave to eternal goods, but use worldly goods only by the way, and since we are pilgrims, and hastening to return to our country, we must use the good things of this world as food for our journey through it, and not as an allurement to abide in it."

Ver. 16. — For all that is in the world is the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye, and the pride of life. You will say that these properly are not in the world, but in the souls of men who desire them. But I answer, the word world is used in a threefold sense.

1. For men of the world, see John i. 10, xvi. 18; and S. Augustine on Ps. lv., "the wicked and ungodly in the world," in which sense S. John uses it in his Gospel.

2. It means this created world, in which, as being inanimate, there is not, properly speaking, any concupiscence. But these are provocatives of concupiscence. For everything we see affects our senses and lures us on to love it.

3. It signifies a worldly life, consisting in the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life. It is the whole body of sin consisting of these several parts or members. As S. Antony of Padua said, "The earth is avarice, water is luxury, the air is inconstancy, fire is pride." These three kinds of concupiscence are embraced in the general term concupiscence. As is added, "It is not of the Father but of the world."

The world can be taken in all these senses, and S. John first takes up one and then another.

But the second of these meanings is most to the point. And S. John wishes to withdraw the minds of the faithful from all objects of desire which the world contains (for they are the roots of every evil), and to fix them on God.

All these worldly things estrange our hearts from the love of God, and relate only to the perishing goods of the world, or rather to the shadows and phantoms of good. Here notice that as the lust of the eyes is avarice, so that which creates the desire is gold, silver, jewels, &c. As S. Augustine says ( Lib. iii . de Symb. cap. i.), "To the lust of the flesh belong the allurements of pleasure; to the lust of the eye, foolish spectacles; to the ambition of the world, the madness of pride." It is called the lust of the eyes, because it provokes the eyes, and through the eyes the fancy and the mind. "The eyes," says S. Augustine in Ps. xli., "are members of the body, the windows of the mind. It is the inner man who sees by their means." The covetous lays up riches, he does not spend them, and his only pleasure is looking at them. An exceeding wretchedness and fatuity. For he might just as well look at the gold, silver, and jewels in the temples, and feed himself on them. Whereas he would feed himself the more with his own wealth, and enjoy it the more, if he expended it on his friends and the poor.

2. As the lust of the flesh is gluttony, so is it wine, delicate and sensual pleasure, which provoke it. It hence appears how vile it is, as being common to the beasts; how little, because it feeds not the mind, but the flesh alone; short-lived, perishing in the very act, and bringing after it foul and filthy diseases. Whence S. Augustine ( de Vera. Relig. cap. lv.) says, "Let us not delight in corrupting or being corrupted by carnal pleasure, lest we should come at last to the more miserable corruption of pain and suffering."

3. As the pride of life is ambition, haughtiness, desire of pre-eminence and glory, so are its provocatives superb dresses, grand houses, attendants, carriages, &c. We speak of being as proud as a peacock, who spreads its wings and struts along. S. Bernard ( on Ps. xi . Serm. vi.) says, "Ambition is a subtle evil, a secret poison, a hidden pest, the contriver of craft, the parent of hypocrisy, the fruit of envy, the source of sin, the fosterer of crime, the destroyer (ærugo ) of virtues, the devourer of sanctity, the blinder of hearts, generating disease from the very remedies, and sickness from that which should heal." S. Basil terms it the "whetstone of wickedness." See S Gregory, Mor. xxxiv. 14, xxxi. 17. These three passions are the threefold sources of all temptations and sin. See S. Augustine, Confess. x. 30. S. Thomas, i. 2, q. lxxv. art. 5. As the Poet says:-

"Ambition, wealth, and foul desires,

 These three as gods the world admires."

Our first parents were tempted by them, and so was our Lord. See S. Augustine, de Vera Relig. cap. xxxviii.

This threefold desire is opposed to the Holy Trinity. Avarice to the Father, who is most liberal in communicating His essence and all His attributes to the Son and the Holy Spirit essentially, but to creatures only by way of participation. The lust of the flesh is opposed to the Son, who was begotten not carnally but spiritually from the mind of the Father, and who hates all carnal impurity. The pride of life is opposed to the Holy Spirit, who is the Spirit of humility and gentleness. Again, it is opposed to the three primary virtues, as lust of the flesh to continence, lust of the eyes to charity and kindness, pride of life to humility. (See S. Bernard, Serm. i . in Octav. Pasch. and de diligendo Deo ).

Which is not of the Father, but is of the world. This refers not merely to the pride of life, but to the threefold lust just spoken of. Moreover, concupiscence or lust comes from the world, from the corruption and vice of those who cleave to the world. Just as the word 'flesh' signifies in Scripture the corruption of the flesh, so in like manner does 'world' signify here the corrupt manners and lust of worldly men.

The reason is that concupiscence arises from a worldly life. Good things become objects of desire, by reason of man's concupiscence. For before the Fall there were no objects for concupiscence, but man's fall caused them to be such. And it is from hence that we derive our concupiscence together with original sin, and accordingly all the things that God gave for the good of man are now become allurements and excitements of concupiscence, when we see after and desire them immoderately. See Wisdom 14:11, 4:12. For the pleasure which arises from desire fascinates the mind, and prevents its seeing the filthiness and the punishment of sin, or the beauty and rewards of virtue. See James i. 14. Œcumenius understands by the 'world' Satan himself—"as Christ said to the Jews, Ye are of your father the devil, that is devoted to worldly pursuits, the seeds of which the devil sows within us"—who accordingly is called the Prince of this world. See Joh 11:31, Joh 14:30, Joh 16:11.

Ver. 17.— And the world passeth away and the lust thereof. See Mat 24:35; 1Co 7:31; 2Pe 3:11. See also Wisdom v. 7; S. Bernard, Epist. cvii ., &c.

As S. Jerome says ( Epist. iii.): "If we were granted the years of Methusalem, yet the previous length would be nothing when it ceased to be, for when the end of life arrives, there will be no difference between the child of ten and the man of a thousand years, except that the old man goes out of life bearing a heavier burden of sin." S. Cyprian ( ad. Demetriad ) shows at great length that the world is growing old: "The labourer is failing in the field, the mariner at sea, the soldier in camp, honesty in the market, justice in the courts, firmness in friendships, skill in arts, discipline in morals, for the sentence has been passed on the world that all things born should die, all things which have grown up should wax old, strong things should become weak, great things become small, and when they are thus weakened and diminished they come to an end." And S. Anselm, in Rom. xii., says, "Be not constant in love for the world, for, since that which thou lovest abideth not, it is in vain for thee to fix thy heart firmly on it, while that which thou lovest is flying away." This is the reason a posteriori ; but the a priori reason is that the world is created from nothing, and therefore tends to become nothing, returning to that from whence it came. But, on the other hand, eternity belongs only to God, He having an uncreated, unchangeable, and eternal nature. Again, the world is not simple, but compounded of various elements; but everything which is so composed is resolved into its own elements or component parts. And the final cause of its being so is that we should turn our thoughts from transient and changing creatures to the Creator, who is unchangeable, and always the same. All creatures silently proclaim this by their changeableness, and our own heart also, as S. Augustine says ( Confess. i. 1), "Thou hast made us, 0 Lord, for Thyself, and our heart is restless till it rests in Thee." S. John adds,

But he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever. Because the soul which doeth the will of God will, on leaving the body, be blessed for ever, and the body will after death rise immortal and glorious. See Psa 119:96, and Joh 5:52. The reason is that love, like the chameleon, conforms the one who loves into the pattern of the thing which he loves, love being an impulse of the mind, and a going out of itself towards the beloved object, whereas understanding and knowledge are, on the contrary, the entering of the thing which is known into the understanding which embraces it. As S. Augustine says, "Every one is like the object he loves. Thou lovest the earth: thou wilt be earthy. Thou lovest God. What shall I say? Wilt thou be God? I dare not say it of myself. Let us hear the scriptures, 'I have said ye are gods, and are all the children of the Most Highest.' If then ye wish to be gods and sons of the Most Highest, love not the world, nor the things that are in the world." The object which is here loved is God, and the will of God which is stable and eternal, and therefore he that loveth it becomes eternal. See Hos. ix. 10, and Sam. i. 8, and note. Dost thou wish to be eternal? love eternal good. Dost thou wish to enjoy for ever the beloved object? Love that which is eternal. For if thou lovest a perishable thing, thou wilt perish together with it. But if thou fixest thy mind on an object which is stable, heavenly, divine, and eternal, thou wilt become the same. This is true wisdom, the wisdom of Saints. Fools then are lovers of the world, who in the place of these love transitory and perishable things, and accordingly they pass away, and in truth perish with them for ever. " 0 ye sons of men, why do ye love vanity and seek after a lie?" (Ps. 4.) Why follow ye after—not real things, but—the empty and fleeting shadows of things? Ye cannot grasp a shadow, nor yet hold fast shadowy wealth and honours. Grant us, Lord, this wisdom, "that among all the changes of the world our hearts may there be fixed where there are true joys."  S. Augustine says beautifully ( in loc.), "Why should not I love that which God made? But what dost thou wish? to love temporal things, and to pass away with them, or not to love the world, and to live for ever with God?" He then compares lovers of the world to a bride who loves the ring her husband has given her, more than she does her husband himself; which is assuredly a spurious love, since he gave it in order that he might be loved in his gift. God gave thee all these things: love Him that made them. He wishes to give thee something more, namely Himself; but if thou lovest these things (though God made them) and neglectest thy Maker, and lovest the world, will it not be regarded as a spurious love?

And Didymus says, "Whosoever despises all things will be above the world. For righteousness endureth for ever, for it is so written." See also Pro 10:25. The old Philosophers had some shadowy notion of this. See Seneca, Ep. lix.

My little children, this is the last hour. The time is now at hand for the coming of Antichrist, as ye have often heard. Many antichrists have already come, which is a sign that the world is waxing old, and that your life in it cannot be long. Tear your mind away from the world, its vain and perishing pleasures, fix it entirely on heavenly and eternal things, and on God Himself (see Rom 13:11). And be also on your strict guard against all heretics and impostors. For this, says Œcumenius and Didymus very properly, leads every one to think about his own end as if his own last hour were at hand, and thus sobriety and purity of living prevail among Christians. See 1Pe 3:14.

By the last hour is meant the last age of the world. See S. Augustine, Ep. lxxx. to Hesychius. It is the last age in regard to the duration of the world and its division into the three parts of the law of Nature, the law of Moses, and the law of grace, after which no other law or state is to be looked for, as the Jews still expect their Messiah. Œcumenius (after S. Chrysostom) adds it may mean the 'worst' age, as we say of a sick man that he is in extremis. And so too Ribera (in Heb. ix. num. cxiii. seq.) says, that it is the time of impostors and heretics. This exposition is most fitting and appropriate. So says the Gloss, Cajetan, Dionysius, and others.

But the word must be taken in a very wide sense. Some wrongly conjecture that as the first, under the law of nature, lasted for 2000 years, and so also the second period under the law, that it will be the same under the Gospel. The early Christians considered that Nero was Antichrist, and S. Cyprian thought that the end of the world was near in his time. See Epist. lib. iv. 6; and so too S. Jerome, de Monog.;  S. Gregory, Epist. iv. 38; and Lactantius, lib. vii . cap. 25. See notes on Rev. 20

The word 'hour' is used indefinitely. The phrase was familiar to S. John, who called the period an 'hour,' because it was very short. But in classic authors it signifies a period of time of any length, a season, e.g., as well as the hour of the day. See Is. xxxviii. 8.

Morally. Hence learn the shortness of life. For if this age of the world is only an hour, what a very small part of it is the life of any one! We are all creatures of an hour. The old have but a part of an hour to live; the young hope for a whole hour, but yet are cut off in its very beginning. As S. Jerome says, "A youth may die soon, an old man cannot live very long."

This word then warns us to be very diligent in employing the time which is allotted us. Suppose a physician or a judge were to tell you to prepare to die—"you will certainly die an hour hence," how anxiously would you clear your conscience, what acts of contrition and charity would you exercise, how would you expend all your goods in good works. Do the same now, for your life is but an hour. Or again, you are afflicted, are sick, are calumniated. Wait a while. It is but for an hour, and after that you pass to a blessed eternity. See 1 Cor. i. 29. Melania, a very wealthy noble lady, persuaded her people, by this text of S. John, to sell all they had, and to go to the Holy Land. For she used frequently to say (as indeed she thought) that the world was about to perish. She went to Jerusalem, and died forty days after, and the Barbarians laid waste the city. This took place under Alaric, A.D. 410.

S. Basil ( in Moral. Reg. lxxx cap. 21) says, "It is the duty of a Christian to watch every day and hour, and to be thus ready for that perfection by which he can please God, as knowing that the Lord will come at an hour he expects not."

Antichrist cometh. See on this the notes on 2Th 2:7.

Even now are there many antichrists. Those who are against Christ and true forerunners of Antichrist, because they impugn equally with the faith, the Church, the sacraments of Christ, nay His very nature and person. As Ebion, Cerinthus, &c., and their followers, of whom S. Paul says " the mystery of iniquity is already working " (2Th 2:7). See note on passage. Rabanus ( apud S. Augustine ) [ vol. vi . append. ] says, "Antichrist has many ministers of his malignity. For every one, layman or canon or monk, who lives not righteously, and violates the authority of his order, and speaks against that which is good, is an antichrist, a minister of Satan." Heretics are antichrists, as S. Hilary called Constantius. See note on 1Pe 3:14.

They went out from us, for they were not of us (either real or pretended) Catholics; and a heretic is one who apostatises from the faith of Christ which he once embraced, and lapses into heresy. See S. Cyprian, Epist. i. 8, and de Unit. Eccl.: "Bitterness cannot co-exist with sweetness, darkness with light, rain with clear weather, strife with peace, barrenness with fertility, drought with gushing water, storm with calm. Let none imagine that good men can forsake the Church; the wind does not sweep away the wheat, nor does the storm throw down a tree which is firmly rooted—the chaff is blown away with the storm, and trees weakly rooted are cast down by the violence of a whirlwind," &c. And S. Jerome says [ Lib. i . in Jerem.], "They go out in order that they may openly worship that which they used to venerate in secret." And S. Augustine ( in loc. ) "Ye will understand, from the Apostle's own exposition, that none can go away but antichrists, but that they who are not contrary to Christ can in no wise go out. For he who is not contrary to Christ abideth in His Body, and is counted a member of it." "They are (he adds afterwards) as evil humours, and just as the body is relieved when they are removed, so is the Church relieved when they go forth, and when the body casts them forth it says, They were not of me, they only weighed on my chest when they were within me."

Whereby we know that it is the last time. For we see the heretics who are his forerunners, just as when we see a king's outrider, we know that he is near, or that the dawn shows that the sun is about to rise. "Many antichrists," as Œcumenius says, "go before the one Antichrist, and prepare for him the way."

They were not of us, for had they been of us, no doubt they would have continued with us. They were not genuine Christians. They had not Christian virtue and constancy boldly to resist all temptations, so that when persecution came on them, they gave up the faith and became apostates, as grass is dried up by the heat of the sun. As was said of Joseph and Azarias (1 Macc. 5:62), that "they were not of the seed of those by whom deliverance was wrought in Israel." As the Romans said of traitors that they were not Romans, or as Saul reviled Jonathan

(1Sa 20:30). As S. Augustine says here, "Temptation proves that they are not of us, for when it comes they fly away as not being sound grain." As he says of Judas ( Tract. 1. on John ), "He did not at that particular time become wicked when he betrayed the Lord. He was a thief even when he followed the Lord, for he followed Him with the body only, and not in heart." And again (in. loc.), "Every one is of his own will either an antichrist, or in Christ; either one of His members, or among the evil humours. He that changeth himself for the better is a member of the Body, but he that abideth in his wickedness is an evil humour, and when he is gone out, they who were oppressed will be relieved."

2. Many explain these words, 'they were not of us,' as referring to the free knowledge and predestination of God. They were not thus predestinated and elected, because it was foreseen that they would fall, for everything future is foreseen by God. This does not refer to election to eternal blessedness.  S. John did not wish to touch on this mystery, especially because so many who have fallen from the faith have in the end returned to it. And on the other hand there are many reprobates who are still in the Church who are not predestined to glory. But S. Augustine ( de bono persever. cap. viii.) understands it of those who are predestined to glory, and of those who (it is foreseen) will perish. Now almost all heresiarchs (excepting only Berengarius), when they have once left the Church, never return to it again, and are consequently foreknown to be reprobates. But we must avoid the error of those who infer from this that the reprobation of God is the cause of their leaving the Church, and subsequent condemnation: a charge which the Semipelagians falsely urged against S. Augustine. He defends himself thus, "They went out voluntarily, they fell voluntarily, and because it was foreseen they would fall, they were not predestinated; but they would have been predestinated, if so be they were to return, and abide in holiness. And in this way predestination is to many a cause of their remaining stedfast, to none is it a cause of their falling." ( Art. xii . in art. sibi falso impositis ).

3. Some explain the words thus, "They were not of us," because, before they openly withdrew from the Church they had secretly withdrawn from it. Heresy is the very height of impiety, and is reached but gradually. See S. Cyprian, Epist. i. 8, and de Unit. Eccl. ; and S. Cyril, Catech. vi .

Catherinus and Melchior Canus take the word 'us' to mean the Apostles. But this is too narrow a meaning. & John speaks of Christians in general. S. John here warns his disciples not to be alarmed if they saw even bishops become apostate (see Act 20:3O). Salmeron thinks that of the hundred and twenty who received the Holy Ghost at the day of Pentecost fourteen became heresiarchs. See, too, S. Vincent of Lerius and Tertullian, de Præscript. ch. i. And at the same time he warns them to work out their own salvation with fear and trembling. See also Rom 11:20.

But that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us. God allowed this to show their inconsistency and want of faith, and to teach the faithful to avoid them. See 1Co 11:19.

Beza has no ground for inferring from this that the faithful could never fall away. It means only that their falling away was a sign that they were not firmly rooted in the faith. S. Augustine says their apostacy was a sign that they were not of the number of the predestinate and elect.

Ver. 20. — But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things, so that it is not necessary to speak at greater length to these antichrists. By the word 'unction' he refers to Antichrist, and also to Christ (the anointed One). See also what Christ Himself says, Joh 16:13.

But what is this 'unction'? (1.) Œcumenius and S. Jerome on Hab 3. and S. Cyril Alex. say 'baptism,' when we are anointed on our head. (2.)  S. Cyril of Jerus. says, 'the sacrament of confirmation,' when we are anointed on our forehead. (3.) Em. Sa. says, 'the profession of Christianity;' others the Christian faith, grace, the gift of wisdom and understanding; others the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. But they all come to the same point, for in these various ways you will learn all the duties and doctrines of Christianity, and to discern and avoid heretics as opposed to Christ. The word unction stands for the ointment or oil, not for the mere transient act of anointing. In the Greek it is χζίσμα. It has reference to the name of Christ, and the sacraments of baptism and confirmation, which used to be given immediately after baptism as its complement and perfection.  S. Cyril accordingly understands it to refer to confirmation, so also does Turrianus, and Bellarmine, de Confim. lib. ii. capp. 5 et 8. For by anointing is here to be understood, not so much sanctifying grace, as the gift of wisdom and understanding. (See S. Gregory, Mor. v. 19 ( al. 20), S. Irenæus iv. 43). For this gift was bestowed at first on baptized persons. Act 2:6, Act 10:46, Act 19:6;

1Cor 14. And it is even now given in baptism (Isa 11:1), though not so abundantly. The word also relates to the royal priesthood, which S. Peter (1Peter2:9) ascribes to all Christians. For as in old time prophets, priests, and kings were anointed to their office, so do Christians when anointed in baptism and confirmation receive grace, to rule themselves as kings; to foresee future good and evil, as prophets; and to present, as priests, the offerings of good works. So that this gift of the, Holy Spirit, conferred by the outward anointing, will teach Christians everything which concerns Christian life and conduct. For these reasons S. John rejoices in the word 'unction,' as representing Christ and His 'love,' of which it is said (Son 1:2), "Thy name is like ointment poured forth;" and S. John was, in consequence of his constant preaching of Christ, thrown about this time into a caldron of boiling oil, but escaped unhurt as having been strengthened by the anointing of Christ. See also Psa 45:8; Isa 61:1; Act 10:38. S. Athanasius ( Epist. ad Serap.) says that this ointment is the Holy Spirit with all His gifts and graces. For in justification is infused not only grace and charity, but the Holy Spirit Himself. See Rom 5:5; Conc. Trid. Sess. vi . cap. 7. And S. Augustine ( in loc.) says, This spiritual anointing is the Holy Spirit Himself, and the outward anointing is the sacrament thereof. So, too, in the "Veni Creator," we read of the 'Anointing Spirit.' The Holy Spirit then, inhabiting, enlightening, and directing the soul, teaches it at the fitting time all things befitting its salvation. S. Clement ( Const. Apost. iii. 17) explains the

Commentary -- Other

Contradiction: 1Jo 1:8

96. Is it that everyone sins (1 Kings 8:46; 2 Chronicles 6:36; Proverbs 20:9; Ecclesiastes 7:20; 1 John 1:8-10), or do some not sin (1 John 3:1, 8-9; 4:7; 5:1)?

(Category: misunderstood the Greek usage & Imposes his own agenda)

This apparent contradiction asks: 'Does every man sin?' Then a number of Old Testament passages that declare this are listed followed by one New Testament passage from 1 John 1:8-10:

"If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives."

After this it is claimed by Shabbir that: 'True Christians cannot possibly sin, because they are children of God.' This is followed by a number of passages from the First Epistle of John showing that Christians are children of God. Shabbir is here imposing his view on the text, assuming that those who are children of God, somehow suddenly have no sin. It is true that a person who is born of God should not habitually practice sin (James 2:14ff), but that is not to say that they will not occasionally fall into sin, as we live in a sinful world and impinged by it.

The last of the verses quoted is from 1 John 3:9 which says:

"No-one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God's seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God."

Shabbir in his quote uses an older translation for 1 John 3:9 and so states, "No one born of God commits sin...and he cannot sin...," which is not a true translation of the Greek. In the newer translations, such as the NIV they translate correctly using the present continuous in this verse, as it is written that way in the Greek. Thus those born of God will not continue to sin, as they cannot go on sinning..., the idea being that this life of sinning will die out now that he has the help of the Holy Spirit in him or her.

It is interesting how Shabbir jumps around to make his point. He begins with 1 John 1, then moves to 1 John 3-5, then returns to the 1 John 1 passage at the beginning of the Epistle and re-quotes verse 8, which speaks of all men sinning, with the hope of highlighting the seeming contradiction. There is no contradiction in this as Shabbir obviously hasn't understood the apostle's letter or grasped the fact that the letter develops its theme as it goes on. Therefore quoting from the beginning of the letter, then moving to the middle of the letter, and finally returning to the beginning of the letter is not the way to read a letter.

The Scriptures clearly teach that all men have sinned except for one, the Lord Jesus Christ, therefore we have no quarrel with Shabbir on this point. As to Shabbir's second point I am glad he has come to realize that Christians are children of God therefore we have no quarrel with him on this subject.

It is Shabbir's third point, however, which is a contentious one because it does not take on board the development of the themes of the letter, of which the one pointed out here is the call to holiness and righteousness because of the forgiveness of sins by Jesus Christ's atoning death. It is for that reason that we are called not to continue in our sinful ways but to be changed into Christ's sinless likeness. In his attempt to show an apparent contradiction Shabbir has mischievously rearranged the order in which the verses were intended to be read in order to force a contradiction, which doesn't exist.

Contradiction: 1Jo 1:9

96. Is it that everyone sins (1 Kings 8:46; 2 Chronicles 6:36; Proverbs 20:9; Ecclesiastes 7:20; 1 John 1:8-10), or do some not sin (1 John 3:1, 8-9; 4:7; 5:1)?

(Category: misunderstood the Greek usage & Imposes his own agenda)

This apparent contradiction asks: 'Does every man sin?' Then a number of Old Testament passages that declare this are listed followed by one New Testament passage from 1 John 1:8-10:

"If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives."

After this it is claimed by Shabbir that: 'True Christians cannot possibly sin, because they are children of God.' This is followed by a number of passages from the First Epistle of John showing that Christians are children of God. Shabbir is here imposing his view on the text, assuming that those who are children of God, somehow suddenly have no sin. It is true that a person who is born of God should not habitually practice sin (James 2:14ff), but that is not to say that they will not occasionally fall into sin, as we live in a sinful world and impinged by it.

The last of the verses quoted is from 1 John 3:9 which says:

"No-one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God's seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God."

Shabbir in his quote uses an older translation for 1 John 3:9 and so states, "No one born of God commits sin...and he cannot sin...," which is not a true translation of the Greek. In the newer translations, such as the NIV they translate correctly using the present continuous in this verse, as it is written that way in the Greek. Thus those born of God will not continue to sin, as they cannot go on sinning..., the idea being that this life of sinning will die out now that he has the help of the Holy Spirit in him or her.

It is interesting how Shabbir jumps around to make his point. He begins with 1 John 1, then moves to 1 John 3-5, then returns to the 1 John 1 passage at the beginning of the Epistle and re-quotes verse 8, which speaks of all men sinning, with the hope of highlighting the seeming contradiction. There is no contradiction in this as Shabbir obviously hasn't understood the apostle's letter or grasped the fact that the letter develops its theme as it goes on. Therefore quoting from the beginning of the letter, then moving to the middle of the letter, and finally returning to the beginning of the letter is not the way to read a letter.

The Scriptures clearly teach that all men have sinned except for one, the Lord Jesus Christ, therefore we have no quarrel with Shabbir on this point. As to Shabbir's second point I am glad he has come to realize that Christians are children of God therefore we have no quarrel with him on this subject.

It is Shabbir's third point, however, which is a contentious one because it does not take on board the development of the themes of the letter, of which the one pointed out here is the call to holiness and righteousness because of the forgiveness of sins by Jesus Christ's atoning death. It is for that reason that we are called not to continue in our sinful ways but to be changed into Christ's sinless likeness. In his attempt to show an apparent contradiction Shabbir has mischievously rearranged the order in which the verses were intended to be read in order to force a contradiction, which doesn't exist.

Contradiction: 1Jo 1:10

96. Is it that everyone sins (1 Kings 8:46; 2 Chronicles 6:36; Proverbs 20:9; Ecclesiastes 7:20; 1 John 1:8-10), or do some not sin (1 John 3:1, 8-9; 4:7; 5:1)?

(Category: misunderstood the Greek usage & Imposes his own agenda)

This apparent contradiction asks: 'Does every man sin?' Then a number of Old Testament passages that declare this are listed followed by one New Testament passage from 1 John 1:8-10:

"If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives."

After this it is claimed by Shabbir that: 'True Christians cannot possibly sin, because they are children of God.' This is followed by a number of passages from the First Epistle of John showing that Christians are children of God. Shabbir is here imposing his view on the text, assuming that those who are children of God, somehow suddenly have no sin. It is true that a person who is born of God should not habitually practice sin (James 2:14ff), but that is not to say that they will not occasionally fall into sin, as we live in a sinful world and impinged by it.

The last of the verses quoted is from 1 John 3:9 which says:

"No-one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God's seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God."

Shabbir in his quote uses an older translation for 1 John 3:9 and so states, "No one born of God commits sin...and he cannot sin...," which is not a true translation of the Greek. In the newer translations, such as the NIV they translate correctly using the present continuous in this verse, as it is written that way in the Greek. Thus those born of God will not continue to sin, as they cannot go on sinning..., the idea being that this life of sinning will die out now that he has the help of the Holy Spirit in him or her.

It is interesting how Shabbir jumps around to make his point. He begins with 1 John 1, then moves to 1 John 3-5, then returns to the 1 John 1 passage at the beginning of the Epistle and re-quotes verse 8, which speaks of all men sinning, with the hope of highlighting the seeming contradiction. There is no contradiction in this as Shabbir obviously hasn't understood the apostle's letter or grasped the fact that the letter develops its theme as it goes on. Therefore quoting from the beginning of the letter, then moving to the middle of the letter, and finally returning to the beginning of the letter is not the way to read a letter.

The Scriptures clearly teach that all men have sinned except for one, the Lord Jesus Christ, therefore we have no quarrel with Shabbir on this point. As to Shabbir's second point I am glad he has come to realize that Christians are children of God therefore we have no quarrel with him on this subject.

It is Shabbir's third point, however, which is a contentious one because it does not take on board the development of the themes of the letter, of which the one pointed out here is the call to holiness and righteousness because of the forgiveness of sins by Jesus Christ's atoning death. It is for that reason that we are called not to continue in our sinful ways but to be changed into Christ's sinless likeness. In his attempt to show an apparent contradiction Shabbir has mischievously rearranged the order in which the verses were intended to be read in order to force a contradiction, which doesn't exist.

Evidence: 1Jo 1:7

THE FUNCTION OF THE LAW

" The Law also shows us our great need—our need of cleansing, cleansing with the water and the blood. It discovers to us our filthiness, and this naturally leads us to feel that we must be washed from it if we are ever to draw near to God. So the Law drives us to accept Christ as the only Person who can cleanse us, and make us fit to stand within the veil in the presence of the Most High.

" The Law is the surgeon’s knife that cuts out the proud flesh that the wound may heal. The Law by itself only sweeps and raises the dust, but the gospel sprinkles clean water upon the dust, and all is well in the chamber of the soul. The Law kills, the gospel makes alive; the Law strips, and then Jesus Christ comes in and robes the soul in beauty and glory. All the commandments, and all the types direct us to Christ, if we will but heed their evident intent." Charles Spurgeon

Evidence: 1Jo 1:9

The Christian who sins . " The great foundational truth respecting the believer in relationship to his sins is the fact that his salvation comprehends the forgiveness of all his trespasses past, present and future so far as condemnation is concerned (see Rom 8:1 , Col 2:13 ; Joh 3:18 ; Joh 5:24 ). Since Christ has vicariously borne all sin and since the believer’s standing in Christ is complete, he is perfected forever in Christ. When a believer sins, he is subjected to chastisement from the Father, but never to condemnation with the world (see 1Co 11:31-32 ). By confession the Christian is forgiven and restored to fellowship (see 1Jo 1:9 ). It needs to be remembered that were it not for Christ’s finished work on the cross and His present intercession in heaven, the least sin would result in his banishment from God’s presence and eternal ruin." Unger’s Bible Dictionary

Introduction / Outline

Robertson: 1 John (Book Introduction)

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

ABOUT a.d. 85 TO 90

By Way of Introduction

Relation to the Fourth Gospel

There are few scholars who deny that the Epistles of John and the Fourth Gospel are by the same writer. As a matter of fact " in the whole of the First Epistle there is hardly a single thought that is not found in the Gospel" (Schulze). H. J. Holtzmann ( Jahrbuch fur Protestantische Theologie , 1882, P. 128) in a series of articles on the " Problem of the First Epistle of St. John in its Relation to the Gospel" thinks that the similarities are closer than those between Luke’s Gospel and the Acts. Baur argued that this fact was explained by conscious imitation on the part of one or the other, probably by the author of the Epistle. The solution lies either in identity of authorship or in imitation. If there is identity of authorship, Holtzmann argues that the Epistle is earlier, as seems to me to be true, while Brooke holds that the Gospel is the earlier and that the First Epistle represents the more complete ideas of the author. Both Holtzmann and Brooke give a detailed comparison of likenesses between the First Epistle and the Fourth Gospel in vocabulary, syntax, style, ideas. The arguments are not conclusive as to the priority of Epistle or Gospel, but they are as to identity of authorship. One who accepts, as I do, the Johannine authorship of the Fourth Gospel for the reasons given in Volume V of this series, does not feel called upon to prove the Johannine authorship of the three Epistles that pass under the Apostle’s name. Westcott suggests that one compare John 1:1-18 with 1Jo_1:1-4 to see how the same mind deals with the same ideas in different connections. " No theory of conscious imitation can reasonably explain the subtle coincidences and differences in these two short crucial passages."

Gnosticism

The Epistle is not a polemic primarily, but a letter for the edification of the readers in the truth and the life in Christ. And yet the errors of the Gnostics are constantly before John’s mind. The leaders had gone out from among the true Christians, but there was an atmosphere of sympathy that constituted a subtle danger. There are only two passages (1Jo_2:18.; 1Jo_4:1-6) in which the false teachers are specifically denounced, but " this unethical intellectualism" (Robert Law) with its dash of Greek culture and Oriental mysticism and licentiousness gave a curious attraction for many who did not know how to think clearly. John, like Paul in Colossians, Ephesians, and the Pastoral Epistles, foresaw this dire peril to Christianity. In the second century it gave pure Christianity a gigantic struggle. " The great Gnostics were the first Christian philosophers" (Robert Law, The Tests of Life , p. 27) and threatened to undermine the Gospel message by " deifying the devil" (ib., p. 31) along with dethroning Christ. There were two kinds of Gnostics, both agreeing in the essential evil of matter. Both had trouble with the Person of Christ. The Docetic Gnostics denied the actual humanity of Christ, the Cerinthian Gnostics distinguished between the man Jesus and the aeon Christ that came on him at his baptism and left him on the Cross. Some practised asceticism, some licentiousness. John opposes both classes in his Epistles. They claimed superior knowledge ( gnōsis ) and so were called Gnostics ( Gnōstikoi ). Nine times John gives tests for knowing the truth and uses the verb ginōskō (know) each time (1Jo_2:3, 1Jo_2:5; 1Jo_3:16, 1Jo_3:19, 1Jo_3:24; 1Jo_4:2, 1Jo_4:6, 1Jo_4:13; 1Jo_5:2). Some of the leaders he calls antichrists. There are stories about John’s dread of Cerinthus and his unwillingness to be seen in the same public bath with him. The Apostle of love, as he is, is a real son of thunder when Gnosticism shows its head. Westcott thinks that the Fourth Gospel was written to prove the deity of Christ, assuming his humanity, while 1 John was written to prove the humanity of Christ, assuming his deity. Certainly both ideas appear in both books.

Destination

It is not clear to whom the Epistle is addressed. Like the Gospel, the Epistle of John came out of the Asiatic circle with Ephesus as the centre. Augustine has the strange statement that the Epistle was addressed to the Parthians. There are other ingenious conjectures which come to nothing. The Epistle was clearly sent to those familiar with John’s message, possibly to the churches of the Province of Asia (cf. the Seven Churches in Revelation).

The Date

The time seems to be considerably removed from the atmosphere of the Pauline and Petrine Epistles. Jerusalem has been destroyed. If John wrote the Fourth Gospel by a.d. 95, then the First Epistle would come anywhere from a.d. 85 to 95. The tone of the author is that of an old man. His urgent message that the disciples, his " little children," love one another is like another story about the aged John, who, when too feeble to stand, would sit in his chair and preach " Little children, love one another." The Muratorian Fragment accepts the First Epistle and Origen makes full use of it, as does Clement of Alexandria. Irenaeus quotes it by name. Polycarp shows knowledge of it also.

JFB: 1 John (Book Introduction)

AUTHORSHIP.--POLYCARP, the disciple of John [Epistle to the Philippians, 7], quotes 1Jo 4:3. EUSEBIUS [Ecclesiastical History, 3.39] says of PAPIAS, a hearer of John, and a friend of POLYCARP, "He used testimonies from the First Epistle of John." IRENÆUS, according to EUSEBIUS [Ecclesiastical History, 5.8], often quoted this Epistle. So in his work Against Heresies [3.15; 5, 8] he quotes from John by name, 1Jo 2:18, &c.; and in [3.16,7], he quotes 1Jo 4:1-3; 1Jo 5:1, and 2Jo 1:7-8. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA [Miscellanies, 2.66, p. 464] refers to 1Jo 5:16, as in John's larger Epistle. See other quotations [Miscellanies, 3.32,42; 4.102]. TERTULLIAN [Against Marcion, 5.16] refers to 1Jo 4:1, &c.; [Against Praxeas, 15], to 1Jo 1:1. See his other quotations [Against Praxeas, 28; Against the Gnostics, 12]. CYPRIAN [Epistles, 28 (24)], quotes as John's, 1Jo 2:3-4; and [On the Lord's Prayer, 5] quotes 1Jo 2:15-17; and [On Works and Alms, 3], 1Jo 1:8; and [On the Advantage of Patience, 2] quotes 1Jo 2:6. MURATORI'S Fragment on the Canon of Scripture states, "There are two of John (the Gospel and Epistle?) esteemed Catholic," and quotes 1Jo 1:3. The Peschito Syriac contains it. ORIGEN (in EUSEBIUS [Ecclesiastical History, 6.25]) speaks of the First Epistle as genuine, and "probably the second and third, though all do not recognize the latter two"; on the Gospel of John, [Commentary on John, 13.2], he quotes 1Jo 1:5. DIONYSIUS OF ALEXANDRIA, ORIGEN'S scholar, cites the words of this Epistle as those of the Evangelist John. EUSEBIUS [Ecclesiastical History, 3.24], says, John's first Epistle and Gospel are acknowledged without question by those of the present day, as well as by the ancients. So also JEROME [On Illustrious Men]. The opposition of COSMAS INDICOPLEUSTES, in the sixth century, and that of MARCION because our Epistle was inconsistent with his views, are of no weight against such irrefragable testimony.

The internal evidence is equally strong. Neither the Gospel, nor this Epistle, can be pronounced an imitation; yet both, in style and modes of thought, are evidently of the same mind. The individual notices are not so numerous or obvious as in Paul's writings, as was to be expected in a Catholic Epistle; but such as there are accord with John's position. He implies his apostleship, and perhaps alludes to his Gospel, and the affectionate tie which bound him as an aged pastor to his spiritual "children"; and in 1Jo 2:18-19; 1Jo 4:1-3, he alludes to the false teachers as known to his readers; and in 1Jo 5:21 he warns them against the idols of the surrounding world. It is no objection against its authenticity that the doctrine of the Word, or divine second Person, existing from everlasting, and in due time made flesh, appears in it, as also in the Gospel, as opposed to the heresy of the Docetæ in the second century, who denied that our Lord is come in the flesh, and maintained He came only in outward semblance; for the same doctrine appears in Col 1:15-18; 1Ti 3:16; Heb 1:1-3; and the germs of Docetism, though not fully developed till the second century, were in existence in the first. The Spirit, presciently through John, puts the Church beforehand on its guard against the coming heresy.

TO WHOM ADDRESSED.--AUGUSTINE [The Question of the Gospels, 2.39], says this Epistle was written to the Parthians. BEDE, in a prologue to the seven Catholic Epistles, says that ATHANASIUS attests the same. By the Parthians may be meant the Christians living beyond the Euphrates in the Parthian territory, outside the Roman empire, "the Church at Babylon elected together with (you)," the churches in the Ephesian region, the quarter to which Peter addressed his Epistles (1Pe 5:12). As Peter addressed the flock which John subsequently tended (and in which Paul had formerly ministered), so John, Peter's close companion after the ascension, addresses the flock among whom Peter had been when he wrote. Thus "the elect lady" (2Jo 1:1) answers "to the Church elected together" (1Pe 5:13). See further confirmation of this view in Introduction to Second John. It is not necessarily an objection to this view that John never is known to have personally ministered in the Parthian territory. For neither did Peter personally minister to the churches in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, Bithynia, though he wrote his Epistles to them. Moreover, in John's prolonged life, we cannot dogmatically assert that he did not visit the Parthian Christians, after Peter had ceased to minister to them, on the mere ground of absence of extant testimony to that effect. This is as probable a view as ALFORD'S, that in the passage of AUGUSTINE, "to the Parthians," is to be altered by conjectural emendation; and that the Epistle is addressed to the churches at and around Ephesus, on the ground of the fatherly tone of affectionate address in it, implying his personal ministry among his readers. But his position, as probably the only surviving apostle, accords very well with his addressing, in a Catholic Epistle, a cycle of churches which he may not have specially ministered to in person, with affectionate fatherly counsel, by virtue of his general apostolic superintendence of all the churches.

TIME AND PLACE OF WRITING.--This Epistle seems to have been written subsequently to his Gospel as it assumes the reader's acquaintance with the Gospel facts and Christ's speeches, and also with the special aspect of the incarnate Word, as God manifest in the flesh (1Ti 3:16), set forth more fully in his Gospel. The tone of address, as a father addressing his "little children" (the continually recurring term, 1Jo 2:1, 1Jo 2:12-13, 1Jo 2:18, 1Jo 2:28; 1Jo 3:7, 1Jo 3:18; 1Jo 4:4; 1Jo 5:21), accords with the view that this Epistle was written in John's old age, perhaps about A.D. 90. In 1Jo 2:18, "it is the last time," probably does not refer to any particular event (as the destruction of Jerusalem, which was now many years past) but refers to the nearness of the Lord's coming as proved by the rise of Antichristian teachers, the mark of the last time. It was the Spirit's purpose to keep the Church always expecting Christ as ready to come at any moment. The whole Christian age is the last time in the sense that no other dispensation is to arise till Christ comes. Compare "these last days," Heb 1:2. Ephesus may be conjectured to be the place whence it was written. The controversial allusion to the germs of Gnostic heresy accord with Asia Minor being the place, and the last part of the apostolic age the time, of writing this Epistle.

CONTENTS.--The leading subject of the whole is, fellowship with the Father and the Son (1Jo 1:3). Two principal divisions may be noted: (1) 1Jo. 1:5-2:28: the theme of this portion is stated at the outset, "God is light, and in Him is no darkness at all"; consequently, in order to have fellowship with Him, we must walk in light (1Jo 1:7); connected with which in the confession and subsequent forgiveness of our sins through Christ's propitiation and advocacy, without which forgiveness there could be no light or fellowship with God: a farther step in thus walking in the light is, positively keeping God's commandments, the sum of which is love, as opposed to hatred, the acme of disobedience to God's word: negatively, he exhorts them according to their several stages of spiritual growth, children, fathers, young men, in consonance with their privileges as forgiven, knowing the Father, and having overcome the wicked one, not to love the world, which is incompatible with the indwelling of the love of the Father, and to be on their guard against the Antichristian teachers already in the world, who were not of the Church, but of the world, against whom the true defense is, that his believing readers who have the anointing of God, should continue to abide in the Son and in the Father. (2) The second division (1Jo. 2:29-5:5) discusses the theme with which it opens, He is righteous; consequently (as in the first division), "every one that doeth righteousness is born of Him." Sonship in us involves our purifying ourselves as He is pure, even as we hope to see, and therefore to be made like our Lord when He shall appear; in this second, as in the first division, both a positive and a negative side are presented of "doing righteousness as He is righteous," involving a contrast between the children of God and the children of the devil. Hatred marks the latter; love, the former: this love gives assurance of acceptance with God for ourselves and our prayers, accompanied as they are (1Jo 3:23) with obedience to His great commandment, to "believe on Jesus, and love one another"; the seal (1Jo 3:24) of His dwelling in us and assuring our hearts, is the Spirit which He hath given us. In contrast to this (as in the first division), he warns against false spirits, the notes of which are, denial of Christ, and adherence to the world. Sonship, or birth of God, is then more fully described: its essential feature is unslavish, free love to God, because God first loved us, and gave His Son to die for us, and consequent love to the brethren, grounded on their being sons of God also like ourselves, and so victory over the world; this victory being gained only by the man who believes in Jesus as the Son of God. (3) The conclusion establishes this last central truth, on which rests our fellowship with God, Christ's having come by the water of baptism, the blood of atonement, and the witnessing Spirit, which is truth. As in the opening he rested this cardinal truth on the apostles' witness of the eye, the ear, and the touch, so now at the close he rests it on God's witness, which is accepted by the believer, in contrast with the unbeliever, who makes God a liar. Then follows his closing statement of his reason for writing (1Jo 5:13; compare the corresponding 1Jo 1:4, at the beginning), namely, that believers in Christ the Son of God may know that they have (now already) eternal life (the source of "joy," 1Jo 1:4; compare similarly his object in writing the Gospel, Joh 20:31), and so have confidence as to their prayers being answered (corresponding to 1Jo 3:22 in the second part); for instance, their intercessions for a sinning brother (unless his sin be a sin unto death). He closes with a brief summing up of the instruction of the Epistle, the high dignity, sanctity, and safety from evil of the children of God in contrast to the sinful world, and a warning against idolatry, literal and spiritual: "Keep yourselves from idols."

Though the Epistle is not directly polemical, the occasion which suggested his writing was probably the rise of Antichristian teachers; and, because he knew the spiritual character of the several classes whom he addresses, children, youths, fathers, he feels it necessary to write to confirm them in the faith and joyful fellowship of the Father and Son, and to assure them of the reality of the things they believe, that so they may have the full privileges of believing.

STYLE.--His peculiarity is fondness for aphorism and repetition. His tendency to repeat his own phrase, arises partly from the affectionate, hortatory character of the Epistle; partly, also, from its Hebraistic forms abounding in parallel clauses, as distinguished from the Grecian and more logical style of Paul; also, from his childlike simplicity of spirit, which, full of his one grand theme, repeats, and dwells on it with fond delight and enthusiasm. Moreover as ALFORD well says, the appearance of uniformity is often produced by want of deep enough exegesis to discover the real differences in passages which seem to express the same. Contemplative, rather than argumentative, he dwells more on the general, than on the particular, on the inner, than on the outer, Christian life. Certain fundamental truths he recurs to again and again, at one time enlarging on, and applying them, at another time repeating them in their condensed simplicity. The thoughts do not march onward by successive steps, as in the logical style of Paul, but rather in circle drawn round one central thought which he reiterates, ever reverting to it, and viewing it, now under its positive, now under its negative, aspect. Many terms which in the Gospel are given as Christ's, in the Epistle appear as the favorite expressions of John, naturally adopted from the Lord. Thus the contrasted terms, "flesh" and "spirit," "light" and "darkness," "life" and "death," "abide in Him": fellowship with the Father and Son, and with one another," is a favorite phrase also, not found in the Gospel, but in Acts and Paul's Epistles. In him appears the harmonious union of opposites, adapting him for his high functions in the kingdom of God, contemplative repose of character, and at the same time ardent zeal, combined with burning, all-absorbing love: less adapted for active outward work, such as Paul's, than for spiritual service. He handles Christian verities not as abstract dogmas, but as living realities, personally enjoyed in fellowship with God in Christ, and with the brethren. Simple, and at the same time profound, his writing is in consonance with his spirit, unrhetorical and undialectic, gentle, consolatory, and loving: the reflection of the Spirit of Him on whose breast he lay at the last supper, and whose beloved disciple he was. EWALD in ALFORD, speaking of the "unruffled and heavenly repose" which characterizes this Epistle, says, "It appears to be the tone, not so much of a father talking with his beloved children, as of a glorified saint addressing mankind from a higher world. Never in any writing has the doctrine of heavenly love--a love working in stillness, ever unwearied, never exhausted--so thoroughly approved itself as in this Epistle."

JOHN'S PLACE IN THE BUILDING UP OF THE CHURCH.--As Peter founded and Paul propagated, so John completed the spiritual building. As the Old Testament puts prominently forward the fear of God, so John, the last writer of the New Testament, gives prominence to the love of God. Yet, as the Old Testament is not all limited to presenting the fear of God, but sets forth also His love, so John, as a representative of the New Testament, while breathing so continually the spirit of love, gives also the plainest and most awful warnings against sin, in accordance with his original character as Boanerges, "son of thunder." His mother was Salome, mother of the sons of Zebedee, probably sister to Jesus' mother (compare Joh 19:25, "His mother's sister," with Mat 27:56; Mar 15:40), so that he was cousin to our Lord; to his mother, under God, he may have owed his first serious impressions. Expecting as she did the Messianic kingdom in glory, as appears from her petition (Mat 20:20-23), she doubtless tried to fill his young and ardent mind with the same hope. NEANDER distinguishes three leading tendencies in the development of the Christian doctrine, the Pauline, the Jacobean (between which the Petrine forms an intermediate link), and the Johannean. John, in common with James, was less disposed to the intellectual and dialectic cast of thought which distinguishes Paul. He had not, like the apostle of the Gentiles, been brought to faith and peace through severe conflict; but, like James, had reached his Christian individuality through a quiet development: James, however, had passed through a moulding in Judaism previously, which, under the Spirit, caused him to present Christian truth in connection with the law, in so far as the latter in its spirit, though not letter, is permanent, and not abolished, but established under the Gospel. But John, from the first, had drawn his whole spiritual development from the personal view of Christ, the model man, and from intercourse with Him. Hence, in his writings, everything turns on one simple contrast: divine life in communion with Christ; death in separation from Him, as appears from his characteristic phrases, "life, light, truth; death, darkness, lie." "As James and Peter mark the gradual transition from spiritualized Judaism to the independent development of Christianity, and as Paul represents the independent development of Christianity in opposition to the Jewish standpoint, so the contemplative element of John reconciles the two, and forms the closing point in the training of the apostolic Church" [NEANDER].

JFB: 1 John (Outline)

• THE WRITER'S AUTHORITY AS AN EYEWITNESS TO THE GOSPEL FACTS, HAVING SEEN, HEARD, AND HANDLED HIM WHO WAS FROM THE BEGINNING: HIS OBJECT IN WRITING: HIS MESSAGE. IF WE WOULD HAVE FELLOWSHIP WITH HIM, WE MUST WALK IN LIGHT, AS HE IS LIGHT. (1Jo 1:1-10) Instead of a formal, John adopts a virtual address (compare 1Jo 1:4). To wish joy to the reader was the ancient customary address. The sentence begun in 1Jo 1:1 is broken off by the parenthetic 1Jo 1:2, and is resumed at 1Jo 1:3 with the repetition of some words from 1Jo 1:1.
• THE ADVOCACY OF CHRIST IS OUR ANTIDOTE TO SIN WHILE WALKING IN THE LIGHT; FOR TO KNOW GOD, WE MUST KEEP HIS COMMANDMENTS AND LOVE THE BRETHREN, AND NOT LOVE THE WORLD, NOR GIVE HEED TO ANTICHRISTS, AGAINST WHOM OUR SAFETY IS THROUGH THE INWARD ANOINTING OF GOD TO ABIDE IN GOD: SO AT CHRIST'S COMING WE SHALL NOT BE ASHAMED. (1Jo. 2:1-29) (1Jo 5:18.)
• DISTINGUISHING MARKS OF THE CHILDREN OF GOD AND THE CHILDREN OF THE DEVIL. BROTHERLY LOVE THE ESSENCE OF TRUE RIGHTEOUSNESS. (1Jo. 3:1-24)
• TESTS OF FALSE PROPHETS. LOVE, THE TEST OF BIRTH FROM GOD, AND THE NECESSARY FRUIT OF KNOWING HIS GREAT LOVE IN CHRIST TO US. (1Jo. 4:1-21)
• WHO ARE THE BRETHREN ESPECIALLY TO BE LOVED (1Jo 4:21); OBEDIENCE, THE TEST OF LOVE, EASY THROUGH FAITH, WHICH OVERCOMES THE WORLD. LAST PORTION OF THE EPISTLE. THE SPIRIT'S WITNESS TO THE BELIEVER'S SPIRITUAL LIFE. TRUTHS REPEATED AT THE CLOSE: FAREWELL WARNING. (1Jo. 5:1-21) Reason why our "brother" (1Jo 4:21) is entitled to such love, namely, because he is "born (begotten) of God": so that if we want to show our love to God, we must show it to God's visible representative.

TSK: 1 John 1 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

1Jo 1:1, He describes the person of Christ, in whom we have eternal life, by a communion with God; 1Jo 1:5, to which we must adjoin holiness of life, to testify the truth of that our communion and profession of faith, as also to assure us of the forgiveness of our sins by Christ’s death.

TSK: 1 John 2 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

1Jo 2:1, He comforts them against the sins of infirmity; 1Jo 2:3, Rightly to know God is to keep his commandments; 1Jo 2:9, to love our brethren; 1Jo 2:15, and not to love the world; 1Jo 2:18, We must beware of seducers; 1Jo 2:20, from whose deceits the godly are safe, preserved by perseverance in faith, and holiness of life.

Poole: 1 John 1 (Chapter Introduction)

ARGUMENT

Concerning the penman of the First Epistle, it doth not appear there hath been any doubt, the ancients generally ascribing it to the apostle St. John. The time of his writing it is uncertain, some assigning to it an earlier, others a later date. It is thought to have been written directly to the Christian Jews, not living in Judea, but remote in Parthia, (where it appears great numbers of them resided), being styled by a noted father, "The Epistle to the Parthians." The design of it is to confirm them in the great fundamental doctrine of Christianity: That our Lord Jesus was the Messiah, against the attempts of divers apostate or degenerate Christians, who (whether this Epistle were of the former or latter date) did in his time deny, or essentially deprave, that most important article. And not only to induce them all most stedfastly to believe it, but to impress it more deeply upon their souls, to reduce the more licentious, to raise and quicken the dead and carnal to a more strict, lively, vigorous Christianity; and (which is greatly inculcated) to excite and inflame mutual Christian love among them, as that which would more strongly fortify them against the endeavours of seducers, and render their communion more pleasant among themselves. The other two Epistles are very much of the same argument, (though the latter hath somewhat of a different and peculiar concernment), but doubted by some whether by the same penman, upon very insufficient grounds, the matter and style, plainly enough, showing them to be this apostle’ s.

1 JOHN CHAPTER 1

1Jo 1:1-4 The apostle professeth to declare what he had formerly

seen and known of the Word of life, to the end that

others might have fellowship with him.

1Jo 1:5-10 The substance of his doctrine is: That to have

fellowship with God, we must be holy as he is holy;

and that if we confess our sins, we shall be forgiven

through the blood of Christ.

The order of discourse requires we begin with the last

thing in this verse,

the Word of life This phrase, the Word,

is by this apostle (not here to inquire in what notion some,

both Jews and pagans, before took it) familiarly used, to signify the

eternal Son of God: and whereas this is his usual style in speaking of

this sacred Person, as in the entrance of his Gospel, (so very like

that of this Epistle), so often over in his Revelation, Rev 19:13 ,

and that afterwards in this Epistle itself, 1Jo 5:7 , he so

readily falls into the mention of him by this name, (as not doubting

to be understood), it is scarce to be supposed, that being so constant

to himself herein, he should use the same form of speech without any

such intendment in this place, where the circumstances do both allow

and invite us so to understand him. Nor doth the addition to it here,

the Word of life, render it the less fit to be applied to this

purpose, but rather the more; as serving to denote the peculiar

excellency of this Word, that he is the living and vivifying Word;

whereupon he also styles him in the following verse, simply, the

life, and, that eternal life, ( which is fit to be noted here, viz.

that these three expressions, the Word of life, the life, and

that eternal life, do, by the contexture of the discourse, plainly

mean the same thing, and seem in their principal intendment to be set

down as so many titles of the Son of God), designing to represent him

as the original and radical life, the root of the holy, divine life,

to all who partake thereof, agreeably to his own words concerning him

in the Gospel, Joh 1:4 , In him (viz. the Word) was life,

and the life was the light of men (i.e. the Word was a vital,

enlivening light); and 1Jo 5:20 , He (viz. the Son of God) is

eternal life: and to our Lord’ s words of himself, I am the life,

Joh 11:25 14:6 ; and that the Father had given him to

have life in himself, Joh 5:26 , and consequently, to be capable

of being to others an original or fountain of life. Yet whereas by

the Word, and the Word of life, is often signified the gospel,

1Jo 2:5 Phi 2:16 ; and elsewhereit seems not incongruous or

disagreeable to this context, to understand the apostle, as designing

to comprehend both the meanings together in one expression, apt enough

to include them both. See Dr. Hammond in loco. Nor are they of so

remote an import, considered in their relation to us, as not fitly to

admit of being both intended at once. The Son of God being his

internal Word, the Word of his mind, his Wisdom, (another appellation

of him, frequent in Scripture, Pro 8:1-36 and elsewhere),

comprehending all ideas of things to be created or done; to us, the

immediate original of light and life, and by whose vivifying beams we

are especially to be transformed into the Divine likeness: the gospel

being his external word, the word of his mouth, the radiation of those

beams themselves. As we do ourselves first conceive, and form in our

minds, what we afterwards utter and express: only whereas our thonght,

or the word of our mind, is fluid, and soon vanishes; God’ s (in whom

is no change) is permanent, consubstantial and coeternal with himself:

The Word was with God, and the Word was God, Joh 1:1 . Neither

are these two senses of the Word of life less fitly (or with more

impropriety) comprehended together under that one expression, than in

common discourse: speaking of the sun in reference to ourselves, we

often comprehend together in our meaning, both the body of the sun

itself and its beams; as when we say it enlightens us, revives us,

shines in at this window, or upon that dial, we do not intend (as

reasonably we cannot) to exclude either, but mean the sun doth it by

its beams. And now the notion being settled of the Word of life,

(which was necessary first to be done, and which required a larger

discourse), we may the more easily perceive, how what is here said of

it may, in the one sense or the other, be applied thereto.

That which was from the beginning so the living Word, in the

first sense, was, viz. when all things also began; which is not said

itself then to have begun, as Joh 1:1 : In the beginning was the

Word, and the Word was with God, and, at the next step, the Word

was God. And with what is said by this Word himself, (then taking

another, but an equivalent, name, the Wisdom of God), Pro 8:22-30 :

The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works

of old. I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever

the earth was. When, & c.— Then I was by him, as one brought up

with him, & c.: where from the beginning, and from everlasting,

we see is all one. See 1Jo 2:13,14 .

Which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled: these are all expressions indifferently applicable both:

1. To the person of the Son of God, primarily meant by the Word of life;

for that same glorious Person who was from the beginning with the

Father, viz. being now incarnate, became the object of these their

very senses, to this and the other apostles, who had so frequent

opportunity to hear, and see, and behold him, and even to handle

him with their hands, Luk 24:39 Joh 20:25 . And:

2. To the gospel revelation, a secondary (not unintended) notion of

the Word of life, and whereof these latter expressions seem

more especially meant; they denote the perfect certainty the

apostles had (the rest of whom his manner of speaking seems

purposely to comprehend with himself) of that truth, which, as he

after speaks, they testified; it being their office and business as

apostles so to do; see Joh 15:27 Act 1:21,22 4:20 ; and it was

necessary they should be able to do it with such assurance as these

expressions import.

Therefore having said,

which we have heard which imports a more

overly notice, it is added,

which we have seen a much more

certain way of knowing, as 2Pe 1:16,17 ; and

with our eyes a

more lively expression of that certainty, as Job expresses his

expected sight of his Redeemer, Job 19:27 : and to signify it was

not a casual, transient glance, it is further said, which we have

looked upon, eyeasameya , i.e. studiously, and of set purpose,

bent ourselves to contemplate. Unto all which it is moreover added,

and our hands have handledeqhlafhsan , which though literally

not otherwise applicable than to the person of our Lord incarnate, yet

is a most emphatical metaphor, elegantly representing their most

certain knowledge and lively sense of his excellent doctrine; as the

expression is usual of a palpable truth, to signify a most evident

one. So is that implied to be a truth that may be felt, that this

world hath a mighty and bountiful Sustainer and Lord, Act 17:27 ;

qhlafhseian .

Poole: 1 John 2 (Chapter Introduction)

JOHN CHAPTER 2

MHCC: 1 John (Book Introduction)

This epistle is a discourse upon the principles of Christianity, in doctrine and practice. The design appears to be, to refute and guard against erroneous and unholy tenets, principles, and practices, especially such as would lower the Godhead of Christ, and the reality and power of his sufferings and death, as an atoning sacrifice; and against the assertion that believers being saved by grace, are not required to obey the commandments. This epistle also stirs up all who profess to know God, to have communion with him, and to believe in him, and that they walk in holiness, not in sin, showing that a mere outward profession is nothing, without the evidence of a holy life and conduct. It also helps forward and excites real Christians to communion with God and the Lord Jesus Christ, to constancy in the true faith, and to purity of life.

MHCC: 1 John 1 (Chapter Introduction)

(1Jo 1:1-4) The apostle prefaces his epistle to believers in general, with evident testimonies to Christ, for promoting their happiness and joy.

(1Jo 1:5-10) The necessity of a life of holiness, in order to communion with God, is shown.

MHCC: 1 John 2 (Chapter Introduction)

(1Jo 2:1, 1Jo 2:2) The apostle directs to the atonement of Christ for help against sinful infirmities.

(1Jo 2:3-11) The effects of saving knowledge in producing obedience, and love to the brethren.

(1Jo 2:12-14) Christians addressed as little children, young men, and fathers.

(1Jo 2:15-23) All are cautioned against the love of this world, and against errors.

(1Jo 2:24-29) They are encouraged to stand fast in faith and holiness.

Matthew Henry: 1 John (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The First Epistle General of John

Though the continued tradition of the church attests that this epistle came from John the apostle, yet we may observe some other evidence that will confirm (or with some perhaps even outweigh) the certainty of that tradition. It should seem that the penman was one of the apostolical college by the sensible palpable assurance he had of the truth of the Mediator's person in his human nature: That which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life, 1Jo 1:1. Here he takes notice of the evidence the Lord gave to Thomas of his resurrection, by calling him to feel the prints of the nails and of the spear, which is recorded by John. And he must have been one of the disciples present when the Lord came on the same day in which he arose from the dead, and showed them his hands and his side, Joh 20:20. But, that we may be assured which apostle this was, there is scarcely a critic or competent judge of diction, or style of argument and spirit, but will adjudge this epistle to the writer of that gospel that bears the name of the apostle John. They wonderfully agree in the titles and characters of the Redeemer: The Word, the Life, the Light; his name was the Word of God. Compare 1Jo 1:1 and 1Jo 5:7 with Joh 1:1 and Rev 19:13. They agree in the commendation of God's love to us (1Jo 3:9; 1Jo 4:7; and 1Jo 5:1; Joh 3:5, Joh 3:6). Lastly (to add no more instances, which may be easily seen in comparing this epistle with that gospel), they agree in the allusion to, or application of, that passage in that gospel which relates (and which alone relates) the issuing of water and blood out of the Redeemer's opened side: This is he that came by water and blood, 1Jo 5:6. Thus the epistle plainly appears to flow from the same pen as that gospel did. Now I know not that the text, or the intrinsic history of any of the gospels, gives us such assurance of its writer or penman as that ascribed to John plainly does. There (viz. Joh 21:24) the sacred historian thus notifies himself: This is the disciple that testifieth of these things and wrote these things; and we know that his testimony is true. Now who is this disciple, but he concerning whom Peter asked, What shall this man do? And concerning whom the Lord answered, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? (Joh 21:22). And who (Joh 21:20) is described by these three characters: - 1. That he is the disciple whom Jesus loved, the Lord's peculiar friend. 2. That he also leaned on his breast at supper. 3. That he said unto him, Lord, who is he that betrayeth thee? As sure then as it is that that disciple was John, so sure may the church be that that gospel and this epistle came from the beloved John.

The epistle is styled general, as being not inscribed to any particular church; it is, as a circular letter (or visitation charge), sent to divers churches (some say of Parthia), in order to confirm them in their stedfast adherence to the Lord Christ, and the sacred doctrines concerning his person and office, against seducers; and to instigate them to adorn that doctrine by love to God and man, and particularly to each other, as being descended from God, united by the same head, and travelling towards the same eternal life.

Matthew Henry: 1 John 1 (Chapter Introduction)

Evidence given concerning Christ's person and excellency (1Jo 1:1, 1Jo 1:2). The knowledge thereof gives us communion with God and Christ (1Jo 1:3), and joy (1Jo 1:4). A description of God (1Jo 1:5). How we are thereupon to walk (1Jo 1:6). The benefit of such walking (1Jo 1:7). The way to forgiveness (1Jo 1:9). The evil of denying our sin (1Jo 1:8-10).

Matthew Henry: 1 John 2 (Chapter Introduction)

Here the apostle encourages against sins of infirmity (1Jo 2:1, 1Jo 2:2), shows the true knowledge and love of God (1Jo 2:3-6), renews the precept of fraternal love (1Jo 2:7-11), addresses the several ages of Christians (1Jo 2:12-14), warns against worldly love (1Jo 2:15-17), against seducers (1Jo 2:18, 1Jo 2:19), shows the security of true Christians (1Jo 2:20-27), and advises to abide in Christ (1Jo 2:28, 1Jo 2:29).

Barclay: 1 John (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO THE FIRST LETTER OF JOHN

A Personal Letter And Its Background

First John is entitled a letter but it has no opening address nor closing greetings such as the letters of Paul have. And yet no one can read it without feeling its intensely personal character. Beyond all doubt the man who wrote it had in his mindeye a definite situation and a definite group of people. Both the form and the personal character of First John will be explained if we think of it as what someone has called "a loving and anxious sermon" written by a pastor who loved his people and sent out to the various churches over which he had charge.

Any such letter is produced by an actual situation apart from which it cannot be fully understood. If, then, we wish to understand First John we have first of all to try to reconstruct the situation which produced it, remembering that it was written in Ephesus a little after A.D. 100.

The Falling Away

By A.D. 100 certain things had almost inevitably happened within the Church, especially in a place like Ephesus.

(i) Many were now second or even third generation Christians. The thrill of the first days had, to some extent at least, passed away. Wordsworth said of one of the great moments of modern history:

"Bliss was it in that dawn to be alive."

In the first days of Christianity there was a glory and a splendour, but now Christianity had become a thing of habit, "traditional, half-hearted, nominal." Men had grown used to it and something of the wonder was lost. Jesus knew men and he had said: "Most menlove will grow cold" (Mat_24:12 ). John was writing at a time when, for some at least, the first thrill was gone and the flame of devotion had died to a flicker.

(ii) One result was that there were members of the Church who found the standards which Christianity demanded a burden and a weariness. They did not want to be saints in the New Testament sense of the term. The New Testament word for saint is hagios (G40), which is also commonly translated holy. Its basic meaning is different. The Temple was hagios (G39) because it was different from other buildings; the Sabbath was hagios (G40) because it was different from other days; the Jewish nation was hagios (G40) because it was different from other peoples; and the Christian was called to be hagios (G40) because he was called to be different from other men. There was always a distinct cleavage between the Christian and the world. In the Fourth Gospel Jesus says, "If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you" (Joh_15:19 ). "I have given them thy word," said Jesus in his prayer to God, "and the world has hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world" (Joh_17:14 ).

All this involved an ethical demand. It demanded a new standard of moral purity, a new kindness, a new service, a new forgiveness--and it was difficult. And once the first thrill and enthusiasm were gone it became harder and harder to stand out against the world and to refuse to conform to the generally accepted standards and practices of the age.

(iii) It is to be noted that First John shows no signs that the Church to which it was written was being persecuted. The peril, as it has been put, was not persecution but seduction; it came from within. That, too, Jesus had foreseen. "Many false prophets," he said, "will arise, and lead many astray" (Mat_24:11 ). This was a danger of which Paul had warned the leaders of this very Church of Ephesus when he made his farewell address to them. "I know," he said, "that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock. And from among your own selves will arise men, speaking perverse things to draw away the disciples after them" (Act_20:29-30 ).

The trouble which First John seeks to combat did not come from men out to destroy the Christian faith but from men who thought they were improving it. It came from men whose aim was to make Christianity intellectually respectable. They knew the intellectual tendencies and currents of the day and felt that the time had come for Christianity to come to terms with secular philosophy and contemporary thought.

The Contemporary Philosophy

What, then, was this contemporary thought and philosophy with which the false prophets and mistaken teachers wished to align the Christian faith? Throughout the Greek world there was a tendency of thought to which the general name of Gnosticism is given. The basic belief of all Gnostic thought was that only spirit was good and matter was essentially evil. The Gnostic, therefore, inevitably despised the world since it was matter. In particular he despised the body which, being matter, was necessarily evil. Imprisoned within this body was the spirit of man. That spirit was a seed of God, who was altogether good. So, then, the aim of life must be to release this heavenly seed imprisoned in the evil of the body. That could be done only by a secret knowledge and elaborate ritual which only the true Gnostic could supply. Here was a tendency of thought which was written deep into Greek thinking--and which has not even vet ceased to exist. Its basis is the conviction that all matter is evil and spirit alone is good, and that the one real aim in life is to liberate manspirit from the vile prison-house of the body.

The False Teachers

With that in our minds let us turn to First John and gather the evidence as to who these false teachers were and what they taught. They had been within the Church but they had seceded from it. "They went out from us, but they were not of us" (1Jo_2:19 ). They were men of influence for they claimed to be prophets. "Many false prophets have gone out into the world" (1Jo_4:1 ). Although they had left the Church, they still tried to disseminate their teaching within it and to seduce its members from the true faith (1Jo_2:26 ).

The Denial Of Jesusessiahship

At least some of these false teachers denied that Jesus was the Messiah. "Who is a liar," demands John, "but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ?" (1Jo_2:22 ). It is most likely that these false teachers were not Gnostics proper, but Jews. Things had always been difficult for Jewish Christians, but the events of history made them doubly so. It was very difficult for a Jew to come to believe in a crucified Messiah. But suppose he had begun so to believe, his difficulties were by no means finished. The Christians believed that Jesus would return quickly to vindicate his people. Clearly that would be a hope that would be specially dear to the heart of the Jews. Then in A.D. 70 Jerusalem was captured by the Romans, who were so infuriated with the long intransigence and the suicidal resistance of the Jews that they tore the Holy City stone from stone and drew a plough across the midst of it. In view of that, how could any Jew easily accept the hope that Jesus would come and save his people? The Holy City was desolate; the Jews were dispersed throughout the world. In face of that how could it be true that the Messiah had come?

The Denial Of The Incarnation

There was something even more serious than that. There was false teaching which came directly from an attempt from within the Church to bring Christianity into line with Gnosticism. We must remember the Gnostic point of view that spirit alone was good and matter utterly evil. Given that point of view any real incarnation is impossible. That is exactly what centuries later Augustine was to point out. Before he became a Christian, he was skilled in the philosophies of the various schools. In the Confessions (1Jo_6:9 ) he tells us that somewhere in the heathen writers he had read in one form or another nearly all the things which Christianity says; but there was one great Christian saying which he had never found in any pagan author and which no one would ever find, and that saying was: "The Word became flesh and dwelt among us" (Joh_1:14 ). Since the heathen thinkers believed in the essential evil of matter and therefore the essential evil of the body, that was one thing they could never say.

It is clear that the false teachers against whom John was writing in this First Letter denied the reality of the incarnation and of Jesushysical body. "Every spirit," writes John, "which confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God; and every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God" (1Jo_4:2-3 ).

In the early Church this refusal to admit the reality of the incarnation took, broadly speaking, two forms.

(i) In its most radical and wholesale form it was called Docetism, which Goodspeed suggests might be translated Seemism. The Greek verb dokein (G1380) means to seem; and the Docetists taught that Jesus only seemed to have a body. They insisted that he was a purely spiritual being who had nothing but the appearance of having a body. One of the apocryphal books written from this point of view is the Acts of John, which dates from about A.D. 160. In it John is made to say that sometimes when he touched Jesus he seemed to meet with a material body but at other times "the substance was immaterial, as if it did not exist at all," and also that when Jesus walked he never left any footprint upon the ground. The simplest form of Docetism is the complete denial that Jesus ever had a physical body.

(ii) There was a more subtle, and perhaps more dangerous, variant of this theory connected with the name of Cerinthus. In tradition John and Cerinthus were sworn enemies. Eusebius (Ecclesiastical History 4: 14.6) hands down a story which tells how John went to the public bathhouse in Ephesus to bathe. He saw Cerinthus inside and refused even to enter the building. "Let us flee," he said, "lest even the bathhouse fall, because Cerinthus the enemy of truth is within." Cerinthus drew a definite distinction between the human Jesus and the divine Christ. He said that Jesus was a man, born in a perfectly natural way. He lived in special obedience to God, and after his baptism the Christ in the shape of a dove descended upon him, from that power which is above all powers, and then he brought to men news of the Father who had been as yet unknown. Cerinthus did not stop there. He said that at the end of Jesusife, the Christ again withdrew from him so that the Christ never suffered at all. It was the human Jesus who suffered, died and rose again.

This again comes out in the stories of the apocryphal gospels written under the influence of this point of view. In the Gospel of Peter, written about A.D. 130, it is said that Jesus showed no pain upon the Cross and that his cry was: "My power! My power! Why hast thou forsaken me?" It was at that moment that the divine Christ left the human Jesus. The Acts of John go further. They tell how, when the human Jesus was being crucified on Calvary, John was actually talking to the divine Christ in a cave in the hillside and that the Christ said to him, "John, to the multitude down below in Jerusalem I am being crucified, and pierced with lances and with reeds, and gall and vinegar are given me to drink. But I am speaking to you, and listen to what I say.... Nothing, therefore, of the things they will say of me have I suffered" (Acts of John 97).

We may see how widespread this way of thinking was from the Letters of Ignatius. He was writing to a group of Churches in Asia Minor which must have been much the same as that to which First John was written. When Ignatius wrote he was a prisoner and was being conveyed to Rome to be martyred by being flung to the beasts in the arena. He wrote to the Trallians: "Be deaf, therefore. when anyone speaks to you apart from Jesus Christ, who was of the family of David and Mary, who was truly born, both ate and drank, was truly persecuted under Pontius Pilate, was truly crucified and died . . . who also was truly raised from the dead.... But if, as some affirm, who are without God that is, who are unbelievers--his suffering was only a semblance ... why am I a prisoner?" (Ignatius: To the Trallians 9 and 10). To the Christians at Smyrna he wrote: "For he suffered all these things for us that we might attain salvation, and he truly suffered even as he also truly raised himself, not as some unbelievers say that his passion was merely in semblance" (To the Smyrnaeans 2). Polycarp writing to the Philippians used Johnvery words: "For everyone who does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is an anti-Christ" (To the Philippians chapter 7: 1).

This teaching of Cerinthus is also rebuked in First John. John writes of Jesus: "This is he who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not with the water only, but with the water and the blood" (1Jo_5:6 ). The point of that verse is that the Gnostic teachers would have agreed that the divine Christ came by water, that is, at the baptism of Jesus; but they would have denied that he came by blood, that is, by the Cross, for they insisted that the divine Christ left the human Jesus before his crucifixion.

The great danger of this heresy is that it comes from what can only be called a mistaken reverence. It is afraid to ascribe to Jesus full humanity. It regards it as irreverent to think that he had a truly physical body. It is a heresy which is by no means dead but is held to this day, usually quite unconsciously, by not a few devout Christians. But it must be remembered, as John so clearly saw, that mansalvation was dependent on the full identification of Jesus Christ with him. As one of the great early fathers unforgettably put it: "He became what we are to make us what he is."

(iii) This Gnostic belief had certain practical consequences in the lives of those who held it.

(a) The Gnostic attitude to matter and to all created things produced a certain attitude to the body and the things of the body. That attitude might take any one of three different forms.

(1) It might take the form of asceticism, with fasting and celibacy and rigid control, even deliberate ill-treatment, of the body. The view that celibacy is better than marriage and that sex is sin go back to Gnostic influence and belief--and this is a view which still lingers on in certain quarters. There is no trace of that view in this letter.

(2) It might take the form of a contention that the body did not matter and that, therefore, its appetites might be gratified without limit. Since the body was in any event evil, it made no difference what a man did with it. There are echoes of this in this letter. John condemns as a liar the man who says that he knows God and vet does not keep Godcommandments; the man who says that he abides in Christ ought to walk as Christ walked (1Jo_1:6 ; 1Jo_2:4-6 ). There were clearly Gnostics in these communities who claimed special knowledge of God but whose conduct was far removed from the demand of the Christian ethic.

In certain quarters this Gnostic belief went even further. The Gnostic was the man who had gnosis (G1108), knowledge. Some held that the real Gnostic must, therefore, know the best as well as the worst and must enter into every experience of life at its highest or at its deepest level, as the case may be. It might almost be said that such men held that it was an obligation to sin. There is a reference to this kind of belief in the letter to Thyatira in the Revelation, where the Risen Christ refers to those who have known "the deep things of Satan" (Rev_2:24 ). And it may well be that John is referring to these people when he insists that "God is light, and in him is no darkness at all" (1Jo_1:5 ). These particular Gnostics would have held that there was in God not only blazing light but deep darkness and that a man must penetrate both. It is easy to see the disastrous consequences of such a belief.

(3) There was a third kind of Gnostic belief. The true Gnostic regarded himself as an altogether spiritual man, as having shed all the material things of life and released his spirit from the bondage of matter. Such Gnostics held that they were so spiritual that they were above and beyond sin and had reached spiritual perfection. It is to them that John refers when he speaks of those who deceive themselves by saying that they have no sin (1Jo_1:8-10 ).

Whichever of these three ways Gnostic belief took, its ethical consequences were perilous in the extreme; and it is clear that its last two were to be found in the society to which John wrote.

(b) Further, this Gnosticism issued in an attitude to men which was the necessary destruction of Christian fellowship. We have seen that the Gnostic aimed at the release of the spirit from the prison house of the evil body by means of an elaborate and esoteric knowledge. Clearly such a knowledge was not for every man. Ordinary people were too involved in the everyday life and work of the world ever to have time for the study and discipline necessary; and, even if they had had such time, many were intellectually incapable of grasping the involved speculations of Gnostic theosophy and philosophy so-called.

This produced an inevitable result. It divided men into two classes those who were capable of a really spiritual life and those who were not. The Gnostics had names for these two classes of men. The ancients commonly divided the being of man into three parts. There was the soma (G4983), the body, the physical part of man. There was the psuche (G5590), which we generally translate soul, but we must have a care for it does not mean what we mean by soul. To the Greeks the psuche (G5590) was the principle of physical life. Everything which had physical life had psuche (G5590). Psuche was that life principle which a man shared with all living creatures. There was the pneuma (G4151), the spirit; and it was the spirit which was possessed only by man and made him kin to God.

The aim of Gnosticism was the release of the pneuma (G4151) from the soma (G4983); but that release could be won only by long and arduous study which only the leisured intellectual could ever undertake. The Gnostics, therefore, divided men into two classes the psuchikoi (G5591), who could never advance beyond the principle of physical life and never attain to anything else than what was to all intents and purposes animal living; and the pneumatikoi (G4152), who were truly spiritual and truly akin to God.

The result was clear. The Gnostics produced a spiritual aristocracy who looked with contempt and even hatred on lesser men. The pneumatikoi (G4152) regarded the psuchikoi (G5591) as contemptible, earthbound creatures who could never know what real religion was. The consequence was obviously the annihilation of Christian fellowship. That is why John insists all over his letter that the true test of Christianity is love for the brethren. If we really are walking in the light we have fellowship with one another (1Jo_1:7 ). He who says he is in the light and hates his brother is in fact in darkness (1Jo_2:9-11 ). The proof that we have passed from dark to light is that we love the brethren (1Jo_3:14-17 ). The marks of Christianity are belief in Christ and love for the brethren (1Jo_3:23 ). God is love and he who does not love does not know God at all (1Jo_4:7-8 ). Because God loved us, we ought to love each other; it is when we love each other that God dwells in us (1Jo_4:10-12 ). The commandment is that he who loves God must love his brother also, and he who says he loves God and at the same time hates his brother is branded as a liar (1Jo_4:20-21 ). The Gnostic, to put it bluntly, would have said that the mark of true religion is contempt for ordinary men; John insists in every chapter that the mark of true religion is love for every man.

Here, then, is a picture of these Gnostic heretics. They talked of being born of God, of walking in the light, of having no sin, of dwelling in God, of knowing God. These were their catch phrases. They had no idea of destroying the Church and the faith; by their way of it they were going to cleanse the Church of dead wood and make Christianity an intellectually respectable philosophy, fit to stand beside the great systems of the day. But the effect of their teaching was to deny the incarnation, to eliminate the Christian ethic and to make fellowship within the Church impossible. It is little wonder that John seeks, with such fervent pastoral devotion, to defend the churches he loved from such an insidious attack from within. This was a threat far more perilous than any heathen persecution; the very existence of the Christian faith was at stake.

The Message Of John

First John is a short letter and we cannot look within it for a systematic exposition of the Christian faith. None the less it will be of the greatest interest to examine the basic underlying beliefs with which John confronts those threatening to be the wreckers of the Christian faith.

The Object Of Writing

Johnobject in writing is two-fold yet one. He writes that the joy of his people may be complete (1Jo_1:4 ), and that they may not sin (1Jo_2:1 ). He sees clearly that, however attractive the wrong way may be, it is not in its nature to bring happiness. To bring them joy and to preserve them from sin is one and the same thing.

The Idea Of God

John has two great things to say about God. God is light and in him there is no darkness at all (1Jo_1:5 ). God is love and that made him love us before we loved him and made him send his son as a remedy for our sins (1Jo_4:7-10 , 1Jo_4:16 ). Johnconviction is that God is self-revealing and self-giving. He is light, and not darkness; he is love, and not hate.

The Idea Of Jesus

Because the main attack of the false teachers was on the person of Christ, this letter, which is concerned to answer them, is specially rich and helpful in what it has to say about him.

(i) Jesus is he who was from the beginning (1Jo_1:1 ; 1Jo_2:14 ). When a man is confronted with Jesus, he is confronted with the eternal.

(ii) Another way of putting this is to say that Jesus is the Son of God and for John it is essential to be convinced of that (1Jo_4:15 ; 1Jo_5:5 ). The relationship of Jesus to God is unique and in him is seen Godever-seeking and ever-forgiving heart.

(iii) Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah (1Jo_2:22 ; 1Jo_5:1 ). That again for him is an essential article of belief. It may seem that here we come into a region of ideas which is much narrower and, in fact, specifically Jewish. But there is something essential here. To say that Jesus is from the beginning and that he is the Son of God is to conserve his connection with eternity; to say that he is the Messiah, is to conserve his connection with history. It is to see his coming as the event towards which Godplan, working itself out in his chosen people, was moving.

(iv) Jesus was most truly and fully man. To deny that Jesus came in the flesh is to be moved by the spirit of Antichrist (1Jo_4:2-3 ). It is Johnwitness that Jesus was so truly man that he himself had known and touched and handled him (1Jo_1:1 , 1Jo_1:3 ). No writer in the New Testament holds with greater intensity the full reality of the incarnation. Not only did he become man, he also suffered for men. It was by water and blood that he came (1Jo_5:6 ); and he laid down his life for men (1Jo_3:16 ).

(v) The coming of Jesus, his incarnation, his life, his death, his resurrection and his ascension all combine to deal with the sin of man. Jesus was without sin (1Jo_3:5 ); and man is essentially a sinner, even though in his arrogance he may claim to be without sin (1Jo_1:8-10 ); and yet the sinless one came to take away the sin of sinning men (1Jo_3:5 ). In regard to mansin Jesus is two things.

(a) He is our advocate with the Father (1Jo_2:1 ). The word is parakletos (G3875). A parakletos is someone who is called in to help. The word could be used of a doctor; it was often used of a witness called in to give evidence in favour of someone on trial or of a defending lawyer called in to defend someone under accusation. Jesus pleads our case with God; he, the sinless one, is the defender of sinning men.

(b) But Jesus is more than that. Twice John calls him the expiation for our sins (1Jo_2:2 ; 1Jo_4:10 ). When a man sins, the relationship which should exist between him and God is broken. An expiatory sacrifice is one which restores that relationship or, rather, a sacrifice in virtue of which that relationship is restored. It is an atoning sacrifice, a sacrifice which once again makes man and God at one. So, then, through what Jesus was and did the relationship between God and man, broken by sin, is restored. Jesus does not only plead the case of the sinner; he sets him at one, with God. The blood of Jesus Christ cleanses us from all sin (1Jo_1:7 ).

(vi) In consequence of all this, through Jesus Christ men who believe have life (1Jo_4:9 ; 1Jo_5:11-12 ). This is true in a double sense. They have life in the sense that they are saved from death; and they have life in the sense that living has ceased to be mere existence and has become life indeed.

(vii) All this may be summed up by saying that Jesus is the Saviour of the world (1Jo_4:14 ). Here we have something which has to be set out in full. "The Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world" (1Jo_4:14 ). We have already talked of Jesus as pleading mencase before God. If we were to leave that without addition, it might be argued that God wished to condemn men and was deflected from his dire purpose by the self-sacrifice of Jesus Christ. But that is not so because for John, as for every writer in the New Testament, the whole initiative was with God. It was he who sent his son to be the Saviour of men.

Within the short compass of this letter the wonder and the glory and the grace of Christ are most fully set out.

The Spirit

In this letter John has less to say about the Spirit; for his highest teaching about him we must turn back to the Fourth Gospel. It may be said that in First John the function of the Spirit is in some sense to be the liaison between God and man. It is he who makes us conscious that there is within us the abiding presence of God through Jesus Christ (1Jo_3:24 ; 1Jo_4:13 ). We may say that it is the Spirit who enables us to grasp the precious fellowship with God which is being offered to us.

The World

The world within which the Christian lives is hostile; it is a world without God. It does not know the Christian, because it did not know Christ (1Jo_3:1 ). It hates the Christian, just as it hated Christ (1Jo_3:13 ). The false teachers are of the world and not of God, and it is because they speak its language that the world is ready to hear them and accept them (1Jo_4:4-5 ). The whole world, says John sweepingly, is in the power of the evil one (1Jo_5:19 ). It is for that reason that the Christian has to overcome it, and his weapon in his struggle with the world is faith (1Jo_5:4 ).

Hostile as the world is, it is doomed. The world and all its desires are passing away (1Jo_2:17 ). That, indeed, is why it is folly to give oneheart to the world; it is on the way to dissolution. Although the Christian lives in a hostile world which is passing away, there is no need for despair and fear. The darkness is past, the true light now shines (1Jo_2:8 ). God in Christ has broken into time; the new age has come. It is not yet fully realized but the consummation is sure.

The Christian lives in an evil and a hostile world, but he possesses that by which he can overcome it and, when the destined end of the world comes, he is safe, because he already possesses that which makes him a member of the new community in the new age.

The Fellowship Of The Church

John does more than move in the high realms of theology; he has certain most practical things to say about the Christian Church and the Christian life. No New Testament writer stresses more consistently or more strenuously the necessity of Christian fellowship. Christians, John was convinced, are not only bound to God, they are also bound to each other. When we walk in the light, we have fellowship with each other (1Jo_1:7 ). The man who claims to walk in the light but hates his brother, is in reality walking in darkness; it is the man who loves his brother who is in the light (1Jo_2:9-11 ). The proof that a man has passed from darkness to light is the fact that he loves his brother. To hate onebrother man is in essence to be a murderer, as Cain was. If any man is able out of his fullness to help his brotherpoverty and does not do so, it is ridiculous for him to claim that the love of God dwells in him. The essence of religion is to believe on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and to love one another (1Jo_3:11-17 , 1Jo_3:23 ). God is love; and, therefore, the man who loves is kin to God. God has loved us, and that is the best reason for loving each other (1Jo_4:7-12 ). If a man says that he loves God and at the same time hates his brother, he is a liar. The command is that he who loves God must love his brother also (1Jo_4:20-21 ).

It was Johnconviction that the only way in which a man can prove that he loves God is by loving his fellow-men; and that that love must be not only a sentimental emotion but a dynamic towards practical help.

The Righteousness Of The Christian

No New Testament writer makes a stronger ethical demand than John, or more strongly condemns a so-called religion which fails to issue in ethical action. God is righteous and the life of every one who knows him must reflect his righteousness (1Jo_2:29 ). Whoever abides in Christ and is born of God, does not sin; whoever does not do right is not of God (1Jo_3:3-10 ); and the characteristic of this righteousness is that it issues in love for the brethren (1Jo_3:10-11 ). We show our love to God and to men by keeping Godcommandments (1Jo_5:2 ). Whoever is born of God does not sin (1Jo_5:18 ).

For John, knowledge of God and obedience to him must ever go hand in hand. It is by keeping his commandments that we prove that we really do know God. The man who says that he knows him and who does not keep his commandments is a liar (1Jo_2:3-5 ).

It is, in fact, this obedience which is the basis of effective prayer. We receive what we ask of God because we keep his commandments and do what is pleasing in his sight (1Jo_3:22 ).

The two marks which characterize genuine Christianity are love of the brethren and obedience to the revealed commandments of God.

The Destination Of The Letter

There are certain baffling problems in regard to the letterdestination. The letter itself gives us no clue as to where it was sent. Tradition strongly connects it with Asia Minor, and especially with Ephesus, where, according to tradition, John lived for many years. But there are certain other odd facts which somehow have to be explained.

Cassiodorus says that the First Letter of John was written Ad Parthos, To the Parthians (compare G3934); and Augustine has a series of ten tractates written on The Epistle of John ad Parthos. One Geneva manuscript still further complicates the matter by entitling the letter Ad Sparthos. There is no such word as Sparthos. There are two possible explanations of this impossible title: (i) Just possibly it is meant for Ad Sparsos, which would mean To the Christians scattered abroad; (ii) In Greek Ad Parthos would be Pros Parthous. Now in the early manuscripts there was no space between the words and they were all written in capital letters so that the title would run PROSPARTHOUS. A scribe writing to dictation could quite easily put that down as PROSSPARTHOUS, especially if he did not know what the title meant. Ad Sparthos can be eliminated as a mere mistake.

But where did To the Parthians come from? There is one possible explanation. Second John does tell us of its destination; it is written to The elect lady,, and her children (2Jo_1:1 ). Let us turn to the end of First Peter. The King James Version has: "The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you" (1Pe_5:13 ). The phrase: "the church that is" is printed in the King James Version in italics which of course, means that it has no equivalent in the Greek which has, in fact, no actual mention of a church at all. This the Revised Standard Version accurately indicates: "She who is at Babylon, who is likewise chosen (elect), sends you greetings." As far as the Greek goes it would be perfectly possible, and indeed natural, to take that as referring not to a Church but to a lad . That is precisely what certain of the scholars in the very early Church did. Now we get the elect lady again in Second John. It was easy to identify the two elect ladies and to assume that Second John was also written to Babylon. The natural title for the inhabitants of Babylon was Parthians and hence we have the explanation of the title.

The process went even further. The Greek for the elect lady is he (G3588) elekte (G1588). We have already seen that the early manuscripts were written all in capital letters; and it would be just possible to take Elekte (G1588) not as an adjective meaning elect but as a proper name, Elekta. This is, in fact, what Clement of Alexandria may have done, for we have information that he said that the Johannine letters were written to a certain Babylonian lady, Elekta by name, and to her children.

It may well be then, that the title Ad Parthos arose from a series of misunderstandings. The elect one in First Peter is quite certainly the church, as the King James Version rightly saw. Moffatt translates: "Your sister church in Babylon, elect like yourselves, salutes you." Further, it is almost certain that in any event Babylon there stands for Rome which the early writers identified with Babylon, the great harlot, drunk with the blood of the saints (compare Rev_17:5 ). The title Ad Parthos has a most interesting history but clearly it arose from an ingenious misunderstanding.

There is one further complication. Clement of Alexandria referred to Johnletters as "written to virgins." On the face of it that is improbable, for it would not be a specially relevant title for them. How, then, could it come about? The Greek would be Pros Parthenous (compare G3933) which closely resembles Pros Parthous (G3934); and, it so happens, John was regularly called Ho Parthenos (G3933), the Virgin, because he never married and because of the purity of his life. This further title must have come from a confusion between Ad Parthos (G3934) and Ho Parthenos (G3933).

This is a case where we may take it that tradition is right and all the ingenious theories mistaken. We may take it that these letters were written in Ephesus and to the surrounding Churches in Asia Minor. When John wrote, it would certainly be to the district where his writ ran, and that was Ephesus and the surrounding territory. He is never mentioned in connection with Babylon.

In Defence Of The Faith

John wrote his great letter to meet a threatening situation and in defence of the faith. The heresies which he attacked are by no means altogether echoes of "old unhappy far off things and battles long ago." They are still beneath the surface and sometimes they even still raise their heads. To study his letter will confirm us in the true faith and enable us to have a defence against that which would seduce us from it.

FURTHER READING

John

J. N. S. Alexander, The Epistles of John (Tch; E)

A. E. Brooke, The Johannine Epistles (ICC; G)

C. H. Dodd, The Johannine Epistles (MC; E)

Abbreviations

ICC: International Critical Commentary

MC: Moffatt Commentary

Tch: Torch Commentary

E: English Text

G: Greek Text

Barclay: 1 John 1 (Chapter Introduction)

The Pastor's Aim (2Jo_1:1-4)

The Pastor's Right To Speak (2Jo_1:1-4 Continued)

The Pastor's Message (2Jo_1:1-4 Continued)

God Is Light (2Jo_1:5)

The Hostile Dark (2Jo_1:5 Continued)

The Necessity Of Walking In The Light (2Jo_1:6-7)

The Tests Of Truth (2Jo_1:6-7 Continued)

The Threefold Lie (2Jo_1:6-7 Continued)

The Sinner's Self-Deception (2Jo_1:8-10)

Barclay: 1 John 2 (Chapter Introduction)

A Pastor's Concern (2Jo_2:1-2)

Jesus Christ, The Paraclete (2Jo_2:1-2 Continued)

Jesus Christ, The Propitiation (2Jo_2:1-2 Continued)

The True Knowledge Of God (2Jo_2:3-6)

The Commandment Which Is Old And New (2Jo_2:7-8)

The Defeat Of The Dark (2Jo_2:7-8 Continued)

Love And Hate, And Light And Dark (2Jo_2:9-11)

The Effect Of Love And Hate (2Jo_2:9-11 Continued)

Remembering Who We Are (2Jo_2:12-14)

At Every Stage (2Jo_2:12-14 Continued)

God's Gifts In Christ (2Jo_2:12-14 Continued)

Rivals For The Human Heart (2Jo_2:15-17)

The Life In Which There Is No Future (2Jo_2:15-17 Continued)

The Time Of The Last Hour (2Jo_2:18)

The Antichrist (2Jo_2:18 Continued)

The Battle Of The Mind (2Jo_2:18 Continued)

The Sifting Of The Church (2Jo_2:19-21)

The Master Lie (2Jo_2:22-23)

The Universal Privilege (2Jo_2:24-29)

Abiding In Christ (2Jo_2:24-29 Continued)

Constable: 1 John (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Historical Background

This epistle does not contain the name of its writer, but from its very early history the church believed the Apostle John wrote it. Several ancient writers referred to this book as John's writing.¹ Though modern critics have challenged this view they have not destroyed it.

Neither is there any reference to who the first recipients of this epistle were or where they lived other than that they were Christians (2:12-14, 21; 5:13). They may have been the leaders of churches (2:20, 27). According to early church tradition John ministered in Ephesus, the capital of the Roman province of Asia, for many years after he left Palestine. We know that he knew the churches and Christians in that Roman province well from Revelation 2 and 3. Perhaps his readers lived in that province.

The false teachers and teachings to which he alluded suggest that John wrote about conditions that existed in Asia: Judaism, Gnosticism, Docetism, the teachings of Cerinthus (a prominent Gnostic), and others.² These philosophies extended beyond Asia, but they were present there during John's lifetime.

This is one of the most difficult of all the New Testament books to date. One of the few references in the book that may help us date it is 2:19. If John meant that the false teachers had departed from among the apostles, a date in the 60s seems possible. This would place it about A.D. 60-65, before the Jewish revolts of A.D. 66-70 scattered the Jews from Judea. In this case John may have written from Jerusalem.³ However many conservative scholars believe John wrote this epistle much later. They suggest between about A.D. 85 and 97, when he evidently wrote the Gospel of John (ca. A.D. 85-95) and the Book of Revelation (ca. A.D. 95-96).⁴ I prefer a date in the 90s following the writing of John's Gospel that 1 John seems to assume.⁵ In view of the nature and the conclusion of the Book of Revelation, which seems to be God's final word to humankind, I think John probably composed his Epistles before that book. So a date for 1 John in the early 90s, A.D. 90-95, seems most probable to me.⁶

Since John ministered in and around Ephesus later in his life, that seems to be the most probable place from which he wrote this epistle.⁷

"The writer of 1 John was thus addressing a community, made up of a number of house-churches in and around Ephesus . . ., which was split in three ways. It consisted of the following: (a) Johannine Christians who were committed to the apostolic gospel of Jesus as they had received it; (b) heretically inclined members from a Jewish background; (c) heterodox followers from a Hellenistic (and/or pagan) background. The problems relating to the two heretical' groups, (b) and (c), were primarily theological and (by extension) ethical; although related difficulties concerning eschatology and pneumatology may have been present also (see on 2:18 and 4:1 . . .). . . .

"To complete the picture, it should be noted that the life of the Johannine community was marked by the presence of a fourth group of people: the secessionists. Whereas the members of the first three groups could be found within John's circle, the anti-Christian secessionists had begun to break away from it. These were heretically inclined adherents of the Johannine community. In some cases they may have been genuine, if uninformed, believers. But in other instances they perhaps never properly belonged to John's church (although they thought they did), because they never really belonged to God (see on 1 John 2:18-19; cf. also 2:22-23)."⁸

Message⁹

If I were to boil down the message of this epistle into one sentence it would be this. Fellowship with God is the essence of eternal life.

Both the Gospel of John and the First Epistle of John deal with eternal life. John wrote his Gospel so his readers might believe that Jesus is the Christ, and that believing they might have life through His name (John 20:31). John wrote this epistle to Christians so we might enter into the fullness of the eternal life that we possess (1 John 1:3; John 10:10). However the subject of this letter is not eternal life but fellowship with God. Fellowship with God is the essence of eternal life (1:3-4; John 17:3).

John evidently wrote this epistle about 90-95 A.D. from Ephesus.

This epistle grew out of Jesus' Upper Room Discourse (John 14-17). Similarly James' epistle grew out of Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, and the Book of Revelation grew out of the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24-25). In the Upper Room Discourse, Jesus explained to the apostles their relationship to God as it would exist after He sent the Holy Spirit to dwell in them (John 14:16-17). John expounded that revelation in this letter.

There are several terms in this epistle that John used as synonyms: fellowship with God, knowing God, and abiding in God. These terms all describe the experience of Christians. They all describe our relationship with God as more or less intimate.

Our relationships with people vary. They are more or less intimate.

Fellowship with God is also a matter of greater or lesser intimacy. When we speak of being "in fellowship" or "out of fellowship," we are oversimplifying our relationship to God.

John's purpose in writing was to motivate his readers to cultivate greater intimacy with God. The greater the intimacy, the greater our "fellowship," the better we "know" God experientially, and the closer we "abide" in Him (cf. John 14:21-24). The greater our intimacy with God the more we will experience the life that is eternal. All Christians possess eternal life, but all do not experience that life as God intended us to enjoy it (John 10:10). Similarly all living human beings have life, but not all live an abundant life.

This letter reveals two things about the life of fellowship.

First, it reveals the resources of this life. There are two resources.

The first is objective. God has provided a pattern for the life of fellowship. The pattern is Jesus Christ. In Christ we have personified two qualities that are characteristics of God that should also characterize us as the children of God.

The first of these is light. Jesus Christ constantly walked in the light of God's holiness (1:5-6; 2:6). He never hid from God. He also conformed to the light of God's will perfectly. He was submissive, sinless, clean, and consecrated.

The second of these resources is love. Jesus also constantly manifested the love of God (4:10). In His attitudes and activities He always demonstrated perfect love. His words and His deeds were a revelation of God's love. Jesus put others before Himself. He was selfless as well as holy.

The second resource of the life of fellowship is subjective. God has not only provided a pattern for the life of fellowship, He has also provided the power. Jesus Christ is not only an external pattern for us to imitate. More helpfully He is an internal power whom God has placed within us who is at work in our lives. With eternal life we get Jesus (5:11-12). With Him come two things.

First, we get light. We see spiritual things that we never saw before (2:20). We see how we ought to walk (2:27). We become sensitive to sin.

Second, we get love. We see the need of other people who are groping in darkness, and we desire to reach out to them in service and to bring them into the light (4:7). As soon as we share God's life we begin to love with God's love. We can quench love, but every person who has eternal life has love in him or her.

To review, this letter reveals two things about the life of fellowship: first the resources of this life, which are an external pattern and internal power. Both of these come from Jesus Christ.

Second, this letter reveals the values of the realization of this life. These are two also.

First, there is value for us. This value is that we realize life as God intended people to live it. We can experience life as God meant it to be when He first made man. We achieve our potential as human beings to the degree to which we walk in fellowship with God (i.e., abide in Him). Our intimacy with God perfects our personalities.

Second, there is also value for God. God enjoys fellowship with man. God's purpose in creation and redemption was to have fellowship with man. God finds in every person who walks with Him in fellowship a person through whom He can manifest Himself, an instrument through whom He can accomplish His purposes. The abiding believer reveals God to those around him or her.

John also called his readers to fulfill our responsibilities in the life of fellowship.

Regarding the light we have two responsibilities.

First, we must obey the light (1:7). That means responding positively to the knowledge of God's will that we gain. We can become callused to the truth. This is a special danger in seminary. Cultivate your relationship with God daily. We all need to keep weeding the gardens of our spiritual lives.

Second, we must seek the light (1:9). We need to forsake the darkness of sin and keep walking in the light. The circle of God's light may move. We may gain new understanding of His will. When that happens, we need to move into that light in obedience.

Regarding love we also have two responsibilities.

First, we must yield to its impulse. We can destroy our capacity to love by not expressing love when God moves us to do so. We can lose our passion for the lost by resisting the Holy Spirit's promptings to reach out in love. We need to be ready to sacrifice rather than to put self first. However if we yield ourselves to the impulse of love to serve others, our love will deepen and intensify. Do not quench the Spirit if He is prompting you to reach out in love.

Second, we must also guard love's purity. We need to watch out for false charity. True love never sacrifices principle. God never loved at the expense of light. Love never justifies sin.

In conclusion, notice two applications of the message of this epistle, one to the individual and one to the church.

First, let me make one application to the individual. We can test whether we are living in fellowship with God easily. Check the light and the love in our lives. Is the light of holiness shining clearly, or are we walking in darkness? Is our love still burning brightly, or has our life deteriorated to the level of only learning? Learning is only one means to the end of living, living in intimate fellowship with God. What do you want people to remember you for, your knowledge or your love?

Second, let me make one application to the church. We need to keep our priorities in line with God's. Intimacy is His goal for us. God desires a few committed disciples rather than a multitude of compromising disciples. A pure church is more important than a large church. Do not draw back from urging people to walk in the light and to walk in love to increase the size of your congregation. Make as broad an appeal as possible without pulling your punches in ministry. I'm referring here to the church's ministry of equipping the saints. In presenting the gospel, we should make as broad an appeal as possible.

Constable: 1 John (Outline)

Outline

I. Introduction: the purpose of the epistle 1:1-4

II. Living in the light 1:5-2:29

A. God as light 1:5-7

B. Conditions for living in the light 1:8-2:29

1. Renouncing sin 1:8-2:2

2. Obeying God 2:3-11

3. Rejecting worldliness 2:12-17

4. Keeping the faith 2:18-29

III. Living as children of God 3:1-5:13

A. God as Father 3:1-3

B. Conditions for living as God's children 3:4-5:13

1. Renouncing sin reaffirmed 3:4-9

2. Obeying God reaffirmed 3:10-24

3. Rejecting worldliness reaffirmed 4:1-6

4. Practicing love 4:7-5:4

5. Keeping the faith reaffirmed 5:5-13

IV. Conclusion: Christian confidence 5:14-21

A. Confidence in action: prayer 5:14-17

B. Certainty of knowledge: assurance 5:18-20

C. A final warning: idolatry 5:21

Another outline that captures the cyclical pattern of John's thought is the following.¹⁰

I. Prologue 1:1-4

II. First cycle 1:5-2:28

A. Righteousness 1:5-2:6

B. Love 2:7-17

C. Belief 2:18-28

III. Second cycle 2:29-4:6

A. Righteousness 2:29-3:10a

B. Love 3:10b-24a

C. Belief 3:24b-4:6

IV. Third cycle 4:7-5:12

A. Love 4:7-21

B. Righteousness 5:1-5

C. Belief 5:6-21

Scholars have struggled to determine the structure of this epistle and have suggested many diverse outlines of the book.¹¹

Constable: 1 John

1 John

Bibliography

Bailey, Mark L., and Thomas L. Constable. The New Testament Explorer. Nashville: Word Publishing Co., 1999.

Baker's Dictionary of Theology, 1960. S.v. "Theophany," by Wick Broomall.

Barclay, William. The Letters of John and Jude. Daily Study Bible series. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press, 1960.

Barker, Glenn W. "1 John." In Hebrews-Revelation. Vol. 12 of The Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981.

Baxter, J. Sidlow. Explore the Book. 6 vols. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1965.

Baylis, Charles P. "The Meaning of Walking in the Darkness' (1 John 1:6)." Bibliotheca Sacra 149:594 (April-June 1992):214-22.

Blair, J. Allen. The Epistles of John. Neptune, N.J.: Loizeaux Brothers, 1982.

Boice, James Montgomery. The Epistles of John. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1979.

Brindle, Wayne A. "Biblical Evidence for the Imminence of the Rapture." Bibliotheca Sacra 158:630 (April-June 2001):138-51.

Brooke, A. E. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Johannine Epistles. International Critical Commentary series. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1912.

Brown, Raymond. The Epistles of John. Anchor Bible series. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1982.

Bruce, F. F. The Epistles of John. London: Pickering & Inglis Ltd., 1970; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1986.

Calvin, John. The First Epistle of John. Calvin's New Testament Commentaries series. Translated by T. H. L. Parker. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1959-61.

Candlish, Robert S. The First Epistle of John. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, n.d.

Constable, Thomas L. "Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament." Paper submitted for course 686 Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament. Dallas Theological Seminary, January 1968.

_____. Talking to God: What the Bible Teaches about Prayer. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1995.

_____. "What Prayer Will and Will Not Change." In Essays in Honor of J. Dwight Pentecost, pp. 99-113. Edited by Stanley D. Toussaint and Charles H. Dyer. Chicago: Moody Press, 1986.

Cook, W. Robert. "Harmartiological Problems in First John." Bibliotheca Sacra 123:491 (July-September 1966):249-60.

Crain, C. Readings on the First Epistle of John. New York: Loizeaux Brothers, n. d.

Darby, John Nelson. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. 5 vols. Revised ed. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Derickson, Gary W. "What Is the Message of 1 John?" Bibliotheca Sacra 150:597 (January-March 1993):89-105.

Dictionary of the Apostolic Church. Edited by James Hastings. 1915 ed. S.v. "John, Epistles of," by A. E. Brooke.

Dictionary of the Bible. Edited by James Hastings. 1910 ed. S.v. "John, Epistles of," by S. D. F. Salmond.

Dillow, Joseph C. The Reign of the Servant Kings. Miami Springs, Fla.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1992.

Dodd, C. H. The Johanine Epistles. The Moffatt New Testament Commentary series. New York: Harper and Row, 1946.

Findlay, George G. Fellowship in the Life Eternal. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1909.

Gaebelein, Arno C. The Annotated Bible. 4 vols. Reprint ed. Chicago: Moody Press, and New York: Loizeaux Brothers, 1970.

Gaster, Theodor H. The Dead Sea Scriptures. Revised and enlarged edition; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday & Co., Anchor Books, 1964.

Gillquist, Peter E. Love Is Now. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1970.

Goodman, G. The Epistle of Eternal Life. London: Pickering & Inglis, 1936.

Graystone, Kenneth. The Johanine Epistles. New Century Bible Commentary series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1984.

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. By C. G. Wilke. Revised by C. L. Wilibald Grimm. Translated, revised and enlarged by Joseph Henry Thayer, 1889.

Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Introduction. 3 vols. 2nd ed. London: Tyndale Press, 1966.

Harris, W. Hall. "A Theology of John's Writings." In A Biblical Theology of the New Testament, pp. 167-242. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

Hiebert, D. Edmond. "An Expositional Study of 1 John." Bibliotheca Sacra 145:578 (April-June 1988):197-210; 579 (July-September 1988):329-42; 580 (October-December 1988):420-35; 146:581 (January-March 1989):76-93; 582 (April-June 1989):198-216; 583 (July-September 1989):310-19; 584 (October-December 1989):420-36; 147:585 (January-March 1990):69-88; 586 (April-June 1990):216-30; 587 (July-September 1990):309-28.

_____. An Introduction to the New Testament, Vol. 3: The Non-Pauline Epistles and Revelation. Chicago: Moody Press, 1977.

Hodges, Zane C. "1 John." In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament, pp. 881-904. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1983.

_____. The Epistles of John: Walking in the Light of God's Love. Irving, Tex.: Grace Evangelical Society, 1999.

_____. "Fellowship and Confession in 1 John 1:5-10." Bibliotheca Sacra129:513 (January-March 1972):48-60.

_____. The Gospel Under Siege. Dallas: Redencion Viva, 1981.

_____. "Is God's Truth in You? 1 John 2:4b." Grace Evangelical Society News 5:7 (July 1990):2-3.

Houlden, J. L. A Commentary on the Johanine Epistles. Harper's New Testament Commentaries series. New York: Harper and Row, 1973.

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Edited by James Orr. 1957 ed. S.v. "Gnosticism," by John Rutherford.

_____. S.v. "John, The Epistles of," by R. Law.

King, Guy H. The Fellowship. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1954.

Kistemaker, Simon J. Exposition of the Epistle of James and the Epistles of John. New Testament Commentary Series. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1986.

Lange, John Peter, ed. Commentary on the Holy Scripture. 12 vols. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960. Vol 12: James-Revelation, by J. P. Lange, J. J. Van Osterzee, G. T. C. Fronmuller, and Karl Braune. Enlarged and edited by E. R. Craven. Translated by J. Isidor Mombert and Evelina Moore.

Law, Robert. The Tests of Life: A Study of the First Epistle of St. John. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1909.

Lenski, Richard C. H. The Interpretation of the Epistles of St. Peter, St. John and St. Jude. Reprint ed. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1961.

Lloyd-Jones, Martyn. Fellowship With God: Studies in 1 John. Vol. 1 of Life in Christ series. Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1993.

MacArthur, John F., Jr. Faith Works: The Gospel According to the Apostles. Dallas: Word Publishing, 1993.

_____. The Gospel according to Jesus. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1988.

Malatesta, E. Interiority and Covenant. A Study of einai en and menein en in the First Letter of Saint John. Anchor Bible 69. Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1978.

Marshall, I. Howard. The Epistles of John. New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1984.

McNeile, A. H. An Introduction to the Study of the New Testament. 2nd ed. Revised by C. S. C. Williams. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965.

Mitchell, John G. An Everlasting Love. Portland: Multnomah Press, 1982.

_____. Fellowship. Portland: Multnomah Press, 1974.

Morgan, G. Campbell. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Morris, Leon. The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1965.

Pentecost, J. Dwight. The Joy of Fellowship. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1977.

Plummer, Alfred. The Epistles of S. John. Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges series. 1883. Reprint ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1938.

Roberts, J. W. The Letters of John. Living Word Commentary series. Austin, Tex.: R. B. Sweet, 1968.

Robertson, Archibald Thomas. Word Pictures in the New Testatment. 6 vols. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1931.

Ross, A. The Epistles of James and John. New International Commentary series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1954.

Ryrie, Charles C. Biblical Theology of the New Testament. Chicago: Moody Press, 1959.

_____. "The First Epistle of John." In The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 1463-78. Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F. Harrison. Chicago: Moody Press, 1962.

Smalley, Stephen S. 1, 2, 3 John. Word Biblical Commentary series. Waco: Word Books, 1984.

Spurgeon, Charles H. 12 Sermons on the Second Coming of Christ. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1976.

Stanton, Gerald B. Kept from the Hour. Fourth ed. Miami Springs, Fla.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1991.

Storms, C. Samuel. Reaching God's Ear. Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers, 1988.

Stott, John R. W. The Epistles of John. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1964.

Thiessen, Henry Clarence. Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1962.

Westcott, Brooke Foss. The Epistles of St. John. 1883. Reprint ed. England: Marcham Manor Press, 1966.

Wiersbe, Warren W. Be Real. BE Books series. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1978.

Wilkin, Robert N. "Assurance: That You May Know' (1 John 5:11-13a)." Grace Evangelical Society News 5:12 (December 1990):2, 4.

_____. "Do Born Again People Sin? 1 John 3:9." Grace Evangelical Society News 5:3 (March 1990):2-3.

_____. "Knowing God By Our Works?" Grace Evangelical Society News 3:10 (October-November 1988):3-4.

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: 1 John (Book Introduction)

THE

FIRST EPISTLE OF ST. JOHN,

THE APOSTLE.

INTRODUCTION.

This epistle was always acknowledged for canonical, and written by St. John, the apostle and evangelist. At what time and place, is uncertain. It is sometimes called the Epistle to the Parthians, or Persians. The chief design is to set forth the mystery of Christ's incarnation against Cerinthus, who denied Christ's divinity, and against Basilides, who denied that Christ had a true body; with zealous exhortations to love God and our neighbour. (Witham) --- The vein of divine love and charity towards our neighbour which runs throughout the gospel written by the beloved disciple and evangelist, St. John, is found also in his epistles. He confirms the two principal mysteries of our faith: the mystery of the Trinity, the mystery of the incarnation of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. The sublimity and excellence of the evangelical doctrine he declares: "And this commandment we have from God, that he who loveth God love also his brother;" (Chap. iv. 21.) and again, "For this is the charity of God, that we keep his commandments; and his commandments are not heavy." (Chap. v. 3.) He shews how to distinguish the children of God from those of the devil; marks out those who should be called antichrists; describes the turpitude and gravity of sin. Finally, he shews how the sinner may hope for pardon. It was written, according to Baronius's account, sixty-six years after our Lord's ascension. (Challoner) --- The effect of all is to prove the certainty of the Catholic faith, and to renounce all heretics and schismatics, who entice persons from the true saving faith.

====================

Gill: 1 John (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO 1 JOHN

The author of this epistle was John, the son of Zebedee, the disciple whom Jesus loved: he was the youngest of the apostles, and survived them all. He does not indeed put his name to this epistle, as the Apostles Paul, Peter, James, and Jude do to theirs; and it is easy to observe, that when this disciple, in his writings, had any occasion to speak of himself, it was usually by such a circumlocution, as the disciple whom Jesus loved, or the other disciple, studiously concealing his name: so that his not putting his name to this epistle need not create any scruple about his being the author of it, which everywhere breathes the temper and spirit of this great apostle; and whoever compares this epistle, and the Gospel written by him, together, will easily conclude it to be his, both from the style and subject matter of it: besides, as Eusebius asserts ^a, this epistle was generally received without scruple, both by ancient and modern writers. It is called "general", because it was not written and sent to any particular church, or person, and not because it was for the general use of the churches, for so are all the particular epistles but because it was written to the Christians in general, or to the believing Jews in general wherever they were; for that it was written to the Jews seems evident from 1Jo 2:2. It was called, by some of the ancients, the epistle of John to the Parthians ^b; by whom must be meant not the natives of Parthia but the Jews professing to believe in Christ, who dwelt in that empire. We read of Parthian Jews a the feast of Pentecost, Act 2:9, who at that time might be converted, and, upon their return to their own country, lay the foundation of a Gospel church state there Dr. Lightfoot ^c conjectures from a passage in 3Jo 1:9 that this epistle was written to the Corinthians; but there does not seem to be any sufficient reason for it. As for the time when, and place where, this epistle was written, it is not easy to say: some think it was written at Patmos, whither the apostle was banished in the reign of Domitian, and where he wrote the book of the Revelations; see Rev 1:9; and here some say he wrote his Gospel, and this epistle, and that a little before the destruction of Jerusalem, and which he calls the last time or hour; and that his design in writing it was to exhort the believing Jews, either in Parthia, or scattered about in other countries, to brotherly love, and to warn them against false Christs and false prophets, which were now gone forth into the world to deceive men; see 1Jo 2:18. Others think that it was written by him, when a very old man, after his return from his exile to Ephesus, where he resided during his life, and where he died, and was buried. It is called his "first" epistle general, not that it is the first general epistle, for the other two are written to particular persons, but is the first he wrote, and which is general: the occasion, and manifest design of it, is to promote brotherly love, which he enforces upon the best principles, and with the strongest arguments, taken from the love of God and Christ, from the commandment of Christ, and its being an evidence of regeneration, and the truth and glory of a profession of religion: and also to oppose and stop the growth of licentious principles, and practices, and heretical doctrines. The licentious principles and practices he condemns are these, that believers had no sin in them, or need not be concerned about it, nor about their outward conversation, so be they had but knowledge; and these men boasted of their communion with God, notwithstanding their impieties; and which were the sentiments and practices of the Nicolaitans, Gnostics, and Carpocratians. The heresies he sets himself against, and refutes, are such as regard the doctrine of the Trinity, and the person and office of Christ. There were some who denied a distinction, of persons in the Trinity, and asserted there was but one person; that the Father was not distinct from the Son, nor the Son from the Father; and, by confounding both, tacitly denied there was either, as Simon Magus, and his followers; regard is had to these in 1Jo 2:22 and others, as the unbelieving Jews, denied that Jesus was the Messiah, or that Christ was come in the flesh; these are taken notice of in 1Jo 2:22. Others, that professed to believe in Jesus Christ, denied his proper deity, and asserted he was a mere man, and did not exist before he took flesh, of the virgin, as Ebion and Cerinthus; these are opposed in 1Jo 1:1. And others denied his real humanity, and affirmed that he was a mere phantom; that he only had the appearance of a man, and assumed human nature, and suffered, and died, and rose again in show only, and not in reality; of which sort were the followers of Saturninus and Basilides, and which are confuted in 1Jo 1:1. This epistle is, by Clemens Alexandrinus ^d, called his "greater" or "larger epistle", it being so in comparison of the other two that follow.

Gill: 1 John 1 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO 1 JOHN 1

In this chapter the apostle gives a summary of the Gospel, and the evidence of it, and from thence presses to a holy life and conversation, The sum of the Gospel is Jesus Christ, who is described both as God and man; his deity is expressed by being that which was from the beginning, the Word of life, life, and eternal life; his humanity by being the life manifested in the flesh, of which the apostles had full evidence by the several senses of seeing, hearing, and handling, and so were capable of bearing witness to the truth thereof, 1Jo 1:1. And the ends had in view in giving this summary, evidence, and testimony, were, that the saints wrote unto might have fellowship with the apostles, whose fellowship was with the Father, and his Son Jesus Christ, and that their joy on hearing these things might be full, 1Jo 1:3. And the amount of the message declared by them was, that God is light, or a pure and holy Being, and that there is no darkness of sin, or unholiness in him; wherefore all such that pretend to communion with him, and live a sinful course of life, are liars; only such have fellowship with him, and with his Son, whose blood cleanses them from all sin, who live holy lives and conversations, 1Jo 1:5, not, that it is to be expected that men should be clear of the being of sin in this life, only that they should, as often as they sin, be humbled for it, and confess it before God, who will forgive them, and cleanse them from all unrighteousness; but as for those who affirm they have no sin in them, or any done by them, they are self-deceivers, the truth of grace is not in them, nor the word of God, and they make him a liar, 1Jo 1:8.

Gill: 1 John 2 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO 1 JOHN 2

In this chapter the apostle comforts the saints under a sense of sin; urges them to an observance of the commandments of God, in imitation of Christ, particularly to the new commandment of brotherly love, and gives his reasons for it; dehorts them from the love of the world, and the things of it; cautions them against false teachers and antichrists, and exhorts them to abide in Christ, and persevere in the faith of him. He first declares that the end of his writing was to prevent their sinning; but supposing any should fall into sin through infirmity, he comforts them with the consideration of the advocacy of Christ, and of his being the propitiation for the sins both of Jews and Gentiles, 1Jo 2:1, and whereas some persons might boast of their knowledge of Christ, and neglect his commands, he observes, that the keeping of them is the best evidence of true knowledge, and of the sincerity of their love to God, and of their being in Christ; and that such who show no regard to them are liars, and the truth is not in them; and such that profess to be in Christ and abide in him, ought to walk as they have him for an example, 1Jo 2:3, and instances in a particular commandment, to love one another, which on different accounts is called an old and a new commandment, and which has been verified both in Christ and his people; for which a reason is given in the latter, the darkness being past, and the true light shining, 1Jo 2:7, upon which some propositions are founded, as that he that professes to be in the light, and hates his brother, is in darkness to this very moment; and that he that loves his brother is evidently in the light, nor will he easily give or take offence; and that he that hates his brother is not only in darkness, but walks in it, being blinded by it, and so knows not whither he is going, 1Jo 2:9, and this commandment of love the apostle writes to the saints, as distinguished into the several classes of fathers, young men, and children; and urges it on them from the consideration of the blessings of grace peculiar to them; as ancient knowledge to fathers, strength and victory to young men, knowledge of the Father, and remission of sins, to children, 1Jo 2:12, and then he dissuades from the love of worldly things, seeing the love of them is not consistent with the love of God; and seeing the things that are in it are vain and sinful, and are not of God, but of the world; and since the world and its lust pass away, when he that does the will of God abides for ever, 1Jo 2:15, he next observes unto them, that there were many antichrists in the world; which was an evidence of its being the last time; and these he describes as schismatics and apostates from the Christian churches, 1Jo 2:18, but as for the saints he writes to, they were of another character, they were truly Christians, having an anointing from the Holy One, by which they knew all things; nor did the apostle write to them as ignorant, but as knowing persons, and able to distinguish between truth and error, 1Jo 2:20, and then he goes on with his description of antichristian liars, showing that they were such who denied Jesus to be the Messiah, and the relation that is between the Father and the Son, 1Jo 2:22, and closes the chapter with an exhortation to perseverance in the doctrine of Christ; since it was what they had heard from the beginning, and since by so doing they would continue in the Father and in the Son, and besides had the promise of eternal life, 1Jo 2:24, and indeed this was the main thing in view in writing to them concerning seducers, to preserve them from them, though indeed this was in a great measure needless, since the anointing they had received abode in them; and taught them all things, and according as they regarded its teaching they would abide in Christ, 1Jo 2:26, to which he exhorts them from the consideration of that boldness and confidence it would give them at his appearance, who they must know is righteous, and so that everyone that doth righteousness is born of him, 1Jo 2:28.

College: 1 John (Book Introduction)

FOREWORD

It has been my pleasure to have been associated with Professor Morris Womack since the middle 1960s when we both accepted positions in the Los Angeles area with what was then Pepperdine College (now University). I have observed his growth as he developed into a distinguished and popular teacher, an accomplished author, diligent scholar, successful minister, and respected bishop of the church. He did these things while he maintained close, loving and productive ties with his family, friendship with his students, and exemplified a servant's attitude to those with whom he came in contact. Having demonstrated himself to be a man whose life in many ways illustrates that love which Christ said would identify his followers, I find it fitting that he should add this commentary on the three epistles of the "Apostle of Love" to his accomplishments.

As one peruses the pages of this work, it will be evident that the author has been able to balance his extensive theological training with his determination that this be a useful and practical work. While he shows mastery of the original language, the historical-cultural setting, the mechanics of biblical interpretation, and a profound acquaintance with the biblical text; he does so with an eye to clear exposition and insightful application of the basic issues portrayed by the Apostle John.

In his commentary on the biblical text, Professor Womack gives special attention to the developing problem of the gnostic heresy. The representatives of this aberrant religious group were dedicated to a view of Christ which in a very real sense robbed him of both his humanity and his divinity. In much the spirit of Athens, their prideful intellect displaced God and relegated to the trash heap of foolishness and naivete those who sought to follow his word. Considering themselves to be above sin, they heralded the virtues of thought and intellectual enterprise while belittling the ignorant folk who believed that following Christ meant obeying his teachings.

Dr. Womack points out that although John said these false teachers were no longer to be considered part of the fellowship (2:19), they considered the church to be their mission field (2:26, 3:7). It therefore is incumbent on church leaders to "mark heresy promoters and not allow them to bring division in the body." It was obviously not the position of the Apostle John that "I'm O.K. and you're O.K." regardless of religious belief. Eusebius claimed that Polycarp, a disciple of John, reported to Irenaeus that on one occasion when the apostle entered the baths at Ephesus and saw the gnostic leader, Cerinthus inside, he immediately left the baths saying, "Let us flee, lest also the baths fall in, since Cerinthus is inside, the enemy of the truth." It is those who obey Christ that by so doing prove that they know him, while those who claim to know him without submitting to his will only prove themselves to be liars (2:3-6).

However, it is especially in this emphasis upon John's insistence that Christians who claim to love God must also love one another that Professor Womack challenges the hypocrisy of a self-centered and legalistic spirit. The refinement of this "son of thunder" into the "Apostle of Love" is presented as both a challenge and a hope for all of us. Jerome reports that when in old age John had to be carried to the place of assembly, he always greeted the church with the words, "little children, love one another." When, perhaps somewhat impatiently, he was asked why he always said the same thing, he responded, "Because this is the Lord's command, and enough is done when this is done."

I am honored to have the opportunity of recommending to you this faithful, and objective aid to your study and understanding of the words of the Holy Spirit as they were revealed through the Apostle John.

Carl Mitchell, Ph.D.

Professor of Bible & Religion

College of Bible & Religion

Harding University

Searcy, Arkansas

I would like to thank John Hunter, Dan Rees, and Saundra Tippett for their creative help. In the writing of 2 and 3 John, C. Michael Moss of Lipscomb University was gracious in allowing the editorial team to use material from a forthcoming book on John's epistles. A special thanks to Steve Cable and Chris DeWelt who have been a source of encouragement in the project.

I appreciate very much the kind words of Dr. Carl Mitchell of Harding University and for his support for the commentary that I have written. He is a friend and loyal brother.

Morris M. Womack

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

INTRODUCTION

John's writings have been my favorite books of the Bible. This does not mean that they are more important than any others, but I like the spirit and tone as well as the content of his writings. They show how one can develop from a "son of thunder," as John was called by Jesus (Mark 3:17) to become the great apostle of love. His teachings on love are the deepest and most precious in the Bible. It was said early in church history (Jerome) that when John would come to the assembly of Christians, he would be carried to the door of the place of meeting where he would pat the Christians on the head, saying, "my little children, love one another."

The greatest memory I have about John comes from my freshman year in college when I began studying Greek. First John was the first place we began reading and translating. I remember it as a simple, clear, and challenging book. It was written in simple, unencumbered Greek, and this impression has stayed with me.

AUTHORSHIP

These three epistles we are studying are referred to as "general epistles." They were not written to specific churches, as were the letters by the apostle Paul. While Jesus was on earth, he selected three of his twelve disciples to be a sort of "inner circle." In his treatise on the life of Jesus, John referred to himself as "the disciple whom Jesus loved" (John 21:7). There are several indications of John's special relation to Jesus. He was one of the select three (Peter, James, and John) with Jesus at the transfiguration. He shared a lonely night in the Garden of Gethsemane prior to Jesus' trial and crucifixion, and he leaned on Jesus' breast and enjoyed a close encounter with Jesus at the last supper.

Some commentators prefer to separate the introductions to 1 John from one for 2 and 3 John. Given their differences, it is understandable to treat them accordingly. We will consider an overview of the three epistles together for this commentary. Traditionally, John the apostle has been accepted as the author of all three books but not without controversy over the centuries. First John is not structured like the typical first century letters and has not been called an epistle in the same light as both 2 and 3 John, which are very typical of early letter form and style. One of the greatest evidences for the books is that all three are found in the earliest Greek manuscripts. Irenaeus attributed authorship to John ( Against Heresies III, 16, 5, and 8).

Internal evidence for the three letters point to the same author as that of the Gospel of John most credibly because of the claim of being an eye witness (1 John 1:1-3). Language, key words, thought, scope and style are similar. A.E. Brooke in his commentary used the comparative work of John's first epistle with his Gospel by Holtzmann who wrote in 1882. The comparison of phrases and terminology provide sufficient evidence to convince the honest seeker of John's authorship of the first epistle. If the commonality of the first epistle with the other two can be shown, the authorship problem is settled on John the apostle. (For example, 1 John 2:7 compares with 2 John 5 and John 13:34-35. Second John 12 compares with 1 John 1:4 and John 15:11; 16:24. The use of "my children" in 3 John compares with 1 John 2:1, etc.)

DATE AND OCCASION

All three letters can be safely dated at the end of the Apostle John's life. If this is accurate, it explains the brevity of 2 and 3 John especially since they would have been written by an old man. We are at a loss to discover from the letters themselves when and from where they were written. John had been exiled to the Isle of Patmos, as is stated in the book of Revelation. Whether John wrote these while he was on the Isle of Patmos, we do now know. It is most commonly thought that John wrote from Ephesus in the last decade (the middle of the 90s) of the first century where John spent his last days.

One reason to handle all three books in one introduction is the fact that they share a common occasion with similar circumstances. Three major problems existed during this time: the spread of persecution by the Roman Empire, the development of false teachings of various kinds in the Christian community, and the rise and growth of Gnosticism. False prophets or false teachers were attacking the church and that prompted the need for an authoritative response (see the section below, Gnosticism, Docetism ). John, as perhaps the last living apostle at the time of writing, could speak with apostolic authority from the Lord. Deceivers and antichrists were calling to the sheep and the Lord sent John to shepherd God's flock. All three situations were faced with the need to strengthen fellowship among the true believers in order to recognize the counterfeit gospel being preached. The heretics were unsettling the firm moorings of the gospel causing some to doubt the first commands of Christ. Were they still loved by God? What is truth? Who are the children of God? Can I have one foot in heaven and also have one on earth? Did Jesus become a man? How could he be divine too? Who is my neighbor and how do I treat him? What if I do not feel saved? What if you have a problem with a "ruling elder?" Diotrephes in 3 John was wanting more authority. It is my view that this could well be the beginning of a striving for power. Ignatius, in the early second century, tells us of a bishop, elders, and deacons in some early churches. The bishop seems to begin to take power within the local church with the elders and deacons working "under" him. These questions challenge the letter writer for solid, inspired answers. John delivers!

Some commentators, such as Lenski and Marshall, have suggested that 2 and 3 John may have been written first and then 1 John. I simply mention this possibility and direct you to these commentators for further discussion.

Why did John write these short letters? First John 1John 5:13 specifically states the author's purpose in writing, "I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life." The theme of 2 John may be expressed in verse 9, "Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son." John summarizes the content of 3 John in verse 11, "Dear friend, do not imitate what is evil but what is good. Anyone who does what is good is from God. Anyone who does what is evil has not seen God." Commentators vary in their opinions as to the epistles' key words and verses, but these will serve as one-verse representatives of their respective themes.

RECIPIENTS

It has been suggested that 1 John was a circular or an encyclical letter much like Paul's letter to the Ephesians. This is partially reasoned from the lack of an addressee. If both of these books were connected to Ephesus, they may have shared a similar tradition. If 2 and 3 John were also encyclical, they were intended to be passed around to various churches and individuals for all to read. All three of John's letters are sent to Christians. Other than that we do not know who they were or where they lived. Area churches in Asia Minor (now Turkey) have been the most commonly proposed recipients. This opinion is based on the place of composition being Ephesus and that strikingly similar heresies are addressed, albeit incipient, in the earlier writings of the apostle Paul. John must have given much tender care and love to many of these churches in his last years around Ephesus. Based on Jesus' charging John to care for Mary at the time of the crucifixion, it is believed that Mary went home with John and spent her life at Ephesus. There is a traditional tomb of Mary in the ancient ruins of Ephesus today. John may have played an actual role in the founding and fostering of the church there.

GNOSTICISM, DOCETISM

What we face today in humanistic and New Age teachings we can identify as merely a refashioning of the old gnostic falsehoods. There is indeed nothing new under the sun! To understand the noxious weeds we fight today, we must turn back the pages of time to expose their beginning roots.

Whatever part John played in the birth and development of the Ephesian congregation, he was certainly involved in protecting them from the encroaching dangers of Gnosticism in the final years of the first century and following. As a witness to all of Jesus' personal ministry, John was quite capable of bearing witness to the historical Jesus and could certainly testify of the dual human/divine nature of Jesus Christ.

The rise and development of Gnosticism had a tremendous impact on the Christian movement. Around the middle of the first century, a monster in the form of Gnosticism arose that threatened the very roots of the Christian religion. The apostle Paul used the term (pseudônymou gnôseôs, "falsely-named knowledge") to identify this threat, Gnosticism (1 Tim 6:20). It presented a new worldview on the relationship between God and humanity which threatened Christianity at the time of its burgeoning growth.

Gnosticism, in my view, was a combination of three major strains of thought: Zoroastrianism, Platonism, and Christianity. Zoroastrianism, the religion of Persia, contributed at least two major elements: dualism (the worship of two gods) and the light-darkness views of Gnosticism (referred to in both John's Gospel and the Epistles of John). The dualism - the presence of two gods (a god of the Old Testament who created all things including evil and materialism and a god of the New Testament for the Gnostics whom they believed was the God of Jesus Christ) was expressed by Zoroastrianism by their two gods - Ahura Mazda (god of light) and Ahura Mainyu (god of darkness). The Jewish nation, having been exposed to the Persian religion during the Babylonian Captivity, were certainly influenced by this ideology.

Platonic and Neoplatonic philosophy contributed to the Gnostic theories through the concept of Plato's "world of ideas," which suggested that nothing exists except in an unseen world of ideas. The gods could not be approached or seen, said the Gnostic. God was at a distance from humankind, the Gnostics argued. In gnostic thought, humans could approach God through a series of "aeons" or "angelic" types of beings.

Some of the elements of Christianity found a welcome home among the Gnostics. The goodness of the God of the New Testament and the importance of knowing about God were some of these elements. The followers of the gnostic religion created a higher level of Christians, the gnostic Christians whom they regarded as the ultimate essence of their spiritual life.

John was not called one of the "sons of thunder" for nothing! Over the course of his lifetime he learned to direct his anger, or euphemistically called "righteous indignation," toward heretical causes aimed at the Christ. One of John's crucial reasons for writing was to answer the attacks by the false teachers faced by the recipients of all three letters.

Christians saw Gnosticism as a threat to the church as early as the last half of the first century. We can find some elements in some of Paul's writings and certainly in John's first epistle. When many biblical critics, especially the critics of the Tübingen school and others in America, began their critical analyses of the New Testament, they generally agreed that many of the New Testament books could not have been written in the first century because they reflected and even opposed the Gnostics, which they argued did not exist until the second century. At that time, many scholars argued that Gnosticism was a second-century phenomenon. I argued in the late 1950s that it originated much earlier. In fact, I wrote that "Until fairly recent times, scholars did not realize the vast span of history that Gnosticsim had. Though it was not called such, it can be traced to pre-Christian times." This claim was questioned by some, but later research by more eminent scholars than I have supported this theory. William F. Albright, eminent paleontologist, had espoused the late authorship of several canonical books of the New Testament. However, near the end of his life he wrote, "all the New Testament books were probably written during the late forties and the early eighties of the first century A.D., possibly even between A.D. 50 and A.D. 75."

The gnostic movement was a prominent influence on first century thought, very strong by the end of the century. That Gnosticism was prominent by the middle of the first century is further evidenced by the presence of the Nag Hammadi Manuscripts, gnostic documents discovered in the late 1940s. They are believed by some to have been nearly as old as the Dead Sea Scrolls. They are gnostic in character and must have been known by many of the period. Gnosticism was a dualistic religion (arguing for the existence of two opposing gods) and taught that Jesus was not really human but that Jesus was probably adopted by God at the time of his baptism (often referred to as the "Adoptionist Theory"). It was a divisive religion and was causing many problems in the early church.

Incipient Gnosticism had been introduced in Colossians and somewhat in Corinthians. John in his letters continues the battle he addressed in his Gospel, the battle most likely directed against "archheretic Cerinthus" and his docetic followers. One of the major concepts of the Christian gnostic movement was that Jesus was not born of human flesh, but that he only seemed to be human, hence the docetic philosophy. John had answered the docetic teaching that Jesus only "seemed" to be in the flesh with his poetic Gospel opening. Later in 19:16-37, he explicitly describes the reality of Jesus' crucifixion.

The opening verses of 1 John clearly answered some of the heresy by giving an eyewitness account of knowing Jesus. As the popular saying goes, "been there, done that." John could say, "I have been there and seen Jesus do that." John also addressed the false belief "we have no sin" because they treated sin with indifference. And, there was no "special knowledge" or "special illumination" to be obtained by a few! Contrary to the false teachings, Jesus did come in the flesh and suffered and rose from the dead to give us life. John and those with him knew Jesus intimately. Jesus, Son of God, Creator of life, appointed John as an apostle with all the rights and authority given by God. Any commands are to come from God and not from man.

STRUCTURE AND STYLE

Alexander Ross organizes the main part of 1 John, apart from the preface and conclusion, under two main points: I. God Is Light (1 John 1:5-2:29), and II. God Is Love (1 John 3:1-5:12). Robert Law outlined 1 John according to cycles of tests for truth and righteous living. Regarding 2 and 3 John, virtually all commentators provide a simple outline for their brief contents.

J.W. Roberts offers a unique analysis of John's letters in relationship to his peculiar style. Among the ones Roberts describes are John's use of "Antithetic Parallelism" (Hebrew device of contrasting two thoughts), "Genuine Antithesis" (or reverse of the same statement, as in 1 John 3:7-10), "Recapitulation" (as in 1 John 3:4a, repeating a word like "sin," "love," or "truth" and discussing it), "Word Parenthesis" ("inclusion of a thought unit between the first and last use of the same word" as in 1 John 5:16), and "Anaphora" (beginning with the same phrase like "If we say").

John's three letters have endeared themselves to the church since they were written in the first century. The original writer and the original audience have a much clearer view of things than we do. Were John's words heeded by his recipients? Obviously some did because the gospel message has continued through the preservation of the letters. As long as they are taught and preached, they will continue to instruct, warn, and encourage their readers. God bless you as you nobly search the Scriptures with the Lord Jesus.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Arndt, William F. and F. Wilbur Gingrich. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature . Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1979.

Barclay, William. The Letters of John . Philadelphia: Westminster, 1976.

Barker, Kenneth, Ed. The NIV Study Bible . Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995.

Brooke, A.E. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Johannine Epistles . The International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1971.

Bruce, F.F. The Epistles of John: Introduction, Exposition and Notes . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970.

Burdick, Donald W. The Epistles of John . Chicago: Moody, 1970.

Burge, G.M. "John, Letters of." Dictionary of the Later New Testament & Its Development , pp. 587-599 . Edited by Ralph P. Martin & Peter H. Davids. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1997.

Dodd, C.H. The Johannine Epistles . New York: Harper & Brothers, 1946.

Fiensy, David. New Testament Introduction . The College Press NIV Commentary. Joplin, MO: College Press, 1994. Revised 1997.

Harrison, Everett F. Introduction to the New Testament . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1971.

Law, Robert. The Tests of Life: A Study of the First Epistle of St. John . 3rd ed. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1968.

Lenski, R.C.H. The Interpretation of the Epistles of St. Peter, St. John and St. Jude . Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1996.

Marshall, I. Howard. The Epistles of John . The New International Commentary of the New Testament. Edited by Ned B. Stonehouse, F.F. Bruce and Gordon D. Fee. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978.

McDowell, Edward A. Hebrews-Revelation . The Broadman Bible Commentary. Vol. 12. Nashville: Broadman, 1972.

Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament . 3rd ed. New York: United Bible Societies, 1971.

Roberts, J.W. The Letters of John. The Living Word Commentary. Edited by Everett Ferguson. Vol. 18. 2nd printing. Austin, TX: Sweet, 1969.

Robinson, John A. T. Redating the New Testament . Philadelphia: Westminster, 1976.

Ross, Alexander. Commentary on the Epistles of James and John . The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970.

Schaff, Phillip. History of the Christian Church . 8 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1950.

Smith, David. The Expositor's Greek Testament . Edited by W. Robertson Nicoll. 5 vols. New York: Hodder and Stoughton, 1922.

Smith, J.B. Greek-English Concordance to the New Testament . Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1955.

Staton, Knofel. Thirteen Lessons on First, Second, and Third John . Joplin: College Press, 1980.

Stott, John R.W. The Letters of John: Introduction and Commentary . Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. 1988. Reprint, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995.

Trench, Richard. Synonyms of the New Testament . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953.

Watson, D.F. "Rhetoric, Rhetorical Criticism," Dictionary of the Later New Testament & Its Development , pp. 1041-1051. Edited by Ralph P. Martin & Peter H. Davids. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1997.

Westcott, Brooke Foss. The Epistles of St. John: The Greek Text with Notes and Essays . London: Macmillan, 1883.

Wilkins, M.J. "Pastoral Theology," Dictionary of the Later New Testament & Its Development , pp. 876-882. Edited by Ralph P. Martin & Peter H. Davids. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1997.

Wright, D.F. "Docetism," Dictionary of the Later New Testament & Its Development , pp. 306-309. Edited by Ralph P. Martin & Peter H. Davids. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1997.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

ABBREVIATIONS

DLNT Dictionary of the Later New Testament

KJV King James Version

NEB New English Bible

NIV New International Version

RSV Revised Standard Version

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

College: 1 John (Outline)

OUTLINE

I. THE WORD OF LIFE - 1:1-4

II. LIFE WITH GOD AND THE WORLD - 1:5-2:27

A. The Way of Light and Darkness - 1:5-7

B. Admitting Our Sin - 1:8-10

C. The Atoning Sacrifice - 2:1-2

D. Keeping God's Commandments - 2:3-6

E. A New Commandment - 2:7-8

F. In the Light or in the Darkness - 2:9-11

G. John's Reasons for Writing - 2:12-14

H. Christians and the World - 2:15-17

I. Warnings against Antichrists - 2:18-27

III. GOD'S LOVE FOR US/OUR LOVE FOR ONE ANOTHER - 2:28-3:24

A. Children of God - 2:28-29

B. God's Love for His Children - 3:1-3

C. Warnings against Sin - 3:4-10

D. Love One Another - 3:11-24

IV. TESTING THE SPIRITS/TRUSTING GOD - 4:1-5:12

A. Testing the Spirits - 4:1-6

B. God's Love and Our Love - 4:7-21

C. Faith in the Son of God - 5:1-5

D. The Three Witnesses - 5:6-12

V. CONCLUDING REMARKS - 5:13-21

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

Lapide: 1 John (Book Introduction)

PREFACE TO THE FIRST EPISTLE

OF S. JOHN.

——o——

I mention three things by way of preface. First, concerning the authority of the Epistle. Second,  concerning the author. Third, concerning the argument.

1. It is of faith that this Epistle is canonical Scripture. This is the general belief of the whole Church, expressed both elsewhere and in the Council of Trent ( sess. 4). Here observe that the canonical books of Holy Scripture are of two kinds. The first are called proto-canonical , because they have been accounted canonical in all ages by all Christians, so that of their authority none of the orthodox have ever been in doubt.

The second kind are called deutero-canonical , because at one time the Church or the Fathers doubted of their authority, but they were subsequently received into the canon by all men. Such are the books of Esther, Baruch, part of Daniel, Tobias, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, two books of the Maccabees, certain portions of the Gospels of S. Mark, S. Luke, or S. John, the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Epistle of James, the second of Peter, the second and third of John, the Epistle of Jude, and the Apocalypse. All the rest are proto-canonical. Among them, therefore, is this Epistle of S. John, with the exception of one verse, concerning which in its place. This is what Eusebius says of this Epistle ( H. E. 3. 24), "Among those things which John wrote after his Gospel, his first Epistle is also received both by the ancients and the moderns without any hesitation." Moreover, it is equally received by ancient and modern heretics. And S. Augustine says ( Tract . 7, in Epis. 1 Joan .), "That Epistle is canonical which is read by all nations, is accepted by the authority of the whole world, which itself has edified the whole world." And Dionysius of Alexandria, says, "The Gospel and the first Epistle of John are not only without fault, but are written with the utmost elegancy of style, the greatest weight of their sentiments and with perfect diction."

2. The orthodox are all agreed that the author of this Epistle is S. John the Apostle, as the inscription gives it. The same is indicated by the style of the Epistle in all things agreeable to S. John's Gospel, so beautiful, and flowing with the honey of charity, plainly indicating its source, the fair and loving breast of S. John. Add to this that he inculcates the same things in this Epistle which he does in his Gospel, as Eusebius well observes ( H. E. 7. 25), "He who reads carefully will find frequently in both, the words 'life,' 'light,' 'departure from darkness,' 'the truth,' 'grace,' 'joy,' 'the flesh and blood of the Lord,' 'judgment,' 'the remission of sins,' 'the love of God towards us,' 'the command to love one another,' 'the rebuke of the world, the devil, and antichrist,' 'the promise of the Holy Ghost;' he will find everywhere 'the Father and the Son.' And if the character of both writings be observed in all things, there will be found altogether the same sense and form of expression in both the Gospel and the Epistle."

3. The object of the Epistle is, first, to teach the true faith, hope, and charity: the faith both concerning the Holy Trinity and the Incarnate Word, of which assuredly no one has treated more fruitfully than S. John both in his Gospel and in this Epistle. And for this reason he is called by S. Dionysius, Athanasius, Cyril, Chrysostom, Epiphanius and others generally, John the Theologian.

Moreover, this is a Catholic Epistle, that is circular and general, written to all Christians throughout the world, like the Epistles of S. Peter, S. James, and S. Jude. Some, however, of the ancients say that this Epistle of John was written expressly to the Parthians. So Pope Hyginus ( Epist. 1), Pope John II. ( Epist. ad Valer .), S . Augustine ( Lib . 2 quæst. Evang. c. 39), Idacius ( Lib. de Trin .) and others. Our Serarius suspects that Patmos ought here to be read instead of Parthos. For John being banished by Domitian to the Isle of Patmos, converted its inhabitants to Christ. Junius, a Calvinist, against Bellarmine ( Lib. 2 de Verbo Dei, cap. 15 num. 22), understands by Parthians, not the inhabitants of Parthia, but pious exiles distant from their native land. For in the Scythian language exiles were formerly called Parthi , from the Hebrew word pur , i.e., to divide. To the Parthians , then, would mean the same thing as to the tribes which are in the dispersion, as S. James says in his Epistle, and "to the elect strangers of the dispersion," as S. Peter says, in the beginning of his Epistle. But exiles, impious as well as pious, were called Parthi by the Scythians, not by the Greeks or Hebrews, such as was St. John. For otherwise S. Peter and S. James, who write to the dispersed, would have written to the Parthians. Properly, therefore, I understand Parthians here to mean those whose name and empire were at that time widely extended, and embraced several nations, the Persians among them. Now there are in Parthia many Jews as well as Christians, both of Jewish and Gentile extraction, to all of whom S. John here writes.

S. John then wrote to the Parthians, either because he had formerly been amongst them and taught them the faith of Christ, as Baronius and others think, or else because many of the Ephesians and other natives of Asia Minor, to whom S. John had preached, and who had been converted to Christ, had migrated into the nearer regions of Parthia and Persia.

All writers agree that this Epistle was written in Greek. There is no reason for wonder that S. John does not give his name at the beginning of the Epistle. Neither did S. Paul in the Epistle to the Hebrews. The same is the case with many modern writers who do not prefix their names to the beginning of their letters, but subscribe them at the end. Besides, the Holy Spirit was the Author of this Epistle rather than S. John. As S. Gregory says ( Præfat. in Job c. i.), "It is altogether vain to ask for the Author of this Epistle, since it is faithfully believed to have been the Holy Ghost. He then wrote these words who commanded them to be written. If we should receive a letter from any great man, we should look upon it as a ridiculous question to ask with what pen it had been written."

S. John appears to have been an old man, and altogether forgetful of earthly things, and panting after Christ, both when he wrote this Epistle and also his Gospel. He was so absorbed in the greatness of the mystery that he omitted both his name and the salutation, and by so doing carries the reader with him in such a manner as to intimate that he was the writer of the Epistle as well as the Gospel. So Thomas Anglicus. The same thing is sufficiently indicated by the words of the first Epistle, by which one is made wonderfully full of sweetness and delight with Christ Incarnate. Lastly, it is plain that S. John wrote these words in extreme old age, from the words themselves in which he calls himself the Elder, and the faithful his little children. The precise date when he wrote is uncertain: but it seems to have been about the same time that he wrote the Gospel, for there is a great agreement between the Epistles and the Gospel. This has led Baronius to assign the same date to both, namely, A.D. 99, which was the seventh year of Pope S. Clement, and the first of the Emperor Nerva.

S. Gregory concludes with the following golden words ( Hom. 15 in Ezech .): "Do we seek to have our hearts inflamed with the fire of love? Then let us ponder over the words of S. John, for everything that he says is filled with the fire of love." He breathes, repeats and enforces nothing else but the love of God, of Christ, and of our neighbour. He is like old men and lovers, who think and speak of nothing else but what they love and have loved all their lives.